PROPOSED RULEMAKING

ENVIRONMENTAL

QUALITY BOARD

[ 25 PA. CODE CH. 129 ]

Large Appliance and Metal Furniture Surface Coating Processes

The Environmental Quality Board (Board) proposes to

amend Chapter 129 (relating to standards for sources) to

read as set forth in Annex A.

The proposed rulemaking would amend Chapter 129 to

limit emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)

from the use and application of coatings and cleaning

materials in large appliance and metal furniture surface

coating processes. The proposal would add § 129.52a

(relating to control of VOC emissions from large appliance

and metal furniture surface coating processes) and amend

§§ 129.51 and 129.52 (relating to general; and surface

coating processes).

This proposal was adopted by the Board at its meeting

on November 17, 2009.

A. Effective Date

This proposed rulemaking will be effective upon finalform publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.

B. Contact Persons

For further information, contact Arleen J. Shulman,

Chief, Division of Air Resource Management, P. O. Box

8468, Rachel Carson State Office Building, Harrisburg,

PA 17105-8468, (717) 772-3436, or Kristen Campfield

Furlan, Assistant Counsel, Bureau of Regulatory Counsel,

P. O. Box 8464, Rachel Carson State Office Building,

Harrisburg, PA 17105-8464, (717) 787-7060. Information

regarding submitting comments on this proposal appears

in Section J of this preamble. Persons with a disability

may use the Pennsylvania AT&T Relay Service by calling

(800) 654-5984 (TDD users) or (800) 654-5988 (voice

users). This proposal is available electronically through

the Department of Environmental Protection’s (Department) web site at www.depweb.state.pa.us (Select Public

Participation).

C. Statutory Authority

This proposed rulemaking is authorized under section 5

of the Air Pollution Control Act (APCA) (35 P. S. § 4005),

which in subsection (a)(1) grants the Board the authority

to adopt rules and regulations for the prevention, control,

reduction and abatement of air pollution in this Commonwealth, and which in subsection (a)(8) grants the Board

the authority to adopt rules and regulations designed to

implement the provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

D. Background and Purpose

The purpose of this proposed rulemaking is to reduce

VOC emissions from large appliance and metal furniture

surface coating operations. VOCs are a precursor for

ozone formation. Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by surface coatings to the atmosphere, but is

formed by a photochemical reaction between VOCs and

nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the presence of sunlight. The

proposed rulemaking adopts the emission limits and other

requirements of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) 2007 Control Techniques Guidelines

(CTGs) for large appliance coatings and metal furniture

coatings in order to meet Federal CAA requirements.

The EPA is responsible for establishing National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six criteria

pollutants considered harmful to public health and the

environment: ozone, particulate matter, NOx, carbon

monoxide, sulfur dioxide and lead. The CAA established

two types of NAAQS: primary standards, limits set to

protect public health; and secondary standards, limits set

to protect public welfare, including protection against

visibility impairment and from damage to animals, crops,

vegetation and buildings. The EPA has established primary and secondary ozone NAAQS to protect public

health and welfare.

When ground-level ozone is present in concentrations in

excess of the Federal health-based 8-hour NAAQS for

ozone, public health and welfare are adversely affected.

Ozone exposure correlates to increased respiratory disease and higher mortality rates. Ozone can inflame and

damage the lining of the lungs. Within a few days, the

damaged cells are shed and replaced. Over a long time

period, lung tissue may become permanently scarred,

resulting in permanent loss of lung function and a lower

quality of life. When ambient ozone levels are high, more

people with asthma have attacks that require a doctor’s

attention or use of medication. Ozone also makes people

more sensitive to allergens including pet dander, pollen

and dust mites, all of which can trigger asthma attacks.

The EPA has concluded that there is an association

between high levels of ambient ozone and increased

hospital admissions for respiratory ailments including

asthma. While children, the elderly and those with

respiratory problems are most at risk, even healthy

individuals may experience increased respiratory ailments and other symptoms when they are exposed to

high levels of ambient ozone while engaged in activities

that involve physical exertion. High levels of ozone also

affect animals in ways similar to humans.

