[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 131 (Wednesday, July 8, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41100-41161]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05908]
[[Page 41099]]
Vol. 85
Wednesday,
No. 131
July 8, 2020
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 63
NESHAP: Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks;
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products; Plastic Parts and Products;
Large Appliances; Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other
Textiles; and Metal Furniture Residual Risk and Technology Reviews;
Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 8, 2020 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 41100]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0314, EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0312, EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0313, EPA-
HQ-OAR-2017-0670, EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0668, EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0669; FRL-
10006-70-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT49 and RIN 2060-AT72
NESHAP: Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks;
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products; Plastic Parts and Products;
Large Appliances; Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other
Textiles; and Metal Furniture Residual Risk and Technology Reviews
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action on the residual risk and technology reviews (RTRs) conducted for
the Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks (ALDT);
Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products (MMPP); and
the Surface Coating of Plastic Parts and Products (PPP) source
categories regulated under national emission standards for hazardous
air pollutants (NESHAP). These final amendments also address emissions
during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM); electronic
reporting of 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.
Several miscellaneous technical amendments were also 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. This notice also finalizes technical corrections to the NESHAP
for Surface Coating of Large Appliances; NESHAP for Printing, Coating,
and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles; and NESHAP for Surface
Coating of Metal Furniture.
DATES: This final rule is effective on July 8, 2020. The incorporation
by reference (IBR) of certain publications listed in the rule is
approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of July 8, 2020.
The incorporation by reference of certain other publications listed in
the rule was approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
June 25, 2004.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0314 for 40 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) part 63, subpart IIII (ALDT Docket); Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2019-0312 for 40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMM, Surface Coating of MMPP
Docket; and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0313 for 40 CFR part 63,
subpart PPPP, Surface Coating of PPP Docket. All documents in the
dockets are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov/ website.
Although listed, 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, 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 EPA Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this final action
for the Surface Coating of ALDT NESHAP, the Surface Coating of MMPP
NESHAP, the Surface Coating of PPP NESHAP, and the technical
corrections to the NESHAP for Surface Coating of Large Appliances and
the NESHAP for Surface Coating of Metal Furniture contact Ms. J. Kaye
Whitfield, Minerals and Manufacturing Group, Sector Policies and
Programs Division (D243-04), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-2509; fax
number: (919) 541-4991; and email address: [email protected]. For
questions about the technical corrections to the Printing, Coating, and
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles, contact Ms. Paula Hirtz, Minerals
and Manufacturing Group, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-
04), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711;
telephone number: (919) 541-2618; 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, WJC South Building
(Mail Code 2227A), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 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:
ALDT Automobile and Light-Duty Trucks
APA Administrative Procedures Act
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
HAP hazardous air pollutant(s)
HF hydrogen fluoride
HI hazard index
HQ hazard quotient
HQREL hazard quotient reference exposure limit
IBR incorporation by reference
ICR Information Collection Request
km kilometer
MACT maximum achievable control technology
mg/m\3\ milligrams per cubic meter
MIBK methyl isobutyl ketone
MIR maximum individual risk
MMPP Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard
NEI National Emission Inventory
NESHAP national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PB-HAP persistent and bioaccumulative HAP
PPP Plastic Parts and Products
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
tpy tons per year
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
VCS voluntary consensus standards
VOC volatile organic compound
[[Page 41101]]
Background information. On November 1, 2019, the EPA proposed
revisions to the Surface Coating of ALDT NESHAP, the Surface Coating of
MMPP NESHAP, and the Surface Coating of PPP NESHAP based on our RTR (84
FR 58936). In this action, we are finalizing decisions and revisions
for these rules. We summarize some of the more significant comments we
timely received regarding the proposed rules and provide our responses
in this preamble. A summary of all other public comments on the
proposal and the EPA's responses to those comments is available in the
``Summary of Public Comments and Responses for the Risk and Technology
Reviews for the NESHAP for Surface Coating of ALDT; Surface Coating of
MMPP; and Surface Coating of PPP,'' in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-
0314 for 40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII, Surface Coating of ALDT, Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0312 for 40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMM, Surface
Coating of MMPP, and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0313 for 40 CFR part
63, subpart PPPP, Surface Coating of PPP. 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 do the NESHAP regulate
their HAP emissions?
C. What changes did we propose for the source categories in our
November 1, 2019, RTR proposal?
III. What is included in these final rules?
A. What are the final rule amendments based on the risk reviews
for these source categories?
B. What are the final rule amendments based on the technology
reviews for these source categories?
C. What are the final rule amendments addressing emissions
during periods of SSM?
D. What other changes have been made to these 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 source categories?
A. Residual Risk Reviews
B. Technology Reviews
C. Electronic Reporting Provisions
D. SSM Provisions
E. Ongoing Compliance Demonstrations
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 code \1\ Regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface Coating of ALDT..... 336111, 336112, ALDT assembly
336211. plants, producers
of automobile and
light-duty truck
bodies.
Surface Coating of MMPP..... 335312, 336111, Automobile parts
336211, 336312, (engine parts,
33632, 33633, vehicle parts and
33634, 33637, accessories,
336399. brakes, axles,
etc.).
331316, 331524, Extruded aluminum,
332321, 332323. architectural
components, rod,
and tubes.
33312, 333611, Heavy equipment
333618. (tractors, earth
moving machinery).
332312, 332722, Job shops (making
332813, 332991, any of the products
332999, 334119, from the MMPP
336413, 339999. segments).
33612, 336211....... Large trucks and
buses.
331319, 331422, Magnet wire.
335929.
332311.............. Prefabricated metal
buildings,
carports, docks,
dwellings,
greenhouses, panels
for buildings.
33242, 81131, Metal drums, kegs,
322214, 326199, pails, shipping
331513, 332439. containers.
331111, 33121, Metal pipe and
331221, 331511. foundry (plate,
tube, rods, nails,
spikes, etc.).
33651, 336611, Rail transportation
482111. (brakes, engines,
freight cars,
locomotives).
3369, 331316, Recreational
336991, 336211, vehicles
336112, 336213, (motorcycles, motor
336214, 336399. homes,
semitrailers, truck
trailers).
326291, 326299...... Rubber to metal
products (engine
mounts, rubberized
tank tread,
harmonic balancers.
332311, 332312...... Structural steel
(joists, railway
bridge sections,
highway bridge
sections).
336212, 336999, Miscellaneous
33635, 56121, 8111. transportation
56211. related equipment
and parts.
Surface Coating of PPP...... 337214.............. Office furniture,
except wood.
[[Page 41102]]
32614, 32615........ Plastic foam
products (e.g.,
pool floats,
wrestling mats,
life jackets).
326199.............. Plastic products not
elsewhere
classified (e.g.,
name plates, coin
holders, storage
boxes, license
plate housings,
cosmetic caps, cup
holders).
333313.............. Office machines.
33422............... Radio and television
broadcasting and
communications
equipment (e.g.,
cellular
telephones).
336211.............. Motor vehicle body
manufacturing.
336399.............. Motor vehicle parts
and accessories.
336212.............. Truck trailer
manufacturing.
336213.............. Motor home
manufacturing.
336214.............. Travel trailer and
camper
manufacturing.
336999.............. Transportation
equipment not
elsewhere
classified (e.g.,
snowmobile hoods,
running boards,
tractor body
panels, personal
watercraft parts).
339111, 339112...... Medical equipment
and supplies.
33992............... Sporting and
athletic goods.
33995............... Signs and
advertising
specialties.
339999.............. Manufacturing
industries not
elsewhere
classified (e.g.,
bezels, consoles,
panels, lenses).
Surface Coating of Large 335221.............. Household cooking
Appliances. equipment.
335222.............. Household
refrigerators and
freezers.
335224.............. Household laundry
equipment.
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).
333319.............. Other commercial/
service industry
machinery, e.g.,
commercial
dishwashers, ovens,
and ranges, etc.
Printing, Coating, and 31321............... Broadwoven fabric
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other mills.
Textiles.
31322............... 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.
332612.............. Wire spring
manufacturing.
335121.............. Residential electric
lighting fixture
manufacturing.
335122.............. Commercial,
industrial, and
institutional
electric lighting
fixture
manufacturing.
339111.............. Laboratory furniture
manufacturing.
339114.............. Dental equipment
manufacturing.
81142............... Reupholstery and
furniture repair.
922140.............. State correctional
institutions that
apply coatings to
metal furniture.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
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
[[Page 41103]]
affected, you should examine the applicability criteria in the
appropriate NESHAP. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of any aspect of these 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/surface-coating-automobiles-and-light-duty-trucks-national-emission,
https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/surface-coating-miscellaneous-metal-parts-and-products-national, and https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/surface-coating-plastic-parts-and-products-national-emission. Following publication in the
Federal Register, the EPA will post the Federal Register version and
key technical documents at these same websites.
Additional information is available on the RTR website at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/risk-and-technology-review-national-emissions-standards-hazardous. This information
includes an overview of the RTR program and links to project websites
for the RTR source categories.
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 September 8, 2020. Under CAA section 307(b)(2), the
requirements established by this final rule 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, 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: (1) Reduce the volume of or
eliminate HAP emissions through process changes, substitution of
materials, or other modifications; (2) enclose systems or processes to
eliminate emissions; (3) collect, capture, or treat HAP when released
from a process, stack, storage, or fugitive emissions point; (4) are
design, equipment, work practice, or operational standards; or (5) 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 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 this rule, see the proposal preamble (84 FR 58936, November 1,
2019) and the memorandum, CAA Section 112 Risk and Technology Reviews:
Statutory Authority and Methodology, December
[[Page 41104]]
14, 2017, in the ALDT Docket, MMPP Docket, and PPP Docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 do the NESHAP regulate their
HAP emissions?
1. What is the surface coating of ALDT source category and how does the
current NESHAP regulate its HAP emissions?
The NESHAP for the ALDT source category was promulgated on April
26, 2004 (69 FR 22602), and is codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart
IIII. Technical corrections and clarifying amendments were promulgated
on December 22, 2006 (71 FR 76922), and April 24, 2007 (72 FR 20227).
The ALDT NESHAP applies to any affected source that is a major source,
is located at a major source, or is part of a major source of HAP
emissions. The affected source is any coating operation that applies
topcoats to new automobile or new light-duty truck bodies or body parts
for new automobiles or new light-duty trucks and/or coatings to other
new motor vehicle bodies or body parts for other new motor vehicles;
parts intended for use in new automobiles, new light-duty trucks, or
other new motor vehicles; or aftermarket repair or replacement parts
for automobiles, light-duty trucks, or other motor vehicles. The source
category covered by this MACT standard currently comprises 43
facilities.
The ALDT NESHAP (40 CFR 63.3176) defines an ``automobile'' as ``a
motor vehicle designed to carry up to eight passengers, excluding vans,
sport utility vehicles, and motor vehicles designed primarily to
transport light loads of property,'' and defines ``light-duty truck''
as ``vans, sport utility vehicles, and motor vehicles designed
primarily to transport light loads of property with gross vehicle
weight rating of 8,500 lbs [pounds] or less.''
The ALDT NESHAP defines a ``coating'' as ``a material that is
applied to a substrate for decorative, protective or functional
purposes. Such materials include, but are not limited to, paints,
sealants, caulks, inks, adhesives, primers, deadeners, and maskants.
Decorative, protective, or functional materials that consist only of
protective oils for metal, acids, bases, or any combination of these
substances are not considered coatings for the purposes of this
subpart.'' (40 CFR 63.3176).
This source category is further described in the November 1, 2019,
RTR proposal. See 84 FR 58941.
The primary HAP emitted from ALDT surface coating operations are
organic HAP and include toluene, xylene, glycol ethers, methyl isobutyl
ketone (MIBK), ethyl benzene, and methanol. The HAP emissions are from
coating application and drying and curing ovens in the ALDT surface
coating operations. Some emissions occur from the cleaning of spray
booths and equipment. In most cases, HAP emissions from surface
preparation, storage, and handling are relatively small (i.e., not
quantifiable) for this source category. Although inorganic HAP are
reported components of coatings, no inorganic HAP are emitted because
of the use of high efficiency spray equipment and filters on coating
spray application operations.
The NESHAP specifies numerical emission limits for existing sources
and for new and reconstructed sources for organic HAP emissions from
(1) electrodeposition primer, primer-surfacer, topcoat, final repair,
glass bonding primer, and glass bonding adhesive operations plus all
coatings and thinners, except for deadener materials and for adhesive
and sealer materials that are not components of glass bonding systems,
used in coating operations; (2) primer-surfacer, topcoat, final repair,
glass bonding primer, and glass bonding adhesive operation plus all
coatings and thinners, except for deadener materials and for adhesive
and sealer materials that are not components of glass bonding systems,
used in coating operations; (3) adhesives and sealers, other than glass
bonding adhesive materials; and (4) deadener materials.
The specific organic HAP emission limits are in 40 CFR 63.3090 (for
new and reconstructed sources) and 40 CFR 63.3091 (for existing
sources), and the operating limits are in 40 CFR 63.3093. The emission
limits and operating limits are summarized in Tables 2 and 3,
respectively, of the memorandum titled Technology Review for Surface
Coating Operations in the Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks Source
Category, in the ALDT Docket.
Compliance with the ALDT NESHAP emission limits can be achieved
using several different options, including a compliant material option,
an emission rate without add-on controls option (emissions averaging
option), and an emission rate with add-on controls option. For bake
ovens used to cure electrodeposition primers, an alternative is to
capture the emissions and duct them to a control device having a
destruction or removal efficiency of at least 95 percent. Facilities
that have multiple paint lines may choose to group operations from two
or more paint lines together to demonstrate compliance, or to make a
separate compliance demonstration for the operations from each paint
line.
All ALDT facilities must develop and implement a work practice plan
to minimize organic HAP emissions from the storage, mixing, and
conveying of coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials used in, and
waste materials generated by, the coating operations. The plan must
specify practices and procedures to ensure that a set of minimum work
practices specified in the NESHAP are implemented.
Those ALDT facilities using add-on controls to comply with the
NESHAP must also comply with site-specific operating limits for the
emission capture and control system. These operating limits are
established during the compliance test for the emission capture system
and add-on control device. Alternatively, emission capture systems can
meet design and air flow specifications to qualify as a permanent total
enclosure with 100-percent capture efficiency.
2. What is the surface coating of MMPP source category and how does the
current NESHAP regulate its HAP emissions?
The MMPP NESHAP was promulgated on January 2, 2004 (69 FR 130), and
is codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMM. Technical corrections to
the final rule were published on April 26, 2004 (69 FR 22602), and
December 22, 2006 (71 FR 76922). The MMPP NESHAP applies to owners or
operators of metal parts and products surface coating operations at
facilities that are major sources of HAP. The source category covered
by this MACT standard currently comprises 368 facilities.
The MMPP include, but are not limited to, metal components of the
following types of products as well as the products themselves: Motor
vehicle parts and accessories, bicycles and sporting goods,
recreational vehicles, extruded aluminum structural components,
railroad cars, heavy-duty trucks, medical equipment, lawn and garden
equipment, electronic equipment, magnet wire, steel drums, industrial
machinery, metal pipes, and numerous other industrial, household, and
consumer products. The MMPP NESHAP does not apply to any surface
coating or coating operation that meets the applicability criteria of
any one of 11 other surface coating NESHAP, e.g., surface coating of
metal components of wood furniture (subpart JJ of 40 CFR part 63),
surface coating of metal components of large appliances (subpart NNNN
of 40 CFR part 63), and surface coating of metal components of ALDT
[[Page 41105]]
(subpart IIII of 40 CFR part 63). See 40 CFR 63. 3881(c) for a list of
exclusions to the MMPP source category.
This source category is further described in the November 1, 2019,
RTR proposal. See 84 FR 58942.
The primary HAP emitted from MMPP surface coating operations are
organic HAP and include xylenes, toluene, glycol ethers, ethyl benzene,
MIBK, methanol, ethylene glycol, and dimethyl phthalate. The majority
of organic HAP emissions can be attributed to the application, drying,
and curing of coatings.
Inorganic HAP emissions were considered in the development of the
MMPP NESHAP, and the EPA determined that inorganic HAP emissions would
be very low based on the coating application techniques in place at the
time of the rule development. Given the combination of very low usage
of coatings containing inorganic HAP in this source category, and the
current and expected continued use of controls (dry filters and
waterwash systems on spray booths and high efficiency equipment) to
reduce overspray emissions, the EPA concluded that levels of inorganic
HAP emissions did not warrant federal regulation because those
regulations would increase regulatory burden but not be expected to
result in additional emissions reduction.
The MMPP NESHAP establishes the organic HAP emissions limits for
existing sources and for new and reconstructed sources for organic HAP
emissions for five subcategories. The five subcategories are (1)
general use coating, (2) high performance coating, (3) magnet wire
coating, (4) rubber-to-metal coating, and (5) extreme performance
fluoropolymer coating.
Compliance can be demonstrated with a compliant coatings option,
where all coatings used have organic HAP contents that individually
meet the organic HAP emissions limit, and all thinners and cleaning
materials contain no organic HAP; an emission rate without add-on
controls option, where the organic HAP emission rate, calculated as a
rolling 12-month emission rate and determined on a monthly basis, is
equal to or less than the organic HAP emissions limit; or an emission
rate with add-on controls option, where the organic HAP emission rate,
calculated as a rolling 12-month emissions rate and determined on a
monthly basis, taking into account the emissions reduction achieved
through the use of one or more emissions capture and control devices,
is equal to or less than the organic HAP emissions limit. A facility
using the add-on control option must also comply with work practice
standards to minimize organic HAP emissions from the storage, mixing,
and conveying of coatings, thinners, cleaning materials, and waste
materials associated with the coating operation(s) and must also comply
with operating limits for the emissions capture systems and add-on
control devices.
The specific organic HAP emission limits for each coating
subcategory can be found in 40 CFR 63.3890 and the operating limits in
40 CFR 63.3892. The emission limits and operating limits are summarized
in Tables 4 and 5, respectively, of the memorandum titled Technology
Review for Surface Coating Operations in the Miscellaneous Metal Parts
and Products Category.
3. What is the surface coating of PPP source category and how does the
current NESHAP regulate its HAP emissions?
The NESHAP for the PPP source category was promulgated on April 19,
2004 (69 FR 20968), and is codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPP.
Technical corrections to the final rule were published on December 22,
2006 (71 FR 76922), and April 24, 2007 (72 FR 20227). The PPP NESHAP
applies to owners or operators of PPP surface coating operations at
facilities that are major sources of HAP. The PPP include, but are not
limited to, plastic components of the following types of products as
well as the products themselves: Motor vehicle parts and accessories
for automobiles, trucks, recreational vehicles; sporting and
recreational goods; toys; business machines; laboratory and medical
equipment; and household and other consumer products. The PPP NESHAP
does not apply to the surface coating or coating operations that meet
the applicability criteria of any of 11 other surface coating NESHAP,
e.g., surface coating of plastic components of wood furniture (subpart
JJ of 40 CFR part 63), surface coating of plastic components of large
appliances (subpart NNNN of 40 CFR part 63), and surface coating of
plastic components of ALDT (subpart IIII of 40 CFR part 63). See 40 CFR
63. 4481(c) for a list of exclusions to the PPP source category.
This source category is further described in the November 1, 2019,
RTR proposal. See 84 FR 58943.
The primary HAP emitted from PPP surface coating operations are
organic HAP and, based on the 2011 National Emission Inventory (NEI),
include xylene, toluene, MIBK, ethylbenzene, styrene, glycol ethers,
and methanol, in order of decreasing emissions. These compounds account
for about 96 percent of the nationwide HAP emissions from this source
category, based on an analysis of the NEI. The source category covered
by this MACT standard currently comprises 125 facilities.
No inorganic HAP are currently associated with the coatings used in
this source category, based on the data in the NEI.
The PPP NESHAP specifies numerical emission limits for existing
sources and for new and reconstructed sources for organic HAP
emissions. The final rule contains four subcategories: (1) General use
coating, (2) thermoplastic olefin coating, (3) automotive lamp coating,
and (4) assembled on-road vehicle coating.
Compliance can be demonstrated with a compliant material option,
where the HAP content of each coating used is less than or equal to the
applicable organic HAP emissions limit and each thinner, additive, and
cleaning material uses no organic HAP; an emission rate without add-on
controls option, where the organic HAP emission rate, calculated as a
rolling 12-month emission rate and determined on a monthly basis, is
equal to or less than the organic HAP emissions limit; or an emission
rate with add-on controls option, where the organic HAP emission rate,
calculated as a rolling 12-month emissions rate and determined on a
monthly basis, taking into account the emissions reduction achieved
through the use of one or more emissions capture and control devices,
is equal to or less than the organic HAP emissions limit. A facility
using the add-on control option must also comply with work practice
standards to minimize organic HAP emissions from the storage, mixing,
and conveying of coatings, thinners, cleaning materials, and waste
materials associated with the coating operation(s) and must also comply
with operating limits for the emissions capture systems and add-on
control devices.
The specific organic HAP emission limits for each coating
subcategory can be found in 40 CFR 63.4490 and the operating limits in
40 CFR 63.4492. The organic HAP emission limits and operating limits
are summarized in Tables 2 and 3, respectively, of the memorandum
titled Technology Review for the Plastic Parts and Products Surface
Coating Operations Source Category.
[[Page 41106]]
4. What are the surface coating of large appliances; printing, coating,
and dyeing of fabrics and other textiles; and surface coating of metal
furniture source categories and how do the current NESHAP regulate
their HAP emissions?
The three source categories that are the subject of the technical
corrections that are being finalized in this action are described in
the Federal Register document for the final RTR rule amendments (84 FR
9590, March 15, 2019).
C. What changes did we propose for the source categories in our
November 1, 2019, RTR proposal?
On November 1, 2019, the EPA published a proposed rule in the
Federal Register for the Surface Coating of ALDT NESHAP, the Surface
Coatings of MMPP NESHAP, and the Surface Coating of PPP NESHAP, 40 CFR
part 63, subpart IIII, 40 CFR 63, subpart MMMM, and 40 CFR 63, subpart
PPPP, respectively, that took into consideration the RTR analyses.
We proposed to find that after compliance with the current NESHAP
(i.e., MACT standards) the risks to public health from each of the
source categories are acceptable, and that for each source category
additional emission controls are not necessary to provide an ample
margin of safety. Based on our technology review, we did not identify
any cost-effective developments in practices, processes, or control
technologies for any of the three surface coating source categories.
Accordingly, we proposed no changes to the existing emission control
requirements in subparts IIII, MMMM, and PPPP pursuant to the RTR
analyses.
We proposed the following amendments to improve rule effectiveness,
provide regulatory flexibility, and comply with a legal ruling:
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 the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
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 the EPA
guidelines;
for each source category, a requirement to perform
performance testing and reestablish operating limits no less frequently
than every 5 years for sources that are using add-on controls to
demonstrate compliance; and
for each source category, IBR of alternative test methods
and references to updated alternative test methods.
We also proposed several minor editorial and technical changes in
each subpart, as well as technical corrections to three other recently
promulgated RTRs for the following source categories: Surface Coating
of Large Appliances NESHAP (40 CFR 63, subpart NNNN); Printing,
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles NESHAP (40 CFR 63,
subpart OOOO); and Surface Coating of Metal Furniture NESHAP (40 CFR
63, subpart RRRR).
III. What is included in these final rules?
This action finalizes the EPA's proposed determinations pursuant to
the RTR provisions of CAA sections 112(d)(6) and (f)(2) for the Surface
Coating of ALDT source category, the Surface Coatings of MMPP source
category, and the Surface Coating of PPP source category. This action
also finalizes other proposed changes to each NESHAP as proposed,
including the following for each source category:
A requirement for electronic submittal of notifications,
semi-annual reports, and compliance reports (which include performance
test reports);
revisions to the SSM provisions of each NESHAP;
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;
replacing a reference to OSHA's Hazard Communication
standard (29 CFR 1910.1200(d)(4)) with a list of HAP that must be
regarded as potentially carcinogenic based on the EPA guidelines;
adding a requirement for sources to perform periodic
control device testing if they are using add-on controls to demonstrate
compliance; and
IBR of alternative test methods and references to updated
alternative test methods.
We are finalizing, as proposed, several minor editorial and
technical changes in each subpart, including technical corrections to
the Surface Coating of Large Appliances NESHAP (40 CFR 63, subpart
NNNN); Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles
NESHAP (40 CFR 63, subpart OOOO); and Surface Coating of Metal
Furniture NESHAP (40 CFR 63, subpart RRRR).
A. What are the final rule amendments based on the risk reviews for
these source categories?
This section describes the final amendments to the Surface Coating
of ALDT NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII); the Surface Coating of
Miscellaneous Metal Parts NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMM); and
the Surface Coating of PPP NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPP) being
promulgated pursuant to CAA section 112(f)(2). The EPA proposed no
changes to these three subparts based on the risk reviews conducted
pursuant to CAA section 112(f)(2). In this action, we are finalizing
our proposed determination that, considering compliance with MACT, the
public health 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 emission 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 reviews
for these source categories?
We determined that there are no cost-effective developments in
practices, processes, and control technologies that warrant revisions
to the MACT standards for the Surface Coating of ALDT, Surface Coating
of MMPP, and Surface Coating of PPP source categories. Therefore, we
are not finalizing revisions to the MACT standards under CAA section
112(d)(6) for any of the three subparts in this action.
[[Page 41107]]
C. What are the final rule amendments addressing emissions during
periods of SSM?
We are finalizing the proposed amendments to the Surface Coating of
ALDT NESHAP; the Surface Coating of MMPP NESHAP; and the Surface
Coating of PPP NESHAP to remove and revise provisions related to SSM.
