[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 51 (Friday, March 15, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9590-9646]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03560]
[[Page 9589]]
Vol. 84
Friday,
No. 51
March 15, 2019
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 63
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Surface
Coating of Large Appliances; Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics
and Other Textiles; and Surface Coating of Metal Furniture Residual
Risk and Technology Reviews; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 84 , No. 51 / Friday, March 15, 2019 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 9590]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0668, EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0669, EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0670; FRL-
9988-80-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT72
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Surface
Coating of Large Appliances; Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics
and Other Textiles; and Surface Coating of Metal Furniture Residual
Risk and Technology Reviews
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action on the residual risk and technology reviews (RTRs) conducted for
the Surface Coating of Large Appliances; the Printing, Coating, and
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles; and the Surface Coating of Metal
Furniture source categories regulated under national emission standards
for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP). In addition, we are taking final
action addressing emissions during periods of startup, shutdown, and
malfunction (SSM); electronic reporting for performance test results
and compliance reports; the addition of EPA Method 18 and updates to
several measurement methods; and the addition of requirements for
periodic performance testing. Additionally, several miscellaneous
technical amendments will be made to improve the clarity of the rule
requirements. We are making no revisions to the numerical emission
limits based on these risk analyses or technology reviews.
DATES: This final rule is effective on March 15, 2019. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this rule
is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of March 15,
2019.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established dockets for this action under Docket
ID Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0668 for 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
part 63, subpart OOOO, Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and
Other Textiles; EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0669 for 40 CFR part 63, subpart RRRR,
Surface Coating of Metal Furniture; or EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0670, for 40 CFR
part 63, subpart NNNN, Surface Coating of Large Appliances, as
applicable. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not
placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through https://www.regulations.gov, or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center, EPA WJC West Building, Room Number 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room hours of
operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST),
Monday through Friday. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room
is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Docket Center is
(202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about the final rule for
the Surface Coating of Large Appliances source category, contact Ms.
Kim Teal, Minerals and Manufacturing Group, Sector Policies and
Programs Division (Mail Code D243-04), Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander
Dr., Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number:
(919) 541-5580; fax number: (919) 541-4991; and email address:
[email protected].
For questions about the final rule for the Printing, Coating, and
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles source category, contact Ms. Paula
Hirtz, Minerals and Manufacturing Group, Sector Policies and Programs
Division (Mail Code D243-04), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander
Dr., Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number:
(919) 541-2618; fax number: (919) 541-4991; and email address:
[email protected].
For questions about the final rule for the Surface Coating of Metal
Furniture source category, contact Ms. J. Kaye Whitfield, Minerals and
Manufacturing Group, Sector Policies and Programs Division (Mail Code
D243-04), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Dr., Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-2509;
fax number: (919) 541-4991; and email address: [email protected].
For specific information regarding the risk modeling methodology,
contact Mr. Chris Sarsony, Health and Environmental Impacts Division
(C539-02), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number: (919) 541-4843; fax number: (919) 541-0840;
and email address: [email protected].
For information about the applicability of the NESHAP to a
particular entity, contact Mr. John Cox, Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA WJC
South Building (Mail Code 2221A), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-1395; and email
address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preamble acronyms and abbreviations. We use multiple acronyms and
terms in this preamble. While this list may not be exhaustive, to ease
the reading of this preamble and for reference purposes, the EPA
defines the following terms and acronyms here:
ASTM--ASTM International
CAA--Clean Air Act
CDX--Central Data Exchange
CEDRI--Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
CRA--Congressional Review Act
EPA--Environmental Protection Agency
ERT--Electronic Reporting Tool
FR--Federal Register
gal--gallon
HAP--hazardous air pollutant(s)
HCl--hydrochloric acid
HF--hydrogen fluoride
HI--hazard index
HQ--hazard quotient
HQREL--hazard quotient recommended exposure limit
HVLP--high-volume, low-pressure
IBR--incorporation by reference
ICR--Information Collection Request
kg--kilogram
km--kilometer
lb--pound
MACT--maximum achievable control technology
MIR--maximum individual risk
NAICS--North American Industry Classification System
NESHAP--national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
NTTAA--National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OAQPS--Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
OMB--Office of Management and Budget
OSHA--Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PB-HAP--hazardous air pollutants known to be persistent and
bioaccumulative in the environment
ppmv--parts per million by volume
PRA--Paperwork Reduction Act
RFA--Regulatory Flexibility Act
RTR--residual risk and technology review
SSM--startup, shutdown, and malfunction
TOSHI--target organ-specific hazard index
[[Page 9591]]
tpy--tons per year
UMRA--Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
VOC--volatile organic compound
Background information. On September 12, 2018, the EPA proposed
revisions to the Surface Coating of Large Appliances; the Printing,
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles (Fabrics); and the
Surface Coating of Metal Furniture NESHAP, based on our RTR. In this
action, we are finalizing decisions and revisions for the rules. We
summarize some of the more significant comments we timely received
regarding the proposed rule and provide our responses in this preamble.
A summary of all other public comments on the proposed rules and the
EPA's responses to those comments are available in ``Summary of Public
Comments and Responses for the Risk and Technology Reviews for the
Surface Coating of Large Appliances; the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing
of Fabrics and Other Textiles; and the Surface Coating of Metal
Furniture,'' in Docket ID Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0668, EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-
0669, and EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0670. A ``track changes'' version of the
regulatory language that incorporates the changes in this action is
available in the docket for each subpart.
Organization of this document. The information in this preamble is
organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration
II. Background
A. What is the statutory authority for this action?
B. What are the source categories and how does the NESHAP
regulate its HAP emissions?
C. What changes did we propose for the source categories in our
September 12, 2018, RTR proposal?
III. What is included in these final rules?
A. What are the final rule amendments based on the risk review
for the Surface Coating of Large Appliances; Printing, Coating, and
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textile; and Surface Coating of Metal
Furniture source categories?
B. What are the final rule amendments based on the technology
review for the source categories?
C. What are the final rule amendments addressing emissions
during periods of SSM?
D. What other changes have been made to the NESHAP?
E. What are the effective and compliance dates of the standards?
F. What are the requirements for submission of performance test
data to the EPA?
IV. What is the rationale for our final decisions and amendments for
these three surface coating source categories?
A. Residual Risk Reviews
B. Technology Reviews
C. Ongoing Emissions Compliance Demonstrations
D. Work Practice During Periods of Malfunction
V. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts and
Additional Analyses Conducted
A. What are the affected facilities?
B. What are the air quality impacts?
C. What are the cost impacts?
D. What are the economic impacts?
E. What are the benefits?
F. What analysis of environmental justice did we conduct?
G. What analysis of children's environmental health did we
conduct?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and
1 CFR Part 51
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
Regulated entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated
by this action are shown in Table 1 of this preamble.
Table 1--NESHAP and Industrial Source Categories Affected by This Final
Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NESHAP Source category NAICS \1\ code Regulated entities \2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface Coating of Large 335221 Household laundry
Appliances. equipment.
335222 Household cooking
equipment.
335224 Household refrigerators
and freezers.
335228 Other major household
appliances.
333312 Commercial laundry, dry
cleaning, and pressing
equipment.
333415 Air-conditioners
(except motor
vehicle), comfort
furnaces, and
industrial
refrigeration units
and freezers (except
heat transfer coils
and large commercial
and industrial
chillers).
\3\ 333319 Other commercial/
service industry
machinery, e.g.,
commercial
dishwashers, ovens,
and ranges, etc.
Printing, Coating, and Dyeing 31321 Broadwoven fabric
of Fabrics and Other Textiles. 31322 mills.
Narrow fabric mills and
Schiffli machine
embroidery.
313241 Weft knit fabric mills.
313311 Broadwoven fabric
finishing mills.
313312 Textile and fabric
finishing (except
broadwoven fabric)
mills.
313320 Fabric coating mills.
314110 Carpet and rug mills.
326220 Rubber and plastics
hoses and belting and
manufacturing.
339991 Gasket, packing, and
sealing device
manufacturing.
Surface Coating of Metal 337124 Metal Household
Furniture. Furniture
Manufacturing.
337214 Nonwood Office
Furniture
Manufacturing.
337127 Institutional Furniture
Manufacturing.
337215 Showcase, Partition,
Shelving, and Locker
Manufacturing.
337127 Institutional Furniture
Manufacturing.
332951 Hardware Manufacturing.
332116 Metal Stamping.
[[Page 9592]]
332612 Wire Spring
Manufacturing.
337215 Showcase, Partition,
Shelving, and Locker
Manufacturing.
335121 Residential Electric
Lighting Fixture
Manufacturing.
335122 Commercial, Industrial,
and Institutional
Electric Lighting
Fixture Manufacturing.
339111 Laboratory Furniture
Manufacturing.
339114 Dental Equipment
Manufacturing.
337127 Institutional Furniture
Manufacturing.
81142 Reupholstery and
Furniture Repair.
922140 State correctional
institutions that
apply coatings to
metal furniture.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
\2\ Regulated entities means major source facilities that apply surface
coatings to these parts or products.
\3\ Excluding special industry machinery, industrial and commercial
machinery and equipment, and electrical machinery equipment and
supplies not elsewhere classified.
Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but
rather to provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by the final action for the source categories listed. To
determine whether your facility is affected, you should examine the
applicability criteria in the appropriate NESHAP. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of any aspect of this NESHAP,
please contact the appropriate person listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this final action will also be available on the internet. Following
signature by the EPA Administrator, the EPA will post a copy of this
final action at: https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/printing-coating-and-dyeing-fabrics-and-other-textiles-national#rule-summary, https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/surface-coating-large-appliances-national-emission-standards, and https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/surface-coating-metal-furniture-national-emission-standards. Following publication in the
Federal Register, the EPA will post the Federal Register version and
key technical documents at this same website.
Additional information is available on the RTR website at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. This information includes an
overview of the RTR program, links to project websites for the RTR
source categories, and detailed emissions and other data we used as
inputs to the risk assessments.
C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration
Under Clean Air Act (CAA) section 307(b)(1), judicial review of
this final action is available only by filing a petition for review in
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
(the Court) by May 14, 2019. Under CAA section 307(b)(2), the
requirements established by these final rules may not be challenged
separately in any civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to
enforce the requirements.
Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that only an
objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable
specificity during the period for public comment (including any public
hearing) may be raised during judicial review. This section also
provides a mechanism for the EPA to reconsider the rule if the person
raising an objection can demonstrate to the Administrator that it was
impracticable to raise such objection within the period for public
comment or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period for
public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) and
if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the rule.
Any person seeking to make such a demonstration should submit a
Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the Administrator, U.S.
EPA, Room 3000, EPA WJC South Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to both the person(s) listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the Associate
General Counsel for the Air and Radiation Law Office, Office of General
Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460.
II. Background
A. What is the statutory authority for this action?
Section 112 of the CAA establishes a two-stage regulatory process
to address emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from stationary
sources. In the first stage, we must identify categories of sources
emitting one or more of the HAP listed in CAA section 112(b) and then
promulgate technology-based NESHAP for those sources. ``Major sources''
are those that emit, or have the potential to emit, any single HAP at a
rate of 10 tons per year (tpy) or more, or 25 tpy or more of any
combination of HAP. For major sources, these standards are commonly
referred to as maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards
and must reflect the maximum degree of emission reductions of HAP
achievable (after considering cost, energy requirements, and non-air
quality health and environmental impacts). In developing MACT
standards, CAA section 112(d)(2) directs the EPA to consider the
application of measures, processes, methods, systems, or techniques,
including but not limited to those that reduce the volume of or
eliminate HAP emissions through process changes, substitution of
materials, or other modifications; enclose systems or processes to
eliminate emissions; collect, capture, or treat HAP when released from
a process, stack, storage, or fugitive emissions point; are design,
equipment, work practice, or operational standards; or any combination
of the above.
For these MACT standards, the statute specifies certain minimum
stringency requirements, which are referred to as MACT floor
requirements, and which may not be based on cost considerations. See
CAA section 112(d)(3). For new sources, the MACT floor cannot be less
stringent than the emission control achieved in practice by the best-
controlled similar source. The
[[Page 9593]]
MACT standards for existing sources can be less stringent than floors
for new sources, but they cannot be less stringent than the average
emission limitation achieved by the best-performing 12 percent of
existing sources in the category or subcategory (or the best-performing
five sources for categories or subcategories with fewer than 30
sources). In developing MACT standards, we must also consider control
options that are more stringent than the floor under CAA section
112(d)(2). We may establish standards more stringent than the floor,
based on the consideration of the cost of achieving the emissions
reductions, any non-air quality health and environmental impacts, and
energy requirements.
In the second stage of the regulatory process, the CAA requires the
EPA to undertake two different analyses, which we refer to as the
technology review and the residual risk review. Under the technology
review, we must review the technology-based standards and revise them
``as necessary (taking into account developments in practices,
processes, and control technologies)'' no less frequently than every 8
years, pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6). Under the residual risk
review, we must evaluate the risk to public health remaining after
application of the technology-based standards and revise the standards,
if necessary, to provide an ample margin of safety to protect public
health or to prevent, taking into consideration costs, energy, safety,
and other relevant factors, an adverse environmental effect. The
residual risk review is required within 8 years after promulgation of
the technology-based standards, pursuant to CAA section 112(f). In
conducting the residual risk review, if the EPA determines that the
current standards provide an ample margin of safety to protect public
health, it is not necessary to revise the MACT standards pursuant to
CAA section 112(f).\1\ For more information on the statutory authority
for these final rules, see 83 Federal Register (FR) 46262, September
12, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Court has affirmed this approach of implementing CAA
section 112(f)(2)(A): NRDC v. EPA, 529 F.3d 1077, 1083 (D.C. Cir.
2008) (``If EPA determines that the existing technology-based
standards provide an `ample margin of safety,' then the Agency is
free to readopt those standards during the residual risk
rulemaking.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. What are the source categories and how does the NESHAP regulate its
HAP emissions?
1. What is the Surface Coating of Large Appliances source category and
how does the current NESHAP regulate its HAP emissions?
The EPA promulgated the Surface Coating of Large Appliances source
category NESHAP on July 23, 2002 (67 FR 48254). The standards are
codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart NNNN. The Surface Coating of Large
Appliances industry consists of facilities that are engaged in the
surface coating of a large appliance part or product. The source
category covered by this MACT standard currently includes ten
facilities.
The Surface Coating of Large Appliances NESHAP (40 CFR 63.4081)
defines a ``large appliance part or product'' as ``a component of a
large appliance product manufactured for household, recreational,
institutional, commercial, or industrial use,'' and defines a coating
as a ``material that is applied to a substrate for decorative,
protective or functional purposes.'' This source category is further
described in the September 12, 2018, RTR proposal. See 83 FR 46262,
46266-67.
The primary HAP emitted from this source category are organic HAP
and include xylene, glycol ethers, toluene, methanol, ethyl benzene,
methylene chloride, and methyl isobutyl ether with approximately 80
percent of the HAP emissions coming from coating operations and from
the mixing and storage areas. The EPA estimates that HAP emissions are
currently about 120 tpy. Most large appliance coating is currently
applied either by using a spray gun in a spray booth, by dipping the
substrate in a tank of coating, or by powder coating.
The Surface Coating of Large Appliances NESHAP specifies numerical
emission limits for organic HAP emissions from surface coating
application operations. The organic HAP emission limit for existing
sources is 0.13 kilogram (kg) organic HAP/liter (1.1 pound/gallon (lb/
gal)) of coating solids and for new or reconstructed sources is 0.022
kg organic HAP/liter (0.18 lb/gal) of coating solids.
The Surface Coating of Large Appliances NESHAP provides three
compliance options for existing sources: (1) Compliant coatings, i.e.,
all coatings have less than or equal to 0.13 kg organic HAP/liter (1.1
lb/gal) of coating solids; (2) emission rate without add-on controls;
or (3) emission rate with add-on controls. Facilities using the
compliant material option or the emission rate without add-on controls
option are not required to meet any work practice standards, but
facilities that use add-on controls to demonstrate compliance must
develop and implement a work practice plan and comply with site-
specific operating limits for the emission capture and control system.
2. What is the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other
Textiles source category and how does the current NESHAP regulate its
HAP emissions?
The EPA promulgated the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics
and Other Textiles NESHAP on May 29, 2003 (68 FR 32172). The standards
are codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart OOOO. The Printing, Coating,
and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles industry consists of
facilities that are engaged in the printing, coating, slashing, dyeing,
or finishing of fabrics and other textiles. The source category covered
by this MACT standard currently includes 43 facilities.
The Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles
NESHAP (40 CFR 63.4371) defines a fabric as any woven, knitted,
plaited, braided, felted, or non-woven material made of filaments,
fibers, or yarns, including thread, and further defines textile as any
one of the following: (1) Staple fibers and filaments suitable for
conversion to or use as yarns, or for the preparation of woven, knit,
or nonwoven fabrics; (2) yarns made from natural or manufactured
fibers; (3) fabrics and other manufactured products made from staple
fibers and filaments and from yarn; and (4) garments and other articles
fabricated from fibers, yarns, or fabrics. The NESHAP also defines a
coating material as an elastomer, polymer, or prepolymer material
applied as a thin layer to a textile web. This source category is
further described in the September 12, 2018, RTR proposal. See 83 FR
46264.
The primary HAP emitted from printing, coating, and dyeing
operations are organic HAP and include toluene, phenol, methanol, and
N,N-dimethylformamide. The majority of organic HAP emissions (greater
than 95 percent) come from the coating and printing subcategories, with
the remainder coming from dyeing and finishing. The EPA estimates that
HAP emissions are currently about 737 tpy.
The Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles
NESHAP specifies numerical emission limits for organic HAP emissions
from three subcategories: Printing and coating; dyeing and finishing;
and slashing. The
[[Page 9594]]
organic HAP emissions limit for existing affected sources is 0.12 kg
organic HAP/kg (lb/lb) of coating solids applied, and for new or
reconstructed affected sources the emissions limit is 0.08 kg organic
HAP/kg (lb/lb) of coating solids applied. Printing or coating-affected
sources also may demonstrate compliance by achieving at least a 98-
percent HAP reduction for new affected sources or a 97-percent HAP
reduction for existing sources. Alternatively, new and existing sources
using a thermal oxidizer may demonstrate compliance by achieving a HAP
concentration at the oxidizer outlet of no greater than 20 parts per
million by volume (ppmv) on a dry basis and having an emission capture
system with 100-percent efficiency.
For new, reconstructed, or existing dyeing and finishing
operations, the emissions limit for conducting dyeing operations is
0.016 kg organic HAP/kg (lb/lb) dyeing materials applied; the emissions
limit for conducting finishing operations is 0.0003 kg organic HAP/kg
(lb/lb) finishing materials applied; and the emissions limit for
conducting both dyeing and finishing operations is 0.016 kg organic
HAP/kg (lb/lb) dyeing and finishing materials applied.
For new, reconstructed, or existing slashing operations, the
slashing materials must contain no organic HAP (each organic HAP that
is not an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)-defined
carcinogen that is measured to be present at less than 1 percent by
weight is counted as zero).
Facilities using the compliant material option or the emission rate
without add-on controls option are not required to meet any work
practice standards, but facilities that use add-on controls to
demonstrate compliance must develop and implement a work practice plan
and comply with site-specific operating limits for the emission capture
and control system.
3. What is the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture source category and
how does the current NESHAP regulate its HAP emissions?
The EPA promulgated the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture NESHAP
on May 23, 2003 (68 FR 28606). The standards are codified at 40 CFR
part 63, subpart RRRR. The Surface Coating of Metal Furniture industry
consists of facilities that engage, either in part or in whole, in the
surface coating of metal furniture. The Surface Coating of Metal
Furniture NESHAP (40 CFR 63.4881) defines metal furniture as furniture
or components of furniture constructed either entirely or partially
from metal. The source category covered by this MACT standard currently
includes 16 facilities. This source category is further described in
the September 12, 2018, RTR proposal. See 83 FR 46264.
Most of the organic HAP emissions from metal furniture surface
coating operations occur from coating application operations and drying
and curing ovens. Xylene, glycol ethers, ethylbenzene, toluene, and
cumene account for more than 95 percent of the HAP emitted from the
source category. The EPA estimates that HAP emissions are currently
about 145 tpy.
The Surface Coating of Metal Furniture NESHAP provides existing
sources three compliance options: (1) Use only compliant coatings,
i.e., all coatings have less than or equal to 0.10 kg organic HAP/liter
(0.83 lb/gal) of coating solids used; (2) collectively manage the
coatings such that the monthly emission rate of organic HAP is less
than or equal to 0.10 kg organic HAP/liter (0.83 lb/gal) coating solids
used; or (3) use emission capture systems and control devices to
achieve an organic HAP emissions rate of less than or equal to 0.10 kg
organic HAP/liter (0.83 lb/gal) coating solids used.
Facilities using the compliant material option or the emission rate
without add-on controls option are not required to meet any work
practice standards, but facilities that use add-on controls to
demonstrate compliance must develop and implement a work practice plan
and comply with site-specific operating limits for the emission capture
and control system.
C. What changes did we propose for the source categories in our
September 12, 2018, RTR proposal?
On September 12, 2018, the EPA published a proposed rule in the
Federal Register for the Surface Coating of Large Appliances NESHAP;
the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles NESHAP;
and the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture NESHAP, 40 CFR part 63,
subpart NNNN, 40 CFR part 63, subpart OOOO, and 40 CFR part 63, subpart
RRRR, respectively, that took into consideration the RTR analyses.
We proposed to find that the risks from each of the source
categories are acceptable, and that additional emission controls for
each source category are not necessary to provide an ample margin of
safety.
We also proposed the following amendments:
Pursuant to the technology reviews for the Surface Coating
of Large Appliances source category and the Surface Coating of Metal
Furniture source category, a requirement that, for each coating
operation for which coatings are spray applied, high-efficiency spray
equipment must be used if the source is not using the emission rate
with add-on control compliance option;
For each source category, a requirement for electronic
submittal of notifications, semi-annual reports, and compliance reports
(which include performance test reports);
For each source category, revisions to the SSM provisions
of each NESHAP in order to ensure that they are consistent with the
Court decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F. 3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008),
which vacated two provisions that exempted source owners and operators
from the requirement to comply with otherwise applicable CAA section
112(d) emission standards during periods of SSM;
For each source category, adding the option of conducting
EPA Method 18 of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60, ``Measurement of Gaseous
Organic Compound Emissions by Gas Chromatography,'' to measure and then
subtract methane emissions from measured total gaseous organic mass
emissions as carbon;
For each source category, removing references to paragraph
(d)(4) of OSHA's Hazard Communication standard (29 CFR 1910.1200),
which dealt with OSHA-defined carcinogens, and replacing that reference
with a list of HAP that must be regarded as potentially carcinogenic
based on EPA guidelines;
For each source category, IBR of alternative test methods
and references to updated alternative test methods; and
Several minor editorial and technical changes in each
subpart.
In the same notice, we requested comment on the following, although
we did not propose actual rule amendments:
Whether the EPA should change the reporting frequency for
all reports submitted to the EPA from semi-annual to annual, for all
three source categories;
Whether, for all three source categories, additional
performance testing should be required, with a specific request for
comment on a requirement to conduct performance testing any time a
source plans to undertake an operational change that may adversely
affect compliance with an applicable standard, operating limit, or
parametric monitoring value;
Whether the Agency should ban the use of ethylene oxide in
the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles source
category under the technology review;
[[Page 9595]]
Whether the Agency should establish a work practice for
sources in the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other
Textiles source category for periods of malfunction when an immediate
line shutdown may not be feasible due to safety concerns, and concerns
that an immediate shutdown would result in the unnecessary generation
of hazardous waste; and
The relationship between CAA sections 112(d)(6),
technology review, and CAA section 112(f), residual risk review;
specifically, the extent to which findings that underlie a CAA section
112(f) determination should be considered in making any determinations
under CAA section 112(d)(6).
III. What is included in these final rules?
This action amends and finalizes the EPA's determinations pursuant
to the RTR provisions of CAA section 112 for three rules--the Surface
Coating of Large Appliances; the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of
Fabrics and Other Textiles; and the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture.
This action also finalizes the following changes for each source
category:
A requirement for periodic performance testing of capture
and control devices every 5 years;
A requirement for electronic submittal of notifications,
semi-annual reports, and compliance reports (which include performance
test reports);
Revising the SSM provisions of each NESHAP;
Adding the option to conduct EPA Method 18 of appendix A
to 40 CFR part 60, ``Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions
by Gas Chromatography,'' to measure and then subtract methane emissions
from measured total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon;
Removing references to paragraph (d)(4) of OSHA's Hazard
Communication standard (29 CFR 1910.1200), which dealt with OSHA-
defined carcinogens, and replacing that reference with a list of HAP
that must be regarded as potentially carcinogenic based on EPA
guidelines;
IBR of alternative test methods and references to updated
alternative test methods and updated appendices; and
Several minor technical amendments and clarifications of
the applicability of the NESHAP and definitions.
A. What are the final rule amendments based on the risk review for the
Surface Coating of Large Appliances; Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of
Fabrics and Other Textile; and Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
source categories?
This section describes the final amendments to the Surface Coating
of Large Appliances NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart NNNN); the
Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles NESHAP (40
CFR part 63, subpart OOOO); and the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart RRRR) being promulgated pursuant to CAA
section 112(f). The EPA proposed no changes to these three subparts
based on the risk reviews conducted pursuant to CAA section 112(f). In
this action, we are finalizing our proposed determination that risks
from these three subparts are acceptable, and that the standards
provide an ample margin of safety to protect public health and prevent
an adverse environmental effect. The EPA received no new data or other
information during the public comment period that causes us to change
that proposed determination. Therefore, we are not requiring additional
controls under CAA section 112(f)(2) for any of the three subparts in
this action.
B. What are the final rule amendments based on the technology review
for the source categories?
For 40 CFR part 63, subpart NNNN, 40 CFR part 63, subpart OOOO, and
40 CFR part 63, subpart RRRR, we are not finalizing any revisions to
the MACT standards under CAA section 112(d)(6) pursuant to our
technology reviews.
C. What are the final rule amendments addressing emissions during
periods of SSM?
We are finalizing, as proposed, changes to the Surface Coating of
Large Appliances; the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and
Other Textiles; and the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture source
categories NESHAP to eliminate the SSM exemption. Consistent with
Sierra Club v. EPA 551 F. 3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008), the EPA is
establishing standards in these rules that apply at all times. Table 2
to Subpart NNNN of Part 63, Table 3 to Subpart OOOO of Part 63, and
Table 2 to Subpart RRRR of Part 63 (General Provisions applicability
table) are being revised to change several references related to
requirements that apply during periods of SSM. We eliminated or revised
certain recordkeeping and reporting requirements related to the
eliminated SSM exemption. The EPA also made changes to the rule to
remove or modify inappropriate, unnecessary, or redundant language in
the absence of the SSM exemption. We determined that facilities in
these source categories can meet the applicable emission standards in
the Surface Coating of Large Appliances; the Printing, Coating, and
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles; and the Surface Coating of Metal
Furniture NESHAP at all times, including periods of startup and
shutdown. Therefore, the EPA determined that no additional standards
are needed to address emissions during these periods. The legal
rationale and detailed changes for SSM periods that we are finalizing
today are set forth in the proposed rule. See 83 FR 46284 through
46288, 46295 through 46298, and 46305 through 46308.
We are finalizing a revision to the performance testing
requirements at 40 CFR 63.4164, 40 CFR 63.4360, and 40 CFR 63.4963. The
final performance testing provisions prohibit performance testing
during startup, shutdown, or malfunction as these conditions are not
representative of normal operating procedures. The final rules will
also require that operators maintain records to document that operating
conditions during the test represent normal operations.
D. What other changes have been made to the NESHAP?
These rules also finalize, as proposed, revisions to several other
NESHAP requirements. We describe the revisions that apply to all the
affected source categories in the following paragraphs.
To increase the ease and efficiency of data submittal and data
accessibility, we are finalizing a requirement that owners and
operators of facilities in the Surface Coating of Large Appliances;
Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles; and
Surface Coating of Metal Furniture source categories submit electronic
copies of certain required performance test reports through the EPA's
Central Data Exchange (CDX) website using an electronic performance
test report tool called the Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT). We also
are finalizing, as proposed, provisions that allow facility operators
the ability to seek extensions for submitting electronic reports for
circumstances beyond the control of the facility, i.e., for a possible
outage in the CDX or Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface
(CEDRI) or for a force majeure event in the time just prior to a
report's due date, as well as the process to assert such a claim.
We are finalizing amendments to 40 CFR 63.4166(b), 40 CFR
63.4362(b), and
[[Page 9596]]
40 CFR 63.4965(b) to add the option of conducting EPA Method 18 of
appendix A to 40 CFR part 60, ``Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound
Emissions by Gas Chromatography,'' to measure and then subtract methane
emissions from measured total gaseous organic mass emissions, as
carbon, for those facilities using the emission rate with add-on
control compliance option and EPA Method 25A to measure control device
destruction efficiency. We also are finalizing the format of references
to test methods in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A to indicate where, in the
eight sections of appendix A, each method is found.
For each subpart, we are finalizing the proposal to remove the
reference to paragraph (d)(4) of OSHA's Hazard Communication standard
(29 CFR 1910.1200) and replace with a reference to a new table in each
subpart (Table 5 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart NNNN, Table 6 to 40 CFR
part 63, subpart OOOO, and Table 5 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart RRRR)
that lists the organic HAP that must be included in calculating total
organic HAP content of a coating material present at 0.1 percent or
greater by mass. We are finalizing the a provision to include organic
HAP in these tables if they were categorized in the EPA's ``Prioritized
Chronic Dose-Response Values for Screening Risk Assessments'' (dated
May 9, 2014) as a ``human carcinogen,'' ``probable human carcinogen,''
or ``possible human carcinogen'' according to ``The Risk Assessment
Guidelines of 1986'' (EPA/600/8-87/045, August 1987),\2\ or as
``carcinogenic to humans,'' ``likely to be carcinogenic to humans,'' or
with ``suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential'' according to the
``Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment'' (EPA/630/P-03/001F, March
2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See https://www.epa.gov/fera/dose-response-assessment-assessing-health-risks-associated-exposure-hazardous-air-pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are including in the final rule for each subpart a requirement
for facilities to conduct control device performance testing no less
frequently than once every 5 years when using the emission rate with
add-on controls compliance option. Facilities will be able to conduct
these performance tests on the same schedule as their title V operating
permit renewals. If the title V permit already requires performance
testing, no additional testing will be required.
1. What other changes have been made to the Surface Coating of Large
Appliances source category NESHAP?
We are finalizing several miscellaneous technical amendments to
improve the clarity of the rule requirements:
Clarifying that a thermocouple is part of the temperature
sensor referred to in 40 CFR 63.4168(c)(3) for purposes of performing
periodic calibration and verification checks;
Renumbering 40 CFR 63.4130(k)(8) and (9) to be 40 CFR
63.4130(k)(7) and (8) because the current paragraph 40 CFR 63.4130(k)
is missing a paragraph (k)(7);
Revising the rule citation ``Sec. 63.4130(k)(9)'' in 40
CFR 63.4163(e) to be ``Sec. 63.4130(k)(8),'' consistent with the
proposed renumbering of 40 CFR 63.4130(k)(9) to (k)(8);
Clarifying that 40 CFR 63.4131(a) applies to all records
that were submitted as reports electronically via the EPA's CEDRI and
adding text to the same provision to clarify that the ability to
maintain electronic copies does not affect the requirement for
facilities to make records, data, and reports available upon request to
a delegated air agency or the EPA as part of an on-site compliance
evaluation; and
Revising 40 CFR 63.4141(b) and (c) to update ASTM
International (ASTM) D1475-90 to ASTM D1475-13, including IBR of the
newer version of the method.
We are finalizing corrections to several erroneous rule citations:
Revising one instance in 40 CFR 63.4160(a)(1) and three
instances in 40 CFR 63.4160(b)(1) that an erroneous rule citation
``Sec. 63.4183'' is specified. Section 63.4183 does not exist in 40
CFR part 63, subpart NNNN, and the corrected citation is ``Sec.