In addition to causing adverse human and animal

health effects, the EPA has concluded that ozone affects

vegetation and ecosystems, leading to reductions in agricultural crop and commercial forest yields by destroying

chlorophyll; reduced growth and survivability of tree

seedlings; and increased plant susceptibility to disease,

pests and other environmental stresses, including harsh

weather. In long-lived species, these effects may become

evident only after several years or even decades and have

the potential for long-term adverse impacts on forest

ecosystems. Ozone damage to the foliage of trees and

other plants can decrease the aesthetic value of ornamental species used in residential landscaping, as well as the

natural beauty of parks and recreation areas. Through

deposition, ground-level ozone also contributes to pollution in the Chesapeake Bay. The economic value of some

welfare losses due to ozone can be calculated, such as

crop yield loss from both reduced seed production and

visible injury to some leaf crops, including lettuce, spinach and tobacco, as well as visible injury to ornamental

plants, including grass, flowers and shrubs. Other types

of welfare loss may not be quantifiable, such as the

reduced aesthetic value of trees growing in heavily visited

parks.

High levels of ground-level ozone can also cause damage to buildings and synthetic fibers, including nylon, and

reduced visibility on roadways and in natural areas. The

implementation of additional measures to address ozone

air quality nonattainment in this Commonwealth is necessary to protect the public health and welfare, animal

and plant health and welfare and the environment.

420

PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN, VOL. 40, NO. 3, JANUARY 16, 2010
In July 1997, the EPA established primary and secondary ozone standards at a level of 0.08 parts per million

(ppm) averaged over 8 hours. See 62 FR 38855 (July 18,

1997). In 2004, the EPA designated 37 counties in this

Commonwealth as 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas for

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS see 69 FR 2385 at p. 2393

(April 30, 2004). The areas in which the 1997 standard

has been attained are required to have permanent and

enforceable control measures to ensure violations do not

occur for the next decade. The Commonwealth must

demonstrate that the two areas currently not attaining

the 1997 standard will meet the 1997 standard as

expeditiously as practicable. If these two areas do not

attain the standard during the 2009 ozone season, additional reductions will be required.

In March 2008, the EPA lowered the standards to 0.075

ppm averaged over 8 hours to provide even greater

protection for children, other at-risk populations and the

environment against the array of ozone-induced adverse

health and welfare effects. See 73 FR 16436 (March 27,

2008). The EPA is reconsidering the March 2008 ozone

NAAQS and on January 7, 2010 announced a proposal to

set a more protective 8-hour ozone standard between

0.060 and 0.070 ppm. The final revised ozone NAAQS is

expected in August 2010.

There are no Federal statutory or regulatory limits for

VOC emissions from large appliance and metal furniture

surface coating operations. State regulations to control

VOC emissions from large appliance and metal furniture

surface coating operations are required under Federal

law, however, and will be reviewed by the EPA for

whether they meet the ‘‘reasonably available control

technology’’ (RACT) requirements of the CAA and its

implementing regulations. Consumer and Commercial

Products; Control Techniques Guidelines in lieu of Regulations for Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings; Metal Furniture

Coatings; and Large Appliance Coatings, 72 FR 57215,

57218 (October 9, 2007).

Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides that State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for nonattainment areas must

include ‘‘reasonably available control measures,’’ including

RACT, for sources of emissions. 42 U.S.C.A. § 7502(c)(1).

Section 182(b)(2) of the CAA provides that for moderate

ozone nonattainment areas, states must revise their SIPs

to include RACT for sources of VOC emissions covered by

a CTG document issued by the EPA prior to the area’s

date of attainment. 42 U.S.C.A. § 7511a(b)(2). More importantly, section 184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA requires that

states in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR), including

the Commonwealth, submit a SIP revision requiring

implementation of RACT for all sources of VOC emissions

in the state covered by a specific CTG. 42 U.S.C.A.

§ 7511c(b)(1)(B).

Section 183(e) of the CAA directs the EPA to list for

regulation those categories of products that account for at

least 80% of the VOC emissions from consumer and

commercial products in ozone nonattainment areas. 42

U.S.C.A. § 7511b(e). Section 183(e)(3)(C) of the CAA

further provides that the EPA may issue a CTG in place

of a National regulation for a product category where the

EPA determines that the CTG will be ‘‘substantially as

effective as regulations’’ in reducing emissions of VOC in

ozone nonattainment areas. 42 U.S.C.A. § 7511b(e)(3)(C).