In its 2008 decision in Sierra Club v. EPA 551 F. 3d 1019 (D.C. Cir.
2008), the Court vacated portions of two provisions in the EPA's CAA
section 112 regulations governing the emissions of HAP during periods
of SSM. Specifically, the Court vacated the SSM exemption contained in
40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) and 40 CFR 63.6(h)(1), holding that under section
302(k) of the CAA, emissions standards or limitations must be
continuous in nature and that the SSM exemption violates the CAA's
requirement that some CAA section 112 standards apply continuously.
As detailed in section IV.A, B, and C of the November 1, 2019,
proposal preamble, the ALDT NESHAP, MMPP NESHAP, and PPP NESHAP require
that the standards apply at all times (see 40 CFR 63.3093(b),
63.3900(a)(2), and 63.4492(b), respectively), consistent with the Court
decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F. 3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008). Table
2 to Subpart IIII of Part 63, Table 2 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63, and
Table 2 to Subpart PPPP of Part 63 (General Provisions applicability
tables) are being revised to change the specification of the
requirements that apply during periods of SSM. We are eliminating or
revising certain recordkeeping and reporting requirements related to
the eliminated SSM exemption. The EPA is also making other harmonizing
changes to remove or modify inappropriate, unnecessary, or redundant
language in the absence of the SSM exemption. We have determined that
facilities in these source categories can meet the applicable emission
standards in the Surface Coating of ALDT NESHAP, the Surface Coating of
MMPP NESHAP, and the Surface Coating of PPP NESHAP at all times,
including periods of startup and shutdown. Therefore, the EPA has
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 here are set forth in the November 1,
2019, preamble to the proposed rule. See 84 FR 58959 through 58963 for
ALDT, 58971 through 58973 for MMPP, and 58980 through 58982 for PPP.
Further, the EPA is not finalizing standards for malfunctions. As
discussed in section IV.A, B, and C of the November 1, 2019, proposal
preamble, the EPA interprets CAA section 112 as not requiring emissions
that occur during periods of malfunction to be factored into
development of CAA section 112 standards, although the EPA has the
discretion to set standards for malfunctions where feasible. For these
source categories, it is unlikely that a malfunction would result in a
violation of the standards, and no comments were submitted that would
suggest otherwise. Refer to section IV.A, B, and C of the November 1,
2019, proposal preamble for further discussion of the EPA's rationale
for the decision not to set standards for malfunctions, as well as a
discussion of the actions a facility could take in the unlikely event
that a facility fails to comply with the applicable CAA section 112
standards as a result of a malfunction event, given that administrative
and judicial procedures for addressing exceedances of the standards
fully recognize that violations may occur despite good faith efforts to
comply and can accommodate those situations.
We are finalizing revisions to the General Provisions tables to 40
CRF part 63, subparts IIII, MMMM, and PPPP, to eliminate requirements
that include rule language providing an exemption for periods of SSM.
Additionally, we are finalizing our proposal to eliminate language
related to SSM that treats periods of startup and shutdown the same as
periods of malfunction. Finally, we are finalizing our proposal to
revise the Deviation Notification Report and related records as they
relate to malfunctions. As discussed in detail in the proposal
preamble, these revisions are consistent with the requirements in 40
CFR 63.3093(b), 63.3900(a)(2), and 63.4492(b) stating that the
standards apply at all times.
We are finalizing a revision to the performance testing
requirements at 40 CFR 63.3164(a)(1), 40 CFR 63.3964(a)(1), and 40 CFR
63.4564(a)(1). The final performance testing provisions prohibit
performance testing during SSM as these conditions are not
representative of steady state operating conditions. The final rules
also require that operators maintain records to document that operating
conditions during the tests represent steady state conditions.
D. What other changes have been made to these 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 or operators
of facilities in the Surface Coating of ALDT; Surface Coating of MMPP;
and Surface Coating of PPP 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.
For each subpart, we also are changing 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.
We are finalizing amendments to 40 CFR 63.3166(b), 40 CFR
63.3966(b), and 40 CFR 63.4566(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, when facilities are using EPA Method 25A to
measure control device destruction efficiency.
For each subpart, we are finalizing the proposal to re-designate
the list of organic HAP that must be used when a facility chooses to
use the compliant material option (i.e., for calculating total organic
HAP content of a coating material present at 0.1 percent or greater by
mass). To specify the applicable HAP, we are changing the rules to
remove the references to paragraph (d)(4) of OSHA's Hazard
Communication standard (29 CFR 1910.1200) and replace it with a new
table in each subpart (Table 5 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII; Table 5
to 40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMM; and Table 5 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
PPPP) that lists the applicable HAP. The organic HAP in these new
tables are those HAP that 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/
[[Page 41108]]
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. For facilities with title V permits
that require comparable periodic testing prior to permit renewal, no
additional testing is required, and we included provisions in the rule
to allow facilities to harmonize the NESHAP testing schedule with a
facility's current title V testing schedule.
1. Technical Amendments to the Surface Coating of ALDT NESHAP
We are revising the monitoring provisions for thermal and catalytic
oxidizers, as proposed, to clarify that a thermocouple is part of the
temperature sensor referred to in 40 CFR 63.3168(c)(3) for purposes of
performing periodic calibration and verification checks.
We are adding, as proposed, a new paragraph 40 CFR 63.3130(p) and
revising 40 CFR 63.3131(a) to allow that any records required to be
maintained by 40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII that are submitted
electronically via the EPA's CEDRI may be maintained in electronic
format. We are also adding clarification that 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.
We are amending 40 CFR 63.3166(b) to add the option of conducting
EPA Method 18 of appendix A-6 to 40 CFR part 60, ``Measurement of
Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas Chromatography,'' to measure
and subtract methane emissions from total gaseous organic mass
emissions as carbon when facilities are using EPA Method 25A.
In the final rule, as proposed, we are adding and updating test
methods that are incorporated by reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is incorporating by reference the
voluntary consensus standards (VCS) and other methods described in the
amendments to 40 CFR 63.14:
ASTM D1475-13, Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products, IBR approved for 40 CFR
63.3151(b);
ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\, Standard Test Method
for Volatile Content of Coatings, IBR approved for 40 CFR
63.3151(a)(2);
ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014), Standard Test Method for
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings, IBR approved
for 40 CFR 63.3161(f)(1);
ASTM D5066-91 (Reapproved 2017), Standard Test Method for
Determination of the Transfer Efficiency Under Production Conditions
for Spray Application of Automotive Paints-Weight Basis, IBR approved
for 40 CFR 63.3161(g);
ASTM D5965-02 (Reapproved 2013), Standard Test Methods for
Specific Gravity of Coating Powders, IBR approved for 40 CFR
63.3151(b);
ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved 2016), Standard Test Method for
Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using
Helium Gas Pycnometer, IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.3161(f)(1);
ASTM D6266-00a (Reapproved 2017), Standard Test Method for
Determining the Amount of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Released from
Waterborne Automotive Coatings and Available for Removal in a VOC
Control Device (Abatement), IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.3165(e); and
EPA-450/3-88-018, Protocol for Determining the Daily
Volatile Organic Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty
Truck Topcoat Operations, IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.3130(c),
63.3161(d) and (g), 63.3165(e), and appendix A to subpart IIII of part
63.
2. Technical Amendments to the Surface Coating of MMPP NESHAP
We are amending 40 CFR 63.3966(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 total gaseous organic mass emissions as
carbon when facilities are using EPA Method 25A.
Current 40 CFR 63.3931 specifies how records must be maintained. We
are adding clarification to this provision at 40 CFR 63.3931(a) that
specifies the allowance to retain electronic records applies to all
records that were submitted as reports electronically via the EPA's
CEDRI. We are also adding text to the same provision clarifying that
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.
In the final rule, as proposed, we are adding and updating test
methods that are incorporated by reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is incorporating by reference the
VCS and other methods described in the amendments to 40 CFR 63.14:
ASTM D1475-13, Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products, IBR approved for 40 CFR
63.3941(b)(4) and (c) and 63.3951(c);
ASTM D2111-10 (Reapproved 2015), Standard Test Methods for
Specific Gravity and Density of Halogenated Organic Solvents and Their
Admixtures, IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.3951(c);
ASTM Method D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\, Standard Test
Method for Volatile Content of Coatings, IBR approved for 40 CFR
63.3961(j)(3);
ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014), Standard Test Method for
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings, IBR approved
for 40 CFR 63.3941(b)(1);
ASTM Method D5965-02 (Reapproved 2013), Standard Test
Methods for Specific Gravity of Coating Powders, IBR approved for 40
CFR 3951(c); and
ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved 2016), Standard Test Method for
Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using
Helium Gas Pycnometer, IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.3941(b)(1).
3. Technical Amendments to the Surface Coating of PPP NESHAP
We are amending 40 CFR 63.4566(b)(4) 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 total gaseous organic
mass emissions as carbon when facilities are using EPA Method 25A.
Current 40 CFR 63.4530 specifies records that must be maintained.
We are adding clarification to this provision at 40 CFR 63.4530(a) that
specifies the allowance to retain electronic records applies to all
records that were submitted as reports electronically via the EPA's
CEDRI. We are also adding text to the same provision clarifying that
this ability to maintain electronic copies does not affect the
requirement for facilities to make records, data, and
[[Page 41109]]
reports available upon request to a delegated air agency or the EPA as
part of an on-site compliance evaluation.
We are clarifying and harmonizing the general requirement in 40 CFR
63.4500(b) with the reporting requirement in 40 CFR 63.4520(a)(5), (6),
and (7), and the recordkeeping requirement in 40 CFR 63.4530(h)(4).
In the final rule, as proposed, we are adding and updating test
methods that are incorporated by reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is incorporating by reference the
following VCS described in the amendments to 40 CFR 63.14:
ASTM D1475-13, Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products, IBR approved for 40 CFR
63.4551(c);
ASTM D2111-10 (Reapproved 2015), Standard Test Methods for
Specific Gravity and Density of Halogenated Organic Solvents and Their
Admixtures, IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.4551(c); and
ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\, Standard Test Method
for Volatile Content of Coatings, IBR approved for 40 CFR
63.4541(a)(2), and 63.4561(j)(3).
4. Technical Amendments to Other Subparts
We are revising the NESHAP for Surface Coating of Large Appliances
(40 CFR part 63, subpart NNNN); the NESHAP for Printing, Coating, and
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles (40 CFR part 63, subpart OOOO);
and the NESHAP for Surface Coating of Metal Furniture (40 CFR part 63,
subpart RRRR) to make corrections after the three subparts were amended
in a final rule published in the Federal Register on March 15, 2019 (84
FR 9590). The proposed corrections were published on November 1, 2019
(84 FR 58936), and no public comments on these corrections were
received. Therefore, we are making the corrections to these three
subparts as proposed.
E. What are the effective and compliance dates of the standards?
The revisions to the MACT standards being promulgated in this
action are effective on July 8, 2020.
For affected sources in the ALDT, MMPP, and PPP source categories,
the compliance date is January 5, 2021, with the exception of the
electronic format for submitting semiannual compliance reports. For the
electronic format for submitting semiannual compliance reports, both
existing and new (or reconstructed) affected sources must comply within
1 year after the electronic reporting templates are available on CEDRI,
or 1 year after July 8, 2020, whichever is later. The EPA selected
these compliance dates based on experience with similar industries and
the EPA's detailed justification for the selected compliance dates is
included in the preamble to the proposed rule (84 FR 58965, 58975, and
58984).
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 or operators of facilities
in the ALDT, MMPP, and PPP source categories to submit electronic
copies of certain required performance test reports.
Performance test results collected using test methods that are
supported by the EPA's ERT as listed on the ERT website (https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert) at the time of the test be submitted in the format generated
through the use of the ERT. The ERT will generate an electronic report
package which will be submitted to the CEDRI interface on the EPA's
CDX. 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. Electronic
reporting will save time in the performance test submittal process. The
electronic submittal of reports increases the usefulness of the data
contained in those reports, is in keeping with current trends in data
availability, further assists in the protection of public health and
the environment, and ultimately results in less burden on regulated
facilities. It also will improve compliance by facilitating the ability
of regulated facilities to demonstrate compliance and the ability of
air agencies and the EPA to assess and determine compliance. Electronic
storage of reports make data more accessible for review, analysis, and
sharing. Electronic reporting also eliminates paper-based, manual
processes; thereby saving time and resources, simplifying data entry,
eliminating redundancies, minimizing data reporting errors, and
providing data quickly and accurately to affected facilities, air
agencies, the EPA, and the public. For a more thorough discussion of
electronic reporting of performance tests, see the memorandum,
Electronic Reporting Requirements for New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) Rules, August 8, 2018, in the ALDT Docket, MMPP Docket, and
PPP Docket.
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 source categories?
For each amendment, this section provides a description of what we
proposed and what we are finalizing for the amendment, the EPA's
rationale for the final decisions and amendments, and a summary of key
comments and responses. For all comments not discussed in this
preamble, comment summaries and the EPA's responses can be found in the
comment summary and response document available in the ALDT Docket,
MMPP Docket, and PPP Docket.
A. Residual Risk Reviews
1. What did we propose pursuant to CAA section 112(f)?
a. Surface Coating of ALDT (40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII) Source
Category
Pursuant to CAA section 112(f)(2), 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 November 1, 2019, proposed rule for 40 CFR part 63,
subpart IIII (84 FR 58954). 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 Automobiles and Light-Duty
Trucks Source Category in Support of the 2019 Risk and Technology
Review Proposed Rule, available in the ALDT Docket.
[[Page 41110]]
Table 2--Surface Coating of ALDT Source Category Inhalation Risk Assessment Results
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum individual Estimated population Estimated annual Maximum chronic
cancer risk (in 1 at increased risk of cancer incidence noncancer target organ-
million) cancer >= 1-in-1 (cases per year) specific hazard index
------------------------ million ------------------------ (TOSHI 1) Maximum screening
Risk assessment ------------------------ ------------------------ acute noncancer HQ 2
Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on
actual allowable actual allowable actual allowable actual allowable
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Category................... 10 10 15,000 19,000 0.01 0.01 0.3 0.3 hazard quotient
reference exposure
limit (HQREL) = 1.
Whole Facility.................... 10 .......... 48,000 .......... 0.02 .......... 0.3 .......... ....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The TOSHI is the sum of the chronic noncancer hazard quotients (HQs) 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 = HQ reference
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) is
10-in-1 million (driven by naphthalene and ethyl benzene from
miscellaneous industrial processes--other/not classified), the maximum
chronic noncancer TOSHI value based on actual emissions is 0.3 (driven
by hexamethylene-1,6-diisocyanate from a painting topcoat process), and
the maximum screening acute noncancer HQ value (off-facility site)
could be up to 1 (driven by formaldehyde). At proposal, the total
annual cancer incidence (national) from these facilities based on
actual emission levels was estimated to be 0.01 excess cancer cases per
year, or one case in every 100 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) is 10-in-1 million (driven by naphthalene and
ethyl benzene), and the maximum chronic noncancer TOSHI value based on
allowable emissions is 0.3 (driven by hexamethylene-1,6-diisocyanate).
At proposal, the total annual cancer incidence (national) from these
facilities based on allowable emissions was estimated to be 0.01 excess
cancer cases per year, or one case in every 100 years.
The maximum individual cancer risk (lifetime) for the whole
facility was determined to be 10-in-1 million at proposal (driven by
naphthalene and ethyl benzene). The maximum facility-wide TOSHI for the
source category was estimated to be 0.3 (driven by emissions of
hexamethylene-1,6-diisocyanate). At proposal, the total estimated
cancer incidence from the whole facility was determined to be 0.02
excess cancer cases per year, or one excess case in every 50 years.
One persistent and bioaccumulative HAP (PB-HAP) is emitted by
facilities in the source category: Lead. In evaluating the potential
for multipathway effects from emissions of lead, we compared modeled
annual lead concentrations to the National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) for lead of 0.15 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m\3\),
arithmetic mean concentration over a 3-month period. The highest annual
average lead concentration of 1.5 x 10-5 mg/m\3\ is below
the NAAQS level for lead, indicating a low potential for multipathway
impacts of concern due to lead even assuming a shorter averaging period
is analyzed. Based on this evaluation, we proposed that there is no
significant potential for human health multi-pathway risks as a result
of HAP emissions from this source category. Three environmental HAP are
emitted by sources within this source category: Lead, hydrochloric acid
(HCl) and hydrogen fluoride (HF). Therefore, at proposal, we conducted
a screening-level evaluation of the potential adverse environmental
risks associated with emissions of lead, HCl, and HF for the ALDT
source category. 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 ALDT
source category are acceptable (section IV.A.2.a of proposal preamble,
84 FR 58956, November 1, 2019).
We then considered whether 40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII provides an
ample margin of safety to protect public health. 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. Related to risk, the baseline risks
were low, and regardless of the availability of further control
options, little risk reduction could be realized. As discussed further
in section IV.B of this preamble, we did not identify any cost-
effective measures to further reduce HAP emissions for the Surface
Coating of ALDT source category. Therefore, given the low baseline
risks and lack of options for further risk reductions, we proposed that
additional emission controls for this source category are not necessary
to provide an ample margin of safety (section IV.A.2.b of proposal
preamble, 84 FR 58956, November 1, 2019).
b. Surface Coating of MMPP (40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMM) Source
Category
Pursuant to CAA section 112(f)(2), 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 November 1, 2019, proposed rule for 40 CFR part 63,
subpart MMMM (84 FR 58966). 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 Surface Coating of MMPP Source Category in
Support of the 2019 Risk and Technology Review Proposed Rule, available
in the MMPP Docket.
[[Page 41111]]
Table 3--Surface Coating of MMPP Source Category Inhalation Risk Assessment Results
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum individual Estimated population Estimated annual Maximum chronic
cancer risk (in 1 at increased risk of cancer incidence noncancer TOSHI 1
million) cancer >= 1-in-1 (cases per year)
------------------------ million ------------------------------------------------ Maximum screening
Risk assessment ------------------------ acute noncancer HQ 2
Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on
actual allowable actual allowable actual allowable actual allowable
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category................... 20 30 18,000 24,000 0.008 0.01 0.8 1 HQREL = 4.
Whole facility.................... 100 .......... 370,000 .......... 0.04 .......... 1 .......... ....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The TOSHI is the sum of the chronic noncancer HQ 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 = HQ reference
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) is
20-in-1 million (driven by naphthalene and ethyl benzene from coating
operations), the maximum chronic noncancer TOSHI value based on actual
emissions is 0.8 (driven by antimony from coating operations), and the
maximum screening acute noncancer HQ value (off-facility site) could be
up to 4 (driven by glycol ethers). At proposal, the total annual cancer
incidence (national) from these facilities based on actual emission
levels was estimated to be 0.008 excess cancer cases per year, or one
case in every 125 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) is 30-in-1 million (driven by naphthalene and
ethyl benzene), and the maximum chronic noncancer TOSHI value based on
allowable emissions is 1 (driven by antimony). At proposal, the total
annual cancer incidence (national) from these facilities based on
allowable emissions was estimated to be 0.01 excess cancer cases per
year, or one case in every 100 years.
The maximum individual cancer risk (lifetime) for the whole
facility was determined to be 100-in-1 million at proposal (driven by
nickel from welding operations). The maximum facility-wide TOSHI for
the source category was estimated to be 1 (driven by emissions of
cobalt from a gel coating operation). At proposal, the total estimated
cancer incidence from the whole facility was determined to be 0.04
excess cancer cases per year, or one excess case in every 25 years.
Three PB-HAP are emitted by facilities in the source category:
Arsenic, cadmium, and lead. The PB-HAP emissions from these facilities
did not exceed the Tier 1 multipathway screening value of 1 for cancer
or noncancer. In evaluating the potential for multipathway effects from
emissions of lead, we compared modeled annual lead concentrations to
the NAAQS for lead of 0.15 mg/m\3\, arithmetic mean concentration over
a 3-month period). The highest annual average lead concentration of
0.059 mg/m\3\ is below the NAAQS level for lead, indicating a low
potential for multipathway impacts of concern due to lead even assuming
a shorter averaging period is analyzed. Based on this evaluation, we
proposed that there is no significant potential for human health multi-
pathway risks as a result of HAP emissions from this source category.
Four environmental HAP are emitted by facilities in this source
category: Arsenic, cadmium, lead and HCl. Therefore, at proposal, we
conducted a screening-level evaluation of the potential adverse
environmental effects associated with emissions of arsenic, cadmium,
lead, and HCl for the MMPP source category. 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
3 of this preamble, in our risk acceptability determination and
proposed that the residual risks from the Surface Coating of MMPP
source category are acceptable (section IV.B.2.a of proposal preamble,
84 FR 58967, November 1, 2019).
We then considered whether 40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMM provides an
ample margin of safety to protect public health. 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 (described in
section IV.B of this preamble), we identified and evaluated the use of
add-on control technologies for the rubber-to-metal bonding and high-
performance coating subcategories.
We determined that the added costs and cost effectiveness for these
two coating subcategories ($9,500 per ton of HAP reduced for the
rubber-to-metal bonding subcategory and $11,700 per ton for the high-
performance coating subcategory) are not justified. We proposed that
these costs are unreasonable particularly because the risks are already
low, and the risks would not be reduced in a meaningful manner by the
control of these subcategories. Six facilities in the high-performance
subcategory had a cancer risk above 1-in-1 million. The cancer risk for
only one of these facilities would be reduced as a result of the add-on
controls evaluated, going from 6-in-1 million to 2-in-1 million (based
on actual emissions) because the facility would be required to reduce
emissions. Only one facility in the rubber-to-metal bonding subcategory
had a cancer risk above 1-in-1 million. The cancer risk for this
facility would not be reduced as a result of the add-on controls
evaluated because the facility is able to use averaging between the
general-use subcategory and the rubber-to-metal bonding subcategory to
meet the general-use emission limit and would not have to reduce
emissions. 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, 84 FR 58968, November
1, 2019). Of the 40 facilities in the high-performance subcategory,
there were six with cancer risk above 1-in-1 million. The cancer risk
for only one of these facilities would be reduced as a result of the
add-on controls evaluated, going from 6-in-1 million to 2-in-1 million
(based on actual emissions). Of the 16 facilities in the rubber-to-
metal bonding subcategory, only one had cancer risk
[[Page 41112]]
above 1-in-1 million. The cancer risk for this facility would not be
reduced as a result of the add-on controls evaluated.
c. Surface Coating of PPP (40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPP) Source
Category
Pursuant to CAA section 112(f)(2), 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 November 1, 2019, proposed action for 40 CFR part 63,
subpart PPPP (84 FR 58976). 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 PPP Source Category in
Support of the 2019 Risk and Technology Review Proposed Rule, available
in the PPP Docket.
Table 4--Surface Coating of PPP Source Category Inhalation Risk Assessment Results
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum individual Estimated population Estimated annual Maximum chronic
cancer risk (in 1 at increased risk of cancer incidence noncancer TOSHI 1
million) cancer >= 1-in-1 (cases per year)
------------------------ million ------------------------------------------------ Maximum screening
Risk assessment ------------------------ acute noncancer HQ 2
Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on Based on
actual allowable actual allowable actual allowable actual allowable
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Category................... 10 10 600 700 0.001 0.001 1 1 HQREL = 4.
Whole Facility.................... 70 .......... 29,000 .......... 0.006 .......... 1 .......... ....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The TOSHI is the sum of the chronic noncancer HQ 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 = HQ reference
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) is
10-in-1 million (driven by formaldehyde, naphthalene, and ethyl benzene
from coating operations), the maximum chronic noncancer TOSHI value
based on actual emissions is 1 (driven by hexamethylene-1,6-
diisocyanate from coating operations), and the maximum screening acute
noncancer HQ value (off-facility site) could be up to 4 (driven by
glycol ethers). At proposal, the total annual cancer incidence
(national) from these facilities based on actual emission levels was
estimated to be 0.001 excess cancer cases per year, or one case in
every 1,000 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) is 10-in-1 million (driven by formaldehyde,
naphthalene, and ethyl benzene), and the maximum chronic noncancer
TOSHI value based on allowable emissions is 1 (driven by hexamethylene-
1,6-diisocyanate from coating operations). At proposal, the total
annual cancer incidence (national) from these facilities based on
allowable emissions was estimated to be 0.001 excess cancer cases per
year, or one case in every 1,000 years.
The maximum individual cancer risk (lifetime) for the whole
facility was determined to be 70-in-1 million at proposal (driven by
nickel and formaldehyde from a co-located boiler). The maximum
facility-wide TOSHI for the source category was estimated to be 1
(driven by emissions of nickel and formaldehyde from a co-located
boiler). At proposal, the total estimated cancer incidence from the
whole facility was determined to be 0.006 excess cancer cases per year,
or one excess case in every 200 years.
No PB-HAP are emitted by facilities in this source category;
therefore, at proposal we did not estimate any human health multi-
pathway risks from this source category. No environmental HAP are
emitted by facilities in this source category; therefore, 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
4 of this preamble, in our risk acceptability determination and
proposed that the residual risks from the Surface Coating of PPP source
category are acceptable (section IV.C.2.a of proposal preamble, 84 FR
58977, November 1, 2019).
We then considered whether 40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPP provides an
ample margin of safety to protect public health. 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 at proposal
(described in section IV.B of this preamble), we did not identify any
measures to further reduce HAP. Therefore, we proposed that additional
emissions controls for this source category are not necessary to
provide an ample margin of safety (section IV.C.2.b of proposal
preamble, 84 FR 58978, November 1, 2019).