63.4083'';
Revising one instance in 40 CFR 63.4110(b)(10) of an
erroneous rule citation ``Sec. 63.4081(d).'' The corrected citation is
``Sec. 63.4081(e)'';
Revising one instance in 40 CFR 63.4130(f) and one
instance in 40 CFR 63.4130(g) of an erroneous rule citation of ``Sec.
63.4141(a).'' The corrected citation is ``Sec. 63.4141'';
Revising one instance in 40 CFR 63.4168(c)(2) where an
erroneous rule citation ``Sec. 63.6167(b)(1) and (2)'' is specified.
The corrected citation is to ``Sec. 63.4167(b)(1) and (2)'';
Revising the rule citation for ``Sec. 63.4120(b)''
specified in the fourth column of the table entry for ``Sec.
63.10(d)(2).'' The corrected citation is ``Sec. 63.4120(h)'';
Revising the rule citation ``Sec. 63.4120(b)'' specified
in the fourth column of the table entry for ``Sec. 63.10(e)(3).'' The
corrected citation is ``Sec. 63.4120(g)''; and
Clarifying that 40 CFR 63.4152(c) requires a statement
that the source was in compliance with the emission limitations during
the reporting period applies only if there were no deviations from the
emission limitations.
The above clarifications and corrections were proposed in the
September 12, 2018, RTR proposal. No comments were received during the
public comment period and these changes are being finalized as
proposed.
2. What other changes have been made to the Printing, Coating, and
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles source category NESHAP?
We are finalizing the proposal to amend 40 CFR 63.4350(a)(3) and
(b)(3); and 40 CFR 63.4351(a) and (e) to correct the references to the
alternative control device outlet organic HAP concentration limit from
20 parts per million by weight to 20 ppmv.
In addition, we are finalizing several miscellaneous technical
amendments to improve the clarity of the rule requirements:
Clarifying that a thermocouple is part of the temperature
indicator referred to in 40 CFR 63.4364(c) for purposes of performing
periodic calibration and verification checks;
Clarifying that 40 CFR 63.4313(a) applies to all records
that were submitted as reports electronically via the EPA's CEDRI and
adding text to the same provision to clarify that the ability to
maintain electronic copies does not affect the requirement for
facilities to make records, data, and reports available upon request to
a delegated air agency or the EPA as part of an on-site compliance
evaluation;
Amending a reporting requirement in 40 CFR 63.4342(f) to
harmonize the requirement with the same reporting requirement in 40 CFR
63.4311(a)(4) that requires the same statement to be reported if
``there were no deviations from the emission limitations in Sec. Sec.
63.4290, 63.4292, and 63.4293'';
Revising one instance in 40 CFR 63.4311(a)(7)(i)(B) to add
a reference for an equation that is missing by adding ``6'' to the list
of equations cited in 40 CFR 63.4311(a)(7)(i)(B) so that the citation
reads ``Equations 4, 4A, 5, 6, and 7 of Sec. 63.4331'';
Revising one instance in 40 CFR 63.4340(b)(3) in which an
erroneous rule citation to ``Sec. 63.4561'' is corrected to ``Sec.
63.4341''; and
Correcting Table 3 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart OOOO in the
fourth column of the table entry for ``Sec. 63.8(g)(1)-(5)'' that
erroneously refers to ``sections 63.4342 and 63.4352.'' The correct
reference is ``Sections 63.4363 and 63.4364.''
The above clarifications and corrections were proposed in the
[[Page 9597]]
September 12, 2018, RTR proposal. No comments were received during the
public comment period and these changes are being finalized as
proposed.
3. What other changes have been made to the Surface Coating of Metal
Furniture source category NESHAP?
We are finalizing several proposed miscellaneous technical
amendments to improve the clarity of the rule requirements:
Clarifying that a thermocouple is part of the temperature
sensor referred to in 40 CFR 63.4967(c)(3) for purposes of performing
periodic calibration and verification checks;
Clarifying that 40 CFR 63.4931(a) applies to all records
that were submitted as reports electronically via the EPA's CEDRI and
adding text to the same provision to clarify that the ability to
maintain electronic copies does not affect the requirement for
facilities to make records, data, and reports available upon request to
a delegated air agency or the EPA as part of an on-site compliance
evaluation;
Revising the second sentence of 40 CFR 63.4920(a)(4) to
correct an erroneous reference to ``the emission limitations in Sec.
63.4890.'' The correct reference is to the applicable emission
limitations in 40 CFR 63.4890, 63.4892, and 63.489;
Changing ``emission limitations'' in the first sentence of
40 CFR 63.4920(a)(4) to ``emission limits'';
Revising 40 CFR 63.4941(c) to update ASTM D1475-90 to ASTM
D1475-13, including IBR of the newer version of the method;
Revising 40 CFR 63.4951(c) to remove repetition with the
cross-referenced 40 CFR 63.4941(c); and
Correcting Table 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart RRRR in the
fourth column of the table entry for ``Sec. 63.10(e)(3)'' for an
erroneous rule citation of ``Sec. 63.4920(b).'' The correct rule
citation is ``Sec. 63.4920(a).''
The above clarifications and corrections were proposed in the
September 12, 2018, RTR proposal. No comments were received during the
public comment period and these changes are being finalized as
proposed.
E. What are the effective and compliance dates of the standards?
The effective date of all three final rules is March 15, 2019. We
are finalizing two changes that would impact ongoing compliance
requirements for each of these three subparts. We are adding a
requirement that notifications, performance test results, and
semiannual compliance reports be submitted electronically using the new
template for each subpart that was included in the docket for each
proposed rule. We are also changing the requirements for SSM by
removing the exemption from the requirements to meet the standard
during SSM periods and by removing the requirement to develop and
implement an SSM plan. From our assessment of the timeframe needed for
implementing the entirety of the revised requirements, the EPA proposed
a period of 180 days to be the most expeditious compliance period
practicable. No comments were received during the public comment period
and the 180-day period is being finalized as proposed. Thus, the
compliance date of the final amendments for all affected sources will
be September 11, 2019.
F. What are the requirements for submission of performance test data to
the EPA?
As proposed, the EPA is taking a step to increase the ease and
efficiency of data submittal and data accessibility. Specifically, the
EPA is finalizing the requirement for owners and operators of
facilities in the Surface Coating of Large Appliances; the Printing,
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles; and the Surface
Coating of Metal Furniture source categories to submit electronic
copies of certain required performance test reports.
Data will be collected by direct computer-to-computer electronic
transfer using EPA-provided software. This EPA-provided software is an
electronic performance test report tool called the ERT (Electronic
Reporting Tool). The ERT will generate an electronic report package
which will be submitted to CEDRI, and then archived to the EPA's CDX. A
description of the ERT and instructions for using ERT can be found at
https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/index.html. CEDRI can be accessed
through the CDX website (https://cdx.epa.gov/).
The requirement to submit performance test data electronically to
the EPA does not create any additional performance testing and will
apply only to those performance tests conducted using test methods that
are supported by the ERT. A listing of the pollutants and test methods
supported by the ERT is available at the ERT website. Through this
approach, industry will save time in the performance test submittal
process. Additionally, this rulemaking will benefit industry by
reducing recordkeeping costs, as the performance test reports that are
submitted to the EPA using CEDRI are no longer required to be kept in
hard copy.
State, local, and tribal agencies may benefit from a more
streamlined and accurate review of performance test data that will
become available to the public through WebFIRE. Having such data
publicly available enhances transparency and accountability. For a more
thorough discussion of electronic reporting of performance tests using
direct computer-to-computer electronic transfer and using EPA-provided
software, see the discussion in the preamble of the proposal.
In summary, in addition to supporting regulation development,
control strategy development, and other air pollution control
activities, having an electronic database populated with performance
test data will save industry, state, local, tribal agencies, and the
EPA significant time, money, and effort while improving the quality of
emission inventories and air quality regulations.
IV. What is the rationale for our final decisions and amendments for
these three surface coating source categories?
A. Residual Risk Reviews
1. What did we propose pursuant to CAA section 112(f)?
a. Surface Coating of Large Appliances (40 CFR part 63, Subpart NNNN)
Source Category
Pursuant to CAA section 112(f), the EPA conducted a residual risk
review and presented the results of this review, along with our
proposed decisions regarding risk acceptability and ample margin of
safety, in the September 12, 2018, proposed rule for 40 CFR part 63,
subpart NNNN (83 FR 46262). The results of the risk assessment for the
proposal are presented briefly below in Table 2 of this preamble. More
detail is in the residual risk technical support document, ``Residual
Risk Assessment for the Surface Coating of Large Appliances Source
Category in Support of the May 2018 Risk and Technology Review Proposed
Rule,'' available in the docket for this rulemaking.
[[Page 9598]]
Table 2--Surface Coating of Large Appliances Source Category Inhalation Risk Assessment Results at Proposal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum individual Estimated population Estimated annual Maximum chronic Maximum screening
cancer risk (in 1 at increased risk of cancer incidence noncancer TOSHI \1\ acute noncancer HQ
million) cancer >=1-in-1 (cases per year) ------------------------ \2\
------------------------ Million ------------------------ ------------------------
Risk assessment ------------------------ Based on Based on
Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on actual allowable Based on actual
actual allowable actual allowable actual allowable emissions emissions emissions
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Category................ 0.9 1 0 50 0.0001 0.0002 0.07 0.08 HQREL = 2
Whole Facility................. 6 .......... 600 .......... 0.0002 .......... 0.2 ..........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The target organ-specific hazard index (TOSHI) is the sum of the chronic noncancer hazard quotients (HQ) values for substances that affect the same
target organ or organ system.
\2\ The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop HQ values (HQREL = hazard
quotient recommended exposure level).
The results of the proposal inhalation risk modeling using actual
emissions data, as shown in Table 2 of this preamble, indicate that the
maximum individual cancer risk based on actual emissions (lifetime)
could be up to 0.9-in-1 million, the maximum chronic noncancer TOSHI
value based on actual emissions could be up to 0.07, and the maximum
screening acute noncancer HQ value (off-facility site) could be up to 2
(driven by glycol ethers). At proposal, the total annual cancer
incidence (national) from these facilities based on actual emission
levels was estimated to be 0.0001 excess cancer cases per year, or one
case in every 10,000 years.
The results of the proposal inhalation risk modeling using
allowable emissions data, as shown in Table 2 of this preamble,
indicate that the maximum individual cancer risk based on allowable
emissions (lifetime) could be up to 1-in-1 million, and the maximum
chronic noncancer TOSHI value based on allowable emissions could be up
to 0.08. At proposal, the total annual cancer incidence (national) from
these facilities based on allowable emission levels was estimated to be
0.0002 excess cancer cases per year, or one case in every 5,000 years.
The maximum whole-facility cancer maximum individual risk (MIR) was
determined to be 6-in-1 million at proposal, driven by chromium (VI)
compounds from a cleaning/pretreatment operation. At proposal, the
total estimated cancer incidence from whole facility emissions was
determined to be 0.0002 excess cancer cases per year, or one excess
case in every 5,000 years. Approximately 600 people were estimated to
have cancer risks above 1-in-1 million from exposure to HAP emitted
from both MACT and non-MACT sources at the 10 facilities in this source
category. The maximum facility-wide TOSHI for the source category was
estimated to be 0.2, driven by emissions of methylene diphenyl
diisocyanate from foam produced as part of plastic products
manufacturing.
There are no persistent and bioaccumulative HAP (PB HAP) emitted by
facilities in this source category. Therefore, we did not estimate any
human health multi-pathway risks from this source category. Two
environmental HAP are emitted by sources within this source category:
Hydrogen chloride (HCl) and hydrogen flouride (HF). Therefore, at
proposal we conducted a screening-level evaluation of the potential
adverse environmental risks associated with emissions of HCl and HF.
Based on this evaluation, we proposed that we do not expect an adverse
environmental effect as a result of HAP emissions from this source
category.
We weighed all health risk factors, including those shown in Table
2 of this preamble, in our risk acceptability determination and
proposed that the residual risks from the Surface Coating of Large
Appliances source category are acceptable (section IV.A.2.a of proposal
preamble, 83 FR 46279, September 12, 2018).
We then considered whether 40 CFR part 63, subpart NNNN provides an
ample margin of safety to protect public health and prevents, taking
into consideration costs, energy, safety, and other relevant factors,
an adverse environmental effect. In considering whether the standards
should be tightened to provide an ample margin of safety to protect
public health, we considered the same risk factors that we considered
for our acceptability determination and also considered the costs,
technological feasibility, and other relevant factors related to
emissions control options that might reduce risk associated with
emissions from the source category.
As discussed further in section III.B. of this preamble, the only
development identified in the technology review was the use of high-
efficiency spray equipment. We estimated no changes in costs or
emissions would occur due to switching to high-efficiency application
methods for this source category, because we expected that large
appliance surface coating facilities already are using high-efficiency
coating application methods due to state volatile organic compound
(VOC) rules and the economic incentives of using more efficient
application methods. Because quantifiable reductions in risk are
unlikely, we proposed that additional emissions controls for this
source category are not necessary to provide an ample margin of safety
(section IV.A.2.b. of proposal preamble, 83 FR 46279, September 12,
2018).
b. Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles (40 CFR
Part 63, Subpart OOOO) Source Category
Pursuant to CAA section 112(f), the EPA conducted a residual risk
review and presented the results of this review, along with our
proposed decisions regarding risk acceptability and ample margin of
safety, in the September 12, 2018, proposed rule for 40 CFR part 63,
subpart OOOO (83 FR 46262). The results of the risk assessment for the
proposal are presented briefly below in Table 3 of this preamble. More
detail is in the residual risk technical support document, ``Residual
Risk Assessment for the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and
Other Textiles Source Category in Support of the May 2018 Risk and
Technology Review Proposed Rule,'' available in the docket for this
rulemaking.
[[Page 9599]]
Table 3--Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles Source Category Inhalation Risk Assessment Results at Proposal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum individual Estimated population Estimated annual Maximum chronic Maximum screening
cancer risk (in 1 at increased risk of cancer incidence noncancer TOSHI \1\ acute noncancer HQ \2\
million) cancer >=1-in-1 (cases per year) ------------------------------------------------
------------------------ million ------------------------
Risk assessment ------------------------ Based on Based on
Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on actual allowable Based on actual
actual allowable actual allowable actual allowable emissions emissions emissions
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Category................ 9 10 8,500 10,000 0.002 0.002 0.3 0.3 HQREL = 0.6
Whole Facility................. 9 .......... 12,200 .......... 0.003 .......... 0.3 .......... .......................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The target organ-specific hazard index (TOSHI) is the sum of the chronic noncancer hazard quotient (HQ) values for substances that affect the same
target organ or organ system.
\2\ The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop HQ values (HQREL = hazard
quotient recommended exposure level).
The results of the proposal inhalation risk modeling using actual
emissions data, as shown in Table 3 of this preamble, indicate that the
maximum individual cancer risk based on actual emissions (lifetime)
could be up to 9-in-1 million (driven by ethylene oxide), the maximum
chronic noncancer TOSHI value based on actual emissions could be up to
0.3, and the maximum screening acute noncancer HQ value (off-facility
site) could be up to 0.6. At proposal, the total annual cancer
incidence (national) from these facilities based on actual emission
levels was estimated to be 0.002 excess cancer cases per year, or one
case in every 500 years.
The results of the proposal inhalation risk modeling using
allowable emissions data, as shown in Table 3 of this preamble,
indicate that the maximum individual cancer risk based on allowable
emissions (lifetime) could be up to 10-in-1 million (driven by ethylene
oxide), the maximum chronic noncancer TOSHI value based on allowable
emissions could be up to 0.3. At proposal, the total annual cancer
incidence (national) from these facilities based on allowable emission
levels was estimated to be 0.002 excess cancer cases per year, or one
case in every 500 years.
The maximum facility-wide cancer MIR was 9-in-1 million at
proposal, driven by ethylene oxide from fabric finishing. The results
of our facility-wide assessment at proposal indicated that 12
facilities have a facility-wide cancer MIR greater than or equal to 1-
in-1 million. At proposal the total estimated cancer incidence from
whole facility emissions was determined to be 0.003 excess cancer cases
per year, or one excess case in every 330 years. Approximately 12,200
people were estimated to have cancer risks above 1-in-1 million from
exposure to HAP emitted from both MACT and non-MACT sources collocated
at the 43 facilities in this source category. The maximum facility-wide
TOSHI for the source category was estimated to be 0.3, driven by
emissions of trichloroethylene from adhesive application.
There are no PB-HAP emitted by facilities in this source category.
Therefore, we did not estimate any human health multi-pathway risks
from this source category. Environmental HAP are not emitted by sources
within this source category; therefore, we do not expect an adverse
environmental effect as a result of HAP emissions from this source
category.
We weighed all health risk factors, including those shown in Table
3 of this preamble, in our risk acceptability determination, and
proposed that the residual risks from the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing
of Fabrics and Other Textiles source category are acceptable (section
IV.B.2.a of proposal preamble, 83 FR 46292, September 12, 2018).
We then considered whether 40 CFR part 63, subpart OOOO provides an
ample margin of safety to protect public health and prevents, taking
into consideration costs, energy, safety, and other relevant factors,
an adverse environmental effect. In considering whether the standards
should be tightened to provide an ample margin of safety to protect
public health, we considered the same risk factors that we considered
for our acceptability determination and also considered the costs,
technological feasibility, and other relevant factors related to
emissions control options that might reduce risk associated with
emissions from the source category.
Based on our review, we did not identify any developments in add-on
control technologies, other equipment or work practices and procedures
since the promulgation of the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics
and Other Textiles NESHAP. We note, however, that the only facility
that previously reported ethylene oxide emissions no longer emits this
HAP as a result of a process change. Therefore, we proposed that
additional emissions controls for this source category are not
necessary to provide an ample margin of safety (section IV.B.2.b. of
proposal preamble, 83 FR 46293, September 12, 2018). However, we
solicited comment on whether the Agency should ban the use of ethylene
oxide in this source category under the technology review (section VI
of proposal preamble, 83 FR 46313, September 12, 2018). Our response to
these comments and rationale for our final decision are found in
section IV.B of this preamble.
c. Surface Coating of Metal Furniture (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart RRRR)
Source Category
Pursuant to CAA section 112(f), the EPA conducted a residual risk
review and presented the results of this review, along with our
proposed decisions regarding risk acceptability and ample margin of
safety, in the September 12, 2018, proposed rule for 40 CFR part 63,
subpart RRRR (83 FR 46262). The results of the risk assessment for the
proposal are presented briefly below in Table 4 of this preamble. More
detail is in the residual risk technical support document, ``Residual
Risk Assessment for the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture Source
Category in Support of the May 2018 Risk and Technology Review Proposed
Rule,'' available in the docket for this rulemaking.
[[Page 9600]]
Table 4--Surface Coating of Metal Furniture Source Category Inhalation Risk Assessment Results at Proposal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum individual Estimated population Estimated annual Maximum chronic Maximum screening
cancer risk (in 1 at increased risk of cancer incidence noncancer TOSHI \1\ acute noncancer HQ
million) cancer >=1-in-1 (cases per year) ------------------------ \2\
------------------------ million ------------------------ ------------------------
Risk assessment ------------------------ Based on Based on
Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on actual allowable Based on actual
actual allowable actual allowable actual allowable emissions emissions emissions
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Category................ 7 10 2,100 4,200 0.0004 0.0008 0.2 0.3 HQREL = 2
Whole Facility................. 7 .......... 2,200 .......... 0.0005 .......... 0.1 .......... .......................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The TOSHI is the sum of the chronic noncancer HQ values for substances that affect the same target organ or organ system.
\2\ The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop HQ values (HQREL = hazard
quotient recommended exposure level).
The results of the proposal inhalation risk modeling using actual
emissions data, as shown in Table 4 of this preamble, indicate that the
maximum individual cancer risk based on actual emissions (lifetime)
could be up to 7-in-1 million (driven by ethyl benzene), the maximum
chronic noncancer TOSHI value based on actual emissions could be up to
0.2, and the maximum screening acute noncancer HQ value (off-facility
site) could be up to 2 (driven by glycol ethers). At proposal, the
total annual cancer incidence (national) from these facilities based on
actual emission levels was estimated to be 0.0004 excess cancer cases
per year, or one case in every 2,500 years.
The results of the proposal inhalation risk modeling using
allowable emissions data, as shown in Table 4 of this preamble,
indicate that the maximum individual cancer risk based on allowable
emissions (lifetime) could be up to 10-in-1 million (driven by ethyl
benzene), the maximum chronic noncancer TOSHI value based on allowable
emissions could be up to 0.3. At proposal, the total annual cancer
incidence (national) from these facilities based on allowable emission
levels was estimated to be 0.0008 excess cancer cases per year, or one
case in every 1,250 years.
The maximum facility-wide cancer MIR was 7-in-1 million at
proposal, driven by ethyl benzene. Four facilities had a facility-wide
cancer MIR greater than or equal to 1-in-1 million. At proposal, the
total cancer incidence from whole facility emissions was estimated to
be 0.0005 excess cancer cases per year, or one excess case in every
2,000 years. Approximately 2,200 people were estimated to have cancer
risks above 1-in-1 million from exposure to HAP emitted from both MACT
and non-MACT sources at the 16 facilities in this source category. The
maximum facility-wide TOSHI for the source category was estimated to be
0.1.
There are no PB-HAP emitted by facilities in this source category.
Therefore, we did not estimate any human health multi-pathway risks
from this source category. Environmental HAP are not emitted by sources
within this source category; therefore, we do not expect an adverse
environmental effect as a result of HAP emissions from this source
category.
We weighed all health risk factors, including those shown in Table
4 of this preamble, in our risk acceptability determination, and
proposed that the residual risks from the Surface Coating of Metal
Furniture source category are acceptable (section IV.C.2.a of proposal
preamble, 83 FR 46301, September 12, 2018).
We then considered whether 40 CFR part 63, subpart RRRR provides an
ample margin of safety to protect public health and prevents, taking
into consideration costs, energy, safety, and other relevant factors,
an adverse environmental effect. In considering whether the standards
should be tightened to provide an ample margin of safety to protect
public health, we considered the same risk factors that we considered
for our acceptability determination and also considered the costs,
technological feasibility, and other relevant factors related to
emissions control options that might reduce risk associated with
emissions from the source category.
As discussed in detail in section III.B of this preamble, the only
development identified in the technology review was the use of high-
efficiency spray equipment. We estimated no changes in costs or
emissions reductions would occur due to switching to high-efficiency
application methods for this source category because we expected that
metal furniture surface coating facilities were already using high-
efficiency coating application methods due to state VOC rules and the
economic incentives of using these more efficient application methods.
Because quantifiable reductions in risk are unlikely, we proposed that
additional emissions controls for this source category were not
necessary to provide an ample margin of safety (section IV.C.2.b. of
proposal preamble, 83 FR 46302, September 12, 2018).
2. How did the risk review change?
We have not changed any aspect of the risk assessment since the
September 2018 proposal for any of the three source categories.
3. What key comments did we receive on the risk reviews, and what are
our responses?
We received comments in support of and against the proposed
residual risk review and our determination that no revisions were
warranted under CAA section 112(f)(2) for all three source categories.
Generally, the comments that were not supportive of the determination
from the risk reviews suggested changes to the underlying risk
assessment methodology. For example, some commenters stated that the
EPA should lower the acceptability benchmark so that risks below 100-
in-1 million are unacceptable, include emissions outside of the source
categories in question in the risk assessment, and assume that
pollutants with noncancer health risks have no safe level of exposure.
After review of all the comments received, we determined that no
changes were necessary. The comments and our specific responses can be
found in the document, ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for
the Risk and Technology Reviews for Surface Coating of Large
Appliances; Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other
Textiles; and Surface Coating of Metal Furniture,'' available in the
dockets for these actions (Docket ID Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0668, EPA-HQ-
OAR-2017-0669, and EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0670).
[[Page 9601]]
4. What is the rationale for our final approach and final decisions for
the risk reviews?
As noted in our proposal, the EPA sets standards under CAA section
112(f)(2) using ``a two-step standard-setting approach, with an
analytical first step to determine an `acceptable risk' that considers
all health information, including risk estimation uncertainty, and
includes a presumptive limit on MIR of ``approximately 1-in-10
thousand'' (see 54 FR 38045, September 14, 1989). We weigh all health
risk factors in our risk acceptability determination, including the
cancer MIR, cancer incidence, the maximum cancer TOSHI, the maximum
acute noncancer HQ, the extent of noncancer risks, the distribution of
cancer and noncancer risks in the exposed population, and the risk
estimation uncertainties.
Since proposal, neither the risk assessment nor our determinations
regarding risk acceptability, ample margin of safety, or adverse
environmental effects have changed. For the reasons explained in the
proposed rule, we determined that the risks from each of these three
source categories are acceptable, and the current standards provide an
ample margin of safety to protect public health and prevent an adverse
environmental effect. Therefore, we are not revising any of these three
subparts to require additional controls pursuant to CAA section
112(f)(2) based on the residual risk review, and we are readopting the
existing standards under CAA section 112(f)(2).
B. Technology Reviews
1. What did we propose pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6)?
The Surface Coating of Large Appliances NESHAP and the Surface
Coating of Metal Furniture NESHAP do not contain any standards
specifying the type of spray application equipment that must be used
when coatings are spray applied. Sources subject to the Printing,
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabric and Other Textiles NESHAP do not spray
apply coatings. However, many facilities complying with these NESHAP
also are required by state VOC regulations to use high-efficiency spray
guns for coatings that are spray applied. We expected that other large
appliance surface coating and metal furniture surface coating
facilities in other states are also using high-efficiency application
equipment for spray-applied coatings to reduce coating and spray booth
filter consumption and to reduce the amount of solid waste generated in
the form of used spray booth filters. Although we expected that
switching to high-efficiency spray application equipment would have
lower costs at facilities not already using it, we are uncertain of
other factors that facilities may need to consider if choosing to
switch to high-efficiency application equipment.
Based on these findings, we proposed to revise the Surface Coating
of Large Appliances NESHAP and the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
NESHAP for coating application operations pursuant to CAA section
112(d)(6) to require that, for each coating operation for which
coatings are spray applied, high-efficiency spray equipment must be
used if the source is not using the emission rate with add-on control
compliance option. Specifically, all spray-applied coating operations,
where the source is not using the emission rate with add-on control
compliance option, would have been required to achieve transfer
efficiency equivalent to or better than 65 percent. At proposal four
types of high-efficiency spray equipment technologies were identified
that the EPA believed could achieve transfer efficiency equivalent to
or better than 65 percent, including high volume, low pressure (HVLP)
spray equipment; electrostatic application; airless spray equipment;
and air-assisted airless spray equipment. Alternative spray equipment
technologies would have had to provide documentation demonstrating at
least 65-percent transfer efficiency. Spray application equipment
sources using alternative spray application equipment technologies
other than the four listed would have had to follow procedures in the
California South Coast Air Quality Management District's, ``Spray
Equipment Transfer Efficiency Test Procedure for Equipment User, May
24, 1989,'' to demonstrate that their spray application equipment is
capable of achieving transfer efficiency equivalent to, or better than,
65 percent. Equivalency documentation would have been certified by
manufacturers of the spray equipment, on behalf of facilities using
spray-applied coatings, by following the aforementioned procedure in
conjunction with California South Coast Air Quality Management
District's, ``Guidelines for Demonstrating Equivalency with District
Approved Transfer Efficient Spray Guns, September 26, 2002.'' We
proposed that all spray equipment used for spray-applied coating
operations be required to be operated according to company procedures,
local specified operating procedures, or the manufacturer's
specifications, whichever achieved 65-percent transfer efficiency.
Further, we proposed related definitions for ``airless and air-assisted
airless spray,'' ``electrostatic application,'' ``high-volume, low-
pressure (HVLP) spray equipment,'' ``spray-applied coating
operations,'' ``and transfer efficiency.''
For the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles
source category, we identified one potential development in technology:
A process change that eliminated the use of ethylene oxide at one
facility. In our residual risk analysis for this source category, we
estimated the maximum facility-wide cancer MIR to be 9-in-1 million,
driven by ethylene oxide emissions from fabric finishing at one
facility. During a site visit to the facility that reported ethylene
oxide emissions in the National Emission Inventory, we learned that the
ethylene oxide emissions were overstated by the facility. The facility
confirmed that it no longer uses the ethylene oxide-containing material
due to cost. We noted this was the only facility that reported ethylene
oxide emissions, and we concluded that ethylene oxide-containing
materials are no longer used in the industry, based on our information.
We solicited comment on whether the Agency should ban the use of
ethylene oxide in this source category under the technology review.
We also solicited comment on the relationship between the CAA
section 112(d)(6) technology review and the CAA section 112(f) risk
review. We solicited comment on whether revisions to the NESHAP are
``necessary,'' as the term is used in CAA section 112(d)(6), in
situations where the EPA has determined that CAA section 112(d)
standards evaluated pursuant to CAA section 112(f) provide an ample
margin of safety to protect public health and prevent an adverse
environmental effect. In other words, we solicited comment on whether
it is ``necessary'' to revise the standards based on developments in
technologies, practices, or processes under CAA section 112(d)(6) if
remaining risks associated with air emissions from a source category
have already been reduced to levels that provide an ample margin of
safety under CAA section 112(f). See CAA section 112(d)(6) (``The
Administrator shall review, and revise as necessary . . .''). We also
solicited comment on whether further revisions under CAA section
112(d)(6) would be necessary if the CAA section 112(f) ample margin of
safety analysis shows lifetime excess cancer risks to the individual
most exposed to emissions from a source in the category is less than 1-
in-1 million or if other, either higher
[[Page 9602]]
or lower, cancer risk levels would be appropriate to consider if they
assured an ample margin of safety.
2. How did the technology review change?
We are not finalizing the proposal to require the use of high-
efficiency application equipment for spray-applied coatings in the
Surface Coating of Large Appliances NESHAP and the Surface Coating of
Metal Furniture NESHAP.
We solicited comment on the potential process change that
eliminated the use of ethylene oxide at one facility, but did not
propose this requirement for the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of
Fabrics and Other Textiles source category. Based on the comments we
received, we are making no changes as a result of the technology review
to the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles
NESHAP.
3. What key comments did we receive on the technology reviews, and what
are our responses?
Comment: One commenter supported the EPA's proposal to require
Large Appliances and Metal Furniture facilities to use high-efficiency
spray equipment as a technology development under CAA section
112(d)(6). However, the commenter disagreed with the EPA's conclusion
that all or most sources are likely using high-efficiency spray
equipment. They argued that the EPA provided no evidence there would be
no emission reduction, and argued that the proposed requirement would
prevent emission increases in the future if economic incentives or
state rules currently encouraging the use of high-efficiency spray
equipment change.
Another commenter objected to the proposed language that all
``spray application equipment must be operated according to company
procedures, local specified operating procedures, and/or the
manufacturer's specifications, whichever is most stringent, at all
times.'' The commenter argued that it was unclear how facilities would
ensure the equipment is operated according to the more stringent
approach so as to avoid having a potential permit deviation/violation
even though they may still be complying with the underlying numerical
emission standard.
Response: The EPA has determined not to finalize the proposed
requirement for all sources to use high-efficiency spray application
technology that has a transfer efficiency of at least 65 percent
because we believe our assumptions at proposal may not be appropriate
for all coating-related processes in the metal furniture and large
appliances source categories. We do not have sufficient data at this
time to determine if the high-efficiency spray application technology
requirement is reasonable from a technological perspective.
At proposal, a critical assumption we made was that the four high-
efficiency spray equipment technologies required in the proposed
rulemaking (HVLP, electrostatic application, airless and air assisted
airless spray equipment) would achieve at least 65-percent transfer
efficiency when used by all facilities in the Surface Coating of Metal
Furniture and Surface Coating of Large Appliances source categories.
New information, however, leads us to conclude that the transfer
efficiency of the proposed high-efficiency spray application
technologies may be less than 65 percent, as it is dependent on
parameters such as part size, part shape, distance of the spray gun
from the parts, atomizing air pressure, fluid pressure, painting
technique, type of coating, viscosity of the coating, and more.