In 1995, the EPA listed large appliance coatings and

metal furniture coatings on its section 183(e) list and, in

2007, issued CTGs for these two product categories. See

60 FR 15264 (March 23, 1995) and 72 FR 57215 (October

9, 2007). In the 2007 notice, the EPA determined that the

CTGs would be substantially as effective as National

regulations in reducing VOC emissions from these product categories in ozone nonattainment areas. 72 FR at p.

57220.

The CTG provides states with the EPA’s recommendation of what constitutes RACT for the covered category.

States can use the recommendations provided in the CTG

to inform their own determination as to what constitutes

RACT for VOC emissions from the covered category. State

air pollution control agencies are free to implement other

technically sound approaches that are consistent with the

CAA requirements and the EPA’s implementing regulations or guidelines.

The Department has reviewed the recommendations

included in the 2007 CTGs for large appliance and metal

furniture coatings for their applicability to the ozone

reduction measures necessary for this Commonwealth.

The Department has determined that the measures provided in the CTGs for large appliance and metal furniture

coatings are appropriate to be implemented in this Commonwealth as RACT for this category.

This rulemaking, if adopted as a final rule, would assist

in reducing VOC emissions locally as well as reducing the

transport of VOC emissions and ground-level ozone to

downwind states. Adoption of VOC emission requirements

for large appliance and metal furniture surface coating

operations is part of the Commonwealth’s strategy, in

concert with other OTR jurisdictions, to further reduce

transport of VOC ozone precursors and ground-level

ozone throughout the OTR to attain and maintain the

8-hour ozone NAAQS. The proposed rulemaking is required under the CAA and is reasonably necessary to

attain and maintain the health-based 8-hour ozone

NAAQS in this Commonwealth. When final, this rulemaking will be submitted to the EPA as a revision to the

SIP.

The concepts of the proposed rulemaking were discussed with the Air Quality Technical Advisory Committee (AQTAC) at its October 30 and December 11, 2008,

meetings. The proposed rulemaking was discussed with

the AQTAC on May 28, 2009. The AQTAC concurred with

the Department’s recommendation to present the proposed amendments to the Board for approval for publication as a proposed rulemaking. The Department also

consulted with the Citizens Advisory Council on July 21,

2009, and with the Small Business Compliance Advisory

Committee on October 22, 2008, and April 22 and July

22, 2009.

E. Summary of Regulatory Requirements

The proposed rulemaking would amend § 129.51(a) to

extend its coverage to large appliance and metal furniture

surface coating processes covered by this proposed rulemaking, as well as to paper, film and foil surface coating

processes and flat wood paneling surface coating processes, which are covered in parallel rulemakings. Section

129.51(a) provides an alternative method for owners and

operators of facilities to achieve compliance with air

emission limits.

The proposed rulemaking would amend § 129.52 by

adding subsection (i). Section 129.52 specifies requirements and emission limits for various surface coating

PROPOSED RULEMAKING 421

PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN, VOL. 40, NO. 3, JANUARY 16, 2010
processes. The amendment in this proposed rulemaking

would clarify in new subsection (i) that the requirements

and limits already specified in § 129.52 for metal furniture coatings, large appliance coatings and paper coatings

are superseded by the requirements and limits that will

be adopted in this proposed rulemaking and in the

proposed rulemaking for paper, film and foil surface

coating processes.

One emission limit is expressed in § 129.52 for large

appliance coatings and one emission limit is expressed for

metal furniture coatings, whereas in the CTGs separate

emission limits are expressed for eight different coating

types within each of these two categories. Several of the

limits in the CTGs are more stringent and several are

less stringent than the existing limits expressed in

§ 129.52. As is explained in the discussion, as follows,

regarding Tables I and II (relating to emission limits of

VOCs for large appliance surface coatings; and emission

limits of VOCs for metal furniture surface coatings), the

more stringent limits are adopted in this proposed rulemaking.

The proposed rulemaking would add § 129.52a to regulate VOC emissions from large appliance and metal

furniture surface coating processes. The applicability of

this new section is described in subsection (a), which

establishes that § 129.52a applies to the owner and

operator of a large appliance or metal furniture surface

coating process if the total actual VOC emissions from all

large appliance or metal furniture surface coating operations, including related cleaning activities, at the facility

are equal to or greater than 15 pounds (6.8 kilograms)

per day or 2.7 tons (2,455 kilograms) per 12-month rolling

period, before consideration of controls. The emission

limits and other requirements of this section supersede

the emission limits and other requirements of § 129.52.