2. How did the risk reviews change since proposal?
We have not changed any aspect of the risk assessments for any of
the three source categories as a result of public comments received on
the November 1, 2019, 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 reviews and our determinations 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 to our Science Advisory Board-approved review process were
necessary. The comments and our specific responses can be found in the
document,
[[Page 41113]]
Summary of Public Comments and Responses for the Risk and Technology
Reviews for Surface Coating Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks, Surface
Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products, and Surface Coating
of Plastic Parts and Products, available in the dockets for this action
(Docket ID Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0312, EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0313, and EPA-HQ-
OAR-2019-0314).
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 the maximum individual risk (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 quantitative 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 and above, we find that the risks from the Surface
Coating of ALDT, Surface Coating of MMPP, and Surface Coating of PPP
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 maintaining the
existing standards under CAA section 112(f)(2).
B. Technology Reviews
1. What did we propose pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6)?
Based on our review, we did not identify any developments in
practices, processes, or control technologies for the Surface Coating
of ALDT source category, and, therefore, we did not propose any changes
to the standards under CAA section 112(d)(6). A brief summary of the
EPA's findings in conducting the technology review of ALDT surface
coating operations was included in the preamble to the proposed action
(84 FR 58957, November 1, 2019). For a detailed discussion of the EPA's
findings, refer to the memorandum, Technology Review for Surface
Coating Operations in the Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks Source
Category, June 2019, in the ALDT Docket.
In our technology review of the Surface Coating of MMPP source
category, we identified and evaluated the use of add-on control
technologies (e.g., regenerative thermal oxidizers) for two coating
subcategories, high-performance coating and rubber-to-metal coating,
that had not been previously considered during development of the MMPP
NESHAP. This analysis is described in detail in the preamble to the
proposed action (84 FR 58969, November 1, 2019). However, we determined
that the added costs and cost effectiveness for these two coating
subcategories ($9,500 per ton of HAP reduced for the rubber-to-metal
coating subcategory and $11,700 per ton for the high-performance
subcategory) were not justified. Aside from this, we did not identify
any new or improved process equipment, work practices, or procedures
that would further reduce emissions. Therefore, the EPA proposed no
revisions to the MMPP NESHAP pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6). For a
detailed discussion of the EPA's findings, refer to the MMPP Technology
Review Memo in the MMPP Docket.
Based on our review, we did not identify any developments in
practices, processes, or control technologies for the Surface Coating
of PPP source category, and, therefore, we did not propose any changes
to the standards under CAA section 112(d)(6). A brief summary of the
EPA's findings in conducting the technology review of plastic parts
surface coating operations was included in the preamble to the proposed
action (84 FR 58978, November 1, 2019). For a detailed discussion of
the EPA's findings, refer to the memorandum, Technology Review for the
Plastic Parts and Products Surface Coating Operations Source Category,
June 2019, in the PPP Docket.
2. How did the technology reviews change since proposal?
We are making no changes to the conclusions of the technology
review and are finalizing the results of the technology reviews for the
Surface Coating of ALDT, Surface Coating of MMPP, and Surface Coating
of PPP source categories as proposed.
3. What key comments did we receive on the technology reviews, and what
are our responses?
We received several general comments supporting the results of our
technology reviews for all three source categories and one comment
objecting to our conclusion that there have been no technology
developments in these three source categories.
Comment: One commenter alleged that the EPA has failed to meet the
statutory obligation to conduct a technology review under CAA section
112(d)(6). The commenter argued that the EPA has refused to complete
the technology review by refusing to strengthen the emission standards
for regulated pollutants based primarily on cost or cost effectiveness.
The commenter argued that CAA section 112(d)(6) does not include that
term ``cost effectiveness,'' and so the EPA's proposed action on the
technology review is unlawful and arbitrary.
Response: The EPA disagrees with the commenter that cost
effectiveness cannot be considered in the technology reviews. CAA
section 112(d)(6) does include the phrase ``as necessary'' and the EPA
interprets ``as necessary'' to include a cost component, such as cost
effectiveness. The EPA's interpretation that cost and cost
effectiveness may be considered in technology reviews was affirmed by
the Court in Association of Battery Recyclers, Inc. v. EPA, 716 F.3d
667 (DC Cir. 2013).\3\ Therefore, the technology review for the Surface
Coating of MMPP source category completed at proposal is not being
revised based on this comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Association of Battery Recyclers, Inc. v. EPA, 716 F.3d
667 (DC Cir. 2013), p. 673: Environmental petitioners next argue
that the EPA impermissibly considered cost in revising emissions
standards under CAA section 112(d)(6). But the statute only bars
cost consideration in setting MACT floors under CAA section
112(d)(3), see National Lime, 233 F.3d at 640; CAA section 112(d)(2)
in contrast expressly directs the EPA to consider costs when setting
beyond-the-floor standards, see 42 U.S.C. 7412(d)(2) (directing the
Administrator to ``tak[e] into consideration the cost of achieving .
. . emission reduction''). Petitioners are correct that CAA section
112(d)(6) itself makes no reference to cost and that the Supreme
Court has ``refused to find implicit in ambiguous sections of the
[CAA] an authorization to consider costs that has elsewhere, and so
often, been expressly granted.'' Whitman v. American Trucking
Associations, Inc., 531 U.S. 457, 467, 121 S. Ct. 903, 149 L.Ed.2d 1
(2001). But given that the EPA has no obligation to recalculate the
MACT floor when revising standards, see supra at 672-73, and given
that CAA section 112(d)(2) expressly authorizes cost consideration
in other aspects of the standard-setting process, we believe this
clear statement rule is satisfied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 41114]]
4. What is the rationale for our final approach and final decisions for
the technology reviews?
For the reasons explained in the preamble to the proposed rules (84
FR 58597, 58969, and 58978, November 1, 2019), and in our analysis of
public comments explained above in section IV.B.3 of this preamble, we
are making no changes to any of the three subparts to require
additional controls pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6) and are
finalizing the results of the technology reviews as proposed.
C. Electronic Reporting Provisions
1. What did we propose?
In the November 1, 2019, document, we proposed to require owners
and operators of surface coating facilities in all three source
categories to submit electronic copies of notifications, reports, and
performance tests through the EPA's CDX, using the CEDRI. These include
the initial notifications required in 40 CFR 63.9(b); notifications of
compliance status required in 40 CFR 63.9(h); the performance test
reports required in 40 CFR 63.7(g); and the semiannual reports required
in 40 CFR 63.3120(a) for ALDT surface coating, 40 CFR 63.3920(a) for
MMPP surface coating, and 40 CFR 63.4520(a) for PPP surface coating. A
description of the electronic submission process is provided in the
memorandum, Electronic Reporting Requirements for New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), August 8, 2018, in the ALDT, MMPP,
and PPP Dockets. The proposed rule requirements would replace the
current rule requirements to submit the notifications and reports to
the Administrator at the appropriate address listed in 40 CFR 63.13.
The proposed rule requirement would not affect submittals required by
state air agencies.
2. What changed since proposal?
We are finalizing the electronic reporting provisions as proposed
with no changes (84 FR 58958, 58970, and 58979, November 1, 2019).
3. What key comments did we receive and what are our responses?
Comment: Several commenters requested that additional opportunity
should be provided for public review and comment of the electronic
reporting templates before they are final and facilities are required
to use them for electronic reporting. One commenter also requested that
the EPA provide a notice and comment period through a Federal Register
document for all future changes in reporting templates because many
industry members do not track changes to the CEDRI website where the
EPA intends to make future template changes. The commenter argued that
this would be consistent with the requirements of both the CAA and the
Administrative Procedures Act (APA) because, the commenter argues, the
development of the reporting template constitutes a rulemaking action.
Response: The EPA disagrees that changes to the electronic
reporting template constitute a rulemaking because the reporting
template does not create new requirements, but instead, provides the
mechanism by which the sources report the information required to be
submitted pursuant to the underlying NESHAP.
The EPA promulgated the original MACT emissions standards and
attendant monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements through
notice and comment rulemaking, but the sources were not required to
submit reports via electronic reporting at the time. The EPA is moving
toward electronic reporting for all NESHAP and proposed to require
electronic reporting for these source categories along with the RTR
rulemaking. The electronic reporting template is the tool by which the
sources will enter their required reports and data to CEDRI to comply
with the NESHAP, but it does not establish, in itself, any
requirements, including monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements. Any future revisions to the underlying NESHAP's
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements will be made
through a proposed rulemaking that will be published in the Federal
Register; thereby giving the public notice and an opportunity to
comment. The changes to reporting templates, by contrast, are merely
changes that are necessary to allow owners/operators to successfully
submit reports (e.g., resolving issues with template cells that are not
properly formatted, unlocking inadvertently locked cells, and
correcting regulatory citations). The EPA disagrees that the APA and
the CAA require such changes undergo notice and comment rulemaking in
the Federal Register.
We also note that if the reporting templates for these subparts are
completed concurrently with the final rule publication, facilities will
have 1 year after the final rule is published to submit semiannual
compliance reports using the electronic reporting template in CEDRI. If
the reporting templates are not finalized concurrently with the final
rule publication, facilities will be required to submit semiannual
compliance reports using the electronic reporting template in CEDRI
once the reporting template has been available on the CEDRI website for
one year. The dates that templates are initially made available in
CEDRI are listed on the CEDRI website.
4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the electronic
reporting provisions?
For the reasons explained in the preamble to the proposed rules (84
FR 58958, 58970, and 58979, November 1, 2019), and in the comment
responses above in section IV.C.3 of this preamble, we are finalizing
the electronic reporting provisions for 40 CFR parts 63, subparts IIII,
MMMM, and PPPP, as proposed.
D. SSM Provisions
1. What did we propose?
In the November 1, 2019, action, we proposed amendments to the ALDT
NESHAP, the MMPP NESHAP, and the PPP NESHAP to remove and revise
provisions related to SSM that are not consistent with the statutory
requirement that the standards apply at all times. More information
concerning the elimination of SSM provisions is in the preamble to the
proposed rules (84 FR 58959, 58971, and 58980, November 1, 2019).
2. What changed since proposal?
We are finalizing the SSM provisions as proposed except for some
changes to the General Provisions references in Table 2 of 40 CFR part
63, subpart IIII (84 FR 58959, 58971, and 58980, November 1, 2019).
3. What key comments did we receive and what are our responses?
Comment: One commenter argued that the proposed removal and
revision of the SSM provisions would effectively eliminate a
longstanding provision applicable to magnet wire coating operations
that allows for extra HAP emissions during SSM events, so long as the
permittee addresses those events according to its facility SSM plan.
The commenter acknowledged that the EPA is compelled to take this
action by the decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (DC Cir.
2008), but the commenter reported that certain facilities now are
challenged to find a methodology for emission calculations during SSM
periods.
The commenter reported that magnet wire coaters--unless advised of
an alternative approach--would account for SSM events in emission
calculations by weighing coating hours in full compliance (with control
percentage
[[Page 41115]]
determined through stack testing) v. coating hours during start-up,
shutdown, and malfunction periods, where the default assumption during
the latter is zero control. The commenter stated that the weighted
efficiency ratio would then be applied to the total mass of HAP input
to surface coating operations to determine estimated emissions.
Response: The EPA agrees we are compelled to remove and revise the
SSM provisions from each subpart consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA,
551 F.3d 1019 (DC Cir. 2008).
The commenter has not provided enough detail for the EPA to
determine whether the compliance approach described by the commenter is
consistent with the current requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart
MMMM. However, subpart MMMM already includes provisions to account for
deviation periods, so the commenter's proposed approach should not be
necessary. For example, for coating operations that use an add-on
control device, Equation 1 of 40 CFR 63.3961 includes the term
HUNC, which is the total mass in kilograms of organic HAP in
the coatings, thinners, and/or other additives, and cleaning materials
used during all deviations specified in 40 CFR 63.3963(c) and (d) that
occurred during the month, as calculated in Equation 1D of 40 CFR
63.3961. The rest of subpart MMMM treats these HAP as being
uncontrolled, which is consistent with the commenter's assumption of
zero control during SSM events.
Comment: One commenter recommended several changes to Table 2
(Applicability of General Provisions) to 40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII,
as result of the changes made to reflect the SSM changes:
Clarify that the provisions of 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3),
63.6(f)(1), 63.10(b)(2), and 63.10(d)(5) apply only to capture systems
and add-on control devices used to comply with the standards, as in the
current rule;
correct an apparent drafting error and add back in a
reference to 40 CFR 63.6(i)(16) with an indicator that it is still
applicable to 40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII;
do not finalize the applicability of 40 CFR 63.8(c)(7)
from ``No'' to ``Yes'' unless the EPA provides further explanation of
this change because it was not discussed in the preamble to the
proposed rule; and
combine the provisions of 40 CFR 63.9(h)(5) and (6) with
the other notification of compliance status requirements in 40 CFR
63.9(h)(1) through (3).
Response: We agree with the commenter that the language indicating
that the provisions of 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3), 63.6(f)(1), 63.10(b)(2), and
63.10(d)(5) apply only to capture systems and add-on control devices
used to comply with the standards is a useful clarification and it is
being added back into the appropriate rows of Table 2 to 40 CFR part
63, subpart IIII suggested by the commenter.
The commenter is correct that 40 CFR 63.6(i)(16) is still
applicable to 40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII and this has been added back
into the final Table 2 to subpart IIII.
We proposed to change the applicability of 40 CFR 63.8(c)(7) in
Table 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII from ``No'' to ``Yes'' because
that was an apparent error in the original Table 2 to subpart IIII.
Facilities are required to comply with 40 CFR 63.8(c)(7) as specified
in 40 CFR 63.3120(a)(4), and the Table 2 to subpart IIII should already
have been ``Yes'' instead of ``No.'' New references to 40 CFR
63.8(c)(7) are also being added in 40 CFR 63.3120(a)(6)(vii) and
(a)(8)(vi).
We agree with the commenter that the provisions of 40 CFR
63.9(h)(5) and (6) should be combined with the other notification of
compliance status requirements in 40 CFR 63.9(h)(1) through (3). The
provisions of 40 CFR 63.9(h)(5) and (6) were separated in drafting the
revised table because 40 CFR 63.9(h)(4) is reserved, but we agree that
keeping them together on one line as ``Sec. 63.9(h)(1) through (3),
(5), and (6)'' would avoid confusion, so we are adopting that approach
in the promulgated version of Table 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII.
4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the SSM provisions?
For the reasons explained in the proposed rule and after evaluation
of the comments on the proposed amendments to the SSM provisions for
the ALDT NESHAP, MMPP NESHAP, and PPP NESHAP, we are finalizing the
proposed revisions related to SSM so that they are now consistent with
the requirement that the standards apply at all times. More information
concerning the proposed amendments to the SSM provisions is in the
preamble to the proposed rules (84 FR 58959, 58971, and 58980, November
1, 2019).
E. Ongoing Compliance Demonstrations
1. What did we propose?
In the November 1, 2019, action, we proposed to require owners and
operators of ALDT, MMPP, and PPP surface coating facilities that use
the emission rate with add-on controls compliance option to conduct
periodic performance testing of add-on control devices on a regular
frequency of every 5 years to ensure the equipment continues to operate
properly. This proposed periodic testing requirement included an
exception to the general requirement for periodic testing for
facilities using the catalytic oxidizer control options and following
catalyst maintenance procedures that are found in 40 CFR part 63,
subparts IIII, MMMM, and PPPP. These catalyst maintenance procedures
include annual testing of the catalyst and other maintenance procedures
that provide ongoing demonstrations that the control system is
operating properly and may, thus, be considered comparable to
conducting a performance test. The proposed periodic performance
testing requirement also allows an exception from periodic testing for
facilities using continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) to show
actual emissions. The use of CEMS to demonstrate compliance would
obviate the need for periodic testing.
This proposed requirement did not require periodic testing or CEMS
monitoring of facilities using the compliant materials option or the
emission-rate without add-on controls compliance option because these
two compliance options do not use any add-on controls or control
efficiency measurements in the compliance calculations.
The proposed periodic performance testing requirement requires
facilities complying with the standards using emission capture systems
and add-on controls and which are not already on a 5-year testing
schedule to conduct the first of the periodic performance tests within
3 years of the effective date of the revised standards. Afterward, they
would conduct periodic testing before they renew their operating
permits, but no longer than 5 years following the previous performance
test. Additionally, facilities that have already tested as a condition
of their permit within the last 2 years before the effective date would
be permitted to maintain their current 5-year schedule.
2. What changed since proposal?
We have revised the proposed periodic testing language in 40 CFR
part 63, subparts IIII, MMMM, and PPPP, since proposal to clarify that
testing is only required for add-on control devices and is not for
emission capture systems. We are also revising 40 CFR 63.3093(a) to
clarify that facilities in the ALDT source category are not required to
meet any operating limits for any coating
[[Page 41116]]
operations that do not use add-on controls to comply with the emission
limits in 40 CFR 63.3090 or 63.3091.
3. What key comments did we receive and what are our responses?
Comment: One commenter recommended that proposed rule language at
40 CFR 63.3163(c)(3) in subpart IIII should be revised to clarify that
periodic performance testing is only required for the add-on control
device and that capture system efficiency testing is not required. The
commenter argued that the EPA provided no technical justification to
require periodic capture efficiency testing, and that capture
efficiency is not likely to change without structural or operational
changes to the emission capture system.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter and has revised the
periodic performance testing language in 40 CFR part 63, subparts IIII,
MMMM, and PPPP to clarify that the testing applies to the add-on
control devices and does not include capture efficiency testing.
Comment: One commenter requested that the final 40 CFR part 63,
subpart IIII should clarify that timing of subsequent performance tests
should be aligned with title V permit requirements for testing to avoid
additional testing to comply with both the NESHAP and their title V
permits. The commenter recommended that regulatory language should
provide for periodic testing ``within the 5-year term of the Title V
permit'' or ``within 5 years of the most recent testing,'' or something
similar. The commenter stated that the EPA should not require testing
within a specified time period from the issuance of the amended rule or
by a specific date.
Response: The EPA disagrees with the commenter that changes to the
proposed rule language are needed because the proposed rule language
already allows this flexibility. The proposed rule language at 40 CFR
63.3163(c)(3) stated,
``. . . You must conduct the first periodic performance test before
[date 3 years after date of publications of final rule in the
Federal Register], 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 [date 2 years
before date of publications of final rule in the Federal Register].
Thereafter you must conduct a performance test no later than 5 years
following the previous performance test. . . .''
Therefore, the proposed rule language already allows a facility to
conduct a performance test within the 5-year period of a title V permit
if testing is already required, and does not specify any additional
testing, as long as the title V permit is renewed on a regular 5-year
schedule as specified under 40 CFR part 70 and 40 CFR part 71.
Comment: One commenter requested that the EPA should allow for
performance testing extensions beyond the 5-year requirement when
necessary to obtain representative conditions and when agreed to with
the EPA or with an EPA-approved permitting authority. The commenter
argued that if, for example, significant coating operation facility
changes or product changes are planned near the end of a 5-year period,
deferring testing until after the change occurs would be preferable to
obtain a more representative result. The commenter noted that the
General Provisions currently allow for delays in performance tests due
to force majeure events or a waiver of subsequent performance tests
under certain conditions, but the General Provisions do not
specifically reference testing delays due to the need to establish
representative conditions. The commenter provided two examples of
permit language that allow for extensions of testing periods.
Response: The EPA disagrees with the need to allow for testing
delays and is not revising the proposed language to include the
commenter's recommendation. The compliance calculations in 40 CFR part
63, subparts IIII, MMMM, and PPPP require a facility to use the organic
HAP destruction or removal efficiency (DRE) of the add-on control
device. The standards already require that tests be performed under
representative coating operation operating conditions and under
representative emission capture system and add-on control device
operating conditions, which specifically exclude testing during periods
of startup, shutdown, nonoperation, and malfunction. The EPA currently
does not have sufficient information to define the conditions under
which an extension should be granted, and no additional information was
provided by the commenter. The commenter also provided no additional
information to indicate whether and how the situations described by the
commenter (e.g., significant coating operation changes or product
changes) would alter the DRE of an add-on control device.
The EPA also notes that the purpose of periodic compliance testing
is to not only demonstrate future compliance, but to also confirm past
compliance. If a facility is planning significant changes that would
prevent testing according to the 5-year schedule, the facility may need
to complete testing earlier so as to demonstrate that the facility was
in compliance under the original configuration. It may be necessary for
the facility to repeat testing under the new configuration to re-
establish new operating limits and efficiency values for the emission
capture and control system.
Comment: One commenter requested that the EPA revise 40 CFR
63.3093(a) to clarify that facilities in the ALDT source category that
do not use add-on controls to comply with the emission limits in 40 CFR
63.3090 or 63.3091 are not required to comply with the operating limits
for add-on controls and emission capture systems. The commenters
reported that the original language in 40 CFR 63.3093(a) only mentioned
``coating operations without add-on controls'' and this has led to
confusion because many facilities have add-on controls to limit VOC
emissions, but they are not needed to comply with the HAP emission
limits.
Response: The EPA agrees that this change will avoid confusion and
we will make the change to the language in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
IIII. Other surface coating NESHAP, such as 40 CFR part 63, subparts
MMMM and PPPP, already have language that avoids similar confusion over
the applicability of the operating limits.
4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the ongoing
compliance demonstrations?
For the reasons explained in the preamble to the proposed rules (84
FR 58963, 58974, and 58983, November 1, 2019), and in the comment
responses above in section IV.E.3 of this preamble, we are finalizing
the periodic testing provisions for 40 CFR part 63, subparts IIII,
MMMM, and PPPP, as proposed. As also described in section IV.E.3 of
this preamble, we are also making changes to each NESHAP to clarify
that testing is only required for add-on control devices and is not
required for emission capture systems. We are also revising 40 CFR
63.3093(a) to clarify that facilities in the ALDT source category are
not required to meet any operating limits for any coating operations
that do not use add-on controls to comply with the emission limits in
40 CFR 63.3090 or 63.3091, as described in section IV.E.3 of this
preamble.
V. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts and Additional
Analyses Conducted
A. What are the affected facilities?
Currently, we estimate 43 major source facilities are subject to
the ALDT NESHAP and operating in the United
[[Page 41117]]
States. The affected source under the NESHAP is the collection of all
coating operations; all storage containers and mixing vessels in which
coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials are stored or mixed; all
manual and automated equipment and containers used for conveying
coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials; and all storage containers
and all manual and automated equipment and containers used for
conveying waste materials generated by a coating operation. A coating
operation is defined as the equipment used to apply coating to a
substrate (coating application) and to dry or cure the coating after
application. A single coating operation always includes at least the
point at which a coating is applied and all subsequent points in the
affected source where organic HAP emissions from that coating occur.
There may be multiple coating operations in an affected source. Coating
application with hand-held nonrefillable aerosol containers, touchup
bottles, touchup markers, marking pens, or pinstriping equipment is not
a coating operation for the purposes of this subpart. The application
of temporary materials such as protective oils and ``travel waxes''
that are designed to be removed from the vehicle before it is delivered
to a retail purchaser is not a coating operation for the purposes of 40
CFR part 61, subpart IIII.
Currently, we estimate 368 major source facilities are subject to
the MMPP NESHAP and operating in the United States. The affected source
under the NESHAP is the collection of all coating operations; all
storage containers and mixing vessels in which coatings, thinners, and
cleaning materials are stored or mixed; all manual and automated
equipment and containers used for conveying coatings, thinners, and
cleaning materials; and all storage containers and all manual and
automated equipment and containers used for conveying waste materials
generated by a coating operation. A coating operation is defined as the
equipment used to apply cleaning materials to a substrate to prepare it
for coating application (surface preparation) or to remove dried
coating; to apply coating to a substrate (coating application) and to
dry or cure the coating after application; or to clean coating
operation equipment (equipment cleaning). A single coating operation
may include any combination of these types of equipment but always
includes at least the point at which a given quantity of coating or
cleaning material is applied to a given part and all subsequent points
in the affected source where organic HAP are emitted from the specific
quantity of coating or cleaning material on the specific part. There
may be multiple coating operations in an affected source. Coating
application with handheld, non-refillable aerosol containers, touch-up
markers, or marking pens is not a coating operation for the purposes of
40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMM.
Currently, we estimate 125 major source facilities are subject to
the PPP NESHAP and operating in the United States. The affected source
under the NESHAP is the collection of coating operations; all storage
containers and mixing vessels in which coatings, thinners, and cleaning
materials are stored or mixed; all manual and automated equipment and
containers used for conveying coatings, thinners, and cleaning
materials; and all storage containers and all manual and automated
equipment and containers used for conveying waste materials generated
by a coating operation. A coating operation is defined as the equipment
used to apply cleaning materials to a substrate to prepare it for
coating application (surface preparation) or to remove dried coating;
to apply coating to a substrate (coating application) and to dry or
cure the coating after application; or to clean coating operation
equipment (equipment cleaning). A single coating operation may include
any combination of these types of equipment but always includes at
least the point at which a given quantity of coating or cleaning
material is applied to a given part and all subsequent points in the
affected source where organic HAP are emitted from the specific
quantity of coating or cleaning material on the specific part. There
may be multiple coating operations in an affected source. Coating
application with handheld, non-refillable aerosol containers, touch-up
markers, or marking pens is not a coating operation for the purposes of
40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPP.
B. What are the air quality impacts?
At the current level of control, estimated emissions of volatile
organic HAP from the 43 facilities in the ALDT source category are
approximately 1,700 tpy. Current estimated emissions of volatile
organic HAP from the 368 facilities in the MMPP source category are
approximately 2,700 tpy. Current estimated emissions of volatile
organic HAP from the 125 facilities in the PPP source category are
approximately 760 tpy.
The amendments require that all major sources in the ALDT, MMPP,
and PPP source categories comply with the relevant emission standards
at all times, including periods of SSM. We were unable to quantify the
emissions that occur during periods of SSM or the specific emissions
reductions that will occur as a result of this action. However,
eliminating the SSM exemption has the potential to reduce emissions by
requiring facilities to meet the applicable standard at all times and
to minimize SSM periods.