Generally, the smaller and narrower the part being coated, the lower
the transfer efficiency. Conversely, the larger and wider the part
being painted, the higher the transfer efficiency. Therefore, transfer
efficiency varies greatly source category-by-source category. In both
the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture and Surface Coating of Large
Appliances source categories, parts are of various shapes and sizes;
therefore, transfer efficiency using high-efficiency spray application
technologies could be lower than the 65-percent transfer efficiency
requirement in the proposed rule, depending on the size and shape of
the parts being coated.
Additionally, we did not receive any data that would allow us to
determine the actual average transfer efficiency of the spray
application technologies we identified in the proposed rule. In light
of this uncertainty, we conclude it would be difficult, if not
impossible, to determine at this time the appropriate high-efficiency
spray application technologies or transfer efficiency to require.
Absent more data and information, we are not able to adequately
estimate the technical feasibility of the proposed 65-percent transfer
efficiency requirement for the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture and
Surface Coating of Large Appliances source categories.
The situation for the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture and
Surface Coating of Large Appliances source categories is different from
other rules where we have required use of high-efficiency spray
application. For example, the high-efficiency spray application
requirements in the Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations
NESHAP were based on available data that allowed us to estimate the
technological feasibility of the requirements. Absent similar data for
the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture and Surface Coating of Large
Appliances source categories, we believe it is not reasonable to
require the use of the high-efficiency spray application technologies
proposed pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6) at this time. The EPA, in
the future, may be able to determine the technological capabilities of
high-efficiency spray application equipment for the Surface Coating of
Metal Furniture and Surface Coating of Large Appliances source
categories and revisit the need to require such spray application
equipment when we have sufficient data and information.
Finally, as noted in the proposed rule, we believe that most, if
not all, sources in the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture and Surface
Coating of Large Appliances source categories are already using the
types of spray application technologies in the proposed rule pursuant
to state requirements. We believe that sources will continue to use
these technologies, even if it is not required in this final rule,
because of the lower coating consumption and waste disposal costs.
Nothing in the record supports the comments that states may remove
these existing spray application technology requirements from current
regulations. We do not expect sources to change from high-efficiency
spray technology to lower-efficiency spray equipment, even if state
requirements changed, unless there was a specific application that did
not work with high-efficiency spray technology. In those cases, the
limits on the HAP content of coatings would still apply. We do not
think it is reasonable to assume sources would choose higher the
coating and waste disposal costs associated with non-high-efficiency
spray technology and incur the costs to switch back to non-high-
efficiency spray technology, even if state requirements were removed.
For all these reasons, we are not finalizing the proposed
requirement for sources in the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture and
Surface Coating of Large Appliances source categories to use high-
efficiency spray application equipment.
Comment: One commenter argued that the EPA should revise the
Coating, Printing, and Dyeing of Fabric and Other Textiles NESHAP to
ban the use of ethylene oxide. The commenter argued that failing to ban
the use of ethylene oxide would allow facilities to
[[Page 9603]]
begin using and emitting this chemical in the future.
Two commenters argued that they saw no justification or rationale
to support a ban on the use of ethylene oxide in the Printing, Coating,
and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles source category because the
decision by one company to stop using materials containing ethylene
oxide based on cost did not represent a development in new control
technologies, processes, or practices that could be deemed applicable
and achievable by the rest of the source category. One of the
commenters argued that, unlike technology changes where efficiency
gains, emissions reductions, and similar advances are not easily
reversed, market forces frequently change the business justification
for and against using particular products.
The two commenters argued that the record reflects only a decision
by one company based on a set of factors that may be applicable to only
that one company and does not provide the statement of basis and
purpose required by CAA section 307(d)(3). The commenters argued that
additional information and data would be needed on potential costs and
emissions reductions and stated that the EPA has not shown whether
similar reductions are achievable across the source category. They
argued that this information would need to be available for public
review and comment. Otherwise, the EPA's proposal would be arbitrary
and capricious.
Response: We received no additional information from other
facilities in the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabric and Other
Textiles source category on whether they use materials containing
ethylene oxide. In addition, we cannot determine whether one facility's
decision to stop using the material containing ethylene oxide as a cost
savings measure demonstrates that all applications of ethylene oxide
should be foreclosed as a development in technology. If sources in this
category were to later determine that materials with ethylene oxide are
necessary for a particular application, the sources would still be
required to comply with the NESHAP limits on the HAP content of
materials or HAP emissions for sources using add-on controls.
Therefore, total HAP emissions are unlikely to increase even if sources
were to start using ethylene oxide containing materials. Under these
circumstances, we have determined it is not reasonable to conclude that
ethylene oxide containing coatings should be prohibited for use by all
sources in the category as an advancement in technology. Finally, we
cannot determine whether finalizing a ban on the use of materials
containing ethylene oxide would reduce HAP from the source category or
otherwise achieve any environmental or risk reduction benefits. For
these reasons, we are not finalizing a ban on the use of materials
containing ethylene oxide.
Comment: We received several substantive and extensive comments in
response to our request for comments on the relationship between the
technology review conducted under CAA section 112(d)(6) and the risk
analysis under CAA section 112(f)(2) and whether it is necessary for
the EPA to amend rules based on CAA section 112(d) to reflect the
results of the CAA section 112(d)(6) technology review if the results
of the risk analysis under CAA section 112(f)(2) show that the current
rule provides an ample margin of safety and no adverse environmental
effect. One commenter argued that the EPA must complete the technology
review and propose standards based on the findings of that review,
regardless of the results of the risk analysis. Other commenters argued
that the results of the risk analysis should be considered in the
``necessity'' determination that should be completed in the process of
deciding whether to amend a subpart as a result of the technology
review.
Response: The EPA is not taking final action on the proposed
interpretation discussed in this comment. Instead, the EPA has
determined for the reasons described in this notice not to implement
the proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subparts NNNN, OOOO, or RRRR
based on our technology review. As we are not relying on the proposed
interpretation in our final action, we are not addressing the comments
we received regarding the relationship between the technology review
conducted under CAA section 112(d)(6) and the risk analysis under CAA
section 112(f)(2).
4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the technology
reviews?
As noted above, we are not finalizing the proposed requirement to
use high-efficiency spray application equipment with a 65-percent or
better transfer efficiency. We received no information in response to
our request for comment on whether any facilities in this source
category do not currently use high-efficiency spray application
methods, so it is unclear whether the proposed requirement is
achievable for all sources in the category. We also received
information indicating that the four types of high-efficiency spray
application equipment described in our proposed rule do not always
achieve the 65-percent transfer efficiency that we proposed to require
for high-efficiency spray equipment.
We are not including in the final rule amendments for the Printing,
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles NESHAP any
requirements to ban the use of ethylene oxide in this source category.
We received no additional information from other facilities on whether
they use materials containing ethylene oxide, so we cannot determine
whether a ban would achieve any environmental or risk reduction
benefits.
C. Ongoing Emissions Compliance Demonstrations
1. What did we propose?
The EPA requested comment for all three source categories on
whether additional performance testing should be required for any
source using the add-on control option based on information from
pollution control manufacturers indicating that periodic performance
tests are necessary to ensure HAP removal efficiency for the controls
is maintained over time. See Proposed Rule, 83 FR 46289. We
specifically requested comment on whether we should require performance
testing for a source that is planning to undertake an operational
change that may adversely affect compliance with an applicable
standard, operating limit, or parametric monitoring value. Any such
requirement would have included provisions to allow a source to make
the change, but it would have limited the change to a specific time
before a test is required. We anticipated that a reasonable time limit
under the new operations change would be approximately 30 days to allow
adequate time for testing and developing a test report. The source
would submit temperature and flow rate data during the test to
establish new operating parameters, including the time a source would
be allowed to operate under the new parameters before the test is
performed, and what would constitute an operational change requiring
testing.
This approach on which we requested comment could have also allowed
an exception from periodic testing for facilities using instruments to
continuously measure actual emissions, such as continuous emission
monitoring systems (CEMS). Use of CEMS to demonstrate compliance would
obviate the need for periodic oxidizer testing.
[[Page 9604]]
2. What changed since proposal?
In the final rule amendments for each subpart, the EPA is requiring
performance testing of control devices at least every 5 years for
facilities complying with the emission rate with add-on controls
compliance option. The EPA solicited comment on the need for additional
performance testing in the proposed rule (see sections IV.A.4.d,
IV.B.4.d, and IV.C.4.d of the Surface Coating of Large Appliances;
Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles; and
Surface Coating of Metal Furniture Residual Risk and Technology
Reviews, 83 FR 46289, 46299, and 46309, September 12, 2018).
3. What key comments did we receive and what are our responses?
Comment: One commenter did not support the requirement to complete
additional add-on control performance testing after operational changes
that may adversely affect compliance because the EPA did not define the
operational changes that would trigger the need for performance
testing. The commenter argued that the EPA did not define the
anticipated costs, burdens, and benefits associated with this testing.
The commenter also argued that the suggested 30-day period for testing
and development of a test report is too short. The commenter
recommended a period of at least 180 days to allow time to hire a
testing contractor, to achieve stable (representative) operating
conditions before the test, and to allow time for the contractor to
prepare the report.
Another commenter supported the testing requirement after a process
change that could affect compliance with an emission limit and noted
that it was a common feature of MACT rules. The commenter suggested
that examples of a process change could include venting additional
equipment to the control device, an increase in line speeds, an
increase in coating materials used, or use of new coating materials.
However, the commenter also suggested that the 30-day timeframe to
perform a test after a process change does not seem adequate to allow a
facility time to schedule an outside contractor to perform the required
testing, test report preparation, review by responsible official, and
submission of results. The commenter recommended a 60-day or 90-day
timeframe as more appropriate.
Response: The EPA is not finalizing a requirement to require add-on
control performance testing after operational changes that may
adversely affect compliance. The EPA acknowledges the difficultly in
defining operational changes for each source category that would
trigger the need for performance testing, as the EPA proposed. However,
as described in the preamble to the proposed rules, the EPA recognizes
the need for periodic performance testing after the initial performance
test to measure the organic HAP destruction or removal efficiency of
the add-on control device, or to measure the control device outlet
concentration of organic HAP. As stated in the proposed rule, pollution
control manufacturers maintain that additional performance testing is
needed to ensure the control devices are operating properly. Continuous
compliance with the standards when a facility is using the emission
rate with add-on control or the control device outlet concentration
compliance options that are included in each of these three subparts
depends on the proper functioning of the control device.
Periodic performance tests require the measurement of the control
devices' actual destruction efficiency or the actual outlet
concentration of organic HAP, depending on the compliance option
chosen, in order to reaffirm or reestablish the control devices'
operating limits. Periodic performance tests help identify potential
degradation of the add-on control device over time and ensure the
control device remains effective, reducing the potential for acute
emissions episodes or non-compliance. As stated in the proposed rule,
many facilities using add-on controls to demonstrate compliance with
the NESHAP emission limits are currently required to conduct
performance tests as a condition for renewing their title V operating
permit, which is required every 5 years. Also, specifying a specific
performance test interval addresses the uncertainty of when tests would
be required was raised by the commenters.
Therefore, the EPA is including in the final rule for each subpart
a requirement that each facility using the emission rate with add-on
control compliance option or the control device outlet concentration
compliance option must complete a performance test of the add-on
control device no less frequently than every 5 years. This approach
will balance the need to ensure ongoing compliance against providing
objective criteria for when performance testing must be completed.
The periodic testing requirement is being added to each subpart but
is not estimated to impose any costs on the Surface Coating of Large
Appliances or Surface Coating of Metal Furniture sources categories. No
facilities in the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture source category
are known to be using the emission rate with add-on controls compliance
option. One facility in the Surface Coating of Large Appliances source
category is using the emission rate with the add-on controls compliance
option, but already is required to conduct performance testing every 5
years as a condition of renewing their title V operating permit. In the
Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles source
category, we have identified 13 facilities using 18 control devices
that are not currently required to perform testing as a condition of
renewing their title V operating permits. We estimate that performance
testing will cost approximately $19,000 per control device once every 5
years. The annualized cost will be about $4,400 per control device.
One environmental benefit of periodic performance testing is
expected to be in the form of reduced excess emissions from sources
using add-on controls, even though facilities are required to be in
compliance at all times, and the overall costs and benefits of a NESHAP
are calculated based on the assumption that facilities are in
compliance. However, this benefit cannot be quantified because our data
are not sufficient to estimate the frequency of sources using add-on
control devices failing to meet the emission standards, and the
magnitude of the excess emissions. If, for example, the standard has a
requirement for 98-percent control (e.g., for new or reconstructed
coating and printing affected sources under 40 CFR part 63, subpart
OOOO), and the device is achieving only 96-percent, emissions are twice
what they would be if the device was meeting the standard. This
potential for significant increases in HAP from poor performing
controls further supports the requirement to conduct periodic testing
every 5 years.
4. What is the rational for our final approach?
For the reasons explained in the preamble to the proposed rules (83
FR 46262, September 12, 2018) and in the comment responses above in
section IV.C.3 of this preamble, we are finalizing requirements in each
of these three subparts to require add-on control performance testing
no less frequently than once every 5 years.
D. Work Practice During Periods of Malfunction
1. What did we propose?
The EPA requested comment on the need to establish a standard
during periods of malfunction of a control device or a capture system
that is used to meet the emission limits for the
[[Page 9605]]
Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles source
category and asked for specific information to support such a standard.
We solicited information from industry on best practices and the best
level of emission control during malfunction events for the Printing,
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles source category. We
solicited information on the potential cost savings associated with
these practices. We solicited specific supporting data on organic HAP
emissions during malfunction events for this category, including the
cause of malfunction, the frequency of malfunction, duration of
malfunction, and the estimate of organic HAP emitted during each
malfunction. We also asked specifically for comment on the use of CEMS
by facilities in this source category as a method to better quantify
organic HAP emissions during malfunctions and normal operation. We also
requested comment on two alternative work practices: (1) During a
malfunction, the facility must discontinue the coating operation, but
can continue the oven curing of any coating materials already applied
onto the web without the control device for the period of the
malfunction so long as it continues to meet the emission limits for the
current compliance period; or (2) during a malfunction, the facility
could initiate repairs immediately and complete them as expeditiously
as possible, without ceasing operations, until it becomes apparent that
the repairs will not be completed before exceeding the 12-month rolling
average compliance limit. Neither alternative provided an opportunity
to exceed the emissions limit. (See section IV.B.4.b of the Surface
Coating of Large Appliances; Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics
and Other Textiles; and Surface Coating of Metal Furniture Residual
Risk and Technology Reviews, 83 FR 46295, September 12, 2018).
2. What changed since proposal?
The EPA is not providing a work practice standard for periods of
malfunction of a control device or a capture system for the Printing,
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles source category in
the final rule amendments.
3. What key comments did we receive and what are our responses?
Comment: One commenter supported the work practice standard that
would apply during malfunctions of any control device or capture system
used by a web coating line, described as alternative 1 in the proposal
preamble, and requested that the EPA develop a malfunction alternative
that balances the generation of waste (from inadequate drying; cured
coatings in lines and guns; and generation of waste coatings) and/or
worker safety with exceeding emission limits. However, the commenter
did not provide any supporting data or information in response to the
EPA's specific solicitation in the proposal preamble.
Another commenter did not support a work practice standard and
noted that it was unlawful to add a malfunction exemption or set a so-
called malfunction-based standard for any source category, including
the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles source
category, because, among other arguments, emission standards must be
``continuous.'' A complete summary of the comments received on the
EPA's proposal is included in the docket for this rulemaking.
Response: The EPA is not finalizing a separate standard for periods
of malfunction, although the EPA may establish a standard for periods
of malfunction if the available information supports a separate
standard in the future. In this case, we requested comment and
information to support the development of a work practice standard
during periods of malfunction, but we did not receive sufficient
information, including additional quantitative emissions data, on which
to base a standard for periods of malfunction. Absent sufficient
information, it is not reasonable at this time to establish a work
practice standard for this source category. We will continue to review
this issue to determine if any new data become available in the future.
4. What is the rational for our final approach?
We are not finalizing a separate standard for periods of
malfunction for the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other
Textiles source category, because we did not receive sufficient
information on which to base a standard for periods of malfunction.
V. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts and Additional
Analyses Conducted
A. What are the affected facilities?
We estimate that the 10 major sources subject to the Surface
Coating of Large Appliances NESHAP, the 43 major sources subject to the
Printing, Coating and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles NESHAP, and
the 16 major sources subject to the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
NESHAP are operating in the United States and will be affected by these
final rules.
B. What are the air quality impacts?
We are not establishing new emission limits and are not requiring
additional controls; therefore, no air quality impacts are expected as
a result of the final amendments to the rule. Requiring periodic
performance testing has the potential to reduce excess emissions from
sources using poorly performing add-on controls, even though facilities
are required to be in compliance at all times.
The final amendments will have no effect on the energy needs of the
affected facilities in any of the three source categories, and would,
therefore, have no indirect or secondary air emissions impacts.
C. What are the cost impacts?
We estimate that each facility in the three source categories will
experience costs as a result of these final amendments for reporting.
Specifically, each facility will experience costs to read and
understand the rule amendments. Costs associated with elimination of
the SSM exemption were estimated as part of the reporting and
recordkeeping costs and include time for re-evaluating previously
developed SSM record systems. Costs associated with the requirement to
electronically submit notifications and semi-annual compliance reports
using CEDRI were estimated as part of the reporting and recordkeeping
costs and include time for becoming familiar with CEDRI and the
reporting template for semi-annual compliance reports. The
recordkeeping and reporting costs are presented in section VI.C of this
preamble.
We estimate that in the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics
and Other Textiles source category, 13 facilities using 18 control
devices may be affected by the final rule requirements to conduct
control device performance testing no less frequently than every 5
years. It is also assumed that 5 percent of the tests will need to be
repeated, so that 19 total performance tests will be required. The
total annualized cost will be about $4,400 per control device, with
additional tests of control devices at the same facility costing 25
percent less due to reduced travel costs. The total annualized cost is
approximately $77,000 per year for the source category, including
retests, with an additional $3,300 in reporting costs per test in the
year in which the test occurs.
We estimate that no facilities in the Surface Coating of Large
Appliances source category nor in the Surface
[[Page 9606]]
Coating of Metal Furniture source category will be affected by the
final rule requirements to conduct control device performance testing
no less frequently than every 5 years. Only one facility in those two
categories is currently using add-on controls to comply, and it is
already required to conduct performance tests as a condition of their
operating permit.
For further information on the potential costs, see the memoranda
titled Estimated Costs/Impacts of the 40 CFR Part 63 Subparts NNNN,
OOOO and RRRR Monitoring Reviews, February 2018, in the Surface Coating
of Large Appliances Docket, Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics
and Other Textiles Docket, and Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
Docket.
D. What are the economic impacts?
For the final revisions to the NESHAP for the Surface Coating of
Large Appliances, the total cost in 2019 is estimated to be $23,000 (in
2016 dollars) for the 10 affected entities and is expected to range
from 0.000002 to 0.02 percent of annual sales revenue per affected
entity. These costs are not expected to result in a significant market
impact, regardless of whether they are passed on to the purchaser or
absorbed by the firms.
For the final revisions to the NESHAP for the Printing, Coating,
and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles, the total cost in 2019 is
estimated to be $90,000 (in 2016 dollars) for the 43 affected entities.
Thirteen facilities will also incur performance testing and additional
reporting costs, which we assume will occur in 2021. The annualized
cost of each performance test is approximately $4,400, with additional
tests of control devices at the same facility costing 25 percent less
due to reduced travel costs. The reporting cost for each test is
approximately $3,100. The 2018 equivalent annualized value of the
present value of the costs (in 2016 dollars) for the analysis period
(2019-2025) is estimated to be approximately $72,000 annually when
assuming a 3-percent discount rate and $75,000 annually when assuming a
7-percent discount rate. The estimated maximum cost faced by affected
entities is expected to range from 0.00002 to 0.42 percent of annual
sales revenue per ultimate owner of affected entities. These costs are
not expected to result in a significant market impact, regardless of
whether they are passed on to the purchaser or absorbed by the firms.
For the final revisions to the NESHAP for the Surface Coating of
Metal Furniture, the total cost in 2019 is estimated to be $32,000 (in
2016 dollars) for the 16 affected entities and is expected to range
from 0.00007 to 0.02 percent of annual sales revenue per ultimate owner
of affected entities. These costs are not expected to result in a
significant market impact, regardless of whether they are passed on to
the purchaser or absorbed by the firms.
E. What are the benefits?
As stated in section V.B. of the September 12, 2018, RTR proposal
(83 FR 46311), we were unable to quantify the specific emissions
reductions associated with eliminating the SSM exemption. We also are
unable to quantify potential environmental benefits as a result of
adding the requirement to conduct periodic add-on control device
performance tests (e.g., reduced emissions of organic HAP during
periods of non-compliance). However, any reduction in HAP emissions
would be expected to provide health benefits in the form of improved
air quality and less exposure to potentially harmful chemicals.
F. What analysis of environmental justice did we conduct?
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
To examine the potential for any environmental justice issues that
might be associated with the source category, we performed a
demographic analysis, which is an assessment of risks to individual
demographic groups of the populations living within 5 kilometers (km)
and within 50 km of the facilities. In the analysis, we evaluated the
distribution of HAP-related cancer and noncancer risks from each source
category across different demographic groups within the populations
living near facilities.
1. Surface Coating of Large Appliances
The results of the demographic analysis for the Surface Coating of
Large Appliances source category indicate that, for two of the 11
demographic groups, ``African American'' and ``Below the Poverty
Level,'' the percentage of the population living within 5 kilometers
(km) of facilities in the source category is greater than the
corresponding national percentage for the same demographic groups. When
examining the risk levels of those exposed to emissions from large
appliance coating facilities, we find that no one is exposed to a
cancer risk at or above 1-in-1 million or to a chronic noncancer hazard
index (HI) greater than 1 based on actual emissions from the source
category.
The methodology and the results of the demographic analysis are
presented in a technical report titled Risk and Technology Review--
Analysis of Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near Surface
Coating of Large Appliances Source Category Operations in the Surface
Coating of Large Appliances Docket.
2. Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles
The results of the demographic analysis for the Printing, Coating,
and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles source category are summarized
in Table 5 of this preamble. These results, for various demographic
groups, are based on the estimated risks from actual emissions levels
for the population living within 50 km of the facilities.
[[Page 9607]]
Table 5--Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles Source Category Demographic Risk Analysis
Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population
with cancer Population
risk at or with chronic
above 1-in-1 noncancer HI
million due to Above 1 due to
Nationwide printing, printing,
coating, and coating, and
dyeing of dyeing of
fabrics and fabrics and
other other
textiles textiles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Population................................................ 317,746,049 8,500 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White and Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White........................................................... 62 54 0
Minority........................................................ 38 46 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minority Detail by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
African American................................................ 12 39 0
Native American................................................. 0.8 0.02 0
Hispanic........................................................ 18 5 0
Other and Multiracial........................................... 7 2 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below Poverty Level............................................. 14 26 0
Above Poverty Level............................................. 86 74 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Education by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 25 and without High School Diploma......................... 14 21 0
Over 25 and with a High School Diploma.......................... 86 79 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The results of the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and
Other Textiles source category demographic analysis indicate that
emissions from the source category expose approximately 8,500 people to
a cancer risk at or above 1-in-1 million and no one to a chronic
noncancer HI greater than 1. The percentages of the at-risk population
in the following specific demographic groups are higher than their
respective nationwide percentages: ``African American,'' ``Over 25
Without a High School Diploma,'' and ``Below the Poverty Level.''
The methodology and the results of the demographic analysis are
presented in a technical report, Risk and Technology Review--Analysis
of Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near Printing, Coating,
and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles Source Category Operations,
available in the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other
Textiles Docket.
3. Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
The results of the demographic analysis for the Surface Coating of
Metal Furniture source category are summarized in Table 6 below. These
results, for various demographic groups, are based on the estimated
risks from actual emissions levels for the population living within 50
km of the facilities.
Table 6--Surface Coating of Metal Furniture Source Category Demographic Risk Analysis Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population
with cancer Population
risk at or with chronic
above 1-in-1 noncancer HI
million due to above 1 due to
Nationwide surface surface
coating of coating of
metal metal
furniture furniture
source source
category category
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Population................................................ 317,746,049 2,100 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White and Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White........................................................... 62 62 0
Minority........................................................ 38 38 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 9608]]
Minority Detail by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
African American................................................ 12 7 0
Native American................................................. 0.8 0 0
Hispanic........................................................ 18 30 0
Other and Multiracial........................................... 7 2 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below Poverty Level............................................. 14 23 0
Above Poverty Level............................................. 86 77 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Education by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 25 and without High School Diploma......................... 14 34 0
Over 25 and with a High School Diploma.......................... 86 66 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The results of the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture source
category demographic analysis indicate that emissions from the source
category expose approximately 2,100 people to a cancer risk at or above
1-in-1 million and no one to a chronic noncancer HI greater than 1. The
percentages of the at-risk population in the following specific
demographic groups are higher than their respective nationwide
percentages: ``Hispanic or Latino,'' ``Over 25 Without a High School
Diploma,'' and ``Below the Poverty Level.''
The methodology and the results of the demographic analysis are
presented in the technical report, Risk and Technology Review--Analysis
of Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near Surface Coating of
Metal Furniture Source Category Operations, available in the Surface
Coating of Metal Furniture Docket.
G. What analysis of children's environmental health did we conduct?
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children. This action's health and risk assessments are summarized in
section IV.A of this preamble and are further documented in the Large
Appliances Risk Assessment Report, Fabrics and Other Textiles Risk
Assessment Report, and Metal Furniture Risk Assessment Report in the
Surface Coating of Large Appliances Docket, Printing, Coating, and
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles Docket, and Surface Coating of
Metal Furniture Docket, respectively.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was,
therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection activities in each of these three
subparts have been submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA.
1. Surface Coating of Large Appliances
The Information Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA
prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 1954.08. You can find a copy
of the ICR in the Surface Coating of Large Appliances Docket (Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0670), and it is briefly summarized here.
As part of the RTR for the Surface Coating of Large Appliances
NESHAP, the EPA is not revising the emission limitation requirements
for this subpart. The EPA has revised the SSM provisions of the rule
and is requiring the use of electronic data reporting for future
performance test data submittals and semi-annual reporting. This
information would be collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part
63, subpart NNNN. The EPA is finalizing a requirement to conduct
control device performance testing no less frequently than once every 5
years for facilities using the emission rate with add-on controls
compliance option, but this is not estimated to affect any facilities
in this source category.
Respondents/affected entities: Facilities performing surface
coating of large appliances.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart NNNN).
Estimated number of respondents: In the 3 years after the
amendments are final, approximately 10 respondents per year would be
subject to the NESHAP and no additional respondents are expected to
become subject to the NESHAP during that period.
[[Page 9609]]
Frequency of response: The total number of responses in year 1 is
30. Years 2 and 3 would have no responses.
Total estimated burden: The average annual burden to the large
appliance facilities over the 3 years after the amendments are final is
estimated to be 77 hours (per year). The average annual burden to the
Agency over the 3 years after the amendments are final is estimated to
be 15 hours (per year) for the Agency. Burden is defined at 5 CFR
1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: The average annual cost to the large
appliance facilities is $7,700 in labor costs, in the first 3 years
after the amendments are final. The total average annual Agency cost
over the first 3 years after the amendments are final is estimated to
be $700.
2. Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles
The ICR document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR
number 2071.08. You can find a copy of the ICR in the Printing,
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles Docket (Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0668), and it is briefly summarized here.
As part of the RTR for the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics
and Other Textiles NESHAP, the EPA is not revising the emission
limitation requirements for this subpart. The EPA has revised the SSM
provisions of the rule and is requiring the use of electronic data
reporting for future performance test data submittals and semiannual
reports. This information is being collected to assure compliance with
40 CFR part 63, subpart OOOO. The EPA is finalizing a requirement to
conduct control device performance testing no less frequently than once
every 5 years for facilities using the emission rate with add-on
controls compliance option.
Respondents/affected entities: Facilities performing printing,
coating, and dyeing of fabrics and other textiles.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart OOOO).
Estimated number of respondents: In the 3 years after the
amendments are final, approximately 43 respondents per year will be
subject to the NESHAP and no additional respondents are expected to
become subject to the NESHAP during that period. The EPA estimates that
13 facilities will be required to conduct performance testing for 19
control devices in the 3 three years after the amendments are final.
Frequency of response: The total number of responses in year 1 is
129. Year 2 will have no responses. Year 3 will have 19 responses
related to control device performance tests.
Total estimated burden: The average annual burden to the Printing,
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles coating facilities
over the 3 years after amendments are finalized is estimated to be 548
hours (per year). The average annual burden to the Agency over the 3
years after the amendments are final is estimated to be 133 hours (per
year) for the Agency. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: The average annual cost to the Printing,
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles coating facilities is
$50,000 in labor costs and $120,000 in capital and operation and
maintenance costs in the first 3 years after the amendments are final.
The average annual Agency cost over the first 3 years after the
amendments are final is estimated to be $14,000.
3. Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
The ICR document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR
number 1952.08. You can find a copy of the ICR in the Surface Coating
of Metal Furniture Docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0669), and it
is briefly summarized here.
As part of the RTR for the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
NESHAP, the EPA is not revising the emission limitations for this
subpart. The EPA has revised the SSM provisions of the rule and is
requiring the use of electronic data reporting for future performance
test data submittals and semi-annual reporting. This information would
be collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart RRRR.
The EPA is finalizing a requirement to conduct control device
performance testing no less frequently than once every 5 years for
facilities using the emission rate with add-on controls compliance
option, but this is not estimated to affect any facilities in this
source category.
Respondents/affected entities: Facilities performing surface
coating of metal furniture.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart RRRR).
Estimated number of respondents: In the 3 years after the
amendments are final, approximately 16 respondents per year will be
subject to the NESHAP and no additional respondents are expected to
become subject to the NESHAP during that period.
Frequency of response: The total number of responses in year 1 is
48. Years 2 and 3 would have no responses.
Total estimated burden: The average annual burden to the large
appliance facilities over the 3 years after the amendments are
finalized is estimated to be 123 hours (per year). The average annual
burden to the Agency over the 3 years after the amendments are final is
estimated to be 25 hours (per year) for the Agency. Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: The average annual cost to the metal
furniture facilities is $11,000 in labor costs in the first 3 years
after the amendments are final. The total average annual Agency cost
over the first 3 years after the amendments are final is estimated to
be $1,200.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. No
facilities meeting the Small Business Administration's definition of a
small business will face significant control costs, based on the
economic impact analysis completed for this action. More information
and details of this analysis is provided in the technical documents
titled Economic Impact and Small Business Screening Assessments for the
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the
Surface Coating of Large Appliances (Subpart NNNN), Economic Impact and
Small Business Screening Assessments for the National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Printing, Coating, and
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles (Subpart OOOO), and Economic
Impact and Small Business Screening Assessments for the National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Surface Coating
of Metal Furniture (Subpart RRRR), available in the Surface Coating of
Large Appliances Docket, Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and
Other Textiles Docket, and Surface Coating of Metal Furniture Docket,
respectively.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The
[[Page 9610]]
action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. No tribal facilities are known to be engaged in
any of the industries that would be affected by this action (large
appliances surface coating; printing, coating, and dyeing of fabrics
and other textiles; surface coating of metal furniture). Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children. This action's health and risk assessments are contained in
sections IV.A of this preamble.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
Part 51
This action involves technical standards. The EPA amended the three
NESHAP in this action to provide owners and operators with the option
of conducting EPA Method 18 of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60,
``Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas
Chromatography,'' to measure and subtract methane emissions from
measured total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon.
For the Surface Coating of Metal Furniture NESHAP, the Printing,
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles NESHAP, and the
Surface Coating of Large Appliances NESHAP, the EPA incorporates by
reference ASTM D2369-10 (2015)\e\, ``Test Method for Volatile Content
of Coatings,'' which describes a procedure for the determination of the
weight percent volatile content of solvent-borne and water-borne
coatings, as an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 24,
``Determination of Volatile Matter Content, Water Content, Density,
Volume Solids, and Weight Solids of Surface Coatings.''