Basing the applicability on a 12-month rolling period is

generally considered to be more stringent than basing it

on a calendar year, as in § 129.52, but is consistent with

the CTGs.

Proposed subsection (b) explains that the requirements

of § 129.52a supersede the requirements of a RACT

permit for VOC emissions from a large appliance or metal

furniture surface coating operation already issued to the

owner or operator of a source subject to § 129.52a, except

to the extent the RACT permit contains more stringent

requirements.

Proposed subsection (c) establishes VOC emission limits. Beginning January 1, 2011, a person may not cause or

permit the emission into the outdoor atmosphere of VOCs

from a large appliance or metal furniture surface coating

process, unless: (1) the VOC content of each as applied

coating is equal to or less than the limit specified in one

of the two tables in § 129.52a; or (2) the overall weight of

VOCs emitted to the atmosphere is reduced through the

use of vapor recovery, incineration or another method that

is acceptable under § 129.51(a). The second option also

addresses the overall efficiency of a control system.

Proposed subsection (d) identifies daily records that

must be kept to demonstrate compliance with § 129.52a,

including records of parameters and VOC content of each

coating, thinner, component and cleaning solvent, as

supplied, and the VOC content of each as applied coating

or cleaning solvent.

Proposed subsection (e) requires that the records be

maintained for 2 years and submitted to the Department

on request.

Under proposed subsection (f), an owner or operator

subject to § 129.52a may not cause or permit the emission into the outdoor atmosphere of VOCs from the

application of large appliance or metal furniture surface

coatings, unless the coatings are applied using electrostatic coating, roller coating, flow coating, dip coating

(including electrodeposition), high volume-low pressure

(HVLP) spray, or brush coating. An owner or operator

may use another coating application method if a request

is submitted in writing that demonstrates that the

method is capable of achieving a transfer efficiency

equivalent to or better than that achieved by the other

methods listed in subsection (f), and is approved in

writing by the Department prior to use.

Proposed subsection (g) exempts stencil coatings,

safety-indicating coatings, solid-film lubricants, electricinsulating coatings, thermal-conducting coatings,

touch-up and repair coatings and coating applications

using hand-held aerosol cans from the VOC coating

content limits in Tables I and II of proposed § 129.52a.

Subsection (g) also exempts a coating used exclusively for

determining product quality and commercial acceptance

and other small quantity coatings, if the quantity of

coating used does not exceed 50 gallons per year for a

single coating and a total of 200 gallons per year for all

coatings combined for the facility and if the owner or

operator of the facility requests, in writing, and the

Department approves, in writing, the exemption prior to

use of the coating.

Proposed subsection (h) establishes work practices that

an owner or operator of a large appliance or metal

furniture surface coating process subject to § 129.52a

must comply with for coating-related activities.

Proposed subsection (i) establishes work practices that

an owner or operator of a large appliance or metal

furniture surface coating process subject to § 129.52a

must comply with for cleaning materials.

Proposed Table I establishes emission limits for VOCs

for eight types of large appliance surface coatings, expressed in weight of VOC per volume of coating solids

(kilograms per liter (kg/l) or pounds per gallon (lb/gal)), as

applied. Limits are prescribed for coatings that are baked

and coatings that are air dried. The emission limits for

the following coating types are taken from the large

appliance coatings CTG: Baked (kg/l and lb/gal)—

‘‘General, one component’’ and ‘‘General, multicomponent’’; Air Dried (kg/l)—‘‘General, one component’’;

and Air Dried (lb/gal)—‘‘General, one component,’’ ‘‘General, multi-component’’ and ‘‘Extreme high gloss.’’ The

emission limits for Air Dried (kg/l)—‘‘General, multicomponent’’ and ‘‘Extreme high gloss’’ are taken from both

the CTG and the emission limit for ‘‘large appliance

coatings’’ in § 129.52, as they are the same in both

places. The remaining emission limits are taken from

§ 129.52 because the limit in § 129.52 is more stringent

than the recommended limits in the CTG. Whenever the

limit in § 129.52 is the same as or more stringent than

the recommended limit in the CTG, the limit in § 129.52

is listed due to the CAA prohibition against backsliding

from existing emission control requirements.

Proposed Table II establishes emission limits for VOCs

for eight types of metal furniture surface coatings, expressed in weight of VOC per volume of coating solids

(kg/l or lb/gal), as applied. Limits are prescribed for

coatings that are baked and coatings that are air dried.