Indirect or secondary air emissions impacts are impacts that would
result from, for example, the increased electricity, natural gas, or
water usage associated with the operation of control devices (e.g.,
increased secondary emissions of criteria pollutants from power
plants). Energy impacts consist of the electricity and steam needed to
operate control devices and other equipment. The amendments would have
no effect on the energy needs of the affected facilities in any of the
three source categories and will, therefore, have no indirect or
secondary air emissions impacts.
C. What are the cost impacts?
We estimate that each affected facility in these three source
categories will experience costs as a result of these final amendments
for recordkeeping and reporting. Each facility will experience costs to
read and understand the rule amendments. Costs associated with
eliminating 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 are also finalizing a requirement for performance testing no
less frequently than every 5 years for sources in each source category
using the add-on controls compliance options. We estimate that five
major source facilities subject to the ALDT NESHAP may incur costs to
conduct periodic testing because they are currently using the emission
rate with add-on controls compliance option, and the total cost for all
five facilities subject to the ALDT NESHAP in a single year would be
$95,000. Similarly, we estimate that seven major source facilities
subject to the MMPP NESHAP may incur costs to conduct periodic testing
because they
[[Page 41118]]
are currently using the emission rate with add-on controls compliance
option, at a total cost in a single year of $133,000. Finally, we
estimate that three major source facilities subject to the PPP NESHAP
may incur costs to conduct periodic testing because they are currently
using the emission rate with add-on controls compliance option, at a
total cost in a single year of $57,000. These estimates exclude testing
costs for facilities that have add-on controls and are currently
required to perform periodic performance testing as a condition of
their state operating permit. The cost for a facility to conduct a
destruction or removal efficiency performance test using EPA Method 25
or 25A is estimated to be about $19,000. For further information on the
potential costs, see the memorandum titled Estimated Costs/Impacts 40
CFR part 63 Subparts IIII, MMMM, and PPPP Monitoring Review Revisions,
May 2019, in the ALDT Docket, MMPP Docket, and PPP Docket.
D. What are the economic impacts?
The economic impact analysis is designed to inform decision makers
about the potential economic consequences of the compliance costs
outlined in section VI.C. of this preamble. To assess the maximum
potential impact, the largest cost expected to be experienced in any
one year is compared to the total sales for the ultimate owner of the
affected facilities to estimate the total burden for each facility.
For the final revisions to the ALDT NESHAP, the total cost is
estimated to be approximately $113,000 for the 43 affected entities in
the first year of the rule, and an additional $122,000 in testing and
reporting costs for five facilities in the third year of the rule and
every 5 years thereafter. The 43 affected facilities are owned by 14
different parent companies, and the total costs associated with the
final requirements range from 0.000002 to 0.0056 percent of annual
sales revenue per ultimate owner. 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 MMPP NESHAP, the total cost is
estimated to be approximately $964,000 for the 368 affected entities in
the first year of the rule, and an additional $172,000 in testing and
reporting costs for seven facilities in the third year of the rule and
every 5 years thereafter. The 368 affected facilities are owned by 265
different parent companies, and the total costs associated with the
final requirements range from 0.000002 to 0.25 percent of annual sales
revenue per ultimate owner. 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 PPP NESHAP, the total cost is
estimated to be approximately $327,000 for the 125 affected entities in
the first year of the rule, and an additional $74,000 in testing and
reporting costs for three facilities in the third year of the rule and
every 5 years thereafter. The 125 affected facilities are owned by 94
different parent companies, and the total costs associated with the
final requirements range from 0.000008 to 0.22 percent of annual sales
revenue per ultimate owner. 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.
The EPA also prepared a small business screening assessment to
determine whether any of the identified affected entities are small
entities, as defined by the U.S. Small Business Administration. One of
the facilities potentially affected by the final revisions to the ALDT
NESHAP is a small entity. However, the annualized costs associated with
the final requirements is 0.0056 percent of annual sales revenue for
the owner of that facility. Of the facilities potentially affected by
the final revisions to the MMPP NESHAP, 110 are small entities.
However, the annualized costs associated with the final requirements
for the 103 ultimate owners of these 110 affected small entities range
from 0.001 to 0.25 percent of annual sales revenues per ultimate owner.
Of the facilities potentially affected by the final revisions to the
PPP NESHAP, 35 are small entities. However, the annualized costs
associated with the final requirements for the 35 ultimate owners of
these 35 affected small entities range from 0.0009 to 0.22 percent of
annual sales revenues per ultimate owner. Therefore, there are no
significant economic impacts on a substantial number of small entities
from these final amendments.
E. What are the benefits?
As stated in section V.B. of the November 1, 2019, RTR proposal (84
FR 58986), we were unable to quantify the specific emissions reductions
associated with eliminating the SSM exemption, although this change has
the potential to reduce emissions of volatile organic HAP.
Because these amendments are not considered economically
significant, as defined by Executive Order 12866, we did not monetize
the benefits of reducing these emissions. This does not mean that there
are no benefits associated with the potential reduction in volatile
organic HAP from this rule.
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. The order 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 these source categories, we performed a
demographic analysis for each source category, 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 ALDT
The results of the demographic analysis for the Surface Coating of
ALDT source category are summarized in Table 5 of this preamble. These
results, for various demographic groups, are based on the estimated
risk from actual emissions levels for the population living within 50
km of the facilities.
The results of the ALDT source category demographic analysis
indicate that emissions from the source category expose approximately
15,000 people to a cancer risk at or above 1-in-1 million and no one is
exposed to a chronic noncancer HI greater than 1. The overall percent
of the population that is minorities is similar nationally (38 percent)
and for the category population with cancer risk greater than or equal
to 1-in-1 million (40 percent). However, the category population with
cancer risk greater than or equal to 1-in-1 million has a greater
percent Hispanic population (27 percent) as compared to the national
percent Hispanic population (18 percent).
[[Page 41119]]
Table 5--Surface Coating of ALDT Source Category Demographic Risk Analysis Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population
with chronic
Population with cancer noncancer HI
Nationwide risk at or above 1-in-1 above 1 due to
million due to surface surface
coating of ALDT coating of
ALDT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Population........................ 317,746,049............... 15,000.................... 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White and Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White................................... 62........................ 60........................ 0
Minority................................ 38........................ 40........................ 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minority Detail by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
African American........................ 12........................ 10........................ 0
Native American......................... 0.8....................... 0.2....................... 0
Hispanic or Latino...................... 18........................ 27........................ 0
Other and Multiracial................... 7......................... 3......................... 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below the Poverty Level................. 14........................ 19........................ 0
Above the Poverty Level................. 86........................ 81........................ 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Education by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 25 Without High a School Diploma... 14........................ 14........................ 0
Over 25 With a High School Diploma...... 86........................ 86........................ 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linguistically Isolated by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linguistically Isolated................. 6......................... 3......................... 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Automobile
and Light-Duty Truck Surface Coating Source Category Operations, in the
ALDT Docket.
2. Surface Coating of MMPP
The results of the demographic analysis for the Surface Coating of
MMPP source category are summarized in Table 6 of this preamble. These
results, for various demographic groups, are based on the estimated
risk from actual emissions levels for the population living within 50
km of the facilities.
The results of the MMPP source category demographic analysis
indicate that approximately 18,000 people are exposed to a cancer risk
at or above 1-in-1 million and no one is exposed 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: ``White,'' ``Below the Poverty Level,'' and
``Over 25 and Without a High School Diploma.''
Table 6--Surface Coating of MMPP Source Category Demographic Risk Analysis Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population
with cancer Population
risk at or with chronic
above 1-in-1 noncancer HI
Nationwide million due above 1 due to
to surface surface
coating of coating of
MMPP MMPP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Population................................................ 317,746,049 18,000 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White and Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White........................................................... 62 75 0
Minority........................................................ 38 25 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minority Detail by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
African American................................................ 12 12 0
Native American................................................. 0.8 0.6 0
Hispanic or Latino.............................................. 18 9 0
[[Page 41120]]
Other and Multiracial........................................... 7 3 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below the Poverty Level......................................... 14 20 0
Above the Poverty Level......................................... 86 80 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Education by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 25 Without High a School Diploma........................... 14 18 0
Over 25 With a High School Diploma.............................. 86 82 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linguistically Isolated by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linguistically Isolated......................................... 6 3 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the Surface
Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Source Category, in
the MMPP Docket.
3. Surface Coating of PPP
The results of the demographic analysis for the Surface Coating of
PPP source category are summarized in Table 7 of this preamble. These
results, for various demographic groups, are based on the estimated
risk from actual emissions levels for the population living within 50
km of the facilities.
The results of the PPP source category demographic analysis
indicate that approximately 500 people are exposed to a cancer risk at
or above 1-in-1 million and no one is exposed 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: ``White'' and ``Below the Poverty Level.''
Table 7--Surface Coating of PPP Source Category Demographic Risk Analysis Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population
with cancer Population
risk at or with chronic
Nationwide above 1-in-1 noncancer HI
million due above 1 due
to surface to surface
coating of PPP coating of PPP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Population................................................ 317,746,049 500 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White and Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White........................................................... 62 92 0
Minority........................................................ 38 8 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minority Detail by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
African American................................................ 12 4 0
Native American................................................. 0.8 0.1 0
Hispanic or Latino.............................................. 18 3 0
Other and Multiracial........................................... 7 1 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below the Poverty Level......................................... 14 19 0
Above the Poverty Level......................................... 86 81 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Education by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 25 Without High a School Diploma........................... 14 14 0
Over 25 With a High School Diploma.............................. 86 86 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 41121]]
Linguistically Isolated by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linguistically Isolated......................................... 6 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Plastic Parts and Products Source Category Operations, in
the PPP Docket.
G. What analysis of children's environmental health did we conduct?
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 Residual Risk
Assessment for the Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks
Source Category in Support of the 2020 Risk and Technology Review Final
Rule, Residual Risk Assessment for the Surface Coating of Miscellaneous
Metal Parts and Products Source Category in Support of the 2020 Risk
and Technology Review Final Rule, and Residual Risk Assessment for the
Surface Coating of Plastic Parts and Products Source Category in
Support of the 2020 Risk and Technology Review Final Rule, in the ALDT
Docket, MMPP Docket, and PPP 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 this rule have been
submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA, as discussed for each
source category covered by this action in sections VI.C.1, 2, and 3 of
this preamble.
1. Surface Coating of ALDT
The Information Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA
prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 2045.09. You can find a copy
of the ICR in the ALDT Docket for this rule (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2019-0314), and it is briefly summarized here. The information
collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves them.
As part of the RTR for the ALDT NESHAP, the EPA is not revising the
emission limit requirements. 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, notifications, and reports.
This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR
part 63, subpart IIII. 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 surface
coating of ALDT.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart IIII).
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
five facilities will be required to conduct performance testing in the
3 years after the amendments are final.
Frequency of response: The total number of responses in year 1 is
129 and in year 3 is 15. Year 2 would have no responses.
Total estimated burden: The average annual burden to the ALDT
surface coating facilities over the 3 years after the amendments are
finalized is estimated to be 410 hours (per year). Burden is defined at
5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: The average annual cost to the ALDT surface
coating facilities is $47,000 in labor costs in the first 3 years after
the amendments are final. The average annual capital and operation and
maintenance (O&M) costs is $32,000.
2. Surface Coating of MMPP
The ICR document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR
number 2056.08. You can find a copy of the ICR in the MMPP Docket for
this rule (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0312), and it is briefly
summarized here. The information collection requirements are not
enforceable until OMB approves them.
As part of the RTR for the MMPP NESHAP, the EPA is not revising the
emission limit requirements. 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, notifications, and reports.
This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR
part 63, subpart MMMM. 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 surface
coating of MMPP.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart MMMM).
Estimated number of respondents: In the 3 years after the
amendments are
[[Page 41122]]
final, approximately 368 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
1,104 and in year 3 is 21. Year 2 would have no responses.
Total estimated burden: The average annual burden to the MMPP
surface coating facilities over the 3 years after the amendments are
final is estimated to be 2,930 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5
CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: The average annual cost to the MMPP surface
coating facilities is $334,000 in labor costs in the first 3 years
after the amendments are final. The average annual capital and O&M cost
is $44,000.
3. Surface Coating of PPP
The ICR document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR
number 2044.09. You can find a copy of the ICR in the PPP Docket for
this rule (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0313), and it is briefly
summarized here. The information collection requirements are not
enforceable until OMB approves them.
As part of the RTR for the PPP NESHAP, the EPA is not revising the
emission limit requirements. 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, notifications, and reports.
This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR
part 63, subpart PPPP. 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 surface
coating of PPP.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart PPPP).
Estimated number of respondents: In the 3 years after the
amendments are final, approximately 125 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
375 and in year 3 is nine. Year 2 would have no responses.
Total estimated burden: The average annual burden to the PPP
surface coating facilities over the 3 years after the amendments are
final is estimated to be 1,007 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5
CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: The average annual cost to the PPP surface
coating facilities is $115,000 in labor costs in the first 3 years
after the amendments are final. The average annual capital and O&M cost
is $19,000.
This action does not impose any new information collection burden
related to the NESHAP for Surface Coating of Large Appliances; NESHAP
for Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles; and
NESHAP for Surface Coating of Metal Furniture. OMB has previously
approved the information collection activities contained in the
existing regulations and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0457 for
NESHAP for Surface Coating of Large Appliances; 2060-0522 for NESHAP
for Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles; and
2060-0518 for NESHAP for Surface Coating of Metal Furniture. This
notice only finalizes technical corrections to these standards and does
not impact the reporting or recordkeeping requirements.
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. When OMB
approves the ICRs, the Agency will announce that approval in the
Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to
display the OMB control number for the approved information collection
activities contained in the final rule.
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. The
economic impact associated with the requirements in this action for the
affected small entities is described in section V.D. of this preamble.
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 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 (ALDT
surface coating, MMPP surface coating, and PPP surface coating). 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 III.A and C, IV.A.1 and 2, IV.B.1 and 2, and IV.C.1 and 2 of
this preamble and are further documented in the Residual Risk
Assessment for the Surface Coating of ALDT Source Category in Support
of the 2020 Risk and Technology Review Final Rule, Residual Risk
Assessment for the Surface Coating of MMPP Source Category in Support
of the 2020 Risk and Technology Review Final Rule, and Residual Risk
Assessment for the Surface Coating of PPP Source Category in Support of
the 2020 Risk and Technology Review Final Rule, in the ALDT Docket,
MMPP Docket, and PPP Docket, respectively.
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 rulemaking involves technical standards. The EPA conducted
searches for the MACT standards through the Enhanced National Standards
Systems Network Database managed by the American National Standards
Institute. We also contacted VCS organizations and accessed and
searched their databases. During the EPA's VCS search, if the title or
abstract (if provided) of the
[[Page 41123]]
VCS described technical sampling and analytical procedures that are
similar to the EPA's reference method, the EPA reviewed it as a
potential equivalent method. The EPA is finalizing, as proposed,
addition of methods to the ALDT NESHAP, the MMPP NESHAP, and the PPP
NESHAP, as discussed in this section VI.J.
The EPA is amending the ALDT NESHAP, the MMPP NESHAP, and the PPP
NESHAP to provide owners and operators with the option of using two new
methods. We are adding 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. We are also
amending each of these NESHAP to incorporate by reference ASTM D2369-10
(Reapproved 2015)\e\, ``Standard Test Method for Volatile Content of
Coatings,'' into these three NESHAP as an alternative to EPA Method 24
for the determination of the volatile matter content in surface
coatings. ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\ is a test method that
allows for more accurate results for multi-component chemical resistant
coatings.
We are amending the MMPP NESHAP and the PPP NESHAP to incorporate
by reference ASTM D2111-10 (Reapproved 2015), ``Standard Test Methods
for Specific Gravity and Density of Halogenated Organic Solvents and
Their Admixtures,'' as an alternative to ASTM D1475-13. ASTM D2111-10
(Reapproved 2015) is a test method that allows measurement of specific
gravity at different temperatures that are chosen by the analyst.
We are amending all three NESHAP to update ASTM D1475-98
(Reapproved 2003), ``Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products,'' by incorporating by reference
ASTM D1475-13, ``Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid Coatings,
Inks, and Related Products.'' This test method covers the measurement
of the density of paints, inks, varnishes, lacquers, and components
thereof, other than pigments, when in fluid form.
We are amending the ALDT NESHAP and the MMPP NESHAP to update ASTM
D2697-86 (Reapproved 1998), ``Standard Test Method for Volume
Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings,'' by incorporating
by reference ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014), which is the updated
version of the previously approved method, and to update ASTM D6093-97
(Reapproved 2003), ``Standard Test Method for Percent Volume
Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using Helium Gas
Pycnometer,'' by incorporating by reference ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved
2016), which is the updated version of the previously approved method.
ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014) is a test method that can be used to
determine the volume of nonvolatile matter in clear and pigmented
coatings, and ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved 2016) is a test method that can
be used to determine the percent volume of nonvolatile matter in clear
and pigmented coatings.
We are amending the ALDT NESHAP to update ASTM D5066-91 (Reapproved
2001), ``Standard Test Method for Determination of the Transfer
Efficiency Under Production Conditions for Spray Application of
Automotive Paints-Weight Basis,'' by incorporating by reference ASTM
D5066-91 (Reapproved 2017), which is the updated version of the
previously approved method. This test method covers procedures for
determination of the transfer efficiency (using a weight method) under
production conditions for in-plant spray application of automotive
paints as outlined in Section 18 of EPA 450/3-88-018.
We are amending the ALDT NESHAP and the MMPP NESHAP to update ASTM
D5965-02, ``Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Coating
Powders,'' by incorporating by reference ASTM D5965-02 (Reapproved
2013), which is the updated version of the previously approved method.
These test methods cover three procedures for determining the specific
gravity (see definition) of coating powders, i.e., Test Method A--For
Testing Coating Powders, Excluding Metallics; Test Method B--For Tests
Requiring Greater Precision than Test Method A, Including Metallics,
Using Helium Pycnometry; and Test Method C--For Theoretical Calculation
Based on Raw Material.
We are amending the ALDT NESHAP to update ASTM D6266-00a,
``Standard Test Method for Determining the Amount of Volatile Organic
Compound (VOC) Released from Waterborne Automotive Coatings and
Available for Removal in a VOC Control Device (Abatement),'' by
incorporating by reference ASTM D6266-00a (Reapproved 2017), which is
the updated version of the previously approved method. This test method
describes the determination of the amount of VOC released from applied
waterborne automotive coatings that is available for delivery to a VOC
control device. The determination is accomplished by measuring the
weight loss of a freshly coated test panel subject to evaporation or
drying and by analysis of the VOC or water content in the coating.
The ASTM standards are available from ASTM International 100 Barr
Harbor Drive, Post Office Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.
See https://www.astm.org/.
The EPA is amending the ALDT NESHAP to incorporate by reference
EPA-450/3-88-018 ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic
Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' for use in 40 CFR 63.3130(c), 63.3161(d), and (g),
63.3165(e), and appendix A to subpart IIII of part 63. This protocol
determines the daily VOC emission rate (pounds of VOC per gallon of
coating solids deposited) for a complete ALDT topcoat operation and is
available in the ALDT Docket. The protocol is designed for uses in
cases where topcoat emission limit is stated in units of pounds of VOC
per gallon of solids deposited, compliance is demonstrated each day,
and entire topcoat operation is treated as a single entity. The
protocol uses the number of square feet coated on each vehicle in each
booth with each coating as the basis for the daily weighting of
individual transfer efficiency and bake oven exhaust control values.
The method is intended to apply to primary coatings for new ALDT
bodies, body parts for new ALDT, and other parts that are coated along
with these bodies or body parts. It can also be downloaded from the
EPA's website at the National Service Center for Environmental
Publications, just access the following website at https://nepis.epa.gov and search either the title or document number.
The EPA decided not to include certain other VCS; 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 NESHAP RTR: Surface Coating of Automobile and Light-Duty
Trucks, June 2019, Voluntary Consensus Standard Results for NESHAP RTR:
Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts, June 2019, and Voluntary
Consensus Standard Results for NESHAP RTR: Surface Coating of Plastic
Parts and Products, June 2019, in the ALDT Docket, MMPP Docket, and the
PPP Docket, respectively.
The revised regulatory text contains references to ANSI/ASME PTC
19.10-
[[Page 41124]]
1981 (Sec. 63.3166) and ASTM D5087-02 (Sec. 63.3165 and appendix A to
subpart IIII). Both of these standards were previously approved for
these sections. That approval continues without change.
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 this action does 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 titled Risk and
Technology Review--Analysis of Demographic Factors for Populations
Living Near Automobile and Light-Duty truck Surface Coating Category
Operations, March 2019, Risk and Technology Review--Analysis of
Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near the Surface Coating of
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Source Category, May 2019, and
Risk and Technology Review--Analysis of Demographic Factors for
Populations Living Near Surface Coating of Plastic Parts and Products
Source Category Operations, April 2019, available in the ALDT Docket,
MMPP Docket, and the PPP Docket, respectively.
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, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surface coating of
automobiles and light-duty trucks, Surface coating of miscellaneous
metal parts and products, Surface coating of plastic parts and
products.
Dated: March 11, 2020.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR
part 63 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. Removing paragraph (h)(12);
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (h)(13) through (115) as paragraphs (h)(12)
through (114);
0
c. Revising newly redesignated paragraphs (h)(12), (20), (25), (28),
(29), (65), (75), (77), (78), and (80);
0
d. Redesignating paragraphs (n)(1) through (24) as paragraphs (n)(2)
through (25); and
0
e. Adding new paragraph (n)(1).
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 63.14 Incorporations by reference
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(12) ASTM D1475-13, Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products, approved November 1, 2013, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 63.3151(b), 63.3941(b) and (c), 63.3951(c),
63.4141(b) and (c), 63.4551(c), 63.4741(b) and (c), 63.4751(c), and
63.4941(b) and (c).
* * * * *
(20) 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.
63.3951(c), 63.4141(b) and (c), 63.4551(c), and 63.4741(a).
* * * * *
(25) ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\, Standard Test Method for
Volatile Content of Coatings, approved June 1, 2015, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 63.3151(a), 63.3961(j), 63.4141(a) and (b), 63.4161(h),
63.4321(e), 63.4341(e), 63.4351(d), 63.4541(a), 63.4561(j), 63.4741(a),
63.4941(a) and (b), and 63.4961(j).
* * * * *
(28) ASTM D2697-86 (Reapproved 1998), Standard Test Method for
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings, IBR approved
for Sec. Sec. 63.3521(b), and 63.5160(c).
(29) 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. 63.3161(f), 63.3941(b),
63.4141(b), 63.4741(a) and (b), and 63.4941(b).
* * * * *
(65) ASTM D5066-91 (Reapproved 2017), Standard Test Method for
Determination of the Transfer Efficiency Under Production Conditions
for Spray Application of Automotive Paints-Weight Basis, approved June
1, 2017, IBR approved for Sec. 63.3161(g).
* * * * *
(75) ASTM D5965-02 (Reapproved 2013), Standard Test Methods for
Specific Gravity of Coating Powders, approved June 1, 2013, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 63.3151(b) and 63.3951(c).
* * * * *
(77) ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved 2003), Standard Test Method for
Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using
a Helium Gas Pycnometer, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 63.3521 and
63.5160(c).
(78) 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. 63.3161(f), 63.3941(b), 63.4141(b), 63.4741(a) and (b), and
63.4941(b).
* * * * *
(80) ASTM D6266-00a (Reapproved 2017), Standard Test Method for
Determining the Amount of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Released from
Waterborne Automotive Coatings and Available for Removal in a VOC
Control Device (Abatement), approved July 1, 2017, IBR approved for
Sec. 63.3165(e).
* * * * *
(n) * * *
(1) EPA-450/3-88-018, Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile
Organic Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck
Topcoat Operations, December 1988, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
63.3130(c), 63.3161(d) and (g), 63.3165(e), and appendix A to subpart
IIII.
* * * * *
Subpart IIII--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks
0
3. Section 63.3092 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:
[[Page 41125]]
Sec. 63.3092 How must I control emissions from my electrodeposition
primer system if I want to comply with the combined primer-surfacer,
topcoat, final repair, glass bonding primer, and glass bonding adhesive
emission limit?
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(2) 0.10 percent by weight of any organic HAP in table 5 of this
subpart.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 63.3093 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.3093 What operating limits must I meet?
(a) You are not required to meet any operating limits for any
coating operation(s) without add-on controls, nor are you required to
meet operating limits for any coating operation(s) that do not utilize
emission capture systems and add-on controls to comply with the
emission limits in Sec. 63.3090 or Sec. 63.3091.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, for any
controlled coating operation(s), you must meet the operating limits
specified in table 1 to this subpart. These operating limits apply to
the emission capture and add-on control systems on the coating
operation(s) for which you use this option, and you must establish the
operating limits during performance tests according to the requirements
in Sec. 63.3167. You must meet the operating limits at all times after
you establish them.
* * * * *
0
5. Section 63.3100 is amended by revising paragraphs (b), (d), and (f)
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3100 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?
* * * * *
(b) Before January 5, 2021, the coating operations must be in
compliance with the operating limits for emission capture systems and
add-on control devices required by Sec. 63.3093 at all times except
during periods of SSM. On and after January 5, 2021, the coating
operations must be in compliance with the operating limits for emission
capture systems and add-on control devices required by Sec. 63.3093 at
all times.
* * * * *
(d) Before January 5, 2021, 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 January 5, 2021,
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.