For the Surface Coating of Large Appliances NESHAP, the EPA
incorporates by reference ASTM D2111-10 (2015), ``Standard Test Methods
for Specific Gravity of Halogenated Organic Solvents and Their
Admixtures,'' These test methods cover the determination of the
specific gravity of halogenated organic solvents and solvent
admixtures. In addition. the EPA incorporates by reference ASTM D1475-
13, ``Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid Coatings, Inks, and
Related Products,'' which is already specified in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart NNNN, and covers the measurement of density of paints, inks,
varnishes, lacquers, and components thereof, other than pigments, when
in fluid form.
We found three voluntary consensus standards already allowed in the
Surface Coating of Large Appliances NESHAP and the Surface Coating of
Metal Furniture NESHAP that have been replaced with newer versions of
the methods. ASTM Dl475-13, ``Standard Test Method for Density of
Liquid Coatings, Inks, and Related Products,'' has replaced ASTM D1475-
90; ASTM D2697-03 (2014),''Standard Test Method for Volume Nonvolatile
Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings,'' believed to be applicable to
the determination of the volume of nonvolatile matter of a variety of
coatings, has replaced ASTM D2697-86 (1998); and ASTM D6093-97 (2016),
``Standard Test Method for Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear
or Pigmented Coatings Using Helium Gas Pycnometer,'' which covers the
determination of the percent volume nonvolatile matter of a variety of
clear and pigmented coatings, has replaced ASTM D6093-97 (2003).
The ASTM standards are available from the American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM), 100 Barr Harbor Drive, Post Office Box
C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. See https://www.astm.org/.
The EPA decided not to include certain other voluntary consensus
standards; these methods are impractical as alternatives because of the
lack of equivalency, documentation, validation date, and other
important technical and policy considerations. The search and review
results have been documented and are in the memoranda titled Voluntary
Consensus Standard Results for Surface Coating of Large Appliances,
March 2018, Voluntary Consensus Standard Results for Printing, Coating,
and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles, March 2018, and Voluntary
Consensus Standard Results for Surface Coating of Metal Furniture,
March 2018, in the Surface Coating of Large Appliances Docket (Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0670), Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics
and Other Textiles Docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0668), and
Surface Coating of Metal Furniture Docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2017-0669), respectively, for the reasons for these determinations.
Under 40 CFR 63.7(f) and 40 CFR 63.8(f) of subpart A of the General
Provisions, a source may apply to the EPA for permission to use
alternative test methods or alternative monitoring requirements in
place of any required testing methods, performance specifications, or
procedures in the final rule or any amendments.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that these final actions do not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority populations, low-income populations, and/or
indigenous peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994). This action increases the level of environmental
protection for all affected populations. The results of this evaluation
are contained in section IV.A of this preamble and the technical
reports, Risk and Technology Review--Analysis of Demographic Factors
for Populations Living Near Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics
and Other Textiles Source Category Operations, September 2017; Risk and
Technology Review--Analysis of Demographic Factors for Populations
Living Near Surface Coating of Metal Furniture Source Category
Operations, October 2017; and Risk and Technology Review--Analysis of
Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near Surface Coating of
Large Appliances Source Category Operations Demographic Analysis,
September 2017, which are available in the dockets for this action.
[[Page 9611]]
L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Appendix A,
Hazardous substances, Incorporation by reference, Printing, coating,
and dyeing of fabrics and other textiles, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Surface coating of large appliances, Surface coating of
metal furniture.
Dated: December 20, 2018.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Acting Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 63 of title 40,
chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES
0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart A--General Provisions
0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (h)(13), (21), (26), (30), and (79).
0
b. Removing in paragraph (h)(78) the text ``63.4141, 63.4741(b),
63.4941(b),''.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 63.14 Incorporations by reference.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(13) ASTM D1475-13, Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products, approved November 1, 2013, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 63.4141(b) and (c), 63.4741(b) and (c),
63.4751(c), and 63.4941(b) and (c).
* * * * *
(21) ASTM D2111-10 (Reapproved 2015), Standard Test Methods for
Specific Gravity and Density of Halogenated Organic Solvents and Their
Admixtures, approved June 1, 2015, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
63.4141(b) and (c) and 63.4741(a).
* * * * *
(26) ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\, Standard Test Method for
Volatile Content of Coatings, approved June 1, 2015, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 63.4141(a) and (b), 63.4161(h), 63.4321(e), 63.4341(e),
63.4351(d), 63.4741(a), 63.4941(a) and (b), and 63.4961(j).
* * * * *
(30) ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014), Standard Test Method for
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings, approved July
1, 2014, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 63.4141(b), 63.4741(a) and (b),
and 63.4941(b).
* * * * *
(79) ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved 2016), Standard Test Method for
Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using
a Helium Gas Pycnometer, Approved December 1, 2016, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 63.4141(b), 63.4741(a) and (b), and 63.4941(b).
* * * * *
Subpart NNNN--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Large Appliances
0
3. Section 63.4100 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (d) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.4100 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?
* * * * *
(b) Before September 12, 2019, you must always operate and maintain
your affected source, including all air pollution control and
monitoring equipment you use for purposes of complying with this
subpart, according to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i). On and
after September 12, 2019, at all times, the owner or operator must
operate and maintain any affected source, including associated air
pollution control equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner
consistent with safety and good air pollution control practices for
minimizing emissions. The general duty to minimize emissions does not
require the owner or operator to make any further efforts to reduce
emissions if levels required by the applicable standard have been
achieved. Determination of whether a source is operating in compliance
with operation and maintenance requirements will be based on
information available to the Administrator that may include, but is not
limited to, monitoring results, review of operation and maintenance
procedures, review of operation and maintenance records, and inspection
of the affected source.
* * * * *
(d) Before September 12, 2019, if your affected source uses an
emission capture system and add-on control device, you must develop a
written startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan according to the
provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(3). The plan must address the startup,
shutdown, and corrective actions in the event of a malfunction of the
emission capture system or the add-on control device. The plan must
also address any coating operation equipment that may cause increased
emissions or that would affect capture efficiency if the process
equipment malfunctions, such as conveyors that move parts among
enclosures. A startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan is not required
on and after September 12, 2019.
0
4. Section 63.4110 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(9)(v) to read
as follows:
Sec. 63. 4110 What notifications must I submit?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(9) * * *
(v) Before September 12, 2019, a statement of whether or not you
developed the startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan required by Sec.
63.4100(d). This statement is not required on and after September 12,
2019.
* * * * *
0
5. Section 63.4120 is amended by revising paragraphs (d), (e), (g), and
(j) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4120 What reports must I submit?
* * * * *
(d) If you use the compliant material option and there was a
deviation from the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4090, the
semiannual compliance report must contain the information in paragraph
(d)(1) or (2) of this section, as applicable.
(1) Before September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(d)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Identification of each coating used that deviated from the
emission limit, each thinner and cleaning material used that contained
organic HAP, and the dates and time periods each was used.
(ii) The determination of the organic HAP content, according to
Sec. 63.4141(d), for each coating identified in paragraph (d)(1)(i) of
this section. You do not need to submit background data supporting this
calculation, for example, information provided by coating suppliers or
manufacturers or test reports.
(iii) The determination of mass fraction of organic HAP for each
thinner and cleaning material identified in paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this
section. You do not need to submit background data supporting this
calculation, for example, information provided by material
[[Page 9612]]
suppliers or manufacturers or test reports.
(iv) A statement of the cause of each deviation.
(2) On and after September 12, 2019, if there was a deviation from
the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4090, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (d)(2)(i)
through (v) of this section.
(i) Identification of each coating used that deviated from the
emission limit, each thinner and cleaning material used that contained
organic HAP, and the date, time, and duration each was used.
(ii) The determination of the organic HAP content, according to
Sec. 63.4141(d), for each coating identified in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of
this section. You do not need to submit background data supporting this
calculation, for example, information provided by coating suppliers or
manufacturers or test reports.
(iii) The determination of mass fraction of organic HAP for each
thinner and cleaning material identified in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this
section. You do not need to submit background data supporting this
calculation, for example, information provided by material suppliers or
manufacturers or test reports.
(iv) A statement of the cause of each deviation (including unknown
cause, if applicable).
(v) The number of deviations and, for each deviation, a list of the
affected source or equipment, an estimate of the quantity of each
regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit in Sec. 63.4090,
and a description of the method used to estimate the emissions.
(e) If you use the emission rate without add-on controls option and
there was a deviation from the applicable emission limitation in Sec.
63.4090, the semiannual compliance report must contain the information
in paragraph (e)(1) or (2), as applicable.
(1) Before September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(e)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period during
which the organic HAP emission rate exceeded the emission limit.
(ii) The calculations used to determine the organic HAP emission
rate for the compliance period in which the deviation occurred. You
must provide the calculations for Equations 1, 1A through 1C, 2, and 3
in Sec. 63.4151; and, if applicable, the calculation used to determine
the organic HAP in waste materials according to Sec. 63.4151(e)(4).
You do not need to submit background data supporting these
calculations, for example, information provided by materials suppliers
or manufacturers or test reports.
(iii) A statement of the cause of each deviation.
(2) On and after September 12, 2019, if there was a deviation from
the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4090, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (e)(2)(i)
through (iv) of this section.
(i) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period during
which the organic HAP emission rate exceeded the emission limit.
(ii) The calculations used to determine the organic HAP emission
rate for the compliance period in which the deviation occurred. You
must provide the calculations for Equations 1, 1A through 1C, 2, and 3
in Sec. 63.4151; and, if applicable, the calculation used to determine
the organic HAP in waste materials according to Sec. 63.4151(e)(4).
You do not need to submit background data supporting these
calculations, for example, information provided by materials suppliers
or manufacturers or test reports.
(iii) A statement of the cause of each deviation (including unknown
cause, if applicable).
(iv) The number of deviations, a list of the affected source or
equipment, an estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant
emitted over any emission limit in Sec. 63.4090, and a description of
the method used to estimate the emissions.
* * * * *
(g) If you use the emission rate with add-on controls option and
there was a deviation from an emission limitation (including any
periods when emissions bypassed the add-on control device and were
diverted to the atmosphere), the semiannual compliance report must
contain the information in paragraph (g)(1) or (2) of this section, as
applicable.
(1) Before September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(g)(1)(i) through (xiv) of this section. This includes periods of
startup, shutdown, and malfunction during which deviations occurred.
(i) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period,
during which the organic HAP emission rate exceeded the applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.4090.
(ii) The calculations used to determine the organic HAP emission
rate for each compliance period in which a deviation occurred. You must
provide the calculation of the total mass of organic HAP emissions for
the coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials used during the
compliance period, using Equations 1, 1A through 1C, and 2 of Sec.
63.4151 and, if applicable, the calculation used to determine the mass
of organic HAP in waste materials according to Sec. 63.4151(e)(4); the
calculation of the total volume of coating solids used during the
compliance period, using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.4151; the calculation
of the mass of organic HAP emission reduction during the compliance
period by emission capture systems and add-on control devices, using
Equations 1, 1A through 1C, 2, 3, and 3A through 3C of Sec. 63.4161;
and the calculation of the organic HAP emission rate, using Equation 4
of Sec. 63.4161. You do not need to submit the background data
supporting these calculations, for example, information provided by
materials suppliers or manufacturers or test reports.
(iii) The date and time that each malfunction started and stopped.
(iv) A brief description of the CPMS.
(v) The date of the latest CPMS certification or audit.
(vi) The date and time that each CPMS was inoperative, except for
zero (low-level) and high-level checks.
(vii) The date, time, and duration that each CPMS was out-of-
control, including the information in Sec. 63.8(c)(8).
(viii) The date and time period of each deviation from an operating
limit in Table 1 to this subpart; date and time period of any bypass of
the add-on control device; and whether each deviation occurred during a
period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction or during another period.
(ix) A summary of the total duration of each deviation from an
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart and bypass of the add-on
control device during the semiannual reporting period and the total
duration as a percent of the total source operating time during that
semiannual reporting period.
(x) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations from the
operating limits in Table 1 to this subpart and bypasses of the add-on
control device during the semiannual reporting period into those that
were due to startup, shutdown, control equipment problems, process
problems, other known causes, and other unknown causes.
(xi) A summary of the total duration of CPMS downtime during the
semiannual reporting period and the total duration of CPMS downtime as
a percent of the total source operating time during that semiannual
reporting period.
(xii) A description of any changes in the CPMS, coating operation,
emission capture system, or add-on control
[[Page 9613]]
device since the last semiannual reporting period.
(xiii) For each deviation from the work practice standards, a
description of the deviation, the date and time period of the
deviation, and the actions you took to correct the deviation.
(xiv) A statement of the cause of each deviation.
(2) On and after September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(g)(2)(i) through (xii), (xiv), and (xv) of this section if there was a
deviation from the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4090 or the
applicable operating limit(s) in Table 1 to this subpart (including any
periods when emissions bypassed the add-on control device and were
diverted to the atmosphere) and the information in paragraph
(g)(2)(xiii) of this section if there was a deviation from the work
practice standards in Sec. 63.4093(b).
(i) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period during
which the organic HAP emission rate exceeded the applicable emission
limit in Sec. 63.4090.
(ii) The calculations used to determine the organic HAP emission
rate for each compliance period in which a deviation occurred. You must
provide the calculation of the total mass of organic HAP emissions for
the coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials used during the
compliance period, using Equations 1, 1A through 1C, and 2 of Sec.
63.4151 and, if applicable, the calculation used to determine the mass
of organic HAP in waste materials according to Sec. 63.4151(e)(4); the
calculation of the total volume of coating solids used during the
compliance period, using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.4151; the calculation
of the mass of organic HAP emission reduction during the compliance
period by emission capture systems and add-on control devices, using
Equations 1, 1A through 1C, 2, 3, and 3A through 3C of Sec. 63.4161;
and the calculation of the organic HAP emission rate, using Equation 4
of Sec. 63.4161. You do not need to submit the background data
supporting these calculations, for example, information provided by
materials suppliers or manufacturers or test reports.
(iii) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture system
or add-on control devices started and stopped.
(iv) A brief description of the CPMS.
(v) The date of the latest CPMS certification or audit.
(vi) For each instance that the CPMS was inoperative, except for
zero (low-level) and high-level checks, the date, time, and duration
that the CPMS was inoperative; the cause (including unknown cause) for
the CPMS being inoperative; and descriptions of corrective actions
taken.
(vii) For each instance that the CPMS was out-of-control, as
specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7), the date, time, and duration that the
CPMS was out-of-control; the cause (including unknown cause) for the
CPMS being out-of-control; and descriptions of corrective actions
taken.
(viii) The date, time, and duration of each deviation from an
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart; and the date, time, and
duration of any bypass of the add-on control device.
(ix) A summary of the total duration of each deviation from an
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart and bypass of the add-on
control device during the semiannual reporting period and the total
duration as a percent of the total source operating time during that
semiannual reporting period.
(x) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations from the
operating limits in Table 1 to this subpart and bypasses of the add-on
control device during the semiannual reporting period into those that
were due to control equipment problems, process problems, other known
causes, and other unknown causes.
(xi) A summary of the total duration of CPMS downtime during the
semiannual reporting period and the total duration of CPMS downtime as
a percent of the total source operating time during that semiannual
reporting period.
(xii) A description of any changes in the CPMS, coating operation,
emission capture system, or add-on control device since the last
semiannual reporting period.
(xiii) For deviations from the work practice standards in Sec.
63.4093(b), the number of deviations and, for each deviation:
(A) A description of the deviation; the date, time, and duration of
the deviation; and the actions you took to minimize emissions in
accordance with Sec. 63.4100(b).
(B) The description required in paragraph (g)(2)(xiii)(A) of this
section must include a list of the affected sources or equipment for
which a deviation occurred and the cause of the deviation (including
unknown cause, if applicable).
(xiv) For deviations from an emission limit in Sec. 63.4090 or
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart, a statement of the cause of
each deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
(xv) For each deviation from an emission limit in Sec. 63.4090 or
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart, a list of the affected
sources or equipment for which a deviation occurred, an estimate of the
quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit in
Sec. 63.4090, and a description of the method used to estimate the
emissions.
* * * * *
(j) Before September 12, 2019, if you use the emission rate with
add-on controls option and you have a startup, shutdown, or malfunction
during the semiannual reporting period, you must submit the reports
specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of this section. The reports
specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of this section are not required
on and after September 12, 2019.
* * * * *
0
6. Section 63.4121 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4121 What are my electronic reporting requirements?
(a) Beginning no later than June 13, 2019, you must submit the
results of the performance test required in Sec. 63.4120(h) following
the procedure specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this
section.
(1) For data collected using test methods supported by the EPA's
Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the EPA's ERT website
(https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert) at the time of the test, you must submit the
results of the performance test to the EPA via the Compliance and
Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI). The CEDRI interface can be
accessed through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). Performance test data must be submitted in a file format
generated through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic
file format consistent with the extensible markup language (XML) schema
listed on the EPA's ERT website.
(2) For data collected using test methods that are not supported by
the EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the
test, you must submit the results of the performance test to the
Administrator at the appropriate address listed in Sec. 63.13, unless
the Administrator agrees to or specifies an alternate reporting method.
(3) If you claim that some of the performance test information
being submitted under paragraph (a)(1) of this section is confidential
business information (CBI), you must submit a complete file generated
through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file
consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT
[[Page 9614]]
website, including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact disc,
flash drive or other commonly used electronic storage medium to the
EPA. The electronic medium must be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to
U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement
Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same
ERT or alternate file with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA
via the EPA's CDX as described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
(b) Beginning on March 15, 2021, the owner or operator shall submit
the initial notifications required in Sec. 63.9(b) and the
notification of compliance status required in Sec. 63.9(h) and Sec.
63.4110(a)(2) and (b) to the EPA via CEDRI. The CEDRI can be accessed
through the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov). The owner or operator must
upload to CEDRI an electronic copy of each applicable notification in
portable document format (PDF). The applicable notification must be
submitted by the deadline specified in this subpart, regardless of the
method in which the reports are submitted. Owners or operators who
claim that some of the information required to be submitted via CEDRI
is CBI shall submit a complete report generated using the appropriate
form in CEDRI or an alternate electronic file consistent with the XML
schema listed on the EPA's CEDRI website, including information claimed
to be CBI, on a compact disc, flash drive, or other commonly used
electronic storage medium to the EPA. The electronic medium shall be
clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office,
Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old
Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file with the CBI omitted shall be
submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as described earlier in this
paragraph.
(c) Beginning on March 15, 2021, or once the reporting template has
been available on the CEDRI website for 1 year, whichever date is
later, the owner or operator shall submit the semiannual compliance
report required in Sec. 63.4120 to the EPA via CEDRI. The CEDRI
interface can be accessed through the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov).
The owner or operator must use the appropriate electronic template on
the CEDRI website for this subpart or an alternate electronic file
format consistent with the XML schema listed on the CEDRI website
(https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/compliance-and-emissions-data-reporting-interface-cedri). The date report templates
become available will be listed on the CEDRI website. If the reporting
form for the semiannual compliance report specific to this subpart is
not available in CEDRI at the time that the report is due, you must
submit the report to the Administrator at the appropriate addresses
listed in Sec. 63.13. Once the form has been available in CEDRI for 1
year, you must begin submitting all subsequent reports via CEDRI. The
reports must be submitted by the deadlines specified in this subpart,
regardless of the method in which the reports are submitted. Owners or
operators who claim that some of the information required to be
submitted via CEDRI is CBI shall submit a complete report generated
using the appropriate form in CEDRI or an alternate electronic file
consistent with XML schema listed on the EPA's CEDRI website, including
information claimed to be CBI, on a compact disc, flash drive, or other
commonly used electronic storage medium to the EPA. The electronic
medium shall be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE
CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-
02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file with the CBI
omitted shall be submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as described
earlier in this paragraph.
(d) If you are required to electronically submit a report through
CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, and due to a planned or actual outage of either
the EPA's CEDRI or CDX systems within the period of time beginning 5
business days prior to the date that the submission is due, you will be
or are precluded from accessing CEDRI or CDX and submitting a required
report within the time prescribed, you may assert a claim of EPA system
outage for failure to timely comply with the reporting requirement. You
must submit notification to the Administrator in writing as soon as
possible following the date you first knew, or through due diligence
should have known, that the event may cause or caused a delay in
reporting. You must provide to the Administrator a written description
identifying the date, time and length of the outage; a rationale for
attributing the delay in reporting beyond the regulatory deadline to
the EPA system outage; describe the measures taken or to be taken to
minimize the delay in reporting; and identify a date by which you
propose to report, or if you have already met the reporting requirement
at the time of the notification, the date you reported. In any
circumstance, the report must be submitted electronically as soon as
possible after the outage is resolved. The decision to accept the claim
of EPA system outage and allow an extension to the reporting deadline
is solely within the discretion of the Administrator.
(e) If you are required to electronically submit a report through
CEDRI in the EPA's CDX and a force majeure event is about to occur,
occurs, or has occurred or there are lingering effects from such an
event within the period of time beginning 5 business days prior to the
date the submission is due, the owner or operator may assert a claim of
force majeure for failure to timely comply with the reporting
requirement. For the purposes of this section, a force majeure event is
defined as an event that will be or has been caused by circumstances
beyond the control of the affected facility, its contractors, or any
entity controlled by the affected facility that prevents you from
complying with the requirement to submit a report electronically within
the time period prescribed. Examples of such events are acts of nature
(e.g., hurricanes, earthquakes, or floods), acts of war or terrorism,
or equipment failure or safety hazard beyond the control of the
affected facility (e.g., large scale power outage). If you intend to
assert a claim of force majeure, you must submit notification to the
Administrator in writing as soon as possible following the date you
first knew, or through due diligence should have known, that the event
may cause or caused a delay in reporting. You must provide to the
Administrator a written description of the force majeure event and a
rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the regulatory
deadline to the force majeure event; describe the measures taken or to
be taken to minimize the delay in reporting; and identify a date by
which you propose to report, or if you have already met the reporting
requirement at the time of the notification, the date you reported. In
any circumstance, the reporting must occur as soon as possible after
the force majeure event occurs. The decision to accept the claim of
force majeure and allow an extension to the reporting deadline is
solely within the discretion of the Administrator.
0
7. Section 63.4130 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (f), (g), (j), (k) introductory text, and (k)(1)
and (2); and
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (k)(8) and (9) as paragraphs (k)(7) and
(8), respectively.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 63.4130 What records must I keep?
* * * * *
(f) A record of the volume fraction of coating solids for each
coating used
[[Page 9615]]
during each compliance period except for zero-HAP coatings for which
volume solids determination is not required as allowed in Sec.
63.4141.
(g) A record of the density for each coating used during each
compliance period except for zero-HAP coatings for which volume solids
determination is not required as allowed in Sec. 63.4141 and, if you
use either the emission rate without add-on controls or the emission
rate with add-on controls compliance option, a record of the density
for each thinner and cleaning material used during each compliance
period.
* * * * *
(j) Before September 12, 2019, you must keep records of the date,
time, and duration of each deviation. On and after September 12, 2019,
for each deviation from an emission limitation reported under Sec.
63.4120(d), (e), and (g), a record of the information specified in
paragraphs (j)(1) through (4) of this section, as applicable.
(1) The date, time, and duration of the deviation, as reported
under Sec. 63.4120(d), (e), and (g).
(2) A list of the affected sources or equipment for which the
deviation occurred and the cause of the deviation, as reported under
Sec. 63.4120(d), (e), and (g).
(3) An estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted
over any applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4090 or any applicable
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart, and a description of the
method used to calculate the estimate, as reported under Sec.
63.4120(d), (e), and (g).
(4) A record of actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance
with Sec. 63.4100(b) and any corrective actions taken to return the
affected unit to its normal or usual manner of operation.
(k) If you use the emission rate with add-on controls option, you
must also keep the records specified in paragraphs (k)(1) through (8)
of this section.
(1) Before September 12, 2019, for each deviation, a record of
whether the deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction. The record in this paragraph (k)(1) is not required on and
after September 12, 2019.
(2) Before September 12, 2019, the records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii)
through (v) related to startup, shutdown, and malfunction. The records
in this paragraph (k)(2) are not required on and after September 12,
2019.
* * * * *
0
8. Section 63.4131 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4131 In what form and for how long must I keep my records?
(a) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). Where
appropriate, the records may be maintained as electronic spreadsheets
or as a data base. Any records required to be maintained by this
subpart that are in reports that were submitted electronically via the
EPA's CEDRI may be maintained in electronic format. This ability to
maintain electronic copies does not affect the requirement for
facilities to make records, data, and reports available upon request to
a delegated air agency or the EPA as part of an on-site compliance
evaluation.
* * * * *
0
9. Section 63.4141 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and
(ii), (a)(2) and (4), and (b)(1), the definitions of
``mvolatiles'' and ``Davg'' in Equation 1 of
paragraph (b)(3), and paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4141 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limitations?
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Count each organic HAP in Table 5 to this subpart that is
measured to be present at 0.1 percent by mass or more and at 1.0
percent by mass or more for other organic HAP compounds. For example,
if toluene (not listed in Table 5 to this subpart) is measured to be
0.5 percent of the material by mass, you do not have to count it.
Express the mass fraction of each organic HAP you count as a value
truncated to four places after the decimal point (for example, 0.3791).
(ii) Calculate the total mass fraction of organic HAP in the test
material by adding up the individual organic HAP mass fractions and
truncating the result to three places after the decimal point (for
example, 0.763).
(2) Method 24 in appendix A-7 of part 60. For coatings, you may use
Method 24 to determine the mass fraction of nonaqueous volatile matter
and use that value as a substitute for mass fraction of organic HAP. As
an alternative to using Method 24, you may use ASTM D2369-10 (R2015),
``Test Method for Volatile Content of Coatings'' (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 63.14).
* * * * *
(4) Information from the supplier or manufacturer of the material.
You may rely on information other than that generated by the test
methods specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section,
such as manufacturer's formulation data if they represent each organic
HAP in Table 5 to this subpart that is present at 0.1 percent by mass
or more and at 1.0 percent by mass or more for other organic HAP
compounds. For example, if toluene (not listed in Table 5 to this
subpart) is 0.5 percent of the material by mass, you do not have to
count it. If there is a disagreement between such information and
results of a test conducted according to paragraphs (a)(1) through (3)
of this section, then the test method results will take precedence.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) ASTM D2697-03 (R2014) or D6093-97 (R2016). You may use ASTM
D2697-03 (R2014), ``Standard Test Method for Volume Nonvolatile Matter
in Clear or Pigmented Coatings,'' or D6093-97 (R2016), ``Standard Test
Method for Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented
Coatings Using a Helium Gas Pycnometer'' (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 63.14) to determine the volume fraction of coating solids for
each coating. Divide the nonvolatile volume percent obtained with the
methods by 100 to calculate volume fraction of coating solids.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
mvolatiles = total volatile matter content of the
coating, including HAP, volatile organic compounds (VOC), water, and
exempt compounds, determined according to Method 24 in appendix A-7
of part 60, or according to ASTM D2369-10 (R2015) Standard Test
Method for Volatile Content of Coatings (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 63.14), grams volatile matter per liter coating.
Davg = average density of volatile matter in the coating,
grams volatile matter per liter volatile matter, determined from
test results using ASTM D1475-13, ``Standard Test Method for Density
of Liquid Coatings, Inks, and Related Products,'' ASTM D2111-10
(R2015), ``Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Halogenated
Organic Solvents and Their Admixtures'' (both incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 63.14); if you use this method, the specific
gravity must be corrected to a standard temperature, information
from the supplier or manufacturer of the material, or reference
sources providing density or specific gravity data for pure
materials. If there is disagreement between ASTM D1475-13 or ASTM
D2111-10 (R2015) test results and other information sources, the
test results will take precedence.
(c) Determine the density of each coating. Determine the density of
each coating used during the compliance period from test results using
ASTM D1475-13, ``Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid Coatings,
Inks, and Related Products, ASTM D2111-10
[[Page 9616]]
(R2015), ``Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Halogenated
Organic Solvents and Their Admixtures''(both incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 63.14); if you use this method, the specific gravity must be
corrected to a standard temperature, information from the supplier or
manufacturer of the material, or reference sources providing density or
specific gravity data for pure materials. If there is disagreement
between test results from ASTM D1475-13 or ASTM D2111-10 (R2015) and
the supplier's or manufacturer's information, the test results will
take precedence.
* * * * *
0
10. Section 63.4142 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4142 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limitations?
* * * * *
(c) As part of each semiannual compliance report required by Sec.
63.4120, you must submit a statement that you were in compliance with
the emission limitations during the reporting period because, during
the compliance period, you used no thinners or cleaning materials that
contained organic HAP, and you used no coatings for which the organic
HAP content exceeded the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4090.
* * * * *
0
11. Section 63.4151 is amended by revising paragraph (h) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4151 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limitations?
* * * * *
(h) The organic HAP emission rate for the initial compliance period
must be less than or equal to the applicable emission limit in Sec.
63.4090. You must keep all records as required by Sec. Sec. 63.4130
and 63.4131. As part of the Notification of Compliance Status required
by Sec. 63.4110, you must identify the coating operation(s) for which
you used the emission rate without add-on controls option and, if there
were no deviations from the emission limitations, submit a statement
that the coating operation(s) was (were) in compliance with the
emission limitations during the initial compliance period because the
organic HAP emission rate was less than or equal to the applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.4090.
0
12. Section 63.4152 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (c) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.4152 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limitations?
(a) To demonstrate continuous compliance, for the compliance
period, the organic HAP emission rate determined according to Sec.
63.4151(a) through (g) must be less than or equal to the applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.4090. Each month following the initial
compliance period described in Sec. 63.4150 is a compliance period.
* * * * *
(c) As part of each semiannual compliance report required by Sec.
63.4120, if there were no deviations from the emission limitations, you
must submit a statement that you were in compliance with the emission
limitations during the reporting period because, during the compliance
period, the organic HAP emission rate was less than or equal to the
applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4090.
* * * * *
0
13. Section 63.4160 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraphs (a)(1) and (b)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4160 By what date must I conduct initial performance tests
and other initial compliance demonstrations?
(a) * * *
(1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS
you use to demonstrate compliance must be installed and operating no
later than the applicable compliance date specified in Sec. 63.4083.
Except for solvent recovery systems for which you conduct liquid-liquid
material balances according to Sec. 63.4161(h), you must conduct a
performance test of each capture system and add-on control device
according to the procedures in Sec. Sec. 63.4164, 63.4165, and
63.4166, and establish the operating limits required by Sec. 63.4092
no later than the compliance date specified in Sec. 63.4083. For a
solvent recovery system for which you conduct liquid-liquid material
balances according to Sec. 63.4161(h), you must initiate the first
material balance no later than the compliance date specified in Sec.
63.4083.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS
you use to demonstrate compliance must be installed and operating no
later than the applicable compliance date specified in Sec. 63.4083.
Except for solvent recovery systems for which you conduct liquid-liquid
material balances according to Sec. 63.4161(h), you must conduct a
performance test of each capture system and add-on control device
according to the procedures in Sec. Sec. 63.4164, 63.4165, and
63.4166, and establish the operating limits required by Sec. 63.4092
no later than 180 days after the applicable compliance date specified
in Sec. 63.4083. For a solvent recovery system for which you conduct
liquid-liquid material balances according to Sec. 63.4161(h), you must
initiate the first material balance no later than 180 days after the
applicable compliance date specified in Sec. 63.4083.
* * * * *
0
14. Section 63.4161 is amended by revising paragraphs (g) introductory
text and (h)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4161 How do I demonstrate initial compliance?
* * * * *
(g) Calculate the organic HAP emissions reduction for controlled
coating operations not using liquid-liquid material balance. For each
controlled coating operation using an emission capture system and add-
on control device other than a solvent recovery system for which you
conduct liquid-liquid material balances, calculate organic HAP
emissions reduction, using Equation 1 of this section, by applying the
emission capture system efficiency and add-on control device efficiency
to the mass of organic HAP contained in the coatings, thinners, and
cleaning materials that are used in the coating operation served by the
emission capture system and add-on control device during the compliance
period. For any period of time a deviation specified in Sec.
63.4163(c) or (d) occurs in the controlled coating operation, you must
assume zero efficiency for the emission capture system and add-on
control device. For the purposes of completing the compliance
calculations, you must treat the materials used during a deviation on a
controlled coating operation as if they were used on an uncontrolled
coating operation for the time period of the deviation. You must not
include those materials in the calculations of organic HAP emissions
reduction in Equation 1 of this section.