The emission limits from the following coating types are

taken from the metal furniture CTG: Baked (kg/l and

lb/gal)—‘‘General, one component’’ and ‘‘General, multicomponent’’; and Air Dried (kg/l and lb/gal)—‘‘General,

one component,’’ ‘‘General, multi-component’’ and ‘‘Ex422 PROPOSED RULEMAKING

PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN, VOL. 40, NO. 3, JANUARY 16, 2010
treme high gloss.’’ The emission limits for Baked (kg/l)—

‘‘Extreme high gloss,’’ ‘‘Extreme performance,’’ ‘‘Heat resistant’’ and ‘‘Solar absorbent’’ are taken from both the CTG

and the emission limit for ‘‘metal furniture coatings’’ in

§ 129.52, as they are the same in both places. The

remaining emission limits are taken from § 129.52 because the limit in § 129.52 is more stringent than the

recommended limits in the CTG. Whenever the limit in

§ 129.52 is the same as or more stringent than the

recommended limit in the CTG, the limit in § 129.52 is

listed due to the CAA prohibition against backsliding

from existing emission control requirements.

F. Benefits, Costs and Compliance

Benefits

Implementation of the proposed control measure would

benefit the health and welfare of the approximately 12

million humans, animals, crops, vegetation and natural

areas of this Commonwealth by reducing emissions of

VOCs, which are precursors to ground-level ozone air

pollution. Although the proposed amendments are designed primarily to address ozone air quality, the reformulation or substitution of coating products to meet the

VOC content limits applicable to users may also result in

reduction of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions,

which are also a serious health threat.

The proposed rulemaking provides as one compliance

option that coatings used on or applied to large appliance

or metal furniture products manufactured in this Commonwealth meet specified limits for VOC content, usually

through substitution of low VOC-content solvents or

water for the high VOC-content solvents. The reduced

levels of high VOC-content solvents would also benefit

water quality through reduced loading on water treatment plants and in reduced quantities of high VOCcontent solvents leaching into the ground. Owners and

operators of affected large appliance and metal furniture

coating process facilities may also reduce VOC emissions

through the use of add-on controls, or a combination of

complying coatings and add-on controls.

In this Commonwealth approximately four large appliance surface coating operations combine to emit an

estimated total of 18.2 tons of VOCs per year; about 16

metal furniture surface coating operations combine to

emit an estimated total of 50.33 tons of VOCs per year.

The EPA estimates that implementation of the recommended control options for large appliance coatings processes will result in approximately a 30% reduction in

VOC emissions. The maximum anticipated additional

annual VOC reductions from the large appliance surface

coating facilities as a result of this rulemaking is approximately 5.5 tons (18.2 tons x 30%).

The EPA estimates that implementation of the recommended control options for metal furniture coatings processes will result in approximately a 35% reduction in

VOC emissions. The maximum anticipated additional

annual VOC reductions from the metal furniture surface

coating facilities as a result of this rulemaking is approximately 17.6 tons (50.33 tons x 35%).

Compliance Costs

The costs of complying with the proposed amendments

include the cost of using alternative product formulations,

such as low-VOC or water-based coatings, and the cost of

using add-on controls. The facility owner or operator

would be given the flexibility to choose controls. Based on

information provided by the EPA in the large appliance

coating CTG, the cost effectiveness of reducing VOC

emissions from large appliance surface coating operations

is estimated to be $500 per ton of VOC reduced. This

estimate is based on the use of low VOC-content coatings

for control. The estimated annual costs for the owners or

operators of the affected large appliance surface coating

facilities in this Commonwealth, combined, is $2,750 (5.5

tons VOC reduced x $500 per ton reduced).

Similarly, based on information provided by the EPA in

the metal furniture coating CTG, the cost effectiveness of

reducing VOC emissions from metal furniture surface

coating operations is estimated to be $200 per ton of VOC

reduced. This estimate is based on the use of low

VOC-content coatings for control. The estimated annual

costs for the owners or operators of the affected metal

furniture coating facilities in this Commonwealth, combined, is $3,520 (17.6 tons VOC reduced x $200 per ton

reduced).

The potential total annual costs to the regulated industry of $2,750 for large appliance surface coating operations and $3,520 for metal furniture surface coating

operations are negligible compared to the improved

health and environmental benefits that would be gained

from this proposed rulemaking.