* * * * *
(f) Before January 5, 2021, if your affected source uses emission
capture systems and add-on control devices, 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 startup,
shutdown, and corrective actions in the event of a malfunction of the
emission capture system or the add-on control devices. On and after
January 5, 2021, the SSMP is not required.
0
6. Section 63.3120 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(4), (a)(5) introductory text, (a)(5)(iv);
0
b. Adding paragraph (a)(5)(v);
0
c. Revising paragraphs (a)(6) introductory text and (a)(6)(iii), (vi)
through (viii), (x), (xiii), and (xiv);
0
d. Adding paragraph (a)(6)(xv);
0
e. Revising paragraphs (a)(7) introductory text and (a)(7)(i) and
(iii);
0
f. Adding paragraph (a)(7)(iv);
0
g. Revising paragraphs (a)(8) introductory text, (a)(8)(ii), (v)
through (vii), (ix), and (xii), (a)(9) introductory text, (a)(9)(i) and
(ii), and (c) introductory text; and
0
h. Adding paragraphs (d) through (h).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 63.3120 What reports must I submit?
(a) * * *
(4) No deviations. If there were no deviations from the emission
limits, operating limits, or work practices in Sec. Sec. 63.3090,
63.3091, 63.3092, 63.3093, and 63.3094 that apply to you, the
semiannual compliance report must include a statement that there were
no deviations from the applicable emission limitations during the
reporting period. If you used control devices to comply with the
emission limits, and there were no periods during which the 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.
(5) Deviations: adhesive, sealer, and deadener. Before January 5,
2021, if there was a deviation from the applicable emission limits in
Sec. 63.3090(c) and (d) or Sec. 63.3091(c) and (d), the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(5)(i)
through (iv) of this section. On and after January 5, 2021, if there
was a deviation from the applicable emission limits in Sec. 63.3090(c)
and (d) or Sec. 63.3091(c) and (d), the semiannual compliance report
must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through (v) of
this section.
* * * * *
(iv) The reason for the deviation (including unknown cause, if
applicable).
(v) On and after January 5, 2021, 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 the applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.3090(c) and (d) or Sec. 63.3091(c) and (d),
and a description of the method used to estimate the emissions.
(6) Deviations: combined electrodeposition primer, primer-surfacer,
topcoat, final repair, glass bonding primer and glass bonding adhesive,
or combined primer-surfacer, topcoat, final repair, glass bonding
primer, and glass bonding adhesive plus all coatings and thinners,
except for deadener materials and for adhesive and sealer materials
that are not components of glass bonding systems, used in coating
operations added to the affected source pursuant to Sec. 63.3082(c).
Before January 5, 2021, if there was a deviation from the applicable
emission limits in Sec. 63.3090(a) or (b) or Sec. 63.3091(a) or (b)
or the applicable operating limit(s) in table 1 to this subpart, the
semiannual compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs
(a)(6)(i) through (xiv) of this section. On and after January 5, 2021,
if there was a deviation from the applicable emission limits in Sec.
63.3090(a) or (b) or Sec. 63.3091(a) or (b) or the applicable
operating limit(s) in table 1 to this subpart, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(6)(i)
through (xv) of this section.
* * * * *
[[Page 41126]]
(iii) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture system
or add-on control devices used to control emissions from these
operations started and stopped.
* * * * *
(vi) Before January 5, 2021, the date and time that each CPMS was
inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks. On and
after January 5, 2021, 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) Before January 5, 2021, the date and time period that each
CPMS was out of control, including the information in Sec. 63.8(c)(8).
On and after January 5, 2021, 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) Before January 5, 2021, The date and time period of each
deviation from an operating limit in table 1 to this subpart; date and
time period of each bypass of an add-on control device; and whether
each deviation occurred during a period of SSM or during another
period. On and after January 5, 2021, 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 each bypass of an add-on control
device.
* * * * *
(x) Before January 5, 2021, a breakdown of the total duration of
the deviations from each operating limit in table 1 to this subpart and
bypasses of each 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. On and after January 5, 2021, a breakdown of the total duration
of the deviations from each operating limit in table 1 to this subpart
and bypasses of each 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.
* * * * *
(xiii) Before January 5, 2021, 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. On and after January 5, 2021, for deviations from the work
practice standards, the number of deviations, and, for each deviation,
the information in paragraphs (a)(6)(xiii)(A) and (B) of this section.
(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. 63.3100(d).
(B) A list of the affected sources or equipment for which a
deviation occurred, the cause of the deviation (including unknown
cause, if applicable), and any corrective actions taken to return the
affected unit to its normal or usual manner of operation.
(xiv) Before January 5, 2021, a statement of the cause of each
deviation. On and after January 5, 2021, for deviations from an
emission limitation in Sec. 63.3090(a) or (b) or Sec. 63.3091(a) or
(b) or operating limit in table 1 of this subpart, a statement of the
cause of each deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
(xv) On and after January 5, 2021, for each deviation from an
emission limitation in Sec. 63.3090(a) or (b), or Sec. 63.3091(a) or
(b), 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. 63.3090(a) or (b) or Sec. 63.3091(a) or (b),
and a description of the method used to estimate the emissions.
(7) Deviations: Separate electrodeposition primer organic HAP
content limit. Before January 5, 2021, if you used the separate
electrodeposition primer organic HAP content limits in Sec.
63.3092(a), and there was a deviation from these limits, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(7)(i)
through (iii) of this section. On and after January 5, 2021, if you
used the separate electrodeposition primer organic HAP content limits
in Sec. 63.3092(a), and there was a deviation from these limits, the
semiannual compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs
(a)(7)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Identification of each material used that deviated from the
emission limit, and the date, time, and duration each was used.
* * * * *
(iii) A statement of the cause of each deviation (including unknown
case, if applicable).
(iv) On and after January 5, 2021, 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.
63.3092(a), and a description of the method used to estimate the
emissions.
(8) Deviations: Separate electrodeposition primer bake oven capture
and control limitations. Before January 5, 2021, if you used the
separate electrodeposition primer bake oven capture and control
limitations in Sec. 63.3092(b), and there was a deviation from the
limitations in Sec. 63.3092(b) or the applicable operating limit in
table 1 to this subpart, the semiannual compliance report must contain
the information in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) through (xii) of this section.
On and after January 5, 2021, if you used the separate
electrodeposition primer bake oven capture and control limitations in
Sec. 63.3092(b), and there was a deviation from the limitations in
Sec. 63.3092(b) or the applicable operating limit in table 1 to this
subpart, the semiannual compliance report must contain the information
in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) through (xiv) of this section.
* * * * *
(ii) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture systems
or control devices used to control emissions from the electrodeposition
primer bake oven started and stopped.
* * * * *
(v) Before January 5, 2021, the date and time that each CPMS was
inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks. On and
after January 5, 2021, 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.
(vi) Before January 5, 2021, the date, time, and duration that each
CPMS was out of control, including the information in Sec. 63.8(c)(8).
On and after January 5, 2021, 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.
(vii) Before January 5, 2021, the date and time period of each
deviation from an operating limit in table 1 to this subpart; date and
time period of each bypass of an add-on control device; and whether
each deviation occurred during a period of SSM or during another
period. On and after January 5, 2021, the date, time, and duration of
each deviation from an operating limit in table 1 to this subpart; and
the date,
[[Page 41127]]
time, and duration of each bypass of an add-on control device.
* * * * *
(ix) Before January 5, 2021, a breakdown of the total duration of
the deviations from each operating limit in table 1 to this subpart and
bypasses of each 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. On and after January 5, 2021, a breakdown of the total duration
of the deviations from each operating limit in table 1 to this subpart
and bypasses of each 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.
* * * * *
(xii) A statement of the cause of each deviation (including unknown
cause, if applicable).
(9) Deviations: Work practice plans. Before January 5, 2021, if
there was a deviation from an applicable work practice plan developed
in accordance with Sec. 63.3094(b) or (c), the semiannual compliance
report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(9)(i) through
(iii) of this section. On and after January 5, 2021, if there were
deviations from an applicable work practice plan developed in
accordance with Sec. 63.3094(b) or (c), the semiannual compliance
report must contain the number of deviations, and, for each deviation,
the information in paragraphs (a)(9)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Before January 5, 2021, the time period during which each
deviation occurred. On and after January 5, 2021, the date, time, and
duration of the deviation.
(ii) Before January 5, 2021, the nature of each deviation. On and
after January 5, 2021, the nature of the deviation, including a list of
the affected sources or equipment for which the deviation occurred, and
the cause of the deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
* * * * *
(c) SSM reports. Before January 5, 2021, if you used add-on control
devices and you had a SSM during the semiannual reporting period, you
must submit the reports specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this
section. On and after January 5, 2021, the reports specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section are not required.
* * * * *
(d) Performance test reports. On and after January 5, 2021, 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). (CEDRI 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 (c)(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 (c)(1) of this section.
(e) Initial notification reports. On and after January 5, 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. Sec. 63.9(h) and 63.3110(c) to the EPA via the 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 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) Semiannual compliance reports. On and after January 5, 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 the 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 Web 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).
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
[[Page 41128]]
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) Reporting during EPA system outages. If you are required to
electronically submit a report through the 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 the 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 the EPA system outage
and allow an extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the
discretion of the Administrator.
(h) Reporting during force majeure events. 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 63.3130 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(4) and (5),
(g), and (h) and adding paragraph (p) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3130 What records must I keep?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) A record of the calculation of the organic HAP emission rate
for electrodeposition primer, primer-surfacer, topcoat, final repair,
glass bonding primer, and glass bonding adhesive plus all coatings and
thinners, except for deadener materials and for adhesive and sealer
materials that are not components of glass bonding systems, used in
coating operations added to the affected source pursuant to Sec.
63.3082(c) for each month if subject to the emission limit of Sec.
63.3090(a) or Sec. 63.3091(a). This record must include all raw data,
algorithms, and intermediate calculations. If the guidelines presented
in ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound
Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat Operations,''
EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), are
used, you must keep records of all data input to this protocol. If
these data are maintained as electronic files, the electronic files, as
well as any paper copies must be maintained. These data must be
provided to the permitting authority on request on paper, and in (if
calculations are done electronically) electronic form.
(5) A record of the calculation of the organic HAP emission rate
for primer-surfacer, topcoat, final repair, glass bonding primer, and
glass bonding adhesive plus all coatings and thinners, except for
deadener materials and for adhesive and sealer materials that are not
components of glass bonding systems, used in coating operations added
to the affected source pursuant to Sec. 63.3082(c) for each month if
subject to the emission limit of Sec. 63.3090(b) or Sec. 63.3091(b),
and a record of the weight fraction of each organic HAP in each
material added to the electrodeposition primer system if subject to the
limitations of Sec. 63.3092(a). This record must include all raw data,
algorithms, and intermediate calculations. If the guidelines presented
in ``Protocol for Determining Daily Volatile Organic Compound Emission
Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat Operations,'' EPA-450/
3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14) are used, you
must keep records of all data input to this protocol. If these data are
maintained as electronic files, the electronic files, as well as any
paper copies must be maintained. These data must be provided to the
permitting authority on request on paper, and in (if calculations are
done electronically) electronic form.
* * * * *
(g) Before January 5, 2021, a record of the date, time, and
duration of each deviation, and for each deviation, a record of whether
the deviation occurred during a period of SSM. On and after January 5,
2021, for each deviation from an emission limitation, operating limit,
or work practice plan reported under Sec. 63.3120(a)(5) through (9), a
record of the information specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (4) of
this section, as applicable.
(1) The date, time, and duration of the deviation, and for each
deviation, the information as reported under Sec. 63.3120(a)(5)
through (9).
(2) A list of the affected sources or equipment for which the
deviation occurred and the cause of the deviation, as reported under
Sec. 63.3120(a)(5) through (9).
(3) An estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted
over any applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3090(a) through (d) or
Sec. 63.3091(a) through (d) 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. 63.3120(a)(5) through (9).
[[Page 41129]]
(4) A record of actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance
with Sec. 63.3100(d) and any corrective actions taken to return the
affected unit to its normal or usual manner of operation.
(h) Before January 5, 2021, the records required by Sec.
63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to SSM. On and after January 5,
2021, the provisions of this paragraph no longer apply.
* * * * *
(p) On and after January 5, 2021, any records required to be
maintained by this subpart that are 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
8. Section 63.3131 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.3131 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. On and after January 5, 2021, any records required to
be maintained by this subpart that are 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 63.3151 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(2)
and (4), and (b) to read as follows.
Sec. 63.3151 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
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
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 (e.g., 0.3791).
* * * * *
(2) EPA Method 24 (appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60). For coatings,
you may use EPA 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 EPA Method 24, you may use ASTM
D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\ (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 more and at 1.0 percent by mass or more for other compounds. For
example, if toluene (not listed in table 5 of 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, unless after
consultation, the facility demonstrates to the satisfaction of the
enforcement authority that the facility's data are correct.
* * * * *
(b) Determine the density of each material used. Determine the
density of each material used during the compliance period from test
results using ASTM D1475-13 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14) or for powder coatings, test method A or test method B of ASTM
D5965-02 (Reapproved 2013) (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
or ASTM D5965-02 (Reapproved 2013), test method A or test method B test
results and the supplier's or manufacturer's information, the test
results will take precedence unless after consultation, the facility
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the enforcement authority that the
facility's data are correct.
* * * * *
0
10. Section 63.3160 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3160 By what date must I conduct initial performance tests
and other initial compliance demonstrations?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance
date specified in Sec. 63.3083. You must conduct an initial
performance test of each capture system and add-on control device
according to the procedures in Sec. Sec. 63.3164 through 63.3166 and
establish the operating limits required by Sec. 63.3093 no later than
the compliance date specified in Sec. 63.3083.
* * * * *
0
11. Section 63.3161 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (d), (f)(1),
(g), and (k)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3161 How do I demonstrate initial compliance?
(a) You must meet all of the requirements of this section to
demonstrate initial compliance. To demonstrate initial compliance, the
organic HAP emissions from the combined electrodeposition primer,
primer-surfacer, topcoat, final repair, glass bonding primer, and glass
bonding adhesive operations plus all coatings and thinners, except for
deadener materials and for adhesive and sealer materials that are not
components of glass bonding systems, used in coating operations added
to the affected source pursuant to Sec. 63.3082(c) must meet the
applicable emission limitation in Sec. 63.3090(a) or Sec. 63.3091(a)
and the applicable operating limits and work practice standards in
Sec. Sec. 63.3093 and 63.3094.
* * * * *
(d) Compliance with emission limits. You must follow the procedures
in paragraphs (e) through (o) of this section to demonstrate compliance
with the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3090(a) or Sec.
63.3091(a). You may also use the guidelines presented in ``Protocol for
Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound Emission Rate of
Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat Operations'' EPA-450/3-88-018
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), in making this
demonstration.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) ASTM Method D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014) or ASTM Method D6093-97
(Reapproved 2016). You may use ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), or ASTM D6093-97
(Reapproved 2016) (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.
* * * * *
(g) Determine the transfer efficiency for each coating. You must
determine the transfer efficiency for each primer-
[[Page 41130]]
surfacer and topcoat coating, and for all coatings, except for deadener
and for adhesive and sealer that are not components of glass bonding
systems, used in coating operations added to the affected source
pursuant to Sec. 63.3082(c) using ASTM D5066-91 (Reapproved 2017)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14) or the guidelines
presented in ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic
Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14). You may conduct transfer efficiency testing on representative
coatings and for representative spray booths as described in ``Protocol
for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound Emission Rate of
Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018.
You may assume 100-percent transfer efficiency for electrodeposition
primer coatings, glass bonding primers, and glass bonding adhesives.
For final repair coatings, you may assume 40-percent transfer
efficiency for air atomized spray and 55-percent transfer efficiency
for electrostatic spray and high volume, low pressure spray. For
blackout, chip resistant edge primer, interior color, in-line repair,
lower body anti-chip coatings, or underbody anti-chip coatings, you may
assume 40-percent transfer efficiency for air atomized spray, 55-
percent transfer efficiency for electrostatic spray and high volume-low
pressure spray, and 80-percent transfer efficiency for airless spray.
* * * * *
(k) * * *
(3) Determine the mass fraction of volatile organic matter for each
coating and thinner used in the coating operation controlled by the
solvent recovery system during the month, kg volatile organic matter
per kg coating. You may determine the volatile organic matter mass
fraction using EPA Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7, or an EPA
approved alternative method, or 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 EPA Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A-7, or an approved alternative method, the test method results will
govern unless after consultation, the facility demonstrates to the
satisfaction of the enforcement authority that the facility's data are
correct.
* * * * *
0
12. Section 63.3163 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. 63.3163 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. 63.3093 that applies to you, as specified in
table 1 to this subpart, and you must conduct 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. 63.3161(k) for
controlled coating operations, you must conduct periodic performance
tests of add-on controls and establish the operating limits required by
Sec. 63.3093 within 5 years following the previous performance test.
You must conduct the first periodic performance test before July 8,
2023, 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 July 8, 2022. 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. For any control device for which you are
using the catalytic oxidizer control option at Sec. 63.3167(b) and
following the catalyst maintenance procedures in Sec. 63.3167(b)(6),
you are not required to conduct periodic control device performance
testing as specified by this paragraph. For any control device for
which instruments are used to continuously measure organic compound
emissions, you are not required to conduct periodic control device
performance testing as specified by this paragraph. The requirements of
this paragraph do not apply to measuring emission capture system
efficiency.
* * * * *
(f) If there were no deviations from the emission limitations,
submit a statement as part of the semiannual compliance report that you
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 Sec.
63.3090(a) or Sec. 63.3091(a), Sec. 63.3090(b) or Sec. 63.3091(b),
or Sec. 63.3092(a) or Sec. 63.3092(b), you achieved the operating
limits required by Sec. 63.3093, and you achieved the work practice
standards required by Sec. 63.3094 during each compliance period.
* * * * *
(h) Before January 5, 2021, consistent with Sec. Sec. 63.6(e) and
63.7(e)(1), deviations that occur during a period of SSM 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)(1). The
Administrator will determine whether deviations that occur during a
period you identify as a SSM are violations according to the provisions
in Sec. 63.6(e). On and after January 5, 2021, the provisions of this
paragraph no longer apply.
* * * * *
0
13. Section 63.3164 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text and (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3164 What are the general requirements for performance tests?
(a) You must conduct each applicable performance test required by
Sec. Sec. 63.3160, 63.3163, and 63.3171 according to the requirements
in Sec. 63.7(e)(1) and under the conditions 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. Before January 5, 2021, operations during
periods of SSM, and during periods of nonoperation do not constitute
representative conditions. You must record the process information that
is necessary to document operating conditions during the test and
explain why the conditions represent normal operation. On and after
January 5, 2021, 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
[[Page 41131]]
necessary to determine the conditions of performance tests.
* * * * *
0
14. Section 63.3165 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraphs (e) introductory text, the definition of
``Wvocc,i'' in Equation 6 of paragraph (e)(2), the
definition of ``Wvocc,i'' in Equation 7 of paragraph (e)(3),
and the definition of ``Ws,i'' in Equation 8 of paragraph
(e)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3165 How do I determine the emission capture system
efficiency?
You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to
determine capture efficiency as part of the performance test required
by Sec. Sec. 63.3160 and 63.3163. For purposes of this subpart, a
spray booth air seal is not considered a natural draft opening in a PTE
or a temporary total enclosure provided you demonstrate that the
direction of air movement across the interface between the spray booth
air seal and the spray booth is into the spray booth. For purposes of
this subpart, a bake oven air seal is not considered a natural draft
opening in a PTE or a temporary total enclosure provided you
demonstrate that the direction of air movement across the interface
between the bake oven air seal and the bake oven is into the bake oven.
You may use lightweight strips of fabric or paper, or smoke tubes to
make such demonstrations as part of showing that your capture system is
a PTE or conducting a capture efficiency test using a temporary total
enclosure. You cannot count air flowing from a spray booth air seal
into a spray booth as air flowing through a natural draft opening into
a PTE or into a temporary total enclosure unless you elect to treat
that spray booth air seal as a natural draft opening. You cannot count
air flowing from a bake oven air seal into a bake oven as air flowing
through a natural draft opening into a PTE or into a temporary total
enclosure unless you elect to treat that bake oven air seal as a
natural draft opening.
* * * * *
(e) Panel testing to determine the capture efficiency of flash-off
or bake oven emissions. You may conduct panel testing to determine the
capture efficiency of flash-off or bake oven emissions using ASTM
D5087-02 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), ASTM D6266-00a
(Reapproved 2017) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), or the
guidelines presented in ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile
Organic Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck
Topcoat Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 63.14). You may conduct panel testing on representative coatings
as described in ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic
Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018. The results of these panel testing
procedures are in units of mass of VOC per volume of coating solids
deposited and must be converted to a percent value for use in this
subpart. If you panel test representative coatings, then you may
convert the panel test result for each representative coating either to
a unique percent capture efficiency for each coating grouped with that
representative coating by using coating specific values for the volume
of coating solids deposited per volume of coating used, mass of VOC per
volume of coating, volume fraction solids, transfer efficiency, density
and mass fraction VOC in Equations 4 through 6 of this section; or to a
composite percent capture efficiency for the group of coatings by using
composite values for the group of coatings for the volume of coating
solids deposited per volume of coating used and for the mass of VOC per
volume of coating, and average values for the group of coatings for
volume fraction solids, transfer efficiency, density and mass fraction
VOC in Equations 4 through 6 of this section. If you panel test each
coating, then you must convert the panel test result for each coating
to a unique percent capture efficiency for that coating by using
coating specific values for the volume of coating solids deposited per
volume of coating used, mass of VOC per volume of coating, volume
fraction solids, transfer efficiency, density, and mass fraction VOC in
Equations 4 through 6 of this section. Panel test results expressed in
units of mass of VOC per volume of coating solids deposited must be
converted to percent capture efficiency using Equation 4 of this
section. An alternative for using panel test results expressed in units
of mass of VOC per mass of coating solids deposited is presented in
paragraph (e)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
Wvocc,i = Mass fraction of VOC in coating, i, or average
mass fraction of VOC for the group of coatings, including coating,
i, kg VOC per kg coating, determined by EPA Method 24 (appendix A-7
to 40 CFR part 60) or the guidelines for combining analytical VOC
content and formulation solvent content presented in Section 9 of
``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound
Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14).
(3) * * *
Wvocc,i = Mass fraction of VOC in coating, i, or average
mass fraction of VOC for the group of coatings, including coating,
i, kg VOC per kg coating, determined by EPA Method 24 (appendix A-7
to 40 CFR part 60) or the guidelines for combining analytical VOC
content and formulation solvent content presented in Section 9 of
``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound
Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14).
(4) * * *
Ws, i = Mass fraction of coating solids for coating, i,
or average mass fraction of coating solids for the group of coatings
including coating, i, kg coating solids per kg coating, determined
by EPA Method 24 (appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60) or the guidelines
for combining analytical VOC content and formulation solvent content
presented in ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic
Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14).
* * * * *
0
15. Section 63.3166 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) and (b) introductory text, and adding
paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3166 How do I determine the add-on control device emission
destruction or removal efficiency?
You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to
determine the add-on control device emission destruction or removal
efficiency as part of the performance test required by Sec. 63.3160,
Sec. 63.3163, or Sec. 63.3171. You must conduct three test runs as
specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3), and each test run must last at least 1
hour.
(a) * * *
(1) Use EPA Method 1 or 1A of appendix A-1 to 40 CFR part 60, as
appropriate, to select sampling sites and velocity traverse points.
(2) Use EPA Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, or 2F of appendix A-1, or 2G of
appendix A-2 to 40 CFR part 60, as appropriate, to measure gas
volumetric flow rate.
(3) Use EPA Method 3, 3A, or 3B of appendix A-2 to 40 CFR part 60,
as appropriate, for gas analysis to determine dry molecular weight. The
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14),
may be used as an alternative to EPA Method 3B.
[[Page 41132]]
(4) Use EPA Method 4 of appendix A-3 to 40 CFR 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 EPA Method 25 or 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60, as
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section. You must
use the same method for both the inlet and outlet measurements.
* * * * *
(4) You may use EPA Method 18 of appendix A-6 to 40 CFR part 60 to
subtract methane emissions from measured total gaseous organic mass
emissions as carbon.
* * * * *
0
16. Section 63.3167 is amended by revising the section heading, the
introductory text, and paragraph (f)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3167 How do I establish the add-on control device operating
limits during performance tests?
During the performance tests required by Sec. Sec. 63.3160,
63.3163, and 63.3171 (and described in Sec. Sec. 63.3164 and 63.3166),
you must establish the operating limits required by Sec. 63.3093
according to this section, unless you have received approval for
alternative monitoring and operating limits under Sec. 63.8(f) as
specified in Sec. 63.3093.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) During the capture efficiency determination required by
Sec. Sec. 63.3160 and 63.3163 and described in Sec. Sec. 63.3164 and
63.3165, 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
17. Section 63.3168 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4) through
(7) and (c)(3) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3168 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. 63.3100(d) and have readily available necessary parts for routine
repairs of the monitoring equipment.
(5) Before January 5, 2021, 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 January 5,
2021, 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 in accordance with Sec. 63.3100(d).
(6) Before January 5, 2021, you must not use emission capture
system or add-on control device parameter data recorded during
monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, out-of-control periods, or
required quality assurance or control activities when calculating data
averages. You must use all the data collected during all other periods
in calculating the data averages for determining compliance with the
emission capture system and add-on control device operating limits. On
and after January 5, 2021, startups and shutdowns are normal operation
for this source category. Emissions from these activities are to be
included when determining if the standards specified in Sec. Sec.