[[Page 9617]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15MR19.000
Where:
HC = mass of organic HAP emissions reduction for the
controlled coating operation during the compliance period, kg.
AI = total mass of organic HAP in the coatings used in
the controlled coating operation, kg, as calculated in Equation 1A
of this section.
BI = total mass of organic HAP in the thinners used in
the controlled coating operation, kg, as calculated in Equation 1B
of this section.
CI = total mass of organic HAP in the cleaning materials
used in the controlled coating operation during the compliance
period, kg, as calculated in Equation 1C of this section.
CE = capture efficiency of the emission capture system vented to the
add-on control device, percent. Use the test methods and procedures
specified in Sec. Sec. 63.4164 and 63.4165 to measure and record
capture efficiency.
DRE = organic HAP destruction or removal efficiency of the add-on
control device, percent. Use the test methods and procedures in
Sec. Sec. 63.4164 and 63.4166 to measure and record the organic HAP
destruction or removal efficiency.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(3) Determine the mass fraction of volatile organic matter for each
coating used in the coating operation controlled by the solvent
recovery system during the compliance period, kg volatile organic
matter per kg coating. You may determine the volatile organic matter
mass fraction using Method 24 in appendix A-7 of part 60, ASTM D2369-10
(R2015), ``Test Method for Volatile Content of Coatings'' (incorporated
by reference, see Sec. 63.14), or an EPA approved alternative method.
Alternatively, you may use information provided by the manufacturer or
supplier of the coating. In the event of any inconsistency between
information provided by the manufacturer or supplier and the results of
Method 24, ASTM D2369-10 (R2015), or an approved alternative method,
the test method results will govern.
* * * * *
0
15. Section 63.4163 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraph (c) introductory text, adding paragraph (c)(3), and revising
paragraphs (e) and (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4163 How do I conduct periodic performance tests and
demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limitations?
* * * * *
(c) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each operating
limit required by Sec. 63.4092 that applies to you as specified in
Table 1 to this subpart, and you must conduct periodic performance
tests as specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
(3) Except for solvent recovery systems for which you conduct
liquid-liquid material balances according to Sec. 63.4161(h), you must
conduct according to the procedures in Sec. Sec. 63.4164, 63.4165, and
63.4166 periodic performance tests of each capture system and add-on
control device used to demonstrate compliance, and you must establish
the operating limits required by Sec. 63.4092. You must conduct the
first periodic performance test and establish the operating limits
required by Sec. 63.4092 before March 15, 2022, unless you are already
required to complete periodic performance tests as a requirement of
renewing your facility's operating permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 40
CFR part 71 and have conducted a performance test on or after March 15,
2017. Thereafter you must conduct a performance test no later than 5
years following the previous performance test. Operating limits must be
confirmed or reestablished during each performance test.
* * * * *
(e) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with the work
practice standards in Sec. 63.4093. If you did not develop a work
practice plan, did not implement the plan, or did not keep the records
required by Sec. 63.4130(k)(8), this is a deviation from the work
practice standards that must be reported as specified in Sec. Sec.
63.4110(b)(6) and 63.4120(g).
* * * * *
(h) Before September 12, 2019, consistent with Sec. Sec. 63.6(e)
and 63.7(e)(1), deviations that occur during a period of startup,
shutdown, or malfunction of the emission capture system, add-on control
device, or coating operation that may affect emission capture or
control device efficiency are not violations if you demonstrate to the
Administrator's satisfaction that you were operating in accordance with
Sec. 63.6(e). The Administrator will determine whether deviations that
occur during a period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction are
violations according to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e). On and after
September 12, 2019, as specified in Sec. 63.4100(b), at all times, the
owner or operator must operate and maintain any affected source,
including associated air pollution control equipment and monitoring
equipment, in a manner consistent with safety and good air pollution
control practices for minimizing emissions, and determination of
whether a source is operating in compliance with operation and
maintenance requirements will be based on information available to the
Administrator.
* * * * *
0
16. Section 63.4164 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text and (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4164 What are the general requirements for performance tests?
(a) You must conduct each performance test required by Sec.
63.4160 according to the requirements in this section unless you obtain
a waiver of the performance test according to the provisions in Sec.
63.7(h).
(1) Representative coating operation operating conditions. You must
conduct the performance test under representative operating conditions
for the coating operation. Operations during periods of startup,
shutdown, or nonoperation do not constitute representative conditions
for purposes of conducting a performance test. The owner or operator
may not conduct performance tests during periods of malfunction. You
must record the process information that is necessary to document
operating conditions during the test and explain why the conditions
represent normal operation. Upon request, you must make available to
the Administrator such records as may be necessary to determine the
conditions of performance tests.
* * * * *
0
17. Section 63.4166 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) through
(4) and (b) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4166 How do I determine the add-on control device emission
destruction or removal efficiency?
(a) * * *
(1) Use Method 1 or 1A in appendix A-1 of part 60, as appropriate,
to select sampling sites and velocity traverse points.
(2) Use Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, or 2F in appendix A-1, or Method 2G
in appendix A-2, of part 60, as
[[Page 9618]]
appropriate, to measure gas volumetric flow rate.
(3) Use Method 3, 3A, or 3B in appendix A-2 of part 60, as
appropriate, for gas analysis to determine dry molecular weight. You
may also use as an alternative to Method 3B, the manual method for
measuring the oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide content of
exhaust gas in ANSI/ASME, PTC 19.10-1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas
Analyses'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14).
(4) Use Method 4 in appendix A-3 of part 60 to determine stack gas
moisture.
* * * * *
(b) Measure total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon at the
inlet and outlet of the add-on control device simultaneously, using
either Method 25 or 25A in appendix A-7 of part 60, as specified in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section. You must use the same
method for both the inlet and outlet measurements. You may use Method
18 in appendix A-6 of part 60 to subtract methane emissions from
measured total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon.
* * * * *
0
18. Section 63.4167 is amended by revising the section heading,
introductory text, and paragraph (f)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4167 How do I establish the emission capture system and add-
on control device operating limits during performance tests?
During the performance tests required by Sec. Sec. 63.4160 and
63.4163, and described in Sec. Sec. 63.4164, 63.4165, and 63.4166, you
must establish the operating limits required by Sec. 63.4092 according
to this section unless you have received approval for alternative
monitoring and operating limits under Sec. 63.8(f) as specified in
Sec. 63.4092.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) During the capture efficiency determination required by
Sec. Sec. 63.4160 and 63.4163, and described in Sec. Sec. 63.4164 and
63.4165, you must monitor and record either the gas volumetric flow
rate or the duct static pressure for each separate capture device in
your emission capture system at least once every 15 minutes during each
of the three test runs at a point in the duct between the capture
device and the add-on control device inlet.
* * * * *
0
19. Section 63.4168 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4) and (5)
and (c)(2) and (3) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4168 What are the requirements for continuous parameter
monitoring system installation, operation, and maintenance?
(a) * * *
(4) You must maintain the CPMS at all times in accordance with
Sec. 63.4100(b) and have readily available necessary parts for routine
repairs of the monitoring equipment.
(5) Before September 12, 2019, you must operate the CPMS and
collect emission capture system and add-on control device parameter
data at all times that a controlled coating operation is operating
except during monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, and required
quality assurance or control activities (including, if applicable,
calibration checks and required zero and span adjustments). On and
after September 12, 2019, you must operate the CPMS and collect
emission capture system and add-on control device parameter data at all
times in accordance with Sec. 63.4100(b).
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) For a catalytic oxidizer, install a gas temperature monitor in
the gas stream immediately before the catalyst bed, and if you
establish operating limits according to Sec. 63.4167(b)(1) and (2),
also install a gas temperature monitor in the gas stream immediately
after the catalyst bed.
(3) For each gas temperature monitoring device, you must comply
with the requirements in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) through (vii) of this
section. For the purposes of this paragraph (c)(3), a thermocouple is
part of the temperature sensor.
* * * * *
0
20. Section 63.4181 is amended by revising the definition of
``Deviation'' to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4181 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
Deviation means:
(1) Before September 12, 2019, any instance in which an affected
source subject to this subpart or an owner or operator of such a
source:
(i) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart including but not limited to any emission limit, or operating
limit, or work practice standard;
(ii) 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
(iii) Fails to meet any emission limit, or operating limit, or work
practice standard in this subpart during startup, shutdown, or
malfunction regardless of whether or not such failure is permitted by
this subpart; and
(2) On and after September 12, 2019, any instance in which an
affected source subject to this subpart or an owner or operator of such
a source:
(i) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart including but not limited to any emission limit, or operating
limit, or work practice standard; or
(ii) 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.
* * * * *
0
21. Table 2 to subpart NNNN of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart NNNN of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart NNNN
[You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements according to the following table:]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject NNNN Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(a)(1)-(12)............ General Applicability..... Yes..................
Sec. 63.1(b)(1)-(3)............. Initial Applicability Yes.................. Applicability to subpart
Determination. NNNN is also specified
in Sec. 63.4081.
Sec. 63.1(c)(1)................. Applicability After Yes..................
Standard Established.
Sec. 63.1(c)(2)-(3)............. Applicability of Permit No................... Area sources are not
Program for Area Sources. subject to subpart NNNN.
Sec. 63.1(c)(4)-(5)............. Extensions and Yes..................
Notifications.
Sec. 63.1(e).................... Applicability of Permit Yes..................
Program Before Relevant
Standard is Set.
[[Page 9619]]
Sec. 63.2....................... Definitions............... Yes.................. Additional definitions
are specified in Sec.
63.4181.
Sec. 63.3(a)-(c)................ Units and Abbreviations... Yes..................
Sec. 63.4(a)(1)-(5)............. Prohibited Activities..... Yes..................
Sec. 63.4(b)-(c)................ Circumvention/Severability Yes..................
Sec. 63.5(a).................... Construction/ Yes..................
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(b)(1)-(6)............. Requirements for Existing, Yes..................
Newly Constructed, and
Reconstructed Sources.
Sec. 63.5(d).................... Application for Approval Yes..................
of Construction/
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(e).................... Approval of Construction/ Yes..................
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(f).................... Approval of Construction/ Yes..................
Reconstruction Based on
Prior State Review.
Sec. 63.6(a).................... Compliance With Standards Yes..................
and Maintenance
Requirements--Applicabili
ty.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(7)............. Compliance Dates for New Yes.................. Section 63.4083 specifies
and Reconstructed Sources. the compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(5)............. Compliance Dates for Yes.................. Section 63.4083 specifies
Existing Sources. the compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i).............. Operation and Maintenance. Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4100(b) for
12, 2019. No on and general duty
after September 12, requirement.
2019.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(ii)............. Operation and Maintenance. Yes, before September
12, 2019. No on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(iii)............ Operation and Maintenance. Yes..................
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)................. Startup, shutdown, Yes, before September
malfunction plan (SSMP). 12, 2019. No on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1)................. Compliance Except During Yes, before September
Startup, Shutdown, and 12, 2019. No on and
Malfunction. after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)-(3)............. Methods for Determining Yes..................
Compliance.
Sec. 63.6(g)(1)-(3)............. Use of an Alternative Yes.................. .........................
Standard.
Sec. 63.6(h).................... Compliance With Opacity/ No................... Subpart NNNN does not
Visible Emission establish opacity
standards. standards and does not
require continuous
opacity monitoring
systems (COMS).
Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(16)............ Extension of Compliance... Yes..................
Sec. 63.6(j).................... Presidential Compliance Yes..................
Exemption.
Sec. 63.7(a)(1)................. Performance Test Yes.................. Applies to all affected
Requirements--Applicabili sources. Additional
ty. requirements for
performance testing are
specified in Sec. Sec.
63.4164, 63.4165, and
63.4166.
Sec. 63.7(a)(2)................. Performance Test Yes.................. Applies only to
Requirements--Dates. performance tests for
capture system and
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Section 63.4160
specifies the schedule
for performance test
requirements that are
earlier than those
specified in Sec.
63.7(a)(2).
Sec. 63.7(a)(3)................. Performance Tests Required Yes..................
By the Administrator.
Sec. 63.7(b)-(d)................ Performance Test Yes.................. Applies only to
Requirements--Notificatio performance tests for
n, Quality Assurance capture system and add-
Facilities Necessary for on control device
Safe Testing, Conditions efficiency at sources
During Test. using these to comply
with the standard.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1)................. Conduct of performance Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4164(a)(1).
tests. 12, 2019. No on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)-(4)............. Conduct of performance Yes. .........................
tests.
Sec. 63.7(f).................... Performance Test Yes.................. Applies to all test
Requirements--Use of methods except those
Alternative Test Method. used to determine
capture system
efficiency.
[[Page 9620]]
Sec. 63.7(g)-(h)................ Performance Test Yes.................. Applies only to
Requirements--Data performance tests for
Analysis, Recordkeeping, capture system and add-
Reporting, Waiver of Test. on control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standard.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)-(3)............. Monitoring Requirements-- Yes.................. Applies only to
Applicability. monitoring of capture
system and add-on
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standard.
Additional requirements
for monitoring are
specified in Sec.
63.4168.
Sec. 63.8(a)(4)................. Additional Monitoring No................... Subpart NNNN does not
Requirements. have monitoring
requirements for flares.
Sec. 63.8(b).................... Conduct of Monitoring..... Yes..................
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)................. Continuous Monitoring Yes, before September
Systems (CMS) Operation 12, 2019. No on and
and Maintenance. after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.8(c)(2)-(3)............. Continuous Monitoring Yes.................. Applies only to
Systems (CMS) Operation monitoring of capture
and Maintenance. system and add-on
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standard.
Additional requirements
for CMS operations and
maintenance are
specified in Sec.
63.4168.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)................. CMS....................... No................... Section 63.4168 specifies
the requirements for the
operation of CMS for
capture systems and add-
on control devices at
sources using these to
comply.
Sec. 63.8(c)(5)................. COMS...................... No................... Subpart NNNN does not
have opacity or visible
emission standards.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6)................. CMS Requirements.......... No................... Section 63.4168 specifies
the requirements for
monitoring systems for
capture systems and add-
on control devices at
sources using these to
comply.
Sec. 63.8(c)(7)................. CMS Out-of-Control Periods Yes..................
Sec. 63.8(c)(8)................. CMS Out-of-Control Periods No................... Section 63.4120 requires
and Reporting. reporting of CMS out-of-
control periods.
Sec. 63.8(d)-(e)................ Quality Control Program No................... Subpart NNNN does not
and CMS Performance require the use of CEMS.
Evaluation.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5)............. Use of an Alternative Yes.................. .........................
Monitoring Method.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6)................. Alternative to Relative No................... Subpart NNNN does not
Accuracy Test. require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.8(g)(1)-(5)............. Data Reduction............ No................... Sections 63.4167 and
63.4168 specify
monitoring data
reduction.
Sec. 63.9(a)-(d)................ Notification Requirements. Yes..................
Sec. 63.9(e).................... Notification of Yes.................. Applies only to capture
Performance Test. system and add-on
control device
performance tests at
sources using these to
comply with the
standard.
Sec. 63.9(f).................... Notification of Visible No................... Subpart NNNN does not
Emissions/Opacity Test. have opacity or visible
emission standards.
Sec. 63.9(g)(1)-(3)............. Additional Notifications No................... Subpart NNNN does not
When Using CMS. require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.9(h).................... Notification of Compliance Yes.................. Section 63.4110 specifies
Status. the dates for submitting
the notification of
compliance status.
Sec. 63.9(i).................... Adjustment of Submittal Yes..................
Deadlines.
Sec. 63.9(j).................... Change in Previous Yes..................
Information.
Sec. 63.10(a)................... Recordkeeping/Reporting-- Yes..................
Applicability and General
Information.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)................ General Recordkeeping Yes.................. Additional requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.4130 and
63.4131.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i)............. Recordkeeping of Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4130(j).
Occurrence and Duration 12, 2019. No on and
of Startups and Shutdowns. after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(ii)............ Recordkeeping of Failures Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4130(j).
to Meet Standards. 12, 2019. No on and
after September 12,
2019.
[[Page 9621]]
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iii)........... Recordkeeping Relevant to Yes..................
Maintenance of Air
Pollution Control and
Monitoring Equipment.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(v)........ Actions Taken to Minimize Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4130(j)(4)
Emissions During SSM. 12, 2019. No, on and for a record of actions
after September 12, taken to minimize
2019. emissions during a
deviation from the
standard.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vi)............ Records for CMS Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4130(j) for
malfunctions. 12, 2019. No, on and records of periods of
after September 12, deviation from the
2019. standard, including
instances where a CMS is
inoperative or out-of-
control.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vii)-(xi)...... Records................... Yes..................
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xii)........... Records................... Yes..................
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiii).......... .......................... No................... Subpart NNNN does not
require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv)........... .......................... Yes..................
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)................ Recordkeeping Requirements Yes..................
for Applicability
Determinations.
Sec. 63.10(c)(1)-(6)............ Additional Recordkeeping Yes..................
Requirements for Sources
with CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c)(7)-(8)............ Additional Recordkeeping No................... See Sec. 63.4130(j)(1)
Requirements for Sources for records of periods
with CMS. of deviation from the
standard, including
instances where a CMS is
inoperative or out-of-
control.
Sec. 63.10(c)(10)-(14).......... Additional Recordkeeping Yes..................
Requirements for Sources
with CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c)(15)............... Records Regarding the SSMP Yes, before September
12, 2019. No, on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)................ General Reporting Yes.................. Additional requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
63.4120.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)................ Report of Performance Test Yes.................. Additional requirements
Results. are specified in Sec.
63.4120(h).
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)................ Reporting Opacity or No................... Subpart NNNN does not
Visible Emissions require opacity or
Observations. visible emissions
observations.
Sec. 63.10(d)(4)................ Progress Reports for Yes..................
Sources With Compliance
Extensions.
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)................ Startup, Shutdown, and Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4120(g).
Malfunction Reports. 12, 2019. No, on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.10(e)(1)-(2)............ Additional CMS Reports.... No................... Subpart NNNN does not
require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)................ Excess Emissions/CMS No................... Section 63.4120(g)
Performance Reports. specifies the contents
of periodic compliance
reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)(4)................ COMS Data Reports......... No................... Subpart NNNN does not
specify requirements for
opacity or COMS.
Sec. 63.10(f)................... Recordkeeping/Reporting Yes..................
Waiver.
Sec. 63.11...................... Control Device No................... Subpart NNNN does not
Requirements/Flares. specify use of flares
for compliance.
Sec. 63.12...................... State Authority and Yes..................
Delegations.
Sec. 63.13...................... Addresses................. Yes..................
Sec. 63.14...................... Incorporation by Reference Yes..................
Sec. 63.15...................... Availability of Yes..................
Information/
Confidentiality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
22. Table 5 to subpart NNNN of part 63 is added to read as follows:
Table 5 to Subpart NNNN of Part 63--List of Hazardous Air Pollutants
That Must Be Counted Toward Total Organic HAP Content if Present at 0.1
Percent or More by Mass
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical name CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane............................... 79-34-5
1,1,2-Trichloroethane................................... 79-00-5
1,1-Dimethylhydrazine................................... 57-14-7
[[Page 9622]]
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane............................. 96-12-8
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine................................... 122-66-7
1,3-Butadiene........................................... 106-99-0
1,3-Dichloropropene..................................... 542-75-6
1,4-Dioxane............................................. 123-91-1
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol................................... 88-06-2
2,4/2,6-Dinitrotoluene (mixture)........................ 25321-14-6
2,4-Dinitrotoluene...................................... 121-14-2
2,4-Toluene diamine..................................... 95-80-7
2-Nitropropane.......................................... 79-46-9
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine.................................. 91-94-1
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine................................. 119-90-4
3,3'-Dimethylbenzidine.................................. 119-93-7
4,4'-Methylene bis(2-chloroaniline)..................... 101-14-4
Acetaldehyde............................................ 75-07-0
Acrylamide.............................................. 79-06-1
Acrylonitrile........................................... 107-13-1
Allyl chloride.......................................... 107-05-1
alpha-Hexachlorocyclohexane (a-HCH)..................... 319-84-6
Aniline................................................. 62-53-3
Benzene................................................. 71-43-2
Benzidine............................................... 92-87-5
Benzotrichloride........................................ 98-07-7
Benzyl chloride......................................... 100-44-7
beta-Hexachlorocyclohexane (b-HCH)...................... 319-85-7
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate.............................. 117-81-7
Bis(chloromethyl)ether.................................. 542-88-1
Bromoform............................................... 75-25-2
Captan.................................................. 133-06-2
Carbon tetrachloride.................................... 56-23-5
Chlordane............................................... 57-74-9
Chlorobenzilate......................................... 510-15-6
Chloroform.............................................. 67-66-3
Chloroprene............................................. 126-99-8
Cresols (mixed)......................................... 1319-77-3
DDE..................................................... 3547-04-4
Dichloroethyl ether..................................... 111-44-4
Dichlorvos.............................................. 62-73-7
Epichlorohydrin......................................... 106-89-8
Ethyl acrylate.......................................... 140-88-5
Ethylene dibromide...................................... 106-93-4
Ethylene dichloride..................................... 107-06-2
Ethylene oxide.......................................... 75-21-8
Ethylene thiourea....................................... 96-45-7
Ethylidene dichloride (1,1-Dichloroethane).............. 75-34-3
Formaldehyde............................................ 50-00-0
Heptachlor.............................................. 76-44-8
Hexachlorobenzene....................................... 118-74-1
Hexachlorobutadiene..................................... 87-68-3
Hexachloroethane........................................ 67-72-1
Hydrazine............................................... 302-01-2
Isophorone.............................................. 78-59-1
Lindane (hexachlorocyclohexane, all isomers)............ 58-89-9
m-Cresol................................................ 108-39-4
Methylene chloride...................................... 75-09-2
Naphthalene............................................. 91-20-3
Nitrobenzene............................................ 98-95-3
Nitrosodimethylamine.................................... 62-75-9
o-Cresol................................................ 95-48-7
o-Toluidine............................................. 95-53-4
Parathion............................................... 56-38-2
p-Cresol................................................ 106-44-5
p-Dichlorobenzene....................................... 106-46-7
Pentachloronitrobenzene................................. 82-68-8
Pentachlorophenol....................................... 87-86-5
Propoxur................................................ 114-26-1
Propylene dichloride.................................... 78-87-5
Propylene oxide......................................... 75-56-9
Quinoline............................................... 91-22-5
Tetrachloroethene....................................... 127-18-4
Toxaphene............................................... 8001-35-2
[[Page 9623]]
Trichloroethylene....................................... 79-01-6
Trifluralin............................................. 1582-09-8
Vinyl bromide........................................... 593-60-2
Vinyl chloride.......................................... 75-01-4
Vinylidene chloride..................................... 75-35-4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart OOOO--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other
Textiles
0
23. Section 63.4300 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(3)(i), (b),
and (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4300 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) Before September 12, 2019, the web coating/printing or dyeing/
finishing operation(s) must be in compliance with the applicable
emission limit in Table 1 to this subpart or minimize emissions at all
times as required by Sec. 63.6(e)(1). On and after September 12, 2019,
the web coating/printing or dyeing/finishing operation(s) must be in
compliance with the applicable emission limit in Table 1 to this
subpart at all times.
* * * * *
(b) Before September 12, 2019, you must always operate and maintain
your affected source, including air pollution control and monitoring
equipment, according to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i). On and
after September 12, 2019, at all times, the owner or operator must
operate and maintain any affected source, including associated air
pollution control equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner
consistent with safety and good air pollution control practices for
minimizing emissions. The general duty to minimize emissions does not
require the owner or operator to make any further efforts to reduce
emissions if levels required by the applicable standard have been
achieved. Determination of whether a source is operating in compliance
with operation and maintenance requirements will be based on
information available to the Administrator that may include, but is not
limited to, monitoring results, review of operation and maintenance
procedures, review of operation and maintenance records, and inspection
of the affected source.
(c) Before September 12, 2019, if your affected source uses an
emission capture system and add-on control device, you must develop a
written startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan according to the
provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(3). The plan must address the startup,
shutdown, and corrective actions in the event of a malfunction of the
emission capture system or the add-on control device. The plan must
also address any web coating/printing or dyeing/finishing operation
equipment such as conveyors that move the substrate among enclosures
that may cause increased emissions or that would affect capture
efficiency if the process equipment malfunctions. A startup, shutdown,
and malfunction plan is not required on and after September 12, 2019.
0
24. Section 63.4310 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(9)
introductory text and (c)(9)(iv) and adding paragraph (c)(9)(v) to read
as follows:
Sec. 63.4310 What notifications must I submit?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(9) For the emission rate with add-on controls option as specified
in Sec. 63.4291(a)(3) and (c)(3), the organic HAP overall control
efficiency option as specified in Sec. 63.4291(a)(4), and the oxidizer
outlet organic HAP concentration option as specified in Sec.
63.4291(a)(5), for each controlled web coating/printing or dyeing/
finishing operation using an emission capture system and add-on control
device other than a solvent recovery system for which you conduct
liquid-liquid material balances according to Sec. 63.4341(e)(5) or
(f)(5) or Sec. 63.4351(d)(5), you must include the information
specified in paragraphs (c)(9)(i) through (v) of this section.
* * * * *
(iv) A statement of whether or not you developed and implemented
the work practice plan required by Sec. 63.4293.
(v) Before September 12, 2019, a statement of whether or not you
developed the startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan required by Sec.
63.4300(c). This statement is not required on and after September 12,
2019.
0
25. Section 63.4311 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(5) and (6) and (a)(7) introductory text;
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (a)(7)(i) as (a)(7)(i)(A);
0
c. Adding new paragraph (a)(7)(i) introductory text;
0
d. Redesignating paragraph (a)(7)(ii) as (a)(7)(i)(B) and revising it;
0
e. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(7)(iii) through (xv) as (a)(7)(i)(C)
through (O), respectively;
0
f. Adding new paragraph (a)(7)(ii).
0
g. Revising paragraphs (a)(8) introductory text, (a)(8)(i), and (c)
introductory text; and
0
h. Adding paragraphs (d) through (h).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 63.4311 What reports must I submit?
(a) * * *
(5) Deviations: Compliant material option. If you use the compliant
material option, and there was a deviation from the applicable organic
HAP content requirements in Table 1 to this subpart, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraph (a)(5)(i)
or (ii) of this section, as applicable.
(i) Before September 12, 2019, the information in paragraph
(a)(5)(i)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) Identification of each coating, printing, slashing, dyeing or
finishing material applied that deviated from the emission limit and
each thinning or cleaning material applied in web coating/printing
operations that contained organic HAP, and the dates and time periods
each was applied.
(B) The calculation of the organic HAP content using Equation 1 of
Sec. 63.4321 for each coating or printing material identified in
paragraph (a)(5)(i)(A) of this section. You do not need to submit
background data supporting this calculation (e.g., information provided
by material suppliers or manufacturers, or test reports).
(C) The determination of mass fraction of organic HAP for each
regulated material identified in
[[Page 9624]]
paragraph (a)(5)(i)(A) of this section. You do not need to submit
background data supporting this calculation (e.g., information provided
by material suppliers or manufacturers, or test reports).
(D) A statement of the cause of each deviation.
(ii) On and after September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(a)(5)(ii)(A) through (E) of this section.
(A) Identification of each coating, printing, slashing, dyeing or
finishing material applied that deviated from the emission limit and
each thinning or cleaning material applied in web coating/printing
operations that contained organic HAP, and the date, time, and duration
each was applied.
(B) The calculation of the organic HAP content using Equation 1 of
Sec. 63.4321 for each coating or printing material identified in
paragraph (a)(5)(ii)(A) of this section. You do not need to submit
background data supporting this calculation (e.g., information provided
by material suppliers or manufacturers, or test reports).
(C) The determination of mass fraction of organic HAP for each
regulated material identified in paragraph (a)(5)(ii)(A) of this
section. You do not need to submit background data supporting this
calculation (e.g., information provided by material suppliers or
manufacturers, or test reports).
(D) A statement of the cause of each deviation (including unknown
cause, if applicable).
(E) The number of deviations and, for each deviation, a list of the
affected source or equipment, an estimate of the quantity of each
regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit in Table 1 to this
subpart, and a description of the method used to estimate the
emissions.
(6) Deviations: Emission rate without add-on controls option. If
you use the emission rate without add-on controls option and there was
a deviation from the applicable emission limit in Table 1 to this
subpart, the semiannual compliance report must contain the information
in paragraph (a)(6)(i) or (ii) of this section, as applicable.
(i) Before September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(a)(6)(i)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period during
which the organic HAP emission rate exceeded the applicable emission
limit in Table 1 to this subpart.
(B) The calculations used to determine the organic HAP emission
rate for the compliance period in which the deviation occurred. You
must submit the calculations for Equations 1, 1A and 1B, 2, and 3 in
Sec. 63.4331 for web coating/printing operations; and for Equations 4,
4A, 5, and 6 in Sec. 63.4331 for dyeing/finishing operations; and if
applicable, the calculation used to determine mass of organic HAP in
waste materials according to Sec. 63.4331(a)(4)(iii) or (b)(3)(ii);
and, for dyeing/finishing operations, if applicable, the mass of
organic HAP in wastewater streams calculation for Equation 7 in Sec.
63.4331. You do not need to submit background data supporting these
calculations (e.g., information provided by materials suppliers or
manufacturers, or test reports).
(C) A statement of the cause of each deviation.
(ii) On and after September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(a)(6)(ii)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period,
during which the organic HAP emission rate exceeded the applicable
emission limit in Table 1 to this subpart.
(B) The calculations used to determine the organic HAP emission
rate for the compliance period in which the deviation occurred. You
must submit the calculations for Equations 1, 1A and 1B, 2, and 3 in
Sec. 63.4331 for web coating/printing operations; and for Equations 4,
4A, 5, and 6 in Sec. 63.4331 for dyeing/finishing operations; and if
applicable, the calculation used to determine mass of organic HAP in
waste materials according to Sec. 63.4331(a)(4)(iii) or (b)(3)(ii);
and, for dyeing/finishing operations, if applicable, the mass of
organic HAP in wastewater streams calculation for Equation 7 in Sec.
63.4331. You do not need to submit background data supporting these
calculations (e.g., information provided by materials suppliers or
manufacturers, or test reports).
(C) A statement of the cause of each deviation (including unknown
cause, if applicable).
(D) The number of deviations, a list of the affected source or
equipment, an estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant
emitted over any emission limit in Table 1 to this subpart, and a
description of the method used to estimate the emissions.
(7) Deviations: Add-on controls options. If you use one of the add-
on controls options in Sec. 63.4291(a) or (c) and there was a
deviation from an emission limitation (including any periods when
emissions bypassed the add-on control device and were diverted to the
atmosphere), the semiannual compliance report must contain the
information in paragraph (a)(7)(i) or (ii) of this section, as
applicable.
(i) Before September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(a)(7)(i)(A) through (O) of this section. This includes periods of
startup, shutdown, and malfunction during which deviations occurred.
* * * * *
(B) If you use the emission rate option, the calculations used to
determine the organic HAP emission rate for each compliance period in
which a deviation occurred. You must submit the calculations that apply
to you, including Equations 1, 1A, 1B, and 2 of Sec. 63.4331 and
Equations 1, 1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3, 3A and 3B and 4 of Sec. 63.4341 for web
coating/printing operations; and Equations 4, 4A, 5, 6, and 7 of Sec.
63.4331 and Equations 5, 5A, 5B, 6, 7, and 8 of Sec. 63.4341 for
dyeing/finishing operations. You do not need to submit the background
data supporting these calculations (e.g., information provided by
materials suppliers or manufacturers, or test reports).
* * * * *
(ii) On and after September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(a)(7)(ii)(A) through (M), (O), and (P) of this section if there was a
deviation from the applicable emission limit in Table 1 to this subpart
or the applicable operating limit(s) in Table 2 to this subpart
(including any periods when emissions bypassed the add-on control
device and were diverted to the atmosphere), and the information in
paragraph (a)(7)(ii)(N) of this section if there was a deviation from
the applicable work practice standards in Sec. 63.4293(b).