The implementation of the work practice requirements

for cleaning materials is expected to result in a net cost

savings. The recommended work practices should reduce

the amount of cleaning materials used by reducing the

amount of cleaning materials lost to evaporation, spillage

and waste.

Compliance Assistance Plan

The Department plans to educate and assist the public

and regulated community in understanding the newly

revised requirements and how to comply with them. This

will be accomplished through the Department’s ongoing

compliance assistance program.

Paperwork Requirements

The owners and operators of affected large appliance or

metal furniture surface coating operations would be required to keep daily operational records of information for

coatings and cleaning solvents sufficient to demonstrate

compliance, including identification of materials, VOC

content and volumes used. The records must be maintained for 2 years and submitted to the Department upon

request. Persons claiming the small quantity exemption

or use of exempt coating would be required to keep

records demonstrating the validity of the exemption.

Persons seeking to comply through the use of add-on

controls would be required to meet the applicable reporting requirements specified in Chapter 139 (relating to

sampling and testing).

G. Pollution Prevention

The Federal Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (42

U.S.C.A. §§ 13101—13109) established a National policy

that promotes pollution prevention as the preferred

means for achieving State environmental protection goals.

The Department encourages pollution prevention, which

is the reduction or elimination of pollution at its source,

through the substitution of environmentally friendly materials, more efficient use of raw materials and the

incorporation of energy efficiency strategies. Pollution

prevention practices can provide greater environmental

protection with greater efficiency because they can result

in significant cost savings to facilities that permanently

achieve or move beyond compliance. This proposal has

incorporated the following pollution prevention incentives:

PROPOSED RULEMAKING 423

PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN, VOL. 40, NO. 3, JANUARY 16, 2010
The proposed amendments will assure that the citizens

and the environment of this Commonwealth experience

the benefits of reduced emissions of VOCs and HAPs from

large appliance and metal furniture surface coating processes. Although the proposed amendments are designed

primarily to address ozone air quality, the reformulation

or substitution of coating products to meet the VOC

content limits applicable to users may also result in

reduction of HAP emissions, which are also a serious

health threat. The proposed rulemaking provides as one

compliance option that coatings used on or applied to

large appliance or metal furniture products manufactured

in this Commonwealth meet specified limits for VOC

content, usually through substitution of low VOC-content

solvents or water for the high VOC-content solvents. The

reduced levels of high VOC-content solvents would also

benefit water quality through reduced loading on water

treatment plants and in reduced quantities of high VOCcontent solvents leaching into the ground. Owners and

operators of affected large appliance and metal furniture

surface coating process facilities may also reduce VOC

emissions through the use of add-on controls, or a

combination of complying coatings and add-on controls.

H. Sunset Review

These regulations will be reviewed in accordance with

the sunset review schedule published by the Department

to determine whether the regulations effectively fulfill the

goals for which they were intended.

I. Regulatory Review

Under section 5(a) of the Regulatory Review Act (71

P. S. § 745.5(a)), on January 5, 2010, the Department

submitted a copy of these proposed amendments to the

Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) and

the House and Senate Environmental Resources and

Energy Committees (Committees). In addition to submitting the proposed amendments, the Department has

provided IRRC and the Committees with a copy of a

detailed Regulatory Analysis Form prepared by the Department. A copy of this material is available to the

public upon request.

Under section 5(g) of the Regulatory Review Act, IRRC

may convey any comments, recommendations or objections to the proposed rulemaking within 30 days of the

close of the public comment period. The comments, recommendations or objections shall specify the regulatory

review criteria that have not been met. The Regulatory

Review Act specifies detailed procedures for review of

these issues by the Department, the General Assembly

and the Governor prior to final-form publication of the

regulations.

J. Public Comments

Written Comments—Interested persons are invited to

submit comments, suggestions or objections regarding the

proposed rulemaking to the Environmental Quality

Board, P. O. Box 8477, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8477 (express mail: Rachel Carson State Office Building, 16th

Floor, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg, PA 17101-2301).

Comments submitted by facsimile will not be accepted.

Comments, suggestions or objections must be received by

the Board by March 22, 2010. Interested persons may

also submit a summary of their comments to the Board.

The summary may not exceed one page in length and

must also be received by the Board by March 22, 2010.

The one-page summary will be provided to each member

of the Board in the agenda packet distributed prior to the

meeting at which the final-form regulation will be considered.

Electronic Comments—Comments may be submitted