63.3090, 63.3091, 63.3092, 63.4292, and 63.4293 are being attained. You
must not use emission capture system or add-on control device parameter
data recorded during monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, out-
of-control periods, or required quality assurance or control activities
when calculating data averages. You must use all the data collected
during all other periods in calculating the data averages for
determining compliance with the emission capture system and add-on
control device operating limits.
(7) A monitoring malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not
reasonably preventable failure of the CPMS to provide valid data.
Monitoring failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or
careless operation are not malfunctions. Before January 5, 2021, any
period for which the monitoring system is out of control and data are
not available for required calculations is a deviation from the
monitoring requirements. On and after January 5, 2021, except for
periods of required quality assurance or control activities, any period
during which the CPMS fails to operate and record data continuously as
required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section, or generates data that
cannot be included in calculating averages as specified in this
paragraph (a)(7) constitutes a deviation from the monitoring
requirements.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) For all thermal oxidizers and catalytic oxidizers, you must
meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) and (c)(3)(i)
through (vii) 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
18. Section 63.3171 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (e)(3) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.3171 How do I demonstrate initial compliance?
(a) You must meet all of the requirements of this section to
demonstrate initial compliance. To demonstrate initial compliance, the
organic HAP emissions from the combined primer-surfacer, topcoat, final
repair, glass bonding primer, and glass bonding adhesive operations
plus all coatings and thinners, except for deadener materials and for
adhesive and sealer materials that are not components of glass bonding
systems, used in coating operations added to the affected source
pursuant to Sec. 63.3082(c) must meet the applicable emission
limitation in Sec. 63.3090(b) or Sec. 63.3091(b); the organic HAP
emissions from the electrodeposition primer operation must meet the
applicable emissions limitations in Sec. 63.3092(a) or (b); and you
must meet the applicable operating limits and work practice standards
in Sec. Sec. 63.3093 and 63.3094.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(3) 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) and (2) 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, and at
1.0 percent by mass or more for other compounds. If there is a
disagreement between such information and results of a test conducted
according to paragraph (e)(1) or (2) of this section, then the test
method results will take precedence unless after consultation, the
facility demonstrates to the satisfaction of the enforcement authority
that the facility's data are correct.
* * * * *
0
19. Section 63.3176 is amended by revising the definition of
``Deviation'' to read as follows:
[[Page 41133]]
Sec. 63.3176 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
Deviation means:
(1) Before January 5, 2021, 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, 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 SSM, regardless of whether or
not such failure is permitted by this subpart; and
(2) On and after January 5, 2021, 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, 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
20. Table 2 to subpart IIII of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart IIII of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart IIII of Part 63
You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements according to the following table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject IIII Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(a)(1)-(12)............... General Applicability.. Yes....................
Sec. 63.1(b)(1)-(3)................ Initial Applicability Yes.................... Applicability to
Determination. subpart IIII is also
specified in Sec.
63.3081.
Sec. 63.1(c)(1).................... Applicability After Yes....................
Standard Established.
Sec. 63.1(c)(2).................... Applicability of Permit No..................... Area sources are not
Program for Area subject to subpart
Sources. IIII.
Sec. 63.1(c)(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.
63.3176.
Sec. 63.3.......................... Units and Abbreviations Yes....................
Sec. 63.4(a)(1)-(2)................ Prohibited Activities.. Yes....................
Sec. 63.4(b)-(c)................... Circumvention/ Yes....................
Fragmentation.
Sec. 63.5(a)....................... Preconstruction Review Yes....................
Applicability.
Sec. 63.5(b)(1), (3), (4), (6)..... Requirements for Yes....................
Existing, Newly
Constructed, and
Reconstructed Sources.
Sec. 63.5(d)(1)(i)-(ii)(F), Application for Yes....................
(d)(1)(ii)(H), (d)(1)(ii)(J), Approval of
(d)(1)(iii), (d)(2)-(4). Construction/
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(e)....................... Approval of Yes....................
Construction/
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(f)....................... Approval of Yes....................
Construction/
Reconstruction Based
on Prior State Review.
Sec. 63.6(a)....................... Compliance With Yes....................
Standards and
Maintenance
Requirements--Applicab
ility.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(5), (b)(7)........ Compliance Dates for Yes.................... Section 63.3083
New and Reconstructed specifies the
Sources. compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1), (2), (5).......... Compliance Dates for Yes.................... Section 63.3083
Existing Sources. specifies the
compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i)-(ii)............ Operation and Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.3100(d)
Maintenance. 2021. No on and after for general duty
January 5, 2021. requirement.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(iii)............... Operation and Yes....................
Maintenance.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(iii)- SSMP................... Yes before January 5, .......................
(ix). 2021. No on and after
January 5, 2021.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1).................... Compliance Except Yes before January 5, .......................
During SSM. 2021. No on and after
January 5, 2021.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)-(3)................ Methods for Determining Yes....................
Compliance.
Sec. 63.6(g)....................... Use of an Alternative Yes....................
Standard.
Sec. 63.6(h)....................... Compliance With Opacity/ No..................... Subpart IIII does not
Visible Emission establish opacity
Standards. standards and does not
require continuous
opacity monitoring
systems (COMS).
Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(14), (16)......... Extension of Compliance Yes....................
63.6(j).............................. Presidential Compliance Yes....................
Exemption.
[[Page 41134]]
Sec. 63.7(a)(1).................... Performance Test Yes.................... Applies to all affected
Requirements--Applicab sources. Additional
ility. requirements for
performance testing
are specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.3164 and
63.3166.
Sec. 63.7(a)(2) except (a)(2)(i)- Performance Test Yes.................... Applies only to
(viii). Requirements--Dates. performance tests for
capture system and
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Section 63.3160
specifies the schedule
for performance test
requirements that are
earlier than those
specified in Sec.
63.7(a)(2).
Sec. 63.7(a)(3)-(4)................ Performance Tests Yes....................
Required By the
Administrator, Force
Majeure.
Sec. 63.7(b)-(d)................... Performance Test Yes.................... Applies only to
Requirements--Notifica performance tests for
tion, Quality capture system and add-
Assurance, Facilities on control device
Necessary for Safe efficiency at sources
Testing Conditions using these to comply
During Test. with the standards.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1).................... Conduct of performance Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.3164.
tests. 2021. No on and after
January 5, 2021.
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 used to determine
Method. capture system
efficiency.
Sec. 63.7(g)-(h)................... Performance Test Yes.................... Applies only to
Requirements--Data performance tests for
Analysis, capture system and add-
Recordkeeping, on control device
Reporting, Waiver of efficiency at sources
Test. using these to comply
with the standards.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)-(2)................ Monitoring Yes.................... Applies only to
Requirements--Applicab monitoring of capture
ility. system and add-on
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Additional
requirements for
monitoring are
specified in Sec.
63.3168.
Sec. 63.8(a)(4).................... Additional Monitoring No..................... Subpart IIII 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 January 5, Section 63.3168
Systems (CMS) 2021. No on and after specifies the
Operation and January 5, 2021. requirements for the
Maintenance. operation of CMS for
capture systems and
add-on control devices
at sources using these
to comply.
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.
63.3168.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4).................... CMS.................... No..................... Section 63.3168
specifies the
requirements for the
operation of CMS for
capture systems and
add-on control devices
at sources using these
to comply with the
standards.
Sec. 63.8(c)(5).................... COMS................... No..................... Subpart IIII does not
have opacity or
visible emission
standards.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6).................... CMS Requirements....... No..................... Section 63.3168
specifies the
requirements for
monitoring systems for
capture systems and
add-on control devices
at sources using these
to comply with the
standards.
[[Page 41135]]
Sec. 63.8(c)(7).................... CMS Out-of-Control Yes....................
Periods.
Sec. 63.8(c)(8).................... CMS Out-of-Control No..................... Section 63.3120
Periods Reporting. requires reporting of
CMS out-of-control
periods.
Sec. 63.8(d)-(e)................... Quality Control Program No..................... Subpart IIII does not
and CMS Performance require the use of
Evaluation. continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5)................ Use of an Alternative Yes....................
Monitoring Method.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6).................... Alternative to Relative No..................... Subpart IIII does not
Accuracy Test. require the use of
CEMS.
Sec. 63.8(g)....................... Data Reduction......... No..................... Sections 63.3167 and
63.3168 specify
monitoring data
reduction.
Sec. 63.9(a)....................... Notification Yes....................
Requirements.
Sec. 63.9(b)(1)-(2)................ Initial Notifications.. Yes....................
Sec. 63.9(b)(4)(i), (b)(4)(v), Application for Yes....................
(b)(5). Approval of
Construction or
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.9(c)....................... Request for Extension Yes....................
of Compliance.
Sec. 63.9(d)....................... Special Compliance Yes....................
Requirement
Notification.
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 IIII does not
Emissions/Opacity Test. have opacity or
visible emission
standards.
Sec. 63.9(g)....................... Additional No..................... Subpart IIII does not
Notifications When require the use of
Using CMS. CEMS.
Sec. 63.9(h)(1)-(3), (5)-(6)....... Notification of Yes.................... Section 63.3110
Compliance Status. specifies 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/ Yes....................
Reporting--Applicabili
ty and General
Information.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)................... General Recordkeeping Yes.................... Additional requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.3130 and
63.3131.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i)-(ii)........... Recordkeeping of Yes before January 5, See 63.3130(g).
Occurrence and 2021. No on and after
Duration of Startups January 5, 2021.
and Shutdowns and of
Failures to Meet
Standards.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iii).............. Recordkeeping Relevant Yes....................
to Maintenance of Air
Pollution Control and
Monitoring Equipment.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(v)........... Actions Taken to Yes before January 5, See Sec.
Minimize Emissions 2021. No on and after 63.3130(g)(4) for a
During SSM. January 5, 2021. record of actions
taken to minimize
emissions during a
deviation from the
standard.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vi)............... Recordkeeping for CMS Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.3130(g)
Malfunctions. 2021. No on and after for records of periods
January 5, 2021. of deviation from the
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 IIII does not
require the use of
CEMS.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv).............. ....................... Yes....................
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)................... Recordkeeping Yes....................
Requirements for
Applicability
Determinations.
Sec. 63.10(c)(1)-(6)............... Additional Yes....................
Recordkeeping
Requirements for
Sources with CMS.
[[Page 41136]]
Sec. 63.10(c)(7)-(8)............... Additional No..................... See Sec. 63.3130(g)
Recordkeeping for records of periods
Requirements for of deviation from the
Sources with CMS. standard, including
instances where a CMS
is inoperative or out-
of-control.
Sec. 63.10(c)(10)-(14)............. ....................... Yes....................
Sec. 63.10(c)(15).................. Records Regarding the Yes before January 5, .......................
SSM Plan. 2021. No on and after
January 5, 2021.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)................... General Reporting Yes.................... Additional requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
63.3120.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)................... Report of Performance Yes.................... Additional requirements
Test Results. are specified in Sec.
63.3120(b).
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)................... Reporting Opacity or No..................... Subpart IIII 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)................... SSM Reports............ Yes before January 5, See 63.3120(a)(6).
2021. No on and after
January 5, 2021.
Sec. 63.10(e)(1)-(2)............... Additional CMS Reports. No..................... Subpart IIII does not
require the use of
CEMS.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)................... Excess Emissions/CMS No..................... Section 63.3120(b)
Performance Reports. specifies the contents
of periodic compliance
reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)(4)................... COMS Data Reports...... No..................... Subpart IIII does not
specify requirements
for opacity or COMS.
Sec. 63.10(f)...................... Recordkeeping/Reporting Yes....................
Waiver.
Sec. 63.11......................... Control Device No..................... Subpart IIII 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......................... IBR.................... Yes....................
Sec. 63.15......................... Availability of Yes....................
Information/
Confidentiality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
21. Table 5 to subpart IIII of part 63 is added to read as follows:
Table 5 to Subpart IIII of Part 63--List of HAP 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
[[Page 41137]]
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
Trichloroethylene....................................... 79-01-6
Trifluralin............................................. 1582-09-8
Vinyl bromide........................................... 593-60-2
Vinyl chloride.......................................... 75-01-4
Vinylidene chloride..................................... 75-35-4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
22. Appendix A to Subpart IIII of part 63 is amended by revising
sections 2.1, 2.2, and 4.1 and the definitions of ``Ws, i''
and ``Wvocc, i'' in Equation A-6 in section 4.2 to read as
follows:
Appendix A to Subpart IIII of Part 63--Determination of Capture
Efficiency of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Spray Booth Emissions
From Solvent-Borne Coatings Using Panel Testing
* * * * *
2.1 You may conduct panel testing to determine the capture
efficiency of spray booth emissions. You must follow the
instructions and calculations in this appendix A, and use the panel
testing procedures in ASTM Method D5087-02 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 63.14), or the guidelines presented in
``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound
Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14). You must weigh panels at the points described in section 2.5
of this appendix A and perform calculations as described in sections
3 and 4 of this appendix A. You may
[[Page 41138]]
conduct panel tests on the production paint line in your facility or
in a laboratory simulation of the production paint line in your
facility.
2.2 You may conduct panel testing on representative coatings as
described in ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic
Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14). If you panel test representative coatings, then you may
calculate either a unique percent capture efficiency value for each
coating grouped with that representative coating, or a composite
percent capture efficiency value for the group of coatings. If you
panel test each coating, then you must convert the panel test result
for each coating to a unique percent capture efficiency value for
that coating.
* * * * *
4.1 If you panel test representative coatings, then you may
convert the panel test result for each representative coating from
section 3.3 of this appendix A either to a unique percent capture
efficiency value for each coating grouped with that representative
coating by using coating specific values for the mass fraction
coating solids and mass fraction VOC in section 4.2 of this appendix
A, or to a composite percent capture efficiency value for the group
of coatings by using the average values for the group of coatings
for mass fraction coating solids and mass fraction VOC in section
4.2 of this appendix A. If you panel test each coating, then you
must convert the panel test result for each coating to a unique
percent capture efficiency value by using coating specific values
for the mass fraction coating solids and mass fraction VOC in
section 4.2 of this appendix A. The mass fraction of VOC in the
coating and the mass fraction of solids in the coating must be
determined by EPA Method 24 (appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60) or by
following the guidelines for combining analytical VOC content and
formulation solvent content presented in ``Protocol for Determining
the Daily Volatile Organic Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and
Light-Duty Truck Topcoat Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14).
4.2 * * *
Ws, i = Mass fraction of coating solids for coating, i,
or average mass fraction of coating solids for the group of coatings
including coating, i, grams coating solids per gram coating,
determined by EPA Method 24 (appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60) or by
following the guidelines for combining analytical VOC content and
formulation solvent content presented in ``Protocol for Determining
the Daily Volatile Organic Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and
Light-Duty Truck Topcoat Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14).
Wvocc, i = Mass fraction of VOC in coating, i, or average
mass fraction of VOC for the group of coatings including coating, i,
grams VOC per grams coating, determined by EPA Method 24 (appendix
A-7 to 40 CFR part 60) or the guidelines for combining analytical
VOC content and formulation solvent content presented in ``Protocol
for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound Emission Rate of
Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-
018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14).
* * * * *
Subpart MMMM--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and
Products
0
23. Section 63.3900 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and
(ii), (b), and (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3900 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Before January 5, 2021, the coating operation(s) must be in
compliance with the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890 at all
times except during periods of SSM. On or after January 5, 2021, you
must be in compliance with the applicable emission limits in Sec. 63.
3890 and the operating limits in table 1 of this subpart at all times.
(ii) Before January 5, 2021, the coating operation(s) must be in
compliance with the operating limits for emission capture systems and
add-on control devices required by Sec. 63.3892 at all times except
during periods of SSM and except for solvent recovery systems for which
you conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to Sec.
63.3961(j). On or after January 5, 2021, the coating operation(s) must
be in compliance with the operating limits for emission capture systems
and add-on control devices required by Sec. 63.3892 at all times,
except for solvent recovery systems for which you conduct liquid-liquid
material balances according to Sec. 63.3961(j).
* * * * *
(b) Before January 5, 2021, 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 January 5, 2021, 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 January 5, 2021, if your affected source uses an
emission capture system and add-on control device, you must develop a
written SSMP 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. On and after January 5, 2021, the SSMP is not
required.
0
24. Section 63.3920 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(5) introductory text and (a)(5)(i) and (iv);
0
b. Adding paragraph (a)(5)(v);
0
c. Revising paragraphs (a)(6) introductory text and (a)(6)(iii);
0
d. Adding paragraph (a)(6)(iv);
0
e. Revising paragraphs (a)(7) introductory text and (a)(7)(iii), (vi)
through (viii), (x), (xiii), and (xiv);
0
f. Adding paragraph (a)(7)(xv);
0
g. Revising paragraph (c) introductory text; and
0
h. Adding paragraphs (d) through (h).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 63.3920 What reports must I submit?
(a) * * *
(5) Deviations: Compliant material option. If you used the
compliant material option and there was a deviation from the applicable
organic HAP content requirements in Sec. 63.3890, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(5)(i)
through (v) of this section.
(i) Identification of each coating used that deviated from the
applicable emission limit, and each thinner and/or other additive, and
cleaning material used that contained organic HAP, and the dates, time
and duration each was used.
* * * * *
(iv) Before January 5, 2021, a statement of the cause of each
deviation. On and after January 5, 2021, a statement of the cause of
each deviation
[[Page 41139]]
(including unknown cause, if applicable).
(v) On and after January 5, 2021, 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 applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, a description of the method used to
estimate the emissions, and the actions you took to minimize emissions
in accordance with Sec. 63.3900(b).
(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 the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, the
semiannual compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs
(a)(6)(i) through (iv) of this section.
* * * * *
(iii) Before January 5, 2021, a statement of the cause of each
deviation. On and after January 5, 2021, a statement of the cause of
each deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
(iv) On and after January 5, 2021, the number of deviations and,
for each deviation, the date, time, duration, a list of the affected
source or equipment, an estimate of the quantity of each regulated
pollutant emitted over any applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890,
a description of the method used to estimate the emissions, and the
actions you took to minimize emissions in accordance with Sec.
63.3900(b).
(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 the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890 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), before January 5, 2021, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(7)(i)
through (xiv) of this section. This includes periods of SSM during
which deviations occurred. On and after January 5, 2021, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(7)(i)
through (xii), (xiv), and (xv) of this section. If you use the emission
rate with add-on controls option and there was a deviation from the
applicable work practice standards in Sec. 63.3893(b), the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraph
(a)(7)(xiii) of this section.
* * * * *
(iii) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture system
or add-on control devices started and stopped.
* * * * *
(vi) Before January 5, 2021, the date and time that each CPMS was
inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks. On and
after January 5, 2021, the number of instances that the CPMS was
inoperative, and for each instance, 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 the actions you took to minimize emissions in
accordance with Sec. 63.3900(b).
(vii) Before January 5, 2021, the date, time, and duration that
each CPMS was out-of-control, including the information in Sec.
63.8(c)(8). On and after January 5, 2021, the number of instances that
the CPMS was out of control as specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7) and, for
each instance, 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) Before January 5, 2021, 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 SSM or during another
period. On and after January 5, 2021, the number of deviations from an
operating limit in table 1 to this subpart and, for each deviation, the
date, time, and duration of each deviation; and the date, time, and
duration of any bypass of the add-on control device.
* * * * *
(x) Before January 5, 2021, a breakdown of the total duration of
the deviations from the operating limits in table 1 of 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. On and after January 5, 2021, 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.
* * * * *
(xiii) Before January 5, 2021, 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. On and after January 5, 2021, for deviations from the work
practice standards, the number of deviations, and, for each deviation,
the information in paragraphs (a)(7)(xiii)(A) and (B) of this section:
(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. 63.3900(b).
(B) The description required in paragraph (a)(7)(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) Before January 5, 2021, statement of the cause of each
deviation. On and after January 5, 2021, for deviations from an
emission limit in Sec. 63.3890 or an operating limit in table 1 to
this subpart, a statement of the cause of each deviation (including
unknown cause, if applicable) and the actions you took to minimize
emissions in accordance with Sec. 63.3900(b).
(xv) On and after January 5, 2021, for each deviation from an
emission limit in Sec. 63.3890 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. 63.3890 or operating
limit in table 1 to this subpart, and a description of the method used
to estimate the emissions.
* * * * *
(c) SSM reports. Before January 5, 2021, if you used the emission
rate with add-on controls option and you had a SSM during the
semiannual reporting period, you must submit the reports specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section. On and after January 5,
2021, the reports specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this
section are not required.
* * * * *
(d) Performance test reports. On and after January 5, 2021, you
must submit the results of the performance test required in Sec. Sec.
63.3940 and 63.3950 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,
[[Page 41140]]
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) Initial notification reports. On and after January 5, 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. Sec. 63.9(h) and 63.3910(c) to the EPA via the 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 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) Semiannual compliance reports. On and after January 5, 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 the 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) Reporting during EPA system outages. If you are required to
electronically submit a report through the 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 the 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 the EPA system outage
and allow an extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the
discretion of the Administrator.
(h) Reporting during force majeure events. 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
[[Page 41141]]
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
25. Section 63.3930 is amended by revising paragraphs (j), (k)
introductory text, and (k)(1) and (2) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3930 What records must I keep?
* * * * *
(j) Before January 5, 2021, you must keep records of the date,
time, and duration of each deviation. On and after January 5, 2021, for
each deviation from an emission limitation reported under Sec.
63.3920(a)(5) through (7), 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. 63.3920(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. 63.3920(a)(5) through (7).
(3) An estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted
over any applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890 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.
63.3920(a)(5) through (7).
(4) A record of actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance
with Sec. 63.3900(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 January 5, 2021, for each deviation, a record of whether
the deviation occurred during a period of SSM. On and after January 5,
2021, a record of whether the deviation occurred during a period of SSM
is not required.
(2) Before January 5, 2021, the records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii)
through (v) related to SSM. On and after January 5, 2021, the records
in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to SSM are not required.
* * * * *
0
26. Section 63.3931 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.3931 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. On and after January 5, 2021, 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
27. Section 63.3941 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i),
(a)(4), (b)(1), the definition of ``Davg'' in Equation 1 of
paragraph (b)(4), and paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3941 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 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 (e.g., 0.3791).
* * * * *
(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 more and at 1.0 percent by mass or more for other 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. For
reactive adhesives in which some of the HAP react to form solids and
are not emitted to the atmosphere, you may rely on manufacturer's data
that expressly states the organic HAP or volatile matter mass fraction
emitted. 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
unless, after consultation, you demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
enforcement agency that the formulation data are correct.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) ASTM Method D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014) or D6093-97 (Reapproved
2016). You may use ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 63.14), or D6093-97 (Reapproved 2016)
(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.
* * * * *
(4) * * *
Davg = Average density of volatile matter in the coating,
grams volatile matter per liter volatile matter, determined from
test results using ASTM D1475-13 (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 unless, after consultation you
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the enforcement agency that the
formulation data are correct.
(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 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), information
from the supplier or manufacturer of the material, or specific gravity
data for pure chemicals. If there is disagreement between ASTM D1475-13
test results and the supplier's or manufacturer's information, the test
results will take precedence unless, after consultation you demonstrate
to the satisfaction of the enforcement agency that the formulation data
are correct.
* * * * *
0
28. Section 63.3951 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
[[Page 41142]]
Sec. 63.3951 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limitations?
* * * * *
(c) Determine the density of each material. Determine the density
of each liquid coating, thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning
material used during each month from test results using ASTM D1475-13
or ASTM D2111-10 (Reapproved 2015) (both 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 you are including powder coatings in the
compliance determination, determine the density of powder coatings,
using ASTM D5965-02 (Reapproved 2013) (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 63.14), or information from the supplier. If there is
disagreement between ASTM D1475-13 or ASTM D2111-10 (Reapproved 2015)
test results and other such information sources, the test results will
take precedence unless, after consultation you demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the enforcement agency that the formulation data are
correct. If you purchase materials or monitor consumption by weight
instead of volume, you do not need to determine material density.
Instead, you may use the material weight in place of the combined terms
for density and volume in Equations 1A, 1B, 1C, and 2 of this section.
* * * * *
0
29. Section 63.3960 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (4),
(b)(1), and (c) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3960 By what date must I conduct performance tests and other
initial compliance demonstrations?
(a) * * *
(1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance
date specified in Sec. 63.3883. Except for solvent recovery systems
for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to
Sec. 63.3961(j), you must conduct according to the schedule in
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section initial and periodic
performance tests of each capture system and add-on control device
according to the procedures in Sec. Sec. 63.3964, 63.3965, and 63.3966
and establish the operating limits required by Sec. 63.3892. For a
solvent recovery system for which you conduct liquid-liquid material
balances according to Sec. 63.3961(j), you must initiate the first
material balance no later than the applicable compliance date specified
in Sec. 63.3883. For magnet wire coating operations, you may, with
approval, conduct a performance test of one representative magnet wire
coating machine for each group of identical or very similar magnet wire
coating machines.
(i) You must conduct the initial performance test and establish the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.3892 no later than 180 days after
the applicable compliance date specified in Sec. 63.3883.
(ii) You must conduct periodic performance tests and establish the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.3892 within 5 years following the
previous performance test. You must conduct the first periodic
performance test before July 8, 2023, 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 July 8, 2018.
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. For any
control device for which you are using the catalytic oxidizer control
option at Sec. 63.3967(b) and following the catalyst maintenance
procedures in Sec. 63.3967(b)(4), you are not required to conduct
periodic testing control device performance testing as specified by
this paragraph. For any control device for which instruments are used
to continuously measure organic compound emissions, you are not
required to conduct periodic control device performance testing as
specified by this paragraph.