(A) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period during
which the organic HAP emission rate exceeded the applicable emission
limit in Table 1 to this subpart.
(B) If you use the emission rate option, the calculations used to
determine the organic HAP emission rate for each compliance period in
which a deviation occurred. You must submit the calculations that apply
to you, including Equations 1, 1A, 1B, and 2 of Sec. 63.4331 and
Equations 1, 1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3, 3A and 3B and 4 of Sec. 63.4341 for web
coating/printing operations; and Equations 4, 4A, 5, 6, and 7 of Sec.
63.4331 and Equations 5, 5A, 5B, 6, 7, and 8 of Sec. 63.4341 for
dyeing/finishing operations. You do not need to submit the background
data supporting these calculations (e.g., information provided by
materials suppliers or manufacturers, or test reports).
[[Page 9625]]
(C) If you use the organic HAP overall control efficiency option,
the calculations used to determine the organic HAP overall control
efficiency for each compliance period in which a deviation occurred.
You must submit the calculations that apply to you, including Equations
1, 1A, and 1B of Sec. 63.4331; Equations 1, 1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3, 3A, and
3B of Sec. 63.4341; and Equation 1 of Sec. 63.4351. You do not need
to submit the background data supporting these calculations (e.g., test
reports).
(D) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture system
or add-on control devices started and stopped.
(E) A brief description of the CPMS.
(F) The date of the latest CPMS certification or audit.
(G) For each instance that the CPMS was inoperative, except for
zero (low-level) and high-level checks, the date, time, and duration
that the CPMS was inoperative; the cause (including unknown cause) for
the CPMS being inoperative; and descriptions of corrective actions
taken.
(H) For each instance that the CPMS was out-of-control, as
specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7), the date, time, and duration that the
CPMS was out-of-control; the cause (including unknown cause) for the
CPMS being out-of-control; and descriptions of corrective actions
taken.
(I) The date, time, and duration of each deviation from an
operating limit in Table 2 to this subpart, and the date, time, and
duration of any bypass of the add-on control device.
(J) A summary of the total duration of each deviation from an
operating limit in Table 2 to this subpart and each bypass of the add-
on control device during the semiannual reporting period and the total
duration as a percent of the total source operating time during that
semiannual reporting period.
(K) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations from the
operating limits in Table 2 to this subpart and bypasses of the add-on
control device during the semiannual reporting period into those that
were due to control equipment problems, process problems, other known
causes, and other unknown causes.
(L) A summary of the total duration of CPMS downtime during the
semiannual reporting period and the total duration of CPMS downtime as
a percent of the total source operating time during that semiannual
reporting period.
(M) A description of any changes in the CPMS, web coating/printing
or dyeing/finishing operation, emission capture system, or add-on
control device since the last semiannual reporting period.
(N) For deviations from the work practice standards, the number of
deviations, and, for each deviation, a description of the deviation;
the date, time, and duration of the deviation; and the actions you took
to minimize emissions in accordance with Sec. 63.4300(b). The
description of the deviation must include a list of the affected
sources or equipment for which the deviation occurred and the cause of
the deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
(O) For deviations from an emission limit in Table 1 to this
subpart or operating limit in Table 2 to this subpart, a statement of
the cause of each deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
(P) For each deviation from an emission limit in Table 1 to this
subpart or operating limit in Table 2 to this subpart, a list of the
affected sources or equipment for which a deviation occurred, an
estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over any
emission limit in Table 1 to this subpart, and a description of the
method used to estimate the emissions.
(8) Deviations: Equivalent Emission Rate Option. If you use the
equivalent emission rate option, and there was a deviation from the
operating scenarios, as defined in Sec. 63.4371, used to demonstrate
initial compliance, the semiannual compliance report must contain the
information in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Before September 12, 2019, the beginning and ending dates of
each compliance period during which the deviation occurred. On and
after September 12, 2019, the beginning and ending dates of each
compliance period during which the deviation occurred, the number of
deviations during the compliance period, and, for each deviation, the
date, time, and duration of the deviation; a list of the affected
sources or equipment; and a statement of the cause of the deviation
(including an unknown cause, if applicable).
* * * * *
(c) Before September 12, 2019, if you use one of the add-on control
options in Sec. 63.4291(a) or (c) and you have a startup, shutdown, or
malfunction during the semiannual reporting period, you must submit the
reports specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section. The
reports specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section are not
required on and after September 12, 2019.
* * * * *
(d) Beginning no later than June 13, 2019, you must submit the
results of the performance test required in paragraph (b) of this
section following the procedure specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through
(3) of this section.
(1) For data collected using test methods supported by the EPA's
Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the EPA's ERT website
(https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert) at the time of the test, you must submit the
results of the performance test to the EPA via the Compliance and
Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI). The CEDRI interface can be
accessed through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). Performance test data must be submitted in a file format
generated through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic
file format consistent with the extensible markup language (XML) schema
listed on the EPA's ERT website.
(2) For data collected using test methods that are not supported by
the EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the
test, you must submit the results of the performance test to the
Administrator at the appropriate address listed in Sec. 63.13, unless
the Administrator agrees to or specifies an alternate reporting method.
(3) If you claim that some of the performance test information
being submitted under paragraph (d)(1) of this section is confidential
business information (CBI), you must submit a complete file generated
through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file
consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT website,
including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact disc, flash
drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium to the EPA. The
electronic medium must be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/
OAPQS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy
Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same ERT or
alternate file with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA via
the EPA's CDX as described in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(e) Beginning on March 15, 2021, the owner or operator shall submit
the initial notifications required in Sec. 63.9(b) and the
notification of compliance status required in Sec. 63.9(h) and Sec.
63.4310(c) to the EPA via CEDRI. The CEDRI interface can be accessed
through the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov). The owner or operator must
upload to CEDRI an electronic copy of each applicable notification in
portable document format (PDF). The applicable notification must be
submitted by the deadline specified in this subpart,
[[Page 9626]]
regardless of the method in which the reports are submitted. Owners or
operators who claim that some of the information required to be
submitted via CEDRI is CBI shall submit a complete report generated
using the appropriate form in CEDRI or an alternate electronic file
consistent with the extensible markup language (XML) schema listed on
the EPA's CEDRI website, including information claimed to be CBI, on a
compact disc, flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage
medium to the EPA. The electronic medium shall be clearly marked as CBI
and mailed to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader,
Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC
27703. The same file with the CBI omitted shall be submitted to the EPA
via the EPA's CDX as described earlier in this paragraph.
(f) Beginning on March 15, 2021, or once the reporting template has
been available on the CEDRI website for 1 year, whichever date is
later, the owner or operator shall submit the semiannual compliance
report required in paragraph (a) of this section to the EPA via CEDRI.
The CEDRI interface can be accessed through the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov). The owner or operator must use the appropriate electronic
template on the CEDRI website for this subpart or an alternate
electronic file format consistent with the XML schema listed on the
CEDRI website (https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/compliance-and-emissions-data-reporting-interface-cedri). The date
report templates become available will be listed on the CEDRI website.
If the reporting form for the semiannual compliance report specific to
this subpart is not available in CEDRI at the time that the report is
due, you must submit the report to the Administrator at the appropriate
addresses listed in Sec. 63.13. Once the form has been available in
CEDRI for 1 year, you must begin submitting all subsequent reports via
CEDRI. The reports must be submitted by the deadlines specified in this
subpart, regardless of the method in which the reports are submitted.
Owners or operators who claim that some of the information required to
be submitted via CEDRI is CBI shall submit a complete report generated
using the appropriate form in CEDRI or an alternate electronic file
consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's CEDRI website,
including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact disc, flash
drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium to the EPA. The
electronic medium shall be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S.
EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy
Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file
with the CBI omitted shall be submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as
described earlier in this paragraph.
(g) If you are required to electronically submit a report through
CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, and due to a planned or actual outage of either
the EPA's CEDRI or CDX systems within the period of time beginning 5
business days prior to the date that the submission is due, you will be
or are precluded from accessing CEDRI or CDX and submitting a required
report within the time prescribed, you may assert a claim of EPA system
outage for failure to timely comply with the reporting requirement. You
must submit notification to the Administrator in writing as soon as
possible following the date you first knew, or through due diligence
should have known, that the event may cause or caused a delay in
reporting. You must provide to the Administrator a written description
identifying the date, time and length of the outage; a rationale for
attributing the delay in reporting beyond the regulatory deadline to
the EPA system outage; describe the measures taken or to be taken to
minimize the delay in reporting; and identify a date by which you
propose to report, or if you have already met the reporting requirement
at the time of the notification, the date you reported. In any
circumstance, the report must be submitted electronically as soon as
possible after the outage is resolved. The decision to accept the claim
of EPA system outage and allow an extension to the reporting deadline
is solely within the discretion of the Administrator.
(h) If you are required to electronically submit a report through
CEDRI in the EPA's CDX and a force majeure event is about to occur,
occurs, or has occurred or there are lingering effects from such an
event within the period of time beginning 5 business days prior to the
date the submission is due, the owner or operator may assert a claim of
force majeure for failure to timely comply with the reporting
requirement. For the purposes of this section, a force majeure event is
defined as an event that will be or has been caused by circumstances
beyond the control of the affected facility, its contractors, or any
entity controlled by the affected facility that prevents you from
complying with the requirement to submit a report electronically within
the time period prescribed. Examples of such events are acts of nature
(e.g., hurricanes, earthquakes, or floods), acts of war or terrorism,
or equipment failure or safety hazard beyond the control of the
affected facility (e.g., large scale power outage). If you intend to
assert a claim of force majeure, you must submit notification to the
Administrator in writing as soon as possible following the date you
first knew, or through due diligence should have known, that the event
may cause or caused a delay in reporting. You must provide to the
Administrator a written description of the force majeure event and a
rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the regulatory
deadline to the force majeure event; describe the measures taken or to
be taken to minimize the delay in reporting; and identify a date by
which you propose to report, or if you have already met the reporting
requirement at the time of the notification, the date you reported. In
any circumstance, the reporting must occur as soon as possible after
the force majeure event occurs. The decision to accept the claim of
force majeure and allow an extension to the reporting deadline is
solely within the discretion of the Administrator.
0
26. Section 63.4312 is amended by revising paragraphs (i), (j)
introductory text, and (j)(1) and (2) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4312 What records must I keep?
* * * * *
(i) Before September 12, 2019, you must keep records of the date,
time, and duration of each deviation. On and after September 12, 2019,
for each deviation from an emission limitation reported under Sec.
63.4311(a)(5) through (8), a record of the information specified in
paragraphs (i)(1) through (4) of this section, as applicable.
(1) The date, time, and duration of the deviation, as reported
under Sec. 63.4311(a)(5) through (8).
(2) A list of the affected sources or equipment for which the
deviation occurred and the cause of the deviation, as reported under
Sec. 63.4311(a)(5) through (8).
(3) An estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted
over any applicable emission limit in Table 1 to this subpart or any
applicable operating limit in Table 2 to this subpart, and a
description of the method used to calculate the estimate, as reported
under Sec. 63.4311(a)(5) through (8). If you use the equivalent
emission rate option to comply with this subpart, a record of the
applicable information specified in Sec. 63.4311(a)(8)(ii) through
(iv) satisfies the recordkeeping requirement in this paragraph (i)(3).
(4) A record of actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance
with Sec. 63.4300(b) and any corrective actions
[[Page 9627]]
taken to return the affected unit to its normal or usual manner of
operation.
(j) If you use the emission rate with add-on controls option, the
organic HAP overall control efficiency option, or the oxidizer outlet
organic HAP concentration option, you must also keep the records
specified in paragraphs (j)(1) through (8) of this section.
(1) Before September 12, 2019, for each deviation, a record of
whether the deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction. The record in this paragraph (j)(1) is not required on and
after September 12, 2019.
(2) Before September 12, 2019, the records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii)
through (v) related to startup, shutdown, and malfunction. The records
in this paragraph (j)(2) are not required on and after September 12,
2019.
* * * * *
0
27. Section 63.4313 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4313 In what form and for how long must I keep my records?
(a) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). Where
appropriate, the records may be maintained as electronic spreadsheets
or as a database. Any records required to be maintained by this subpart
that are in reports that were submitted electronically via the EPA's
CEDRI may be maintained in electronic format. This ability to maintain
electronic copies does not affect the requirement for facilities to
make records, data, and reports available upon request to a delegated
air agency or the EPA as part of an on-site compliance evaluation.
* * * * *
0
28. Section 63.4321 is amended by revising paragraphs (e)(1)(i)(A),
(e)(1)(ii) and (iv), and (e)(2)(i) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4321 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limitations?
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) Count each organic HAP in Table 6 to this subpart that is
measured to be present at 0.1 percent by mass or more and at 1.0
percent by mass or more for other compounds. For example, if toluene
(not listed in Table 6 to this subpart) is measured to be 0.5 percent
of the material by mass, you don't have to count it. Express the mass
fraction of each organic HAP you count as a value truncated to no more
than four places after the decimal point (e.g., 0.3791).
* * * * *
(ii) Method 24 in appendix A-7 of part 60. You may use Method 24 to
determine the mass fraction of nonaqueous volatile matter and use that
value as a substitute for mass fraction of organic HAP. As an
alternative to using Method 24, you may use ASTM D2369-10 (R2015),
``Test Method for Volatile Content of Coatings'' (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 63.14). For a multi-component coating with
reactive chemicals, you may use Method 24 or ASTM D2369-10 (R2015) on
the coating as applied to determine the mass fraction of nonaqueous
volatile matter and use that value as a substitute for the mass
fraction of organic HAP determined from the sum of organic HAP in each
component.
* * * * *
(iv) Information from the supplier or manufacturer of the material.
You may rely on information other than that generated by the test
methods specified in paragraphs (e)(1)(i) through (iii) of this
section, such as manufacturer's formulation data, if it represents each
organic HAP in Table 6 to this subpart that is present at 0.1 percent
by mass or more and at 1.0 percent by mass or more for other compounds.
For example, if toluene (not listed in Table 6 to this subpart) is 0.5
percent of the material by mass, you do not have to count it. If there
is a disagreement between such information and results of a test
conducted according to paragraphs (e)(1)(i) through (iii) of this
section on coating, thinning, or cleaning material, then the test
method results will take precedence. Information from the supplier or
manufacturer of the printing, slashing, dyeing, or finishing material
is sufficient for determining the mass fraction of organic HAP.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Method 24 in appendix A-7 of part 60. You may use Method 24 for
determining the mass fraction of solids of coating materials. As an
alternative to using Method 24, you may use ASTM D2369-10 (R2015),
``Test Method for Volatile Content of Coatings'' (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 63.14).
* * * * *
0
29. Section 63.4340 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4340 By what date must I conduct initial performance tests
and other initial compliance demonstrations?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) You must complete the compliance demonstration for the initial
compliance period according to the requirements of Sec. 63.4341. The
initial compliance period begins on the applicable compliance date
specified in Sec. 63.4283 and ends on the last day of the 12th full
month after the compliance date. The initial compliance demonstration
includes the results of emission capture system and add-on control
device performance tests conducted according to Sec. Sec. 63.4360,
63.4361, and 63.4362; results of liquid-liquid material balances
conducted according to Sec. 63.4341(e)(5) or (f)(5); calculations
according to Sec. 63.4341 and supporting documentation showing that
during the initial compliance period the organic HAP emission rate was
equal to or less than the applicable emission limit in Table 1 to this
subpart; the operating limits established during the performance tests
and the results of the continuous parameter monitoring required by
Sec. 63.4364; and documentation of whether you developed and
implemented the work practice plan required by Sec. 63.4293.
0
30. Section 63.4341 is amended:
0
a. In paragraph (e)(4) introductory text by removing the three
sentences after the subject heading and adding four sentences in their
place;
0
b. By revising paragraph (e)(5)(iii); and
0
c. In paragraph (f)(4) introductory text by removing the first four
sentences after the subject heading and adding four new sentences in
their place.
The additions and revision read as follows:
Sec. 63.4341 How do I demonstrate initial compliance?
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(4) * * * For each controlled web coating/printing operation using
an emission capture system and add-on control device other than a
solvent recovery system for which you conduct liquid-liquid material
balances, calculate the organic HAP emissions reductions using Equation
1 of this section. The equation applies the emission capture system
efficiency and add-on control device efficiency to the mass of organic
HAP contained in the coating, printing, thinning, and cleaning
materials applied in the web coating/printing operation served by the
emission capture system and add-on control device during the compliance
period. For any period of time a deviation specified in Sec.
63.4342(c) or (d) occurs in the controlled web coating/printing
operation, then you must assume zero efficiency for the emission
capture system and add-on control device. Equation 1 of this section
treats the coating, printing, thinning, and
[[Page 9628]]
cleaning materials applied during such a deviation as if they were used
on an uncontrolled web coating/printing operation for the time period
of the deviation. * * *
* * * * *
(5) * * *
(iii) Determine the mass fraction of volatile organic matter for
each coating, printing, cleaning, and thinning material applied in the
web coating/printing operation controlled by the solvent recovery
system during the compliance period, kg volatile organic matter per kg
coating, printing, cleaning, and thinning material. You may determine
the volatile organic matter mass fraction using Method 24 in appendix
A-7 of part 60, ASTM D2369-10 (R2015), ``Test Method for Volatile
Content of Coatings'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), or
an EPA approved alternative method. Alternatively, you may use
information provided by the manufacturer or supplier of the coating or
printing material. In the event of any inconsistency between
information provided by the manufacturer or supplier and the results of
Method 24, ASTM D2369-10 (R2015), or an approved alternative method,
the test method results will govern.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(4) * * * For each controlled dyeing/finishing operation using an
emission capture system and add-on control device other than a solvent
recovery system for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances,
calculate the organic HAP emissions reductions using Equation 5 of this
section. The equation applies the emission capture system efficiency
and add-on control device efficiency to the mass of organic HAP
contained in the dyeing and finishing materials applied in the dyeing/
finishing operation served by the emission capture system and add-on
control device during the compliance period. For any period of time a
deviation specified in Sec. 63.4342(c) or (d) occurs in the controlled
dyeing/finishing operation, then you must assume zero efficiency for
the emission capture system and add-on control device. Equation 5 of
this section treats the dyeing and finishing materials applied during
such a deviation as if they were applied on an uncontrolled dyeing/
finishing operation for the time period of the deviation. * * *
* * * * *
0
31. Section 63.4342 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraph (c) introductory text, adding paragraph (c)(3), and revising
paragraphs (f) and (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4342 How do I conduct periodic performance tests and
demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limitations?
* * * * *
(c) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each operating
limit required by Sec. 63.4292 that applies to you, as specified in
Table 2 to this subpart, and you must conduct periodic performance
tests as specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
(3) Except for solvent recovery systems for which you conduct
liquid-liquid material balances according to Sec. 63.4351(d)(5),
within 5 years following the previous performance test, you must
conduct according to the procedures in Sec. Sec. 63.4360, 63.4361, and
63.4362 a periodic performance test of each capture system and add-on
control device used, and you must establish the operating limits
required by Sec. 63.4292. You must conduct the first periodic
performance test and establish the operating limits required by Sec.
63.4292 before March 15, 2022, unless you are already required to
complete periodic performance tests as a requirement of renewing your
facility's operating permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71 and
have conducted a performance test on or after March 15, 2017.
Thereafter you must conduct a performance test no later than 5 years
following the previous performance test. Operating limits must be
confirmed or reestablished during each performance test.
* * * * *
(f) As part of each semiannual compliance report required in Sec.
63.4311, you must identify the coating/printing and dyeing/finishing
operation(s) for which you use the emission rate with add-on controls
option. If there were no deviations from the applicable emission
limitations in Sec. Sec. 63.4290, 63.4292, and 63.4293, you must
submit a statement that, as appropriate, the web coating/printing
operations or the dyeing/finishing operations were in compliance with
the emission limitations during the reporting period because the
organic HAP emission rate for each compliance period was less than or
equal to the applicable emission limit in Table 1 to this subpart, and
you achieved the operating limits required by Sec. 63.4292 and the
work practice standards required by Sec. 63.4293 during each
compliance period.
* * * * *
(h) Before September 12, 2019, consistent with Sec. Sec. 63.6(e)
and 63.7(e)(1), deviations that occur during a period of startup,
shutdown, or malfunction of the emission capture system, add-on control
device, or web coating/printing or dyeing/finishing operation that may
affect emission capture or control device efficiency are not violations
if you demonstrate to the Administrator's satisfaction that you were
operating in accordance with Sec. 63.6(e)(1). The Administrator will
determine whether deviations that occur during a period of startup,
shutdown, or malfunction are violations according to the provisions in
Sec. 63.6(e). On and after September 12, 2019, as specified in Sec.
63.4300(b), at all times, the owner or operator must operate and
maintain any affected source, including associated air pollution
control equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner consistent with
safety and good air pollution control practices for minimizing
emissions, and determination of whether a source is operating in
compliance with operation and maintenance requirements will be based on
information available to the Administrator.
* * * * *
0
32. Section 63.4350 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(3) and (b)(3)
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4350 By what date must I conduct performance tests and other
initial compliance demonstrations?
(a) * * *
(3) You must complete the compliance demonstration for the initial
compliance period according to the requirements of Sec. 63.4351. The
initial compliance period begins on the applicable compliance date
specified in Sec. 63.4283 and ends on the last day of the first full
month after the compliance date, or the date you conduct the
performance tests of the emission capture systems and add-on control
devices, or initiate the first liquid-liquid material balance for a
solvent recovery system, whichever is later. The initial compliance
demonstration includes the results of emission capture system and add-
on control device performance tests conducted according to Sec. Sec.
63.4360, 63.4361, and 63.4362; results of liquid-liquid material
balances conducted according to Sec. 63.4351(d)(5); calculations
according to Sec. 63.4351 and supporting documentation showing that
during the initial compliance period either the organic HAP overall
control efficiency was equal to or greater than the applicable overall
control efficiency limit in Table 1 to this subpart or the oxidizer
outlet organic HAP concentration was no greater than 20 parts per
million by volume (ppmv) on
[[Page 9629]]
a dry basis; the operating limits established during the performance
tests and the results of the continuous parameter monitoring required
by Sec. 63.4364; and documentation of whether you developed and
implemented the work practice plan required by Sec. 63.4293.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) You must complete the compliance demonstration for the initial
compliance period according to the requirements of Sec. 63.4351. The
initial compliance period begins on the applicable compliance date
specified in Sec. 63.4283 and ends on the last day of the first full
month after the compliance date. The initial compliance demonstration
includes the results of emission capture system and add-on control
device performance tests conducted according to Sec. Sec. 63.4360,
63.4361, and 63.4362; results of liquid-liquid material balances
conducted according to Sec. 63.4351(d)(5); calculations according to
Sec. 63.4351 and supporting documentation showing that during the
initial compliance period the organic HAP overall control efficiency
was equal to or greater than the applicable organic HAP overall control
efficiency limit in Table 1 to this subpart or the oxidizer outlet
organic HAP concentration was no greater than 20 ppmv on a dry basis
and the efficiency of the capture system was 100 percent; the operating
limits established during the performance tests and the results of the
continuous parameter monitoring required by Sec. 63.4364; and
documentation of whether you developed and implemented the work
practice plan required by Sec. 63.4293.
0
33. Section 63.4351 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (d)(4)
introductory text, (d)(5)(iii), and (e) introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4351 How do I demonstrate initial compliance?
(a) You may use the organic HAP overall control efficiency option
or the oxidizer outlet organic HAP concentration option for any
individual web coating/printing operation, for any group of web
coating/printing operations in the affected source, or for all of the
web coating/printing operations in the affected source. You may include
both controlled and uncontrolled web coating/printing operations in a
group for which you use the organic HAP overall control efficiency
option. You must use either the compliant material option, the emission
rate without add-on controls option, or the emission rate with add-on
controls option for any web coating/printing operation(s) in the
affected source for which you do not use either the organic HAP overall
control efficiency option or the oxidizer outlet organic HAP
concentration option. To demonstrate initial compliance, any web
coating/printing operation for which you use the organic HAP overall
control efficiency option must meet the applicable organic HAP overall
control efficiency limitations in Table 1 to this subpart according to
the procedures in paragraph (d) of this section. Any web coating/
printing operation for which you use the oxidizer outlet organic HAP
concentration option must meet the 20 ppmv on a dry basis limit and
achieve 100 percent capture efficiencies according to the procedures in
paragraph (e) of this section. To demonstrate initial compliance with
either option, you also must meet the applicable operating limits in
Sec. 63.4292 according to the procedures in paragraph (b) of this
section and the work practice standards in Sec. 63.4293 according to
the procedures in paragraph (c) of this section. When calculating the
organic HAP overall control efficiency according to this section, do
not include any coating, printing, thinning, or cleaning materials
applied on web coating/printing operations for which you use the
compliant material option, the emission rate without add-on controls
option, the emission rate with add-on controls option, or the oxidizer
outlet organic HAP concentration option. You do not need to redetermine
the mass of organic HAP in coating, printing, thinning, or cleaning
materials that have been reclaimed onsite and reused in web coating/
printing operation(s) for which you use the organic HAP overall control
efficiency option.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(4) Calculate the organic HAP emissions reductions for controlled
web coating/printing operations not using liquid-liquid material
balance. For each controlled web coating/printing operation using an
emission capture system and add-on control device other than a solvent
recovery system for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances,
calculate the organic HAP emissions reductions using Equation 1 of
Sec. 63.4341. The equation applies the emission capture system
efficiency and add-on control device efficiency to the mass of organic
HAP contained in the coating, printing, thinning, and cleaning
materials applied in the web coating/printing operation served by the
emission capture system and add-on control device during the compliance
period. For any period of time a deviation specified in Sec.
63.4352(c) or (d) occurs in the controlled web coating/printing
operation, then you must assume zero efficiency for the emission
capture system and add-on control device. Equation 1 of Sec. 63.4341
treats the coating, printing, thinning, and cleaning materials applied
during such a deviation as if they were applied on an uncontrolled web
coating/printing operation for the time period of the deviation.
* * * * *
(5) * * *
(iii) Determine the mass fraction of volatile organic matter for
each coating and printing material applied in the web coating/printing
operation controlled by the solvent recovery system during the
compliance period, kg volatile organic matter per kg coating and
printing material. You may determine the volatile organic matter mass
fraction using Method 24 in appendix A-7 of part 60, ASTM D2369-10
(R2015), ``Test Method for Volatile Content of Coatings'' (incorporated
by reference, see Sec. 63.14), or an EPA approved alternative method.
Alternatively, you may use information provided by the manufacturer or
supplier of the coating or printing material. In the event of any
inconsistency between information provided by the manufacturer or
supplier and the results of Method 24, ASTM D2369-10 (R2015), or an
approved alternative method, the test method results will govern.
* * * * *
(e) Compliance with oxidizer outlet organic HAP concentration
limit. You must follow the procedures in paragraphs (e)(1) through (3)
of this section to demonstrate compliance with the oxidizer outlet
organic HAP concentration limit of no greater than 20 ppmv on a dry
basis.
* * * * *
0
34. Section 63.4352 is amended by revising paragraph (h) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4352 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limitations?
* * * * *
(h) Before September 12, 2019, consistent with Sec. Sec. 63.6(e)
and 63.7(e)(1), deviations that occur during a period of startup,
shutdown, or malfunction of the emission capture system, add-on control
device, or web coating/printing operation that may affect emission
capture or control device efficiency are not violations if you
demonstrate to the Administrator's satisfaction that you
[[Page 9630]]
were operating in accordance with Sec. 63.6(e)(1). The Administrator
will determine whether deviations that occur during a period of
startup, shutdown, or malfunction are violations according to the
provisions in Sec. 63.6(e). On and after September 12, 2019, as
specified in Sec. 63.4300(b), at all times, the owner or operator must
operate and maintain any affected source, including associated air
pollution control equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner
consistent with safety and good air pollution control practices for
minimizing emissions, and determination of whether a source is
operating in compliance with operation and maintenance requirements
will be based on information available to the Administrator.
* * * * *
0
35. Section 63.4360 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text and (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4360 What are the general requirements for performance tests?
(a) You must conduct each performance test required by Sec.
63.4340 or Sec. 63.4350 according to the requirements in this section,
unless you obtain a waiver of the performance test according to the
provisions in Sec. 63.7(h).
(1) Representative web coating/printing or dyeing/finishing
operation operating conditions. You must conduct the performance test
under representative operating conditions for the web coating/printing
or dyeing/finishing operation. Operations during periods of startup,
shutdown, or nonoperation do not constitute representative conditions
for purposes of conducting a performance test. The owner or operator
may not conduct performance tests during periods of malfunction. You
must record the process information that is necessary to document
operating conditions during the test and explain why the conditions
represent normal operation. Upon request, you must make available to
the Administrator such records as may be necessary to determine the
conditions of performance tests.
* * * * *
0
36. Section 63.4362 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) through
(4) and (b) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4362 How do I determine the add-on control device emission
destruction or removal efficiency?
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) Use Method 1 or 1A in appendix A-1 of part 60, as appropriate,
to select sampling sites and velocity traverse points.
(2) Use Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, or 2F in appendix A-1, or Method 2G
in appendix A-2, of part 60, as appropriate, to measure gas volumetric
flow rate.
(3) Use Method 3, 3A, or 3B in appendix A of part 60, as
appropriate, for gas analysis to determine dry molecular weight. You
may also use as an alternative to Method 3B, the manual method for
measuring the oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide content of
exhaust gas in ANSI/ASME, PTC 19.10-1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas
Analyses [Part 10, Instruments and Apparatus]'' (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 63.14).
(4) Use Method 4 in appendix A of part 60 to determine stack gas
moisture.
* * * * *
(b) Measure the volatile organic matter concentration as carbon at
the inlet and outlet of the add-on control device simultaneously, using
Method 25 or 25A in appendix A-7 of part 60. If you are demonstrating
compliance with the oxidizer outlet organic HAP concentration limit,
only the outlet volatile organic matter concentration must be
determined. The outlet volatile organic matter concentration is
determined as the average of the three test runs. You may use Method 18
in appendix A-6 of part 60 to subtract methane emissions from measured
volatile organic matter concentration as carbon.
* * * * *
0
37. Section 63.4364 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(6) through (8) and (c) introductory text;
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(i) through (iii) as (c)(1) through (3),
respectively; and
0
c. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (c)(1).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 63.4364 What are the requirements for CPMS installation,
operation, and maintenance?
(a) * * *
(6) At all times, you must maintain the monitoring system in
accordance with Sec. 63.4300(b) and in proper working order including,
but not limited to, keeping readily available necessary parts for
routine repairs of the monitoring equipment.
(7) Before September 12, 2019, except for monitoring malfunctions,
associated repairs, or required quality assurance or control activities
(including calibration checks or required zero and span adjustments),
you must conduct all monitoring at all times that the unit is
operating. On and after September 12, 2019, you must operate the CPMS
and collect emission capture system and add-on control device parameter
data at all times in accordance with Sec. 63.4300(b). Data recorded
during monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, out-of-control
periods, or required quality assurance or control activities shall not
be used for purposes of calculating the emissions concentrations and
percent reductions specified in Table 1 to this subpart. You must use
all the data collected during all other periods in assessing compliance
of the control device and associated control system. A monitoring
malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not reasonably preventable
failure of the monitoring system to provide valid data. Monitoring
failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or careless
operation are not malfunctions.
(8) Except for periods of required quality assurance or control
activities, any averaging period during which the CPMS fails to operate
and record data continuously as required by paragraph (a)(1) of this
section, or during which generated data cannot be included in
calculating averages as specified in paragraph (a)(7) of this section,
constitutes a deviation, and you must notify the Administrator in
accordance with Sec. 63.4311(a).
* * * * *
(c) Oxidizers. If you are using an oxidizer to comply with the
emission standards, you must comply with paragraphs (c)(1) through (3)
of this section.
(1) Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate temperature
monitoring equipment according to the manufacturer's specifications.
The calibration of the chart recorder, data logger, or temperature
indicator must be verified every 3 months or the chart recorder, data
logger, or temperature indicator must be replaced. A thermocouple is
considered part of the temperature indicator for purposes of performing
periodic calibration and verification checks.