* * * * *
(4) For the initial compliance demonstration, you do not need to
comply with the operating limits for the emission capture system and
add-on control device required by Sec. 63.3892 until after you have
completed the initial performance tests specified in paragraph (a)(1)
of this section. Instead, you must maintain a log detailing the
operation and maintenance of the emission capture system, add-on
control device, and continuous parameter monitors during the period
between the compliance date and the performance test. You must begin
complying with the operating limits established based on the initial
performance tests specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section for
your affected source on the date you complete the performance tests.
For magnet wire coating operations, you must begin complying with the
operating limits for all identical or very similar magnet wire coating
machines on the date you complete the performance test of a
representative magnet wire coating machine. The requirements in this
paragraph (a)(4) do not apply to solvent recovery systems for which you
conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to the requirements
in Sec. 63.3961(j).
(b) * * *
(1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance
date specified in Sec. 63.3883. Except for magnet wire coating
operations and solvent recovery systems for which you conduct liquid-
liquid material balances according to Sec. 63.3961(j), you must
conduct according to the schedule in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii) of
this section initial and periodic performance tests of each capture
system and add-on control device according to the procedures in
Sec. Sec. 63.3964, 63.3965, and 63.3966 and establish the operating
limits required by Sec. 63.3892. For magnet wire coating operations,
you may, with approval, conduct a performance test of a single magnet
wire coating machine that represents identical or very similar magnet
wire coating machines. For a solvent recovery system for which you
conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to Sec. 63.3961(j),
you must initiate the first material balance no later than the
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.3883.
(i) You must conduct the initial performance test and establish the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.3892 no later than 180 days after
the applicable compliance date specified in Sec. 63.3883.
(ii) You must conduct periodic performance tests and establish the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.3892 within 5 years following the
previous performance test. You must conduct the first periodic
performance test before July 8, 2020, 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 July 8, 2018.
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. For any
control device for which you are using the catalytic oxidizer control
option at Sec. 63.3967(b) and following the catalyst maintenance
procedures in Sec. 63.3967(b)(4), you are not required to conduct
periodic testing
[[Page 41143]]
control device performance testing as specified by this paragraph. For
any control device for which instruments are used to continuously
measure organic compound emissions, you are not required to conduct
periodic control device performance testing as specified by this
paragraph.
* * * * *
(c) You are not required to conduct an initial performance test to
determine capture efficiency or destruction efficiency of a capture
system or control device if you receive approval to use the results of
a performance test that has been previously conducted on that capture
system or control device. Any such previous tests must meet the
conditions described in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section.
You are still required to conduct a periodic performance test according
to the applicable requirements of paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) and (b)(2)(ii)
of this section.
* * * * *
0
30. Section 63.3961 is amended by revising paragraph (j)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.3961 How do I demonstrate initial compliance?
* * * * *
(j) * * *
(3) Determine the mass fraction of volatile organic matter for each
coating, thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning material used in
the coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system during
the month, kg volatile organic matter per kg coating. You may determine
the volatile organic matter mass fraction using EPA Method 24 of 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A-7, ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015) \e\
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), or an EPA approved
alternative method, or 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 EPA Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A-7, ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015) \e\, or an approved alternative
method, the test method results will take precedence unless, after
consultation you demonstrate to the satisfaction of the enforcement
agency that the formulation data are correct.
* * * * *
0
31. Section 63.3963 is amended by revising paragraph (f) and adding
paragraph (i) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3963 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limitations?
* * * * *
(f) As part of each semiannual compliance report required in Sec.
63.3920, you must identify the coating operation(s) for which you used
the emission rate with add-on controls option. If there were no
deviations from the emission limits in Sec. 63.3890, the operating
limits in Sec. 63.3892, and the work practice standards in Sec.
63.3893, submit a statement that you 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 Sec. 63.3890, and you achieved the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.3892 and the work practice
standards required by Sec. 63.3893 during each compliance period.
* * * * *
(i) On and after January 5, 2021, deviations that occur due to
malfunction of the emission capture system, add-on control device, or
coating operation that may affect emission capture or control device
efficiency are required to operate in accordance with Sec. 63.3900(b).
The Administrator will determine whether the deviations are violations
according to the provisions in Sec. 63.3900(b).
* * * * *
0
32. Section 63.3964 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text and (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3964 What are the general requirements for performance tests?
(a) Before January 5, 2021, you must conduct each performance test
required by Sec. 63.3960 according to the requirements in Sec.
63.7(e)(1) and under the conditions in this section, unless you obtain
a waiver of the performance test according to the provisions in Sec.
63.7(h). On and after January 5, 2021, you must conduct each
performance test required by Sec. 63.3960 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 periods of 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
33. Section 63.3965 is amended by revising the introductory text to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.3965 How do I determine the emission capture system
efficiency?
You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to
determine capture efficiency as part of each performance test required
by Sec. 63.3960.
* * * * *
0
34. Section 63.3966 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3966 How do I determine the add-on control device emission
destruction or removal efficiency?
You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to
determine the add-on control device emission destruction or removal
efficiency as part of the performance test required by Sec. 63.3960.
For each performance test, you must conduct three test runs as
specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3) and each test run must last at least 1
hour. If the source is a magnet wire coating machine, you may use the
procedures in section 3.0 of appendix A to this subpart as an
alternative.
* * * * *
(b) Measure total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon at the
inlet and outlet of the add-on control device simultaneously, using
either EPA Method 25 or 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60.
(1) Use EPA Method 25 of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 if the add-
on control device is an oxidizer and you expect the total gaseous
organic concentration as carbon to be more than 50 parts per million
(ppm) at the control device outlet.
(2) Use EPA Method 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 if the
add-on control device is an oxidizer and you expect the total gaseous
organic concentration as carbon to be 50 ppm or less at the control
device outlet.
(3) Use EPA Method 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 if the
add-on control device is not an oxidizer.
(4) You may use EPA Method 18 of appendix A-6 to 40 CFR part 60 to
subtract methane emissions from measured total gaseous organic mass
emissions as carbon.
* * * * *
[[Page 41144]]
0
35. Section 63.3967 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2),
(b)(1) through (3), (d)(1) and (2), and (e)(1) through (4) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.3967 How do I establish the emission capture system and add-
on control device operating limits during the performance test?
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the
combustion temperature at least once every 15 minutes during each of
the three test runs. You must monitor the temperature in the firebox of
the thermal oxidizer or immediately downstream of the firebox before
any substantial heat exchange occurs.
(2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the
performance test to calculate and record the average combustion
temperature maintained during the performance test. This average
combustion temperature is the minimum operating limit for your thermal
oxidizer.
(b) * * *
(1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the
temperature just before the catalyst bed and the temperature difference
across the catalyst bed at least once every 15 minutes during each of
the three test runs.
(2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the
performance test to calculate and record the average temperature just
before the catalyst bed and the average temperature difference across
the catalyst bed maintained during the performance test. These are the
minimum operating limits for your catalytic oxidizer.
(3) You must monitor the temperature at the inlet to the catalyst
bed and implement a site-specific inspection and maintenance plan for
your catalytic oxidizer as specified in paragraph (b)(4) of this
section. During the performance test, you must monitor and record the
temperature just before the catalyst bed at least once every 15 minutes
during each of the three test runs. For each performance test, use the
data collected during the performance test to calculate and record the
average temperature just before the catalyst bed during the performance
test. This is the minimum operating limit for your catalytic oxidizer.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the
condenser outlet (product side) gas temperature at least once every 15
minutes during each of the three test runs.
(2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the
performance test to calculate and record the average condenser outlet
(product side) gas temperature maintained during the performance test.
This average condenser outlet gas temperature is the maximum operating
limit for your condenser.
(e) * * *
(1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the
desorption concentrate stream gas temperature at least once every 15
minutes during each of the three runs of the performance test.
(2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the
performance test to calculate and record the average temperature. This
is the minimum operating limit for the desorption concentrate gas
stream temperature.
(3) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the
pressure drop of the dilute stream across the concentrator at least
once every 15 minutes during each of the three runs of the performance
test.
(4) For each performance test, use the data collected during the
performance test to calculate and record the average pressure drop.
This is the minimum operating limit for the dilute stream across the
concentrator.
* * * * *
0
36. Section 63.3968 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4), (5), and
(7), and (c)(3) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3968 What are the requirements for continuous parameter
monitoring system installation, operation, and maintenance?
(a) * * *
(4) Before January 5, 2021, you must maintain the CPMS at all times
and have available necessary parts for routine repairs of the
monitoring equipment. On and after January 5, 2021, you must maintain
the CPMS at all times in accordance with Sec. 63.3900(b) and keep
necessary parts readily available for routine repairs of the monitoring
equipment.
(5) Before January 5, 2021, 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 January 5,
2021, you must operate the CPMS and collect emission capture system and
add-on control device parameter data at all times in accordance with
Sec. 63.3900(b).
* * * * *
(7) A monitoring malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not
reasonably preventable failure of the CPMS to provide valid data.
Monitoring failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or
careless operation are not malfunctions. Before January 5, 2021, any
period for which the monitoring system is out-of-control and data are
not available for required calculations is a deviation from the
monitoring requirements. On and after January 5, 2021, except for
periods of required quality assurance or control activities, any period
for which the CPMS fails to operate and record data continuously as
required by paragraph (a)(5) of this section, or generates data that
cannot be included in calculating averages as specified in (a)(6) of
this section constitutes a deviation from the monitoring requirements.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) For all thermal oxidizers and catalytic oxidizers, you must
meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (c)(3)(i) through (v) 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
37. Section 63.3981 is amended by revising the definitions of
``Deviation'' and ``Non-HAP coating'' to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3981 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
Deviation means:
(1) Before January 5, 2021, 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 SSM, regardless of whether or
not such failure is permitted by this subpart; and
(2) On and after January 5, 2021, any instance in which an affected
source subject to this subpart or an owner or operator of such a
source:
[[Page 41145]]
(i) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart including but not limited to any emission limit, 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.
* * * * *
Non-HAP coating means, for the purposes of this subpart, a coating
that contains no more than 0.1 percent by mass of any individual
organic HAP that is listed in Table 5 to this subpart and no more than
1.0 percent by mass for any other individual HAP.
* * * * *
0
38. Table 2 to Subpart MMMM of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart MMMM of Part 63
You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements according to the following table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject MMMM Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(a)(1)-(14)............... General Applicability.. Yes....................
Sec. 63.1(b)(1)-(3)................ Initial Applicability Yes.................... Applicability to
Determination. subpart MMMM is also
specified in Sec.
63.3881.
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 subject to subpart
Sources. MMMM.
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.
63.3981.
Sec. 63.1(a)-(c)................... Units and Abbreviations Yes....................
Sec. 63.4(a)(1)-(5)................ Prohibited Activities.. Yes....................
Sec. 63.4(b)-(c)................... Circumvention/ Yes....................
Severability.
Sec. 63.5(a)....................... Construction/ Yes....................
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(b)(1)-(6)................ Requirements for Yes....................
Existing Newly
Constructed, and
Reconstructed Sources.
Sec. 63.5(d)....................... Application for Yes....................
Approval of
Construction/
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(e)....................... Approval of Yes....................
Construction/
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(f)....................... Approval of Yes....................
Construction/
Reconstruction Based
on Prior State Review.
Sec. 63.6(a)....................... Compliance With Yes....................
Standards and
Maintenance
Requirements--Applicab
ility.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(7)................ Compliance Dates for Yes.................... Section 63.3883
New and Reconstructed specifies the
Sources. compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(5)................ Compliance Dates for Yes.................... Section 63.3883
Existing Sources. specifies the
compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)-(2)................ Operation and Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.3900(b)
Maintenance. 2021. No on and after for general duty
January 5, 2021. requirement.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3).................... SSMP................... Yes before January 5,
2021. No on and after
January 5, 2021.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1).................... Compliance Except Yes before January 5,
During SSM. 2021. No on and after
January 5, 2021.
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 MMMM 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--Applicab sources. Additional
ility. requirements for
performance testing
are specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.3964,
63.3965, and 63.3966.
[[Page 41146]]
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.
Section 63.3960
specifies the schedule
for performance test
requirements that are
earlier than those
specified in Sec.
63.7(a)(2).
Sec. 63.7(a)(3)-(4)................ Performance Tests Yes....................
Required By the
Administrator, Force
Majeure.
Sec. 63.7(b)-(d)................... Performance Test Yes.................... Applies only to
Requirements--Notifica performance tests for
tion, Quality capture system and add-
Assurance, Facilities on control device
Necessary for Safe efficiency at sources
Testing, Conditions using these to comply
During Test. with the standard.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1).................... Conduct of Performance Yes before January 5, See Sec. Sec.
Tests. 2021. No on and after 63.3964.
January 5, 2021.
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 used to determine
Method. capture system
efficiency.
Sec. 63.7(g)-(h)................... Performance Test Yes.................... Applies only to
Requirements--Data performance tests for
Analysis, capture system and add-
Recordkeeping, on control device
Reporting, Waiver of efficiency at sources
Test. using these to comply
with the standard.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)-(3)................ Monitoring Yes.................... Applies only to
Requirements--Applicab monitoring of capture
ility. system and add-on
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standard.
Additional
requirements for
monitoring are
specified in Sec.
63.3968.
Sec. 63.8(a)(4).................... Additional Monitoring No..................... Subpart MMMM 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 January 5, Section 63.3968
System (CMS) Operation 2021. No on and after specifies the
and Maintenance. January 5, 2021. requirements for the
operation of CMS for
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 standard.
Additional
requirements for CMS
operations and
maintenance are
specified in Sec.
63.3968.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4).................... CMS.................... No..................... Sec. 63.3968
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 MMMM does not
have opacity or
visible emission
standards.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6).................... CMS Requirements....... No..................... Section 63.3968
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 Yes....................
Periods.
Sec. 63.8(c)(8).................... CMS Out-of-Control No..................... Sec. 63.3920 requires
Periods and Reporting. reporting of CMS out-
of-control periods.
[[Page 41147]]
Sec. 63.8(d)-(e)................... Quality Control Program No..................... Subpart MMMM does not
and CMS Performance require the use of
Evaluation. continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5)................ Use of an Alternative Yes....................
Monitoring Method.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6).................... Alternative to Relative No..................... Subpart MMMM does not
Accuracy Test. require the use of
continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.8(g)(1)-(5)................ Data Reduction......... No..................... Sections 63.3967 and
63.3968 specify
monitoring data
reduction.
Sec. 63.9(a)-(d)................... Notification Yes....................
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
standard.
Sec. 63.9(f)....................... Notification of Visible No..................... Subpart MMMM does not
Emissions/Opacity Test. have opacity or
visible emissions
standards.
Sec. 63.9(g)(1)-(3)................ Additional No..................... Subpart MMMM does not
Notifications When require the use of
Using CMS. continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.9(h)....................... Notification of Yes.................... Section 63.3910
Compliance Status. specifies 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/ Yes....................
Reporting--Applicabili
ty and General
Information.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)................... General Recordkeeping Yes.................... Additional requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.3930 and
63.3931.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i)-(ii)........... Recordkeeping of Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.3930(j).
Occurrence and 2021. No on and after
Duration of Startups January 5, 2021.
and Shutdowns and of
Failures to Meet
Standards.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iii).............. Recordkeeping Relevant Yes.................... Sec.
to Maintenance of Air 63.10(b)(2)(iii).
Pollution Control and
Monitoring Equipment.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(v)........... Actions Taken to Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.3930(j)
Minimize Emissions 2021. No on and after for a record of
During SSM. January 5, 2021. actions taken to
minimize emissions
duration a deviation
from the standard.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vi)............... Recordkeeping for CMS Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.3930(j)
Malfunctions. 2021. No on and after for records of periods
January 5, 2021. of deviation from the
standard, including
instances where a CMS
is inoperative or out-
of-control.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xii).............. Records................ Yes....................
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiii)............. ....................... No..................... Subpart MMMM does not
require the use of
continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv).............. ....................... Yes....................
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)................... Recordkeeping Yes....................
Requirements for
Applicability
Determinations.
Sec. 63.10(c)(1)-(6)............... Additional Yes....................
Recordkeeping
Requirements for
Sources with CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c)(7)-(8)............... Additional No..................... See Sec. 63.3930(j)
Recordkeeping for records of periods
Requirements for of deviation from the
Sources with CMS. standard, including
instances where a CMS
is inoperative or out-
of-control.
Sec. 63.10(c)(10)-(14)............. Additional Yes....................
Recordkeeping
Requirements for
Sources with CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c)(15).................. Records Regarding the Yes before January 5,
SSMP. 2021. No on and after
January 5, 2021.
[[Page 41148]]
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)................... General Reporting Yes.................... Additional requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
63.3920.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)................... Report of Performance Yes.................... Additional requirements
Test Results. are specified in Sec.
63.3920(b) and (d).
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)................... Reporting Opacity or No..................... Subpart MMMM 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)................... SSM Reports............ Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.3920
2021. No on and after (a)(7) and (c).
January 5, 2021.
Sec. 63.10(e)(1)-(2)............... Additional CMS Reports. No..................... Subpart MMMM does not
require the use of
continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)................... Excess Emissions/CMS No..................... Section 63.3920(b)
Performance Reports. specifies the contents
of periodic compliance
reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)(4)................... COMS Data Reports...... No..................... Subpart MMMMM does not
specify requirements
for opacity or COMS.
Sec. 63.10(f)...................... Recordkeeping/Reporting Yes....................
Waiver.
Sec. 63.11......................... Control Device No..................... Subpart MMMM 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......................... IBR.................... Yes....................
Sec. 63.15......................... Availability of Yes....................
Information/
Confidentiality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
39. Table 5 to Subpart MMMM of part 63 is added to read as follows:
Table 5 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63--List of HAP 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
[[Page 41149]]
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart NNNN--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Large Appliances
0
40. Section 63.4168 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(3)(i) through
(vii) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4168 What are the requirements for continuous parameter
monitoring system installation, operation, and maintenance?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) Locate the temperature sensor in a position that provides a
representative temperature.
(ii) Use a temperature sensor with a measurement sensitivity of 4
degrees Fahrenheit or 0.75 percent of the temperature value, whichever
is larger.
(iii) Shield the temperature sensor system from electromagnetic
interference and chemical contaminants.
(iv) If a gas temperature chart recorder is used, it must have a
measurement sensitivity in the minor division of at least 20 degrees
Fahrenheit.
(v) Perform an electronic calibration at least semiannually
according to the procedures in the manufacturer's owner's manual.
Following the electronic calibration, you must conduct a temperature
sensor validation check in which a second or redundant temperature
sensor placed nearby the process temperature sensor must yield a
reading within 30 degrees Fahrenheit of the process temperature
sensor's reading.
(vi) Any time the sensor exceeds the manufacturer's specified
maximum operating temperature range, either conduct calibration and
validation checks or install a new temperature sensor.
[[Page 41150]]
(vii) At least monthly, inspect components for integrity and
electrical connections for continuity, oxidation, and galvanic
corrosion.
* * * * *
Subpart OOOO--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other
Textiles
0
41. Section 63.4371 is amended by revising the definition for ``No
organic HAP'' to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4371 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
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).
* * * * *
Subpart PPPP--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Surface Coating of Plastic Parts and Products
0
42. Section 63.4492 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4492 What operating limits must I meet?
* * * * *
(b) For any controlled coating operation(s) on which you use the
emission rate with add-on controls option, except those for which you
use a solvent recovery system and conduct a liquid-liquid material
balance according to Sec. 63.4561(j), you must meet the operating
limits specified in table 1 to this subpart. These operating limits
apply to the emission capture and control systems on the coating
operation(s) for which you use this option, and you must establish the
operating limits during the performance tests required in Sec. 63.4560
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.4567. You must meet the
operating limits established during the most recent performance tests
required in Sec. 63.4560 at all times after you establish them.
* * * * *
0
43. Section 63.4500 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and
(ii), (b), and (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4500 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) The coating operation(s) must be in compliance with the
applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4490 at all times.
(ii) The coating operation(s) must be in compliance with the
operating limits for emission capture systems and add-on control
devices required by Sec. 63.4492 at all times, except for solvent
recovery systems for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances
according to Sec. 63.4561(j).
* * * * *
(b) Before January 5, 2021, 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 January 5, 2021, 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 January 5, 2021, if your affected source uses an
emission capture system and add-on control device, you must develop a
written SSMP 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. On and after January 5, 2021, the SSMP is not
required.
0
44. Section 63.4520 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(5) introductory text and (a)(5)(i) and (iv);
0
b. Adding paragraph (a)(5)(v);
0
c. Revising paragraph (a)(6) introductory text and (a)(6)(iii);
0
d. Adding paragraph (a)(6)(iv);
0
e. Revising paragraphs (a)(7) introductory text and (a)(7)(iii), (vi)
through (viii), (x), (xiii), and (xiv);
0
f. Adding paragraph (a)(7)(xv);
0
g. Revising paragraph (c) introductory text; and
0
h. Adding paragraphs (d) through (h).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 63.4520 What reports must I submit?
(a) * * *
(5) Deviations: Compliant material option. If you used the
compliant material option and there was a deviation from the applicable
organic HAP content requirements in Sec. 63.4490, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(5)(i)
through (v) of this section.
(i) Identification of each coating used that deviated from the
applicable emission limit, and each thinner and/or other additive, and
cleaning material used that contained organic HAP, and the date, time,
and duration each was used.
* * * * *
(iv) Before January 5, 2021, a statement of the cause of each
deviation. On and after January 5, 2021, a statement of the cause of
each deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
(v) On and after January 5, 2021, 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 applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.4490, a description of the method used to
estimate the emissions, and the actions you took to minimize emissions
in accordance with Sec. 63.4500(b).
(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 the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4490, the
semiannual compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs
(a)(6)(i) through (iv) of this section.
* * * * *
(iii) Before January 5, 2021, a statement of the cause of each
deviation. On and after January 5, 2021, a statement of the cause of
each deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
(iv) On and after January 5, 2021, the number of deviations, date,
time, duration, a list of the affected source or equipment, an estimate
of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over any applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.4490, a description of the method used to
estimate the emissions, and the actions you took to minimize emissions
in accordance with Sec. 63.4500(b).
(7) Deviations: Emission rate with add-on controls option. If you
used the
[[Page 41151]]
emission rate with add-on controls option and there was a deviation
from the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4490 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), before January 5, 2021, the semiannual compliance
report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(7)(i) through
(xiv) of this section. This includes periods of SSM during which
deviations occurred. On and after January 5, 2021, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(7)(i)
through (xii), (xiv), and (xv) of this section. If you use the emission
rate with add-on controls option and there was a deviation from the
applicable work practice standards in Sec. 63.4493(b), the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraph
(a)(7)(xiii) of this section.
* * * * *
(iii) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture system
or add-on control devices started and stopped.
* * * * *
(vi) Before January 5, 2021, the date and time that each CPMS was
inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks. On and
after January 5, 2021, the number of instances that the CPMS was
inoperative, and for each instance, 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 the actions you took to minimize emissions in
accordance with Sec. 63.4500(b).
(vii) Before January 5, 2021, the date, time, and duration that
each CPMS was out-of-control, including the information in Sec.
63.8(c)(8). On and after January 5, 2021, the number of instances that
the CPMS was out of control as specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7) and, for
each instance, 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) Before January 5, 2021, 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 SSM or during another
period. On and after January 5, 2021, the number of deviations from an
operating limit in table 1 to this subpart and, for each deviation, the
date, time, and duration of each deviation; the date, time, and
duration of any bypass of the add-on control device.
* * * * *
(x) Before January 5, 2021, a breakdown of the total duration of
the deviations from the operating limits in table 1 of 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. On and after January 5, 2021, 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.
* * * * *
(xiii) Before January 5, 2021, 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. On and after January 5, 2021, for deviations from the work
practice standards, the number of deviations, and, for each deviation,
the information in paragraphs (a)(7)(xiii)(A) and (B) of this section:
(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. 63.4500(b).
(B) The description required in paragraph (a)(7)(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) Before January 5, 2021, a statement of the cause of each
deviation. On and after January 5, 2021, for deviations from an
emission limit in Sec. 63.4490 or an operating limit in Table 1 to
this subpart, a statement of the cause of each deviation (including
unknown cause, if applicable) and the actions you took to minimize
emissions in accordance with Sec. 63.4500(b).
(xv) On and after January 5, 2021, for each deviation from an
emission limit in Sec. 63.4490 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. 63.4490 or operating
limit in table 1 to this subpart, and a description of the method used
to estimate the emissions.
* * * * *
(c) SSM reports. Before January 5, 2021, if you used the emission
rate with add-on controls option and you had a SSM during the
semiannual reporting period, you must submit the reports specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section. On and after January 5,
2021, the reports specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this
section are not required.
* * * * *
(d) Performance test reports. On and after January 5, 2021, you
must submit the results of the performance tests required in Sec.
63.4560 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
[[Page 41152]]
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) Initial notification reports. On and after January 5, 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. 63.4510(c) to the EPA via the 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 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) Semiannual compliance reports. On and after January 5, 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 the CEDRI. (CEDRI 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) Reporting during EPA system outages. If you are required to
electronically submit a report through the 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 the 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 the EPA system outage
and allow an extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the
discretion of the Administrator.
(h) Reporting during force majeure events. 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 63.4530 is amended by revising paragraphs (h), (i)
introductory text, and (i)(1) and (2) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4530 What records must I keep?
* * * * *
(h) Before January 5, 2021, you must keep records of the date,
time, and duration of each deviation. On and after January 5, 2021, for
each deviation from an emission limitation reported under Sec.
63.4520(a)(5) through (7), a record of the information specified in
paragraphs (h)(1) through (4) of this section, as applicable.
(1) The date, time, and duration of the deviation, as reported
under Sec. 63.4520(a)(5) through (7).