* * * * *
0
38. Section 63.4371 is amended by revising the definition of
``Deviation'' to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4371 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
Deviation means:
(1) Before September 12, 2019, any instance in which an affected
source subject to this subpart or an owner or operator of such a
source:
(i) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart
[[Page 9631]]
including but not limited to any emission limit, or operating limit, or
work practice standard;
(ii) 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
(iii) Fails to meet any emission limit, or operating limit, or work
practice standard in this subpart during startup, shutdown, or
malfunction regardless of whether or not such failure is permitted by
this subpart; and
(2) On and after September 12, 2019, any instance in which an
affected source subject to this subpart or an owner or operator of such
a source:
(i) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart including but not limited to any emission limit, or operating
limit, or work practice standard; or
(ii) 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.
* * * * *
No organic HAP means no organic HAP in Table 5 to this subpart is
present at 0.1 percent by mass or more and no organic HAP not listed in
Table 5 to this subpart is present at 1.0 percent by mass or more. The
organic HAP content of a regulated material is determined according to
Sec. 63.4321(e)(1).
* * * * *
0
39. Table 3 to subpart OOOO of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
Table 3 to Subpart OOOO of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart OOOO
[You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements according to the following table:]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject OOOO Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(a)(1)-(12)............ General Applicability..... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.1(b)(1)-(3)............. Initial Applicability Yes.................. Applicability to subpart
Determination. OOOO is also specified
in Sec. 63.4281.
Sec. 63.1(c)(1)................. Applicability After Yes.................. .........................
Standard Established.
Sec. 63.1(c)(2)-(3)............. Applicability of Permit No................... Area sources are not
Program for Area Sources. subject to subpart OOOO.
Sec. 63.1(c)(4)-(5)............. Extensions and Yes.................. .........................
Notifications.
Sec. 63.1(e).................... Applicability of Permit Yes.................. .........................
Program Before Relevant
Standard is Set.
Sec. 63.2....................... Definitions............... Yes.................. Additional definitions
are specified in Sec.
63.4371.
Sec. 63.3(a)-(c)................ Units and Abbreviations... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.4(a)(1)-(5)............. Prohibited Activities..... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.4(b)-(c)................ Circumvention/Severability Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.5(a).................... Construction/ Yes.................. .........................
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(b)(1)-(6)............. Requirements for Existing, Yes.................. .........................
Newly Constructed, and
Reconstructed Sources.
Sec. 63.5(d).................... Application for Approval Yes.................. .........................
of Construction/
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(e).................... Approval of Construction/ Yes.................. .........................
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(f).................... Approval of Construction/ Yes.................. .........................
Reconstruction Based on
Prior State Review.
Sec. 63.6(a).................... Compliance With Standards Yes.................. .........................
and Maintenance
Requirements--Applicabili
ty.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(7)............. Compliance Dates for New Yes.................. Section 63.4283 specifies
and Reconstructed Sources. the compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(5)............. Compliance Dates for Yes.................. Section 63.4283 specifies
Existing Sources. the compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i).............. Operation and Maintenance. Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4300(b) for
12, 2019.. general duty
No, on and after requirement.
September 12, 2019.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(ii)............. Operation and Maintenance. Yes, before September .........................
12, 2019..
No, on and after
September 12, 2019.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(iii)............ Operation and Maintenance. Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)................. Startup, Shutdown, and Yes, before September .........................
Malfunction Plan. 12, 2019..
No, on and after
September 12, 2019.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1)................. Compliance Except During Yes, before September .........................
Startup, Shutdown, and 12, 2019..
Malfunction. No, on and after
September 12, 2019.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)-(3)............. Methods for Determining Yes.................. .........................
Compliance.
Sec. 63.6(g)(1)-(3)............. Use of an Alternative Yes.................. .........................
Standard.
Sec. 63.6(h).................... Compliance With Opacity/ No................... Subpart OOOO does not
Visible Emission establish opacity
Standards. standards and does not
require continuous
opacity monitoring
systems (COMS).
Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(16)............ Extension of Compliance... Yes.................. .........................
[[Page 9632]]
Sec. 63.6(j).................... Presidential Compliance Yes.................. .........................
Exemption.
Sec. 63.7(a)(1)................. Performance Test Yes.................. Applies to all affected
Requirements--Applicabili sources. Additional
ty. requirements for
performance testing are
specified in Sec. Sec.
63.4360, 63.4361, and
63.4362.
Sec. 63.7(a)(2)................. Performance Test Yes.................. Applies only to
Requirements--Dates. performance tests for
capture system and
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standard.
Sec. 63.7(a)(3)................. Performance Tests Required Yes.................. .........................
by the Administrator.
Sec. 63.7(b)-(d)................ Performance Test Yes.................. Applies only to
Requirements--Notificatio performance tests for
n, Quality Assurance, capture system and
Facilities Necessary for control device
Safe Testing, Conditions efficiency at sources
During Test. using these to comply
with the standard.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1)................. Conduct of performance Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4360.
tests. 12, 2019..
No, on and after
September 12, 2019.
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)-(4)............. Conduct of performance Yes.................. .........................
tests.
Sec. 63.7(f).................... Performance Test Yes.................. Applies to all test
Requirements--Use of methods except those
Alternative Test Method. used to determine
capture system
efficiency.
Sec. 63.7(g)-(h)................ Performance Test Yes.................. Applies only to
Requirements--Data performance tests for
Analysis, Recordkeeping, capture system and add-
Waiver of Test. on control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)-(3)............. Monitoring Requirements-- Yes.................. Applies only to
Applicability. monitoring of capture
system and add-on
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Additional requirements
for monitoring are
specified in Sec.
63.4364.
Sec. 63.8(a)(4)................. Additional Monitoring No................... Subpart OOOO does not
Requirements. have monitoring
requirements for flares.
Sec. 63.8(b).................... Conduct of Monitoring..... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)................. Continuous Monitoring Yes, before September Section 63.4364 specifies
Systems (CMS) Operation 12, 2019. No, on and the requirements for the
and Maintenance. after September 12, operation of CMS for
2019. capture systems and add-
on control devices at
sources using these to
comply.
Sec. 63.8(c)(2)-(3)............. CMS Operation and Yes.................. Applies only to
Maintenance. monitoring of capture
system and add-on
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Additional requirements
for CMS operations and
maintenance are
specified in Sec.
63.4364.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)................. CMS....................... No................... Section 63.4364 specifies
the requirements for the
operation of CMS for
capture systems and add-
on control devices at
sources using these to
comply.
Sec. 63.8(c)(5)................. COMS...................... No................... Subpart OOOO does not
have opacity or visible
emission standards.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6)................. CMS Requirements.......... No................... Section 63.4364 specifies
the requirements for
monitoring systems for
capture systems and add-
on control devices at
sources using these to
comply.
Sec. 63.8(c)(7)................. CMS Out of Control Periods Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.8(c)(8)................. CMS Out of Control Periods No................... Section 63.4311 requires
and Reporting. reporting of CMS out-of-
control periods.
Sec. 63.8(d)-(e)................ Quality Control Program No................... Subpart OOOO does not
and CMS Performance require the use of CEMS.
Evaluation.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5)............. Use of an Alternative Yes.................. .........................
Monitoring Method.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6)................. Alternative to Relative No................... Subpart OOOO does not
Accuracy Test. require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.8(g)(1)-(5)............. Data Reduction............ No................... Sections 63.4363 and
63.4364 specify
monitoring data
reduction.
Sec. 63.9(a).................... Applicability and General Yes.................. .........................
Information.
Sec. 63.9(b).................... Initial Notifications..... No................... Subpart OOOO provides 1
year for an existing
source to submit an
initial notification.
[[Page 9633]]
Sec. 63.9(c).................... Request for Extension of Yes.................. .........................
Compliance.
Sec. 63.9(d).................... Notification that Source Yes.................. .........................
is Subject to Special
Compliance Requirements.
Sec. 63.9(e).................... Notification of Yes.................. Applies only to capture
Performance Test. system and add-on
control device
performance tests at
sources using these to
comply with the
standards.
Sec. 63.9(f).................... Notification of Visible No................... Subpart OOOO does not
Emissions/Opacity Test. have opacity or visible
emission standards.
Sec. 63.9(g)(1)-(3)............. Additional Notifications No................... Subpart OOOO does not
When Using CMS. require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.9(h).................... Notification of Compliance Yes.................. Section 63.4310 specifies
Status. the dates for submitting
the notification of
compliance status.
Sec. 63.9(i).................... Adjustment of Submittal Yes.................. .........................
Deadlines.
Sec. 63.9(j).................... Change in Previous Yes.................. .........................
Information.
Sec. 63.10(a)................... Recordkeeping/Reporting-- Yes.................. .........................
Applicability and General
Information.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)................ General Recordkeeping Yes.................. Additional Requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.4312 and
63.4313.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i)............. Recordkeeping of Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4312(i)
Occurrence and Duration 12, 2019. No, on and
of Startups and Shutdowns. after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(ii)............ Recordkeeping of Failures Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4312(i).
to Meet Standards. 12, 2019. No, on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iii)........... Recordkeeping Relevant to Yes.................. .........................
Maintenance of Air
Pollution Control and
Monitoring Equipment.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(v)........ Actions Taken to Minimize Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4312(i)(4)
Emissions During Startup, 12, 2019. No, on and for a record of actions
Shutdown, and Malfunction. after September 12, taken to minimize
2019. emissions during a
deviation from the
standard.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vi)............ Recordkeeping for CMS Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4312(i) for
malfunctions. 12, 2019. No, on and records of periods of
after September 12, deviation from the
2019.. standard, including
instances where a CMS is
inoperative or out-of-
control.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vii)-(xi)...... Records................... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xii)........... Records................... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiii).......... .......................... No................... Subpart OOOO does not
require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv)........... .......................... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)................ Recordkeeping Requirements Yes.................. .........................
for Applicability
Determinations.
Sec. 63.10(c)(1)-(6)............ Additional Recordkeeping Yes.................. .........................
Requirements for Sources
with CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c)(7)-(8)............ Additional Recordkeeping No................... See Sec. 63.4312(i)(1)
Requirements for Sources for records of periods
with CMS. of deviation from the
standard, including
instances where a CMS is
inoperative or out-of-
control.
Sec. 63.10(c)(10)-(14).......... Additional Recordkeeping Yes.................. .........................
Requirements for Sources
with CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c)(15)............... Records Regarding the Yes, before September .........................
Startup, Shutdown, and 12, 2019. No, on and
Malfunction Plan. after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)................ General Reporting Yes.................. Additional requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
63.4311.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)................ Report of Performance Test Yes.................. Additional requirements
Results. are specified in Sec.
63.4311(b).
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)................ Reporting Opacity or No................... Subpart OOOO does not
Visible Emissions require opacity or
Observations. visible emissions
observations.
Sec. 63.10(d)(4)................ Progress Reports for Yes.................. .........................
Sources With Compliance
Extensions.
[[Page 9634]]
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)................ Startup, Shutdown, and Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4311(a)(7).
Malfunction Reports. 12, 2019. No, on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.10(e)(1)-(2)............ Additional CMS Reports.... No................... Subpart OOOO does not
require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)................ Excess Emissions/CMS No................... Section 63.4311(a)
Performance Reports. specifies the contents
of periodic compliance
reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)(4)................ COMS Data Reports......... No................... Subpart OOOO does not
specify requirements for
opacity or COMS.
Sec. 63.10(f)................... Recordkeeping/Reporting Yes.................. .........................
Waiver.
Sec. 63.11...................... Control Device No................... Subpart OOOO does not
Requirements/Flares. specify use of flares
for compliance.
Sec. 63.12...................... State Authority and Yes.................. .........................
Delegations.
Sec. 63.13...................... Addresses................. Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.14...................... Incorporation by Reference Yes.................. ASNI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981,
part 10.
Sec. 63.15...................... Availability of Yes.................. .........................
Information/
Confidentiality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
40. Table 6 to subpart OOOO of part 63 is added to read as follows:
Table 6--To Subpart OOOO of Part 63--List of Hazardous Air Pollutants
That Must Be Counted Toward Total Organic HAP Content if Present at 0.1
Percent or More by Mass
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical name CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane............................ 79-34-5
1,1,2-Trichloroethane................................ 79-00-5
1,1-Dimethylhydrazine................................ 57-14-7
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane.......................... 96-12-8
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine................................ 122-66-7
1,3-Butadiene........................................ 106-99-0
1,3-Dichloropropene.................................. 542-75-6
1,4-Dioxane.......................................... 123-91-1
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol................................ 88-06-2
2,4/2,6-Dinitrotoluene (mixture)..................... 25321-14-6
2,4-Dinitrotoluene................................... 121-14-2
2,4-Toluene diamine.................................. 95-80-7
2-Nitropropane....................................... 79-46-9
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine............................... 91-94-1
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine.............................. 119-90-4
3,3'-Dimethylbenzidine............................... 119-93-7
4,4'-Methylene bis(2-chloroaniline).................. 101-14-4
Acetaldehyde......................................... 75-07-0
Acrylamide........................................... 79-06-1
Acrylonitrile........................................ 107-13-1
Allyl chloride....................................... 107-05-1
alpha-Hexachlorocyclohexane (a-HCH).................. 319-84-6
Aniline.............................................. 62-53-3
Benzene.............................................. 71-43-2
Benzidine............................................ 92-87-5
Benzotrichloride..................................... 98-07-7
Benzyl chloride...................................... 100-44-7
beta-Hexachlorocyclohexane (b-HCH)................... 319-85-7
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate........................... 117-81-7
Bis(chloromethyl)ether............................... 542-88-1
Bromoform............................................ 75-25-2
Captan............................................... 133-06-2
Carbon tetrachloride................................. 56-23-5
Chlordane............................................ 57-74-9
Chlorobenzilate...................................... 510-15-6
Chloroform........................................... 67-66-3
Chloroprene.......................................... 126-99-8
Cresols (mixed)...................................... 1319-77-3
DDE.................................................. 3547-04-4
Dichloroethyl ether.................................. 111-44-4
Dichlorvos........................................... 62-73-7
Epichlorohydrin...................................... 106-89-8
[[Page 9635]]
Ethyl acrylate....................................... 140-88-5
Ethylene dibromide................................... 106-93-4
Ethylene dichloride.................................. 107-06-2
Ethylene oxide....................................... 75-21-8
Ethylene thiourea.................................... 96-45-7
Ethylidene dichloride (1,1-Dichloroethane)........... 75-34-3
Formaldehyde......................................... 50-00-0
Heptachlor........................................... 76-44-8
Hexachlorobenzene.................................... 118-74-1
Hexachlorobutadiene.................................. 87-68-3
Hexachloroethane..................................... 67-72-1
Hydrazine............................................ 302-01-2
Isophorone........................................... 78-59-1
Lindane (hexachlorocyclohexane, all isomers)......... 58-89-9
m-Cresol............................................. 108-39-4
Methylene chloride................................... 75-09-2
Naphthalene.......................................... 91-20-3
Nitrobenzene......................................... 98-95-3
Nitrosodimethylamine................................. 62-75-9
o-Cresol............................................. 95-48-7
o-Toluidine.......................................... 95-53-4
Parathion............................................ 56-38-2
p-Cresol............................................. 106-44-5
p-Dichlorobenzene.................................... 106-46-7
Pentachloronitrobenzene.............................. 82-68-8
Pentachlorophenol.................................... 87-86-5
Propoxur............................................. 114-26-1
Propylene dichloride................................. 78-87-5
Propylene oxide...................................... 75-56-9
Quinoline............................................ 91-22-5
Tetrachloroethene.................................... 127-18-4
Toxaphene............................................ 8001-35-2
Trichloroethylene.................................... 79-01-6
Trifluralin.......................................... 1582-09-8
Vinyl bromide........................................ 593-60-2
Vinyl chloride....................................... 75-01-4
Vinylidene chloride.................................. 75-35-4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart RRRR--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
0
41. Section 63.4900 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4900 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?
(a) The affected source must be in compliance at all times with the
applicable emission limitations specified in Sec. Sec. 63.4890,
63.4892, and 63.4893.
(b) Before September 12, 2019, you must always operate and maintain
your affected source, including all air pollution control and
monitoring equipment you use for purposes of complying with this
subpart, according to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i). On and
after September 12, 2019, at all times, the owner or operator must
operate and maintain any affected source, including associated air
pollution control equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner
consistent with safety and good air pollution control practices for
minimizing emissions. The general duty to minimize emissions does not
require the owner or operator to make any further efforts to reduce
emissions if levels required by the applicable standard have been
achieved. Determination of whether a source is operating in compliance
with operation and maintenance requirements will be based on
information available to the Administrator that may include, but is not
limited to, monitoring results, review of operation and maintenance
procedures, review of operation and maintenance records, and inspection
of the affected source.
(c) Before September 12, 2019, if your affected source uses an
emission capture system and add-on control device to comply with the
emission limitations in Sec. 63.4890, you must develop a written
startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan (SSMP) according to the
provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(3). The SSMP must address the startup,
shutdown, and corrective actions in the event of a malfunction of the
emission capture system or the add-on control device. The SSMP must
also address any coating operation equipment that may cause increased
emissions or that would affect capture efficiency if the process
equipment malfunctions, such as conveyors that move parts among
enclosures. A startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan is not required
on and after September 12, 2019.
0
42. Section 63.4910 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(9)(v) to read
as follows:
Sec. 63.4910 What notifications must I submit?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(9) * * *
(v) Before September 12, 2019, a statement of whether or not you
developed and implemented the startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan
required by Sec. 63.4900. This statement is not required on and after
September 12, 2019.
[[Page 9636]]
0
43. Section 63.4920 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(3)
introductory text, (a)(3)(ii), (a)(4), (a)(5) introductory text, (a)(5)
through (7), and (c) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4920 What reports must I submit?
(a) * * *
(3) General requirements. The semiannual compliance report must
contain the information specified in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (v)
of this section, and the information specified in paragraphs (a)(4)
through (7) of this section that is applicable to your affected source.
* * * * *
(ii) Statement by a responsible official with that official's name,
title, and signature, certifying the truth, accuracy, and completeness
of the report. Such certifications must also comply with the
requirements of 40 CFR 70.5(d) or 40 CFR 71.5(d).
* * * * *
(4) No deviations. If there were no deviations from the emission
limits, operating limits, and work practice standards in Sec. Sec.
63.4890, 63.4892, and 63.4893, respectively, that apply to you, the
semiannual compliance report must include an affirmative statement that
there were no deviations from the emission limits, operating limits, or
work practice standards in Sec. Sec. 63.4890, 63.4892, and 63.4893
during the reporting period. If there were no deviations from these
emission limitations, the semiannual compliance report must include the
affirmative statement that is described in either Sec. 63.4942(c),
Sec. 63.4952(c), or Sec. 63.4962(f), as applicable. If you used the
emission rate with add-on controls option and there were no periods
during which the continuous parameter monitoring systems (CPMS) were
out-of-control as specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7), the semiannual
compliance report must include a statement that there were no periods
during which the CPMS were out-of-control during the reporting period
as specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7).
(5) Deviations: Compliant material option. If you used the
compliant material option, and there was a deviation from the
applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4890, the semiannual compliance
report must contain the information in paragraph (a)(5)(i) or (ii) of
this section, as applicable.
(i) Before September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(a)(5)(i)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) Identification of each coating used that deviated from the
emission limit, and of each thinner and cleaning material used that
contained organic HAP, and the dates and time periods each was used.
(B) The calculation of the organic HAP content for each coating
identified in paragraph (a)(5)(i) of this section, using Equation 2 of
Sec. 63.4941. You do not need to submit background data supporting
this calculation, for example, information provided by materials
suppliers or manufacturers, or test reports.
(C) The determination of mass fraction of organic HAP for each
coating, thinner, and cleaning material identified in paragraph
(a)(5)(i) of this section. You do not need to submit background data
supporting this calculation, for example, information provided by
materials suppliers or manufacturers, or test reports.
(D) A statement of the cause of each deviation.
(ii) On and after September 12, 2019, if there was a deviation from
the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4890, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs
(a)(5)(ii)(A) through (E) of this section.
(A) Identification of each coating used that deviated from the
emission limit, and of each thinner and cleaning material used that
contained organic HAP, and the date, time, and duration each was used.
(B) The calculation of the organic HAP content for each coating
identified in paragraph (a)(5)(ii)(A) of this section, using Equation 2
of Sec. 63.4941. You do not need to submit background data supporting
this calculation, for example, information provided by materials
suppliers or manufacturers, or test reports.
(C) The determination of mass fraction of organic HAP for each
coating, thinner, and cleaning material identified in paragraph
(a)(5)(ii)(A) of this section. You do not need to submit background
data supporting this calculation, for example, information provided by
materials suppliers or manufacturers, or test reports.
(D) A statement of the cause of each deviation (including unknown
cause, if applicable).
(E) The number of deviations and, for each deviation, a list of the
affected source or equipment, an estimate of the quantity of each
regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit in Sec. 63.4890,
and a description of the method used to estimate the emissions.
(6) Deviations: Emission rate without add-on controls option. If
you used the emission rate without add-on controls option, and there
was a deviation from any applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4890,
the semiannual compliance report must contain the information in
paragraph (a)(6)(i) or (ii) of this section, as applicable. You do not
need to submit background data supporting these calculations, for
example, information provided by materials suppliers or manufacturers,
or test reports.
(i) Before September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(a)(6)(i)(A) through (E) of this section.
(A) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period during
which the organic HAP emission rate exceeded the applicable emission
limit in Sec. 63.4890.
(B) The calculation of the total mass of organic HAP emissions for
each month, using Equations 1 of Sec. 63.4951.
(C) The calculation of the total volume of coating solids used each
month, using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.4951.
(D) The calculation of the organic HAP emission rate for each
month, using Equation 3 of Sec. 63.4951.
(E) A statement of the cause of each deviation.
(ii) On and after September 12, 2019, if there was a deviation from
the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4890, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs
(a)(6)(ii)(A) through (F) of this section.
(A) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period during
which the organic HAP emission rate exceeded the applicable emission
limit in Sec. 63.4890.
(B) The calculation of the total mass of organic HAP emissions for
each month, using Equation 1 of Sec. 63.4951.
(C) The calculation of the total volume of coating solids used each
month, using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.4951.
(D) The calculation of the organic HAP emission rate for each
month, using Equation 3 of Sec. 63.4951.
(E) A statement of the cause of each deviation (including unknown
cause, if applicable).
(F) The number of deviations, a list of the affected source or
equipment, an estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant
emitted over any emission limit in Sec. 63.4890, and a description of
the method used to estimate the emissions.
(7) Deviations: Emission rate with add-on controls option. If you
used the emission rate with add-on controls option, and there was a
deviation from any applicable emission limitation (including any
periods when emissions bypassed the add-on control device and were
diverted to the atmosphere), the semiannual compliance report must
contain the information in paragraph (a)(7)(i) or (ii) of this section,
as applicable.
[[Page 9637]]
(i) Before September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(a)(7)(i)(A) through (Q) of this section. This includes periods of
startup, shutdown, and malfunction during which deviations occurred.
You do not need to submit background data supporting these
calculations, for example, information provided by materials suppliers
or manufacturers, or test reports.
(A) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period during
which the organic HAP emission rate exceeded the applicable emission
limit in Sec. 63.4890.
(B) The calculation of the total mass of organic HAP emissions for
the coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials used during each month,
using Equation 1 of Sec. 63.4951 and, if applicable, the calculation
used to determine the total mass of organic HAP in waste materials sent
or designated for shipment to a hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facility (TSDF) for treatment or disposal during each
compliance period, according to Sec. 63.4951(e)(4).
(C) The calculation of the total volume of coating solids used,
using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.4951.
(D) The calculation of the mass of organic HAP emission reduction
each month by emission capture systems and add-on control devices,
using Equation 1 of Sec. 63.4961, and Equation 3 of Sec. 63.4961 for
the calculation of the mass of organic HAP emission reduction for the
coating operation controlled by solvent recovery systems each
compliance period, as applicable.
(E) The calculation of the organic HAP emission rate for each
compliance period, using Equation 4 of Sec. 63.4961.
(F) The date and time that each malfunction started and stopped.
(G) A brief description of the CPMS.
(H) The date of the latest CPMS certification or audit.
(I) The date and time that each CPMS was inoperative, except for
zero (low-level) and high-level checks.
(J) The date, time, and duration that each CPMS was out-of-control,
including the information in Sec. 63.8(c)(8).
(K) The date and time period of each deviation from an operating
limit in Table 1 to this subpart; date and time period of any bypass of
the add-on control device; and whether each deviation occurred during a
period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction or during another period.
(L) A summary of the total duration of each deviation from an
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart and each bypass of the add-
on control device during the semiannual reporting period and the total
duration as a percent of the total affected source operating time
during that semiannual reporting period.
(M) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations from the
operating limits in Table 1 to this subpart and bypasses of the add-on
control device during the semiannual reporting period into those that
were due to startup, shutdown, control equipment problems, process
problems, other known causes, and other unknown causes.
(N) A summary of the total duration of CPMS downtime during the
semiannual reporting period and the total duration of CPMS downtime as
a percent of the total affected source operating time during that
semiannual reporting period.
(O) A description of any changes in the CPMS, coating operation,
emission capture system, or add-on control device since the last
semiannual reporting period.
(P) For each deviation from the work practice standards, a
description of the deviation; the date and time period of the
deviation; and the actions you took to correct the deviation.
(Q) A statement of the cause of each deviation.
(ii) On and after September 12, 2019, the information in paragraphs
(a)(7)(ii)(A) through (O), (Q), and (R) of this section if there was a
deviation from the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4890 or the
applicable operating limit(s) in Table 1 to this subpart (including any
periods when emissions bypassed the add-on control device and were
diverted to the atmosphere) and the information in paragraph
(a)(7)(ii)(P) of this section if there was a deviation from the work
practice standards in Sec. 63.4893(b).
(A) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period during
which the organic HAP emission rate exceeded the applicable emission
limit in Sec. 63.4890.
(B) The calculation of the total mass of organic HAP emissions for
the coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials used during each month,
using Equation 1 of Sec. 63.4951 and, if applicable, the calculation
used to determine the total mass of organic HAP in waste materials sent
or designated for shipment to a hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facility (TSDF) for treatment or disposal during each
compliance period, according to Sec. 63.4951(e)(4).
(C) The calculation of the total volume of coating solids used,
using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.4951.
(D) The calculation of the mass of organic HAP emission reduction
each month by emission capture systems and add-on control devices,
using Equation 1 of Sec. 63.4961, and Equation 3 of Sec. 63.4961 for
the calculation of the mass of organic HAP emission reduction for the
coating operation controlled by solvent recovery systems each
compliance period, as applicable.
(E) The calculation of the organic HAP emission rate for each
compliance period, using Equation 4 of Sec. 63.4961.
(F) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture system
or add-on control devices started and stopped.
(G) A brief description of the CPMS.
(H) The date of the latest CPMS certification or audit.
(I) For each instance that the CPMS was inoperative, except for
zero (low-level) and high-level checks, the date, time, and duration
that the CPMS was inoperative; the cause (including unknown cause) for
the CPMS being inoperative, and descriptions of corrective actions
taken.
(J) For each instance that the CPMS was out-of-control, as
specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7), the date, time, and duration that the
CPMS was out-of-control; the cause (including unknown cause) for the
CPMS being out-of-control; and descriptions of corrective actions
taken.
(K) The date, time, and duration of each deviation from an
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart; and the date, time, and
duration of any bypass of the add-on control device.
(L) A summary of the total duration of each deviation from an
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart and each bypass of the add-
on control device during the semiannual reporting period and the total
duration as a percent of the total affected source operating time
during that semiannual reporting period.
(M) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations from the
operating limits in Table 1 to this subpart and bypasses of the add-on
control device during the semiannual reporting period into those that
were due to control equipment problems, process problems, other known
causes, and other unknown causes.
(N) A summary of the total duration of CPMS downtime during the
semiannual reporting period and the total duration of CPMS downtime as
a percent of the total affected source operating time during that
semiannual reporting period.
(O) A description of any changes in the CPMS, coating operation,
emission capture system, or add-on control
[[Page 9638]]
device since the last semiannual reporting period.
(P) For deviations from the work practice standards in Sec.
63.4893(b), the number of deviations, and, for each deviation: A
description of the deviation; the date, time, and duration of the
deviation; and the actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance
with Sec. 63.4900(b). The description of the deviation must include a
list of the affected sources or equipment for which a deviation
occurred and the cause of the deviation (including unknown cause, if
applicable).
(Q) For deviations from an emission limit in Sec. 63.4890 or
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart, a statement of the cause of
each deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
(R) For each deviation from an emission limit in Sec. 63.4890 or
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart, a list of the affected
sources or equipment for which a deviation occurred, an estimate of the
quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit in
Sec. 63.4890, and a description of the method used to estimate the
emissions.
* * * * *
(c) Before September 12, 2019, if you used the emission rate with
add-on controls option and you had a startup, shutdown, or malfunction
during the semiannual reporting period, you must submit the reports
specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section. The reports
specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section are not required
on and after September 12, 2019.
* * * * *
0
44. Section 63.4921 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4921 What are my electronic reporting requirements?
(a) Beginning no later than June 13, 2019, you must submit the
results of the performance test required Sec. 63.4920(b) following the
procedure specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section.
(1) For data collected using test methods supported by the EPA's
Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the EPA's ERT website147
(https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert) at the time of the test, you must submit the
results of the performance test to the EPA via the Compliance and
Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI). The CEDRI interface can be
accessed through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). Performance test data must be submitted in a file format
generated through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic
file format consistent with the extensible markup language (XML) schema
listed on the EPA's ERT website.
(2) For data collected using test methods that are not supported by
the EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the
test, you must submit the results of the performance test to the
Administrator at the appropriate address listed in Sec. 63.13, unless
the Administrator agrees to or specifies an alternate reporting method.
(3) If you claim that some of the performance test information
being submitted under paragraph (a)(1) of this section is confidential
business information (CBI), you must submit a complete file generated
through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file
consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT website,
including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact disc, flash drive
or other commonly used electronic storage medium to the EPA. The
electronic medium must be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/
OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy
Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same ERT or
alternate file with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA via
the EPA's CDX as described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
(b) Beginning on March 15, 2021, the owner or operator shall submit
the initial notifications required in Sec. 63.9(b) and the
notification of compliance status required in Sec. 63.9(h) and Sec.
63.4910(c) to the EPA via CEDRI. The CEDRI interface can be accessed
through the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov). The owner or operator must
upload to CEDRI an electronic copy of each applicable notification in
portable document format (PDF). The applicable notification must be
submitted by the deadline specified in this subpart, regardless of the
method in which the reports are submitted. Owners or operators who
claim that some of the information required to be submitted via CEDRI
is CBI shall submit a complete report generated using the appropriate
form in CEDRI or an alternate electronic file consistent with the
extensible markup language (XML) schema listed on the EPA's CEDRI
website, including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact disc,
flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium to the
EPA. The electronic medium shall be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to
U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement
Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same
file with the CBI omitted shall be submitted to the EPA via the EPA's
CDX as described earlier in this paragraph.
(c) Beginning on March 15, 2021, or once the reporting template has
been available on the CEDRI website for 1 year, whichever date is
later, the owner or operator shall submit the semiannual compliance
report required in Sec. 63.4920 to the EPA via CEDRI. The CEDRI
interface can be accessed through the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov).). The owner or operator must use the appropriate
electronic template on the CEDRI website for this subpart or an
alternate electronic file format consistent with the XML schema listed
on the CEDRI website (https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/compliance-and-emissions-data-reporting-interface-cedri). The
date report templates become available will be listed on the CEDRI
website. If the reporting form for the semiannual compliance report
specific to this subpart is not available in CEDRI at the time that the
report is due, you must submit the report to the Administrator at the
appropriate addresses listed in Sec. 63.13. Once the form has been
available in CEDRI for 1 year, you must begin submitting all subsequent
reports via CEDRI. The reports must be submitted by the deadlines
specified in this subpart, regardless of the method in which the
reports are submitted. Owners or operators who claim that some of the
information required to be submitted via CEDRI is CBI shall submit a
complete report generated using the appropriate form in CEDRI or an
alternate electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed on the
EPA's CEDRI website, including information claimed to be CBI, on a
compact disc, flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage
medium to the EPA. The electronic medium shall be clearly marked as CBI
and mailed to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader,
Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC
27703. The same file with the CBI omitted shall be submitted to the EPA
via the EPA's CDX as described earlier in this paragraph.