[[Page 41153]]
(2) A list of the affected sources or equipment for which the
deviation occurred and the cause of the deviation, as reported under
Sec. 63.4520(a)(5) through (7).
(3) An estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted
over any applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.4490 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.
63.4520(a)(5) through (7).
(4) A record of actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance
with Sec. 63.4500(b) and any corrective actions taken to return the
affected unit to its normal or usual manner of operation.
(i) If you use the emission rate with add-on controls option, you
must also keep the records specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (8)
of this section.
(1) Before January 5, 2021, for each deviation, a record of whether
the deviation occurred during a period of SSM. On and after January 5,
2021, a record of whether the deviation occurred during a period of SSM
is not required.
(2) Before January 5, 2021, the records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii)
through (v) related to SSM. On and after January 5, 2021, the records
in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to SSM are not required.
* * * * *
0
46. Section 63.4531 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4531 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. On and after January 5, 2021, 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 63.4541 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and
(a)(2) and (4) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4541 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 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 (e.g., 0.3791).
* * * * *
(2) EPA Method 24 (appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60). For coatings,
you may use EPA 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 EPA Method 24, you may use ASTM
D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\ (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14). For reactive adhesives in which some of the HAP react to form
solids and are not emitted to the atmosphere, you may use the
alternative method contained in appendix A to this subpart, rather than
EPA Method 24. You may use the volatile fraction that is emitted, as
measured by the alternative method in appendix A to this subpart, as a
substitute for the mass fraction of organic HAP.
* * * * *
(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 more and at 1.0 percent by mass or more for other 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. For
reactive adhesives in which some of the HAP react to form solids and
are not emitted to the atmosphere, you may rely on manufacturer's data
that expressly states the organic HAP or volatile matter mass fraction
emitted. 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
unless, after consultation you demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
enforcement agency that the formulation data are correct.
* * * * *
0
48. Section 63.4551 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4551 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limitations?
* * * * *
(c) Determine the density of each material. Determine the density
of each liquid coating, thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning
material used during each month from test results using ASTM D1475-13
or ASTM D2111-10 (Reapproved 2015) (both 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
or ASTM D2111-10 (Reapproved 2015) and other such information sources,
the test results will take precedence unless, after consultation you
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the enforcement agency that the
formulation data are correct. If you purchase materials or monitor
consumption by weight instead of volume, you do not need to determine
material density. Instead, you may use the material weight in place of
the combined terms for density and volume in Equations 1A, 1B, 1C, and
2 of this section.
* * * * *
0
49. Section 63.4560 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraphs (a)(1) and (4), (b)(1), and (c) introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4560 By what date must I conduct performance tests and
initial compliance demonstrations?
(a) * * *
(1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance
date specified in Sec. 63.4483. Except for solvent recovery systems
for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to
Sec. 63.4561(j), you must conduct according to the schedule in
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section initial and periodic
performance tests of each capture system and add-on control device
according to the procedures in Sec. Sec. 63.4564, 63.4565, and 63.4566
and establish the operating limits required by Sec. 63.4492. For a
solvent recovery system for which you conduct liquid-liquid material
balances according to Sec. 63.4561(j), you must initiate the first
material balance no later than the applicable compliance date specified
in Sec. 63.4483.
(i) You must conduct the initial performance test and establish the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.4492 no later than 180 days after
the applicable compliance date specified in Sec. 63.4483.
[[Page 41154]]
(ii) You must conduct periodic performance tests and establish the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.4492 within 5 years following the
previous performance test. You must conduct the first periodic
performance test before July 8, 2023, 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 July 8, 2018.
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. For any
control device for which you are using the catalytic oxidizer control
option at Sec. 63.4567(b) and following the catalyst maintenance
procedures in Sec. 63.4567(b)(4), you are not required to conduct
periodic control device performance testing as specified by this
paragraph. For any control device for which instruments are used to
continuously measure organic compound emissions, you are not required
to conduct periodic control device performance testing as specified by
this paragraph.
* * * * *
(4) For the initial compliance demonstration, you do not need to
comply with the operating limits for the emission capture system and
add-on control device required by Sec. 63.4492 until after you have
completed the initial performance tests specified in paragraph (a)(1)
of this section. Instead, you must maintain a log detailing the
operation and maintenance of the emission capture system, add-on
control device, and continuous parameter monitors during the period
between the compliance date and the performance test. You must begin
complying with the operating limits established based on the initial
performance tests specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section for
your affected source on the date you complete the performance tests.
The requirements in this paragraph (a)(4) do not apply to solvent
recovery systems for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.4561(j).
(b) * * *
(1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance
date specified in Sec. 63.4483. Except for solvent recovery systems
for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to
Sec. 63.4561(j), you must conduct according to the schedule in
paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section initial and periodic
performance tests of each capture system and add-on control device
according to the procedures in Sec. Sec. 63.4564, 63.4565, and 63.4566
and establish the operating limits required by Sec. 63.4492. For a
solvent recovery system for which you conduct liquid-liquid material
balances according to Sec. 63.4561(j), you must initiate the first
material balance no later than the compliance date specified in Sec.
63.4483.
(i) You must conduct the initial performance test and establish the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.4492 no later than 180 days after
the applicable compliance date specified in Sec. 63.4483.
(ii) You must conduct periodic performance tests and establish the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.4492 within 5 years following the
previous performance test. You must conduct the first periodic
performance test before July 8, 2023, 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 July 8, 2018.
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. For any
control device for which you are using the catalytic oxidizer control
option at Sec. 63.4567(b) and following the catalyst maintenance
procedures in Sec. 63.4567(b)(4), you are not required to conduct
periodic control device performance testing as specified by this
paragraph. For any control device for which instruments are used to
continuously measure organic compound emissions, you are not required
to conduct periodic control device performance testing as specified by
this paragraph.
* * * * *
(c) You are not required to conduct an initial performance test to
determine capture efficiency or destruction efficiency of a capture
system or control device if you receive approval to use the results of
a performance test that has been previously conducted on that capture
system or control device. Any such previous tests must meet the
conditions described in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section.
You are still required to conduct a periodic performance test according
to the applicable requirements of paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) and (b)(2)(ii)
of this section.
* * * * *
0
50. Section 63.4561 is amended by revising paragraphs (j)(3) and (n) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.4561 How do I demonstrate initial compliance?
* * * * *
(j) * * *
(3) Determine the mass fraction of volatile organic matter for each
coating, thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning material used in
the coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system during
the month, kg volatile organic matter per kg coating. You may determine
the volatile organic matter mass fraction using EPA Method 24 of 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A-7, ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\ (incorporated
by reference, see Sec. 63.14), or an EPA approved alternative method.
Alternatively, you may determine the volatile organic matter mass
fraction using 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 EPA Method
24 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7, ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\,
or an approved alternative method, the test method results will take
precedence unless, after consultation you demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the enforcement agency that the formulation data are
correct.
* * * * *
(n) Compliance demonstration. The organic HAP emission rate for the
initial compliance period, calculated using Equation 5 of this section,
must be less than or equal to the applicable emission limit for each
subcategory in Sec. 63.4490 or the predominant activity or facility-
specific emission limit allowed in Sec. 63.4490(c). You must keep all
records as required by Sec. Sec. 63.4530 and 63.4531. As part of the
notification of compliance status required by Sec. 63.4510, you must
identify the coating operation(s) for which you used the emission rate
with add-on controls option and 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.
63.4490, and for control devices other than solvent recovery system
using a liquid-liquid material balance, you achieved the operating
limits required by Sec. 63.4492 and the work practice standards
required by Sec. 63.4493.
0
51. Section 63.4563 is amended by revising paragraph (f) and adding
paragraph (g) to read as follows:
[[Page 41155]]
Sec. 63.4563 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limitations?
* * * * *
(f) As part of each semiannual compliance report required in Sec.
63.4520, you must identify the coating operation(s) for which you used
the emission rate with add-on controls option. If there were no
deviations from the emission limits in Sec. 63.4490, the operating
limits in Sec. 63.4492, and the work practice standards in Sec.
63.4493, submit a statement that you 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 Sec. 63.4490, and you achieved the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.4492 and the work practice
standards required by Sec. 63.4493 during each compliance period.
(g) On and after January 5, 2021, deviations that occur due to
malfunction of the emission capture system, add-on control device, or
coating operation that may affect emission capture or control device
efficiency are required to operate in accordance with Sec. 63.4500(b).
The Administrator will determine whether the deviations are violations
according to the provisions in Sec. 63.4500(b).
* * * * *
0
52. Section 63.4564 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text and (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4564 What are the general requirements for performance tests?
(a) Before January 5, 2021, you must conduct each performance test
required by Sec. 63.4560 according to the requirements in Sec.
63.7(e)(1) and under the conditions in this section, unless you obtain
a waiver of the performance test according to the provisions in Sec.
63.7(h). On and after January 5, 2021, you must conduct each
performance test required by Sec. 63.4560 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 63.4565 is amended by revising the introductory text to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.4565 How do I determine the emission capture system
efficiency?
You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to
determine capture efficiency as part of each performance test required
by Sec. 63.4560.
* * * * *
0
54. Section 63.4566 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) and (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4566 How do I determine the add-on control device emission
destruction or removal efficiency?
You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to
determine the add-on control device emission destruction or removal
efficiency as part of the performance test required by Sec. 63.4560.
For each performance test, you must conduct three test runs as
specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3) and each test run must last at least 1
hour.
(a) * * *
(1) Use EPA Method 1 or 1A of appendix A-1 to 40 CFR part 60, as
appropriate, to select sampling sites and velocity traverse points.
(2) Use EPA Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, or 2F of appendix A-1 to 40 CFR
part 60, or 2G of appendix A-2 to 40 CFR part 60, as appropriate, to
measure gas volumetric flow rate.
(3) Use EPA Method 3, 3A, or 3B of appendix A-2 to 40 CFR part 60,
as appropriate, for gas analysis to determine dry molecular weight.
(4) Use EPA Method 4 of appendix A-3 to 40 CFR 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 EPA Method 25 or 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60.
(1) Use EPA Method 25 of appendix A-7 if the add-on control device
is an oxidizer and you expect the total gaseous organic concentration
as carbon to be more than 50 parts per million (ppm) at the control
device outlet.
(2) Use EPA Method 25A of appendix A-7 if the add-on control device
is an oxidizer and you expect the total gaseous organic concentration
as carbon to be 50 ppm or less at the control device outlet.
(3) Use EPA Method 25A of appendix A-7 if the add-on control device
is not an oxidizer.
(4) You may use EPA Method 18 in appendix A-6 of part 60 to
subtract methane emissions from measured total gaseous organic mass
emissions as carbon.
* * * * *
0
55. Section 63.4567 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraphs (a)(1) and (2), (b)(1) through (3), (c)(1), (d)(1) and (2),
and (e)(1) through (4) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4567 How do I establish the emission capture system and add-
on control device operating limits during the performance test?
During performance tests required by Sec. 63.4560 and described in
Sec. Sec. 63.4564, 63.4565, and 63.4566, you must establish the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.4492 according to this section,
unless you have received approval for alternative monitoring and
operating limits under Sec. 63.8(f) as specified in Sec. 63.4492.
(a) * * *
(1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the
combustion temperature at least once every 15 minutes during each of
the three test runs. You must monitor the temperature in the firebox of
the thermal oxidizer or immediately downstream of the firebox before
any substantial heat exchange occurs.
(2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the
performance test to calculate and record the average combustion
temperature maintained during the performance test. This average
combustion temperature is the minimum operating limit for your thermal
oxidizer.
(b) * * *
(1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the
temperature just before the catalyst bed and the temperature difference
across the catalyst bed at least once every 15 minutes during each of
the three test runs.
(2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the
performance test to calculate and record the average temperature just
before the catalyst bed and the average temperature difference across
the catalyst bed maintained during the performance test. These are the
minimum operating limits for your catalytic oxidizer.
(3) You must monitor the temperature at the inlet to the catalyst
bed and implement a site-specific inspection and
[[Page 41156]]
maintenance plan for your catalytic oxidizer as specified in paragraph
(b)(4) of this section. During performance tests, you must monitor and
record the temperature just before the catalyst bed at least once every
15 minutes during each of the three test runs. For each performance
test, use the data collected during the performance test to calculate
and record the average temperature just before the catalyst bed during
the performance test. This is the minimum operating limit for your
catalytic oxidizer.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the total
regeneration desorbing gas (e.g., steam or nitrogen) mass flow for each
regeneration cycle, and the carbon bed temperature after each carbon
bed regeneration and cooling cycle for the regeneration cycle either
immediately preceding or immediately following the performance test.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the
condenser outlet (product side) gas temperature at least once every 15
minutes during each of the three test runs of the performance test.
(2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the
performance test to calculate and record the average condenser outlet
(product side) gas temperature maintained during the performance test.
This average condenser outlet gas temperature is the maximum operating
limit for your condenser.
(e) * * *
(1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the
desorption concentrate stream gas temperature at least once every 15
minutes during each of the three runs of the performance test.
(2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the
performance test to calculate and record the average temperature. This
is the minimum operating limit for the desorption concentrate gas
stream temperature.
(3) During each performance test, you must monitor and record the
pressure drop of the dilute stream across the concentrator at least
once every 15 minutes during each of the three runs of the performance
test.
(4) For each performance test, use the data collected during the
performance test to calculate and record the average pressure drop.
This is the minimum operating limit for the dilute stream across the
concentrator.
* * * * *
0
56. Section 63.4568 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4), (5), and
(7) and (c)(3) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4568 What are the requirements for continuous parameter
monitoring system installation, operation, and maintenance?
(a) * * *
(4) Before January 5, 2021, you must maintain the CPMS at all times
and have available necessary parts for routine repairs of the
monitoring equipment. On and after January 5, 2021, you must maintain
the CPMS at all times in accordance with Sec. 63.4500(b) and keep
necessary parts readily available for routine repairs of the monitoring
equipment.
(5) Before January 5, 2021, 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 January 5,
2021, you must operate the CPMS and collect emission capture system and
add-on control device parameter data at all times in accordance with
Sec. 63.4500(b).
* * * * *
(7) A monitoring malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not
reasonably preventable failure of the CPMS to provide valid data.
Monitoring failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or
careless operation are not malfunctions. Before January 5, 2021, any
period for which the monitoring system is out-of-control and data are
not available for required calculations is a deviation from the
monitoring requirements. On and after January 5, 2021, except for
periods of required quality assurance or control activities, any period
for which the CPMS fails to operate and record data continuously as
required by paragraph (a)(5) of this section, or generates data that
cannot be included in calculating averages as specified in (a)(6) of
this section constitutes a deviation from the monitoring requirements.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) For all thermal oxidizers and catalytic oxidizers, you must
meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (c)(3)(i) through (v) 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
57. Section 63.4581 is amended by revising the definitions of
``Deviation'' and ``Non-HAP coating'' to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4581 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
Deviation means:
(1) Before January 5, 2021, 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 SSM, regardless of whether or
not such failure is permitted by this subpart; and
(2) On and after January 5, 2021, 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, 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.
* * * * *
Non-HAP coating means, for the purposes of this subpart, a coating
that contains no more than 0.1 percent by mass of any individual
organic HAP that is listed in table 5 to this subpart and no more than
1.0 percent by mass for any other individual HAP.
* * * * *
0
58. Table 2 to Subpart PPPP of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
[[Page 41157]]
Table 2 to Subpart PPPP of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart PPPP of Part 63
You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements according to the following table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject PPPP Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(a)(1)-(12)............... General Applicability.. Yes....................
Sec. 63.1(b)(1)-(3)................ Initial Applicability Yes.................... Applicability to
Determination. subpart PPPP is also
specified in Sec.
63.4481.
Sec. 63.1(c)(1).................... Applicability After Yes....................
Standard Established.
Sec. 63.1(c)(2).................... Applicability of Permit No..................... Area sources are not
Program for Area subject to subpart
Sources. PPPP.
Sec. 63.1(c)(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.
63.4581.
Sec. 63.3.......................... Units and Abbreviations Yes....................
Sec. 63.4(a)(1)-(2)................ Prohibited Activities.. Yes....................
Sec. 63.4(b)-(c)................... Circumvention/ Yes....................
Fragmentation.
Sec. 63.5(a)....................... Construction/ Yes....................
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(b)(1), (3), (4), (6)..... Requirements for Yes....................
Existing, Newly
Constructed, and
Reconstructed Sources.
Sec. 63.5(d)(1)(i)-(ii)(F), Application for Yes....................
(d)(1)(ii)(H), (d)(1)(ii)(J), Approval of
(d)(1)(iii), (d)(2)-(4). Construction/
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(e)....................... Approval of Yes....................
Construction/
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(f)....................... Approval of Yes....................
Construction/
Reconstruction Based
on Prior State Review.
Sec. 63.6(a)....................... Compliance With Yes....................
Standards and
Maintenance
Requirements--Applicab
ility.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(5), (b)(7)........ Compliance Dates for Yes.................... Section 63.4483
New and Reconstructed specifies the
Sources. compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1), (2), (5).......... Compliance Dates for Yes.................... Section 63.4483
Existing Sources. specifies the
compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i)-(ii)............ Operation and Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.4500(b)
Maintenance. 2021. No on and after for general duty
January 5, 2021. requirement.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(iii)............... Operation and Yes....................
Maintenance.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(iii)- SSMP................... Yes before January 5,
(ix). 2021. No on and after
January 5, 2021.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1).................... Compliance Except Yes before January 5,
During SSM. 2021. No on and after
January 5, 2021.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)-(3)................ Methods for Determining Yes....................
Compliance.
Sec. 63.6(g)....................... Use of an Alternative Yes....................
Standard.
Sec. 63.6(h)....................... Compliance With Opacity/ No..................... Subpart PPPP does not
Visible Emission establish opacity
Standards. standards and does not
require continuous
opacity monitoring
systems (COMS).
Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(14), (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--Applicab sources. Additional
ility. requirements for
performance testing
are specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.4564,
63.4565, and 63.4566.
Sec. 63.7(a)(2), except (a)(2)(i)- Performance Test Yes.................... Applies only to
(viii). Requirements--Dates. performance tests for
capture system and
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Section 63.4560
specifies the schedule
for performance test
requirements that are
earlier than those
specified in Sec.
63.7(a)(2).
Sec. 63.7(a)(3)-(4)................ Performance Tests Yes....................
Required By the
Administrator, Force
Majeure.
[[Page 41158]]
Sec. 63.7(b)-(d)................... Performance Test Yes.................... Applies only to
Requirements--Notifica performance tests for
tion, Quality capture system and add-
Assurance, Facilities on control device
Necessary for Safe efficiency at sources
Testing, Conditions using these to comply
During Test. with the standards.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1).................... Conduct of Performance Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.4500 and
Tests. 2021. No on and after Sec. 63.4564(a).
January 5, 2021.
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)-(4)................ Conduct of Performance Yes....................
Tests.
Sec. 63.7(f)....................... Performance Test Yes.................... Applies to all test
Requirements--Use methods except those
Alternative Test of used to determine
Method. capture system
efficiency.
Sec. 63.7(g)-(h)................... Performance Test Yes.................... Applies only to
Requirements--Data performance tests for
Analysis, capture system and add-
Recordkeeping, on control device
Reporting, Waiver of efficiency at sources
Test. using these to comply
with the standards.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)-(2)................ Monitoring Yes.................... Applies only to
Requirements--Applicab monitoring of capture
ility. system and add-on
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standards.
Additional
requirements for
monitoring are
specified in Sec.
63.4568.
Sec. 63.8(a)(4).................... Additional Monitoring No..................... Subpart PPPP 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 January 5, Section 63.4568
System (CMS) Operation 2021. No on and after specifies the
and Maintenance. January 5, 2021. requirements for the
operation of CMS for
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 standard.
Additional
requirements for CMS
operations and
maintenance are
specified in Sec.
63.4568.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4).................... CMS.................... No..................... Section 63.4568
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 PPPP does not
have opacity or
visible emission
standards.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6).................... CMS Requirements....... No..................... Section 63.4568
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 Yes....................
Periods.
Sec. 63.8(c)(8).................... CMS Out-of-Control No..................... Section 63.4520
Periods and Reporting. requires reporting of
CMS out-of-control
periods.
Sec. 63.8(d)-(e)................... Quality Control Program No..................... Subpart PPPP does not
and CMS Performance require the use of
Evaluation. continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5)................ Use of an Alternative Yes....................
Monitoring Method.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6).................... Alternative to Relative No..................... Subpart PPPP does not
Accuracy Test. require the use of
continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.8(g)....................... Data Reduction......... No..................... Sections 63.4567 and
63.4568 specify
monitoring data
reduction.
[[Page 41159]]
Sec. 63.9(a)-(d)................... Notification Yes....................
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 PPPP does not
Emissions/Opacity Test. have opacity or
visible emission
standards.
Sec. 63.9(g)....................... Additional No..................... Subpart PPPP does not
Notifications When require the use of
Using CMS. continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.9(h)(1)-(3), (5)-(6)....... Notification of Yes.................... Section 63.4510
Compliance Status. specifies 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/ Yes....................
Reporting--Applicabili
ty and General
Information.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)................... General Recordkeeping Yes.................... Additional requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.4530 and
63.4531.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i)-(ii)........... Recordkeeping of Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.4530(h).
Occurrence and 2021. No on and after
Duration of Startups January 5, 2021.
and Shutdowns and of
Failures to Meet
Standards.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iii).............. Recordkeeping Relevant Yes....................
to Maintenance of Air
Pollution Control and
Monitoring Equipment.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(v)........... Actions Taken to Yes before January 5, See Sec.
Minimize Emissions 2021. No on and after 63.4530(h)(4) for a
During SSM. January 5, 2021. record of actions
taken to minimize
emissions during a
deviation from the
standard.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vi)............... Recordkeeping for CMS Yes before January 5, See Sec. 63.4530(h)
Malfunctions. 2021. No on and after for records of periods
January 5, 2021. of deviation from the
standard, including
instances where a CMS
is inoperative or out-
of-control.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vii)-(xii)........ Records................ Yes....................
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiii)............. ....................... No..................... Subpart PPPP does not
require the use of
continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv).............. ....................... Yes....................
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)................... Recordkeeping Yes....................
Requirements for
Applicability
Determinations.
Sec. 63.10(c)(1), (5)-(6).......... Additional Yes....................
Recordkeeping
Requirements for
Sources with CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c)(7)-(8)............... Additional No..................... See Sec. 63.4530(h)
Recordkeeping for records of periods
Requirements for of deviation from the
Sources with CMS. standard, including
instances where a CMS
is inoperative or out-
of-control.
Sec. 63.10(c)(10)-(14)............. Additional Yes....................
Recordkeeping
Requirements for
Sources with CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c)(15).................. Records Regarding the Yes before January 5,
SSMP. 2021. No on and after
January 5, 2021.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)................... General Reporting Yes.................... Additional requirements
Requirements. are specified in Sec.
63.4520.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)................... Report of Performance Yes.................... Additional requirements
Test Results. are specified in Sec.
63.4520(b).
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)................... Reporting Opacity or No..................... Subpart PPPP 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 41160]]
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)................... SSM Reports............ Yes before January 5, See Sec.
2021. No on and after 63.4520(a)(7).
January 5, 2021.
Sec. 63.10(e)(1)-(2)............... Additional CMS Reports. No..................... Subpart PPPP does not
require the use of
continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)................... Excess Emissions/CMS No..................... Section 63.4520(b)
Performance Reports. specifies the contents
of periodic compliance
reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)(4)................... COMS Data Reports...... No..................... Subpart PPPP does not
specify requirements
for opacity or COMS.
Sec. 63.10(f)...................... Recordkeeping/Reporting Yes....................
Waiver.
Sec. 63.11......................... Control Device No..................... Subpart PPPP 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......................... IBR.................... Yes....................
Sec. 63.15......................... Availability of Yes....................
Information/
Confidentiality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
59. Table 5 to Subpart PPPP of part 63 is added to read as follows:
Table 5 to Subpart PPPP of Part 63--List of HAP 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
[[Page 41161]]
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
60. Appendix A to Subpart PPPP of Part 63 is amended by revising
section 1.2 to read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart PPPP of Part 63--Determination of Weight Volatile
Matter Content and Weight Solids Content of Reactive Adhesives
* * * * *
1.2 Principle: One-part and multiple-part reactive adhesives
undergo a reactive conversion from liquid to solid during the
application and assembly process. Reactive adhesives are applied to
a single surface, but then are usually quickly covered with another
mating surface to achieve a bonded assembly. The monomers employed
in such systems typically react and are converted to non-volatile
solids. If left uncovered, as in a EPA Method 24 (or ASTM D2369-10
(Reapproved 2015)\e\) test, the reaction is inhibited by the
presence of oxygen and volatile loss of the reactive components
competes more heavily with the cure reaction. If this were to happen
under normal use conditions, the adhesives would not provide
adequate performance. This method minimizes this undesirable
deterioration of the adhesive performance.
* * * * *
Subpart RRRR--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
0
61. Section 63.4965 is amended by adding paragraphs (b)(1) through (3)
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4965 How do I determine the add-on control device emission
destruction or removal efficiency?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Use EPA Method 25 to appendix A-7 to part 60 if the add-on
control device is an oxidizer and you expect the total gaseous organic
concentration as carbon to be more than 50 parts per million (ppm) at
the control device outlet.
(2) Use EPA Method 25A to appendix A-7 to part 60 if the add-on
control device is an oxidizer and you expect the total gaseous organic
concentration as carbon to be 50 ppm or less at the control device
outlet.
(3) Use EPA Method 25A to appendix A-7 to part 60 if the add-on
control device is not an oxidizer.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-05908 Filed 7-7-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P