(d) If you are required to electronically submit a report through
CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, and due to a planned or actual outage of either
the EPA's CEDRI or CDX systems within the period of time beginning 5
business days prior to the date that the submission is due, you will be
or are precluded from accessing CEDRI or CDX and submitting a required
report within
[[Page 9639]]
the time prescribed, you may assert a claim of EPA system outage for
failure to timely comply with the reporting requirement. You must
submit notification to the Administrator in writing as soon as possible
following the date you first knew, or through due diligence should have
known, that the event may cause or caused a delay in reporting. You
must provide to the Administrator a written description identifying the
date, time and length of the outage; a rationale for attributing the
delay in reporting beyond the regulatory deadline to the EPA system
outage; describe the measures taken or to be taken to minimize the
delay in reporting; and identify a date by which you propose to report,
or if you have already met the reporting requirement at the time of the
notification, the date you reported. In any circumstance, the report
must be submitted electronically as soon as possible after the outage
is resolved. The decision to accept the claim of EPA system outage and
allow an extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the
discretion of the Administrator.
(e) If you are required to electronically submit a report through
CEDRI in the EPA's CDX and a force majeure event is about to occur,
occurs, or has occurred or there are lingering effects from such an
event within the period of time beginning 5 business days prior to the
date the submission is due, the owner or operator may assert a claim of
force majeure for failure to timely comply with the reporting
requirement. For the purposes of this section, a force majeure event is
defined as an event that will be or has been caused by circumstances
beyond the control of the affected facility, its contractors, or any
entity controlled by the affected facility that prevents you from
complying with the requirement to submit a report electronically within
the time period prescribed. Examples of such events are acts of nature
(e.g., hurricanes, earthquakes, or floods), acts of war or terrorism,
or equipment failure or safety hazard beyond the control of the
affected facility (e.g., large scale power outage). If you intend to
assert a claim of force majeure, you must submit notification to the
Administrator in writing as soon as possible following the date you
first knew, or through due diligence should have known, that the event
may cause or caused a delay in reporting. You must provide to the
Administrator a written description of the force majeure event and a
rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the regulatory
deadline to the force majeure event; describe the measures taken or to
be taken to minimize the delay in reporting; and identify a date by
which you propose to report, or if you have already met the reporting
requirement at the time of the notification, the date you reported. In
any circumstance, the reporting must occur as soon as possible after
the force majeure event occurs. The decision to accept the claim of
force majeure and allow an extension to the reporting deadline is
solely within the discretion of the Administrator.
0
45. Section 63.4930 is amended by revising paragraphs (j), (k)
introductory text, and (k)(1) and (2) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4930 What records must I keep?
* * * * *
(j) Before September 12, 2019, you must keep records of the date,
time, and duration of each deviation. On and after September 12, 2019,
for each deviation from an emission limitation reported under Sec.
63.4920(a)(5) through (7), you must keep a record of the information
specified in paragraphs (j)(1) through (4) of this section, as
applicable.
(1) The date, time, and duration of the deviation, as reported
under Sec. 63.4920(a)(5) through (7).
(2) A list of the affected sources or equipment for which the
deviation occurred and the cause of the deviation, as reported under
Sec. 63.4920(a)(5) through (7).
(3) An estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted
over any applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4890 or any applicable
operating limit(s) in Table 1 to this subpart, and a description of the
method used to calculate the estimate, as reported under Sec.
63.4920(a)(5) through (7).
(4) A record of actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance
with Sec. 63.4900(b) and any corrective actions taken to return the
affected unit to its normal or usual manner of operation.
(k) If you use the emission rate with add-on controls option, you
must also keep the records specified in paragraphs (k)(1) through (8)
of this section.
(1) Before September 12, 2019, for each deviation, a record of
whether the deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction. The record in this paragraph (k)(1) is not required on and
after September 12, 2019.
(2) Before September 12, 2019, the records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii)
through (v) related to startup, shutdown, and malfunction. The records
in this paragraph (k)(2) are not required on and after September 12,
2019.
* * * * *
0
46. Section 63.4931 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4931 In what form and for how long must I keep my records?
(a) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). Where
appropriate, the records may be maintained as electronic spreadsheets
or as a database. Any records required to be maintained by this subpart
that are in reports that were submitted electronically via the EPA's
CEDRI may be maintained in electronic format. This ability to maintain
electronic copies does not affect the requirement for facilities to
make records, data, and reports available upon request to a delegated
air agency or the EPA as part of an on-site compliance evaluation.
* * * * *
0
47. Section 63.4941 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(2)
and (4), and (b)(1), the definitions of ``Mvolatiles'' and
``Davg'' in Equation 1 in paragraph (b)(3), and paragraphs
(c) and (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4941 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limitations?
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Count each organic HAP in Table 5 to this subpart that is
measured to be present at 0.1 percent by mass or more and at 1.0
percent by mass or more for other organic HAP compounds. For example,
if toluene (not listed in Table 5 to this subpart) is measured to be
0.5 percent of the material by mass, you do not have to count it.
Express the mass fraction of each organic HAP you count as a value
truncated to four places after the decimal point (for example, 0.3791).
* * * * *
(2) Method 24 in appendix A-7 of part 60. For coatings, you may use
Method 24 to determine the mass fraction of nonaqueous volatile matter
and use that value as a substitute for mass fraction of organic HAP. As
an alternative to using Method 24, you may use ASTM D2369-10 (R2015),
``Test Method for Volatile Content of Coatings'' (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 63.14).
* * * * *
(4) Information from the supplier or manufacturer of the material.
You may rely on information other than that generated by the test
methods specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section,
such as manufacturer's formulation data, if it represents each organic
HAP in Table 5 to this subpart that is present at 0.1 percent by mass
or
[[Page 9640]]
more and at 1.0 percent by mass or more for other organic HAP
compounds. For example, if toluene (not listed in Table 5 to this
subpart) is 0.5 percent of the material by mass, you do not have to
count it. If there is a disagreement between such information and
results of a test conducted according to paragraphs (a)(1) through (3)
of this section, then the test method results will take precedence.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Test results. You may use ASTM D2697-03 (R2014), ``Standard
Test Method for Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented
Coatings'', or D6093-97 (R2016), ``Standard Test Method for Percent
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using a Helium
Gas Pycnometer'' (both incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), to
determine the volume fraction of coating solids for each coating.
Divide the nonvolatile volume percent obtained with the methods by 100
to calculate volume fraction of coating solids. Alternatively, you may
use another test method once you obtain approval from the Administrator
according to the requirements of Sec. 63.7(f).
* * * * *
(3) * * *
Mvolatiles = Total volatile matter content of the
coating, including HAP, volatile organic compounds (VOC), water, and
exempt compounds, determined according to Method 24 in appendix A-7
of part 60, or according to ASTM D2369--10 (R2015) Standard Test
Method for Volatile Content of Coatings (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 63.14), grams volatile matter per liter coating.
Davg = Average density of volatile matter in the coating,
grams volatile matter per liter volatile matter, determined from
test results using ASTM D1475-13, ``Standard Test Method for Density
of Liquid Coatings, Inks, and Related Products'' (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 63.14), information from the supplier or
manufacturer of the material, or reference sources providing density
or specific gravity data for pure materials. If there is
disagreement between ASTM D1475-13 test results and other
information sources, the test results will take precedence.
(c) Determine the density of each coating. You must determine the
density of each coating used during the compliance period from test
results using ASTM D1475-13, ``Standard Test Method for Density of
Liquid Coatings, Inks, and Related Products'' (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 63.14), or information from the supplier or
manufacturer of the material. If there is disagreement between ASTM
D1475-13 test results and the supplier's or manufacturer's information,
the test results will take precedence.
* * * * *
(e) Compliance demonstration. The calculated organic HAP content
for each coating used during the initial compliance period must be less
than or equal to the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4890 and
each thinner and cleaning material used during the initial compliance
period must contain no organic HAP, determined according to paragraph
(a) of this section. You must keep all records required by Sec. Sec.
63.4930 and 63.4931. As part of the Notification of Compliance Status
required in Sec. 63.4910(c) and the semiannual compliance reports
required in Sec. 63.4920, you must identify each coating operation and
group of coating operations for which you used the compliant material
option. If there were no deviations from the emission limit, include a
statement that each coating operation was in compliance with the
emission limitations during the initial compliance period because it
used no coatings for which the organic HAP content exceeded the
applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4890, and it used no thinners or
cleaning materials that contained organic HAP.
0
48. Section 63.4951 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4951 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limitations?
* * * * *
(c) Determine the density of each material. You must determine the
density of each coating, thinner, and cleaning material used during the
compliance period according to the requirements in Sec. 63.4941(c).
* * * * *
0
49. Section 63.4960 is amended by revising the section heading to read
as follows:
Sec. 63.4960 By what date must I conduct initial performance tests
and other initial compliance demonstrations?
* * * * *
0
50. Section 63.4961 is amended by revising paragraphs (h) introductory
text and (j)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4961 How do I demonstrate initial compliance?
* * * * *
(h) Calculate the organic HAP emission reduction for controlled
coating operations not using liquid-liquid material balance. For each
controlled coating operation using an emission capture system and add-
on control device other than a solvent recovery system for which you
conduct liquid-liquid material balances, calculate the organic HAP
emission reduction, using Equation 1 of this section. The calculation
applies the emission capture system efficiency and add-on control
device efficiency to the mass of organic HAP contained in the coatings,
thinners, and cleaning materials that are used in the coating operation
served by the emission capture system and add-on control device during
the compliance period. For any period of time a deviation specified in
Sec. 63.4962(c) or (d) occurs in the controlled coating operation, you
must assume zero efficiency for the emission capture system and add-on
control device. Equation 1 of this section treats the materials used
during such a deviation as if they were used on an uncontrolled coating
operation for the time period of the deviation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15MR19.001
Where:
HR = Mass of organic HAP emission reduction for the
controlled coating operation during the compliance period, kg.
AI = Total mass of organic HAP in the coatings used in
the controlled coating operation during the compliance period,
excluding coatings used during deviations, kg, as calculated in
Equation 1A of this section.
BI = Total mass of organic HAP in the thinners used in
the controlled coating operation during the compliance period,
excluding thinners used during deviations, kg, as calculated in
Equation 1B of this section.
CI = Total mass of organic HAP in the cleaning materials
used in the controlled coating operation during the compliance
period, excluding cleaning materials used during deviations, kg, as
calculated in Equation 1C of this section.
Rw = Total mass of organic HAP in waste materials sent or
designated for shipment to a hazardous waste TSDF for treatment
[[Page 9641]]
or disposal during the compliance period, kg, determined according
to Sec. 63.4951(e)(4). The mass of any waste material reused during
the same compliance period may not be included in Rw.
(You may assign a value of zero to Rw if you do not wish
to use this allowance.)
CE = Capture efficiency of the emission capture system vented to the
add-on control device, percent. Use the test methods and procedures
specified in Sec. Sec. 63.4963 and 63.4964 to measure and record
capture efficiency.
DRE = Organic HAP destruction or removal efficiency of the add-on
control device, percent. Use the test methods and procedures in
Sec. Sec. 63.4963 and 63.4965 to measure and record the organic HAP
destruction or removal efficiency.
Hunc = Total mass of organic HAP in the coatings,
thinners, and cleaning materials used during all deviations
specified in Sec. 63.4962(c) and (d) that occurred during the
compliance period in the controlled coating operation, kg, as
calculated in Equation 1D of this section.
* * * * *
(j) * * *
(3) Determine the mass fraction of volatile organic matter for each
coating, thinner, and cleaning material used in the coating operation
controlled by the solvent recovery system during the compliance period.
You may determine the volatile organic matter mass fraction using
Method 24 in appendix A-7 of part 60, ASTM D2369-10 (R2015), ``Test
Method for Volatile Content of Coatings'' (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 63.14), or an EPA-approved alternative method. Alternatively,
you may use information provided by the manufacturer or supplier of the
coating. In the event of any inconsistency between information provided
by the manufacturer or supplier and the results of Method 24, ASTM
D2369-10 (R2015), or an approved alternative method, the test method
results will govern.
* * * * *
0
51. Section 63.4962 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraph (c) introductory text and adding paragraph (c)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4962 How do I conduct periodic performance tests and
demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limitations?
* * * * *
(c) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each operating
limit required by Sec. 63.4892 that applies to you, as specified in
Table 1 to this subpart, and you must conduct periodic performance
tests as specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
(3) Except for solvent recovery systems for which you conduct
liquid-liquid material balances according to Sec. 63.4961(j), within 5
years following the previous performance test, you must conduct
according to the procedures in Sec. Sec. 63.4963, 63.4964, and 63.4965
a periodic performance test of each capture system and add-on control
device used, and you must establish the operating limits required by
Sec. 63.4892. You must conduct the first periodic performance test and
establish the operating limits required by Sec. 63.4892 before March
15, 2022, unless you are already required to complete periodic
performance tests as a requirement of renewing your facility's
operating permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71 and have
conducted a performance test on or after March 15, 2017. Thereafter you
must conduct a performance test no later than 5 years following the
previous performance test. Operating limits must be confirmed or
reestablished during each performance test.
* * * * *
0
52. Section 63.4963 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text and (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4963 What are the general requirements for performance tests?
(a) You must conduct each performance test required by Sec. Sec.
63.4960 and 63.4962 according to the requirements in this section
unless you obtain a waiver of the performance test according to the
provisions in Sec. 63.7(h).
(1) Representative coating operation operating conditions. You must
conduct the performance test under representative operating conditions
for the coating operation. Operations during periods of startup,
shutdown, or nonoperation do not constitute representative conditions
for purposes of conducting a performance test. The owner or operator
may not conduct performance tests during periods of malfunction. You
must record the process information that is necessary to document
operating conditions during the test and explain why the conditions
represent normal operation. Upon request, you must make available to
the Administrator such records as may be necessary to determine the
conditions of performance tests.
* * * * *
0
53. Section 63.4965 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) through
(4) and paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4965 How do I determine the add-on control device emission
destruction or removal efficiency?
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) Use Method 1 or 1A in appendix A-1 of part 60, as appropriate,
to select sampling sites and velocity traverse points.
(2) Use Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F in appendix A-1, or Method 2G in
appendix A-2, of part 60, as appropriate, to measure gas volumetric
flow rate.
(3) Use Method 3, 3A, or 3B in appendix A-2 of part 60, as
appropriate, for gas analysis to determine dry molecular weight. You
may also use as an alternative to Method 3B, the manual method for
measuring the oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide content of
exhaust gas in ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas
Analyses [Part 10, Instruments and Apparatus]'' (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 63.14).
(4) Use Method 4 in appendix A-3 of part 60 to determine stack gas
moisture.
* * * * *
(b) Measure total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon at the
inlet and outlet of the add-on control device simultaneously, using
either Method 25 or 25A in appendix A-7 of part 60, as specified in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section. You must use the same
method for both the inlet and outlet measurements. You may use Method
18 in appendix A-6 of part 60 to subtract methane emissions from
measured total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon.
* * * * *
0
54. Section 63.4966 is amended by revising the section heading,
introductory text, and paragraph (e)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4966 How do I establish the emission capture system and add-
on control device operating limits during performance tests?
During the performance tests required by Sec. Sec. 63.4960 and
63.4962, and described in Sec. Sec. 63.4963, 63.4964, and 63.4965, you
must establish the operating limits required by Sec. 63.4892 according
to this section, unless you have received approval for alternative
monitoring and operating limits under Sec. 63.8(f) as specified in
Sec. 63.4892.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) During the capture efficiency determination required by
Sec. Sec. 63.4960 and 63.4962, and described in Sec. Sec. 63.4963 and
63.4964, you must monitor and record either the gas volumetric flow
rate or the duct static pressure for each separate capture device in
your emission capture system at least once every 15 minutes during each
of the three test runs at a point in
[[Page 9642]]
the duct between the capture device and the add-on control device
inlet.
* * * * *
0
55. Section 63.4967 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4) and (5)
and (c)(3) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4967 What are the requirements for continuous parameter
monitoring system installation, operation, and maintenance?
(a) * * *
(4) You must maintain the CPMS at all times in accordance with
Sec. 63.4900(b) and have readily available necessary parts for routine
repairs of the monitoring equipment.
(5) Before September 12, 2019, you must operate the CPMS and
collect emission capture system and add-on control device parameter
data at all times that a controlled coating operation is operating,
except during monitoring malfunctions, repairs to correct the monitor
malfunctions, and required quality assurance or control activities
(including, if applicable, calibration checks and required zero and
span adjustments). On and after September 12, 2019, you must operate
the CPMS and collect emission capture system and add-on control device
parameter data at all times in accordance with Sec. 63.4900(b).
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) For each gas temperature monitoring device, you must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (c)(3)(i) through (vi) of this
section for each gas temperature monitoring device. For the purposes of
this paragraph (c)(3), a thermocouple is part of the temperature
sensor.
* * * * *
0
56. Section 63.4981 is amended by revising the definition for
``Deviation'' to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4981 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
Deviation means:
(1) Before September 12, 2019, any instance in which an affected
source subject to this subpart or an owner or operator of such a
source:
(i) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart including but not limited to any emission limit, or operating
limit, or work practice standard;
(ii) 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
(iii) Fails to meet any emission limit, or operating limit, or work
practice standard in this subpart during startup, shutdown, or
malfunction regardless of whether or not such failure is permitted by
this subpart; and
(2) On and after September 12, 2019, any instance in which an
affected source subject to this subpart or an owner or operator of such
a source:
(i) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart including but not limited to any emission limit, or operating
limit, or work practice standard; or
(ii) 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.
* * * * *
0
57. Table 2 to subpart RRRR of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart RRRR of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart RRRR
[You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements according to the following table:]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Subject Applicable to subpart Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(a)(1)-(12)............ General Applicability..... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.1(b)(1)-(3)............. Initial Applicability Yes.................. Applicability to subpart
Determination. RRRR is also specified
in Sec. 63.4881.
Sec. 63.1(c)(1)................. Applicability After Yes.................. .........................
Standard Established.
Sec. 63.1(c)(2)-(3)............. Applicability of Permit No................... Area sources are not
Program for Area Sources. subject to subpart RRRR.
Sec. 63.1(c)(4)-(5)............. Extensions and Yes.................. .........................
Notifications.
Sec. 63.1(e).................... Applicability of Permit Yes.................. .........................
Program Before Relevant
Standard is Set.
Sec. 63.2....................... Definitions............... Yes.................. Additional definitions
are specified in Sec.
63.4981.
Sec. 63.3(a)-(c)................ Units and Abbreviations... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.4(a)(1)-(5)............. Prohibited Activities..... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.4(b)-(c)................ Circumvention/Severability Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.5(a).................... Construction/ Yes.................. .........................
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(b)(1)-(6)............. Requirements for Existing, Yes.................. .........................
Newly Constructed, and
Reconstructed Sources.
Sec. 63.5(d).................... Application for Approval Yes.................. .........................
of Construction/
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(e).................... Approval of Construction/ Yes.................. .........................
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(f).................... Approval of Construction/ Yes.................. .........................
Reconstruction Based on
Prior State Review.
Sec. 63.6(a).................... Compliance With Standards Yes.................. .........................
and Maintenance
Requirements--Applicabili
ty.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(7)............. Compliance Dates for New Yes.................. Section 63.4883 specifies
and Reconstructed Sources. the compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(5)............. Compliance Dates for Yes.................. Section 63.4883 specifies
Existing Sources. the compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i).............. Operation and Maintenance. Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4900(b) for
12, 2019. No, on and general duty
after September 12, requirement.
2019.
[[Page 9643]]
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(ii)............. Operation and Maintenance. Yes, before September .........................
12, 2019. No, on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(iii)............ Operation and Maintenance. Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)................. Startup, shutdown, and Yes, before September .........................
malfunction Plan (SSMP). 12, 2019. No, on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1)................. Compliance Except During Yes, before September .........................
Startup, Shutdown, and 12, 2019. No, on and
Malfunction. after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)-(3)............. Methods for Determining Yes.................. .........................
Compliance.
Sec. 63.6(g)(1)-(3)............. Use of Alternative Yes.................. .........................
Standards.
Sec. 63.6(h).................... Compliance With Opacity/ No................... Subpart RRRR does not
Visible Emission establish opacity
Standards. standards and does not
require continuous
opacity monitoring
systems (COMS).
Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(16)............ Extension of Compliance... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.6(j).................... Presidential Compliance Yes.................. .........................
Exemption.
Sec. 63.7(a)(1)................. Performance Test Yes.................. Applies to all affected
Requirements--Applicabili sources using an add-on
ty. control device to comply
with the standards.
Additional requirements
for performance testing
are specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.4963, 63.4964,
and 63.4965.
Sec. 63.7(a)(2)................. Performance Test Yes.................. Applies only to
Requirements--Dates. performance tests for
capture system and
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Section 63.4960
specifies the schedule
for performance test
requirements that are
earlier than those
specified in Sec.
63.7(a)(2).
Sec. 63.7(a)(3)................. Performance Tests Required Yes.................. .........................
by the Administrator.
Sec. 63.7(b)-(d)................ Performance Test Yes.................. Applies only to
Requirements--Notificatio performance tests for
n, Quality Assurance, capture system and add-
Facilities Necessary Safe on control device
Testing, Conditions efficiency at sources
During Test. using these to comply
with the standards.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1)................. Conduct of performance Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4963(a).
tests. 12, 2019. No, on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)-(4)............. Conduct of performance Yes..................
tests.
Sec. 63.7(f).................... Performance Test Yes.................. Applies to all test
Requirements--Use of methods except those
Alternative Test Method. used to determine
capture system
efficiency.
Sec. 63.7(g)-(h)................ Performance Test Yes.................. Applies only to
Requirements--Data performance tests for
Analysis, Recordkeeping, capture system and add-
Reporting, Waiver of Test. on control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)-(3)............. Monitoring Requirements-- Yes.................. Applies only to
Applicability. monitoring of capture
system and add-on
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Additional requirements
for monitoring are
specified in Sec.
63.4967.
Sec. 63.8(a)(4)................. Additional Monitoring No................... Subpart RRRR does not
Requirements. have monitoring
requirements for flares.
Sec. 63.8(b).................... Conduct of Monitoring..... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)................. Continuous Monitoring Yes, before September .........................
Systems (CMS) Operation 12, 2019. No, on and
and Maintenance. after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.8(c)(2)-(3)............. CMS Operation and Yes.................. Applies only to
Maintenance. monitoring of capture
system and add-on
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Additional requirements
for CMS operations and
maintenance are
specified in Sec.
63.4967.
[[Page 9644]]
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)................. CMS....................... No................... Section 63.4967 specifies
the requirements for the
operation of CMS for
capture systems and add-
on control devices at
sources using these to
comply.
Sec. 63.8(c)(5)................. COMS...................... No................... Subpart RRRR does not
have opacity or visible
emissions standards.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6)................. CMS Requirements.......... No................... Section 63.4967 specifies
the requirements for
monitoring systems for
capture systems and add-
on control devices at
sources using these to
comply.
Sec. 63.8(c)(7)................. CMS Out-of-Control Periods Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.8(c)(8)................. CMS Out-of-Control Periods No................... Section 63.4920 requires
Reporting. reporting of CMS out-of-
control periods.
Sec. 63.8(d)-(e)................ Quality Control Program No................... Subpart RRRR does not
and CMS Performance require the use of CEMS.
Evaluation.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5)............. Use of an Alternative Yes..................
Monitoring Method.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6)................. Alternative to Relative No................... Subpart RRRR does not
Accuracy Test. require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.8(g)(1)-(5)............. Data Reduction............ No................... Sections 63.4966 and
63.4967 specify
monitoring data
reduction.
Sec. 63.9(a)-(d)................ Notification Requirements. Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.9(e).................... Notification of Yes.................. Applies only to capture
Performance Test. system and add-on
control device
performance tests at
sources using these to
comply with the
standards.
Sec. 63.9(f).................... Notification of Visible No................... Subpart RRRR does not
Emissions/Opacity Test. have opacity or visible
emission standards.
Sec. 63.9(g)(1)-(3)............. Additional Notifications No................... Subpart RRRR does not
When Using CMS. require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.9(h).................... Notification of Compliance Yes.................. Section 63.4910 specifies
Status. the dates for submitting
the notification of
compliance status.
Sec. 63.9(i).................... Adjustment of Submittal Yes.................. .........................
Deadlines.
Sec. 63.9(j).................... Change in Previous Yes.................. .........................
Information.
Sec. 63.10(a)................... Recordkeeping/Reporting-- Yes.................. .........................
Applicability and General
Information.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)................ General Recordkeeping Yes.................. Additional requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.4930 and
63.4931.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i)............. Recordkeeping of Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4930(j).
Occurrence and Duration 12, 2019. No, on and
of Startups and Shutdowns. after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(ii)............ Recordkeeping of Failures Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4930(j).
to Meet Standards. 12, 2019. No, on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iii)........... Recordkeeping Relevant to Yes.................. .........................
Maintenance of Air
Pollution Control and
Monitoring Equipment.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iv)- (v)....... Actions Taken to Minimize Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4930(j)(4)
Emissions During SSM. 12, 2019.. for a record of actions
No, on and after taken to minimize
September 12, 2019. emissions during a
deviation from the
standard.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vi)............ Recordkeeping for CMS Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4930(j) for
malfunctions. 12, 2019. No, on and records of periods of
after September 12, deviation from the
2019. standard, including
instances where a CMS is
inoperative or out-of-
control.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vii)-(xi)...... Records................... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xii)........... Records................... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiii).......... .......................... No................... Subpart RRRR does not
require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv)........... .......................... Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)................ Recordkeeping Requirements Yes.................. .........................
for Applicability
Determinations.
Sec. 63.10(c)(1)-(6)............ Additional Recordkeeping Yes.................. .........................
Requirements for Sources
with CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c)(7)-(8)............ Additional Recordkeeping No................... See Sec. 63.4930(j)(1)
Requirements for Sources for records of periods
with CMS. of deviation from the
standard, including
instances where a CMS is
inoperative or out-of-
control.
[[Page 9645]]
Sec. 63.10(c)(10)-(14).......... Additional Recordkeeping Yes.................. .........................
Requirements for Sources
with CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c)(15)............... Records Regarding the SSMP Yes, before September .........................
12, 2019. No, on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)................ General Reporting Yes.................. Additional requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
63.4920.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)................ Report of Performance Test Yes.................. Additional requirements
Results. are specified in Sec.
63.4920(b).
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)................ Reporting Opacity or No................... Subpart RRRR does not
Visible Emissions require opacity or
Observations. visible emissions
observations.
Sec. 63.10(d)(4)................ Progress Reports for Yes.................. .........................
Sources With Compliance
Extensions.
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)................ Startup, Shutdown, and Yes, before September See Sec. 63.4920(a)(7).
Malfunction Reports. 12, 2019. No, on and
after September 12,
2019.
Sec. 63.10(e)(1)-(2)............ Additional CMS Reports.... No................... Subpart RRRR does not
require the use of CEMS.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)................ Excess Emissions/CMS No................... Section 63.4920(a)
Performance Reports. specifies the contents
of periodic compliance
reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)(4)................ COMS Data Reports......... No................... Subpart RRRR does not
specify requirements for
opacity or COMS.
Sec. 63.10(f)................... Recordkeeping/Reporting Yes.................. .........................
Waiver.
Sec. 63.11...................... Control Device No................... Subpart RRRR does not
Requirements/Flares. specify use of flares
for compliance.
Sec. 63.12...................... State Authority and Yes.................. .........................
Delegations.
Sec. 63.13...................... Addresses................. Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.14...................... Incorporation by Reference Yes.................. .........................
Sec. 63.15...................... Availability of Yes.................. .........................
Information/
Confidentiality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
58. Table 5 to subpart RRRR of part 63 is added to read as follows:
Table 5 to Subpart RRRR of Part 63--List of Hazardous Air Pollutants
That Must Be Counted Toward Total Organic HAP Content if Present at 0.1
Percent or More by Mass
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical name CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane............................... 79-34-5
1,1,2-Trichloroethane................................... 79-00-5
1,1-Dimethylhydrazine................................... 57-14-7
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane............................. 96-12-8
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine................................... 122-66-7
1,3-Butadiene........................................... 106-99-0
1,3-Dichloropropene..................................... 542-75-6
1,4-Dioxane............................................. 123-91-1
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol................................... 88-06-2
2,4/2,6-Dinitrotoluene (mixture)........................ 25321-14-6
2,4-Dinitrotoluene...................................... 121-14-2
2,4-Toluene diamine..................................... 95-80-7
2-Nitropropane.......................................... 79-46-9
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine.................................. 91-94-1
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine................................. 119-90-4
3,3'-Dimethylbenzidine.................................. 119-93-7
4,4'-Methylene bis(2-chloroaniline)..................... 101-14-4
Acetaldehyde............................................ 75-07-0
Acrylamide.............................................. 79-06-1
Acrylonitrile........................................... 107-13-1
Allyl chloride.......................................... 107-05-1
alpha-Hexachlorocyclohexane (a-HCH)..................... 319-84-6
Aniline................................................. 62-53-3
Benzene................................................. 71-43-2
Benzidine............................................... 92-87-5
Benzotrichloride........................................ 98-07-7
Benzyl chloride......................................... 100-44-7
beta-Hexachlorocyclohexane (b-HCH)...................... 319-85-7
[[Page 9646]]
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate.............................. 117-81-7
Bis(chloromethyl)ether.................................. 542-88-1
Bromoform............................................... 75-25-2
Captan.................................................. 133-06-2
Carbon tetrachloride.................................... 56-23-5
Chlordane............................................... 57-74-9
Chlorobenzilate......................................... 510-15-6
Chloroform.............................................. 67-66-3
Chloroprene............................................. 126-99-8
Cresols (mixed)......................................... 1319-77-3
DDE..................................................... 3547-04-4
Dichloroethyl ether..................................... 111-44-4
Dichlorvos.............................................. 62-73-7
Epichlorohydrin......................................... 106-89-8
Ethyl acrylate.......................................... 140-88-5
Ethylene dibromide...................................... 106-93-4
Ethylene dichloride..................................... 107-06-2
Ethylene oxide.......................................... 75-21-8
Ethylene thiourea....................................... 96-45-7
Ethylidene dichloride (1,1-Dichloroethane).............. 75-34-3
Formaldehyde............................................ 50-00-0
Heptachlor.............................................. 76-44-8
Hexachlorobenzene....................................... 118-74-1
Hexachlorobutadiene..................................... 87-68-3
Hexachloroethane........................................ 67-72-1
Hydrazine............................................... 302-01-2
Isophorone.............................................. 78-59-1
Lindane (hexachlorocyclohexane, all isomers)............ 58-89-9
m-Cresol................................................ 108-39-4
Methylene chloride...................................... 75-09-2
Naphthalene............................................. 91-20-3
Nitrobenzene............................................ 98-95-3
Nitrosodimethylamine.................................... 62-75-9
o-Cresol................................................ 95-48-7
o-Toluidine............................................. 95-53-4
Parathion............................................... 56-38-2
p-Cresol................................................ 106-44-5
p-Dichlorobenzene....................................... 106-46-7
Pentachloronitrobenzene................................. 82-68-8
Pentachlorophenol....................................... 87-86-5
Propoxur................................................ 114-26-1
Propylene dichloride.................................... 78-87-5
Propylene oxide......................................... 75-56-9
Quinoline............................................... 91-22-5
Tetrachloroethene....................................... 127-18-4
Toxaphene............................................... 8001-35-2
Trichloroethylene....................................... 79-01-6
Trifluralin............................................. 1582-09-8
Vinyl bromide........................................... 593-60-2
Vinyl chloride.......................................... 75-01-4
Vinylidene chloride..................................... 75-35-4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2019-03560 Filed 3-14-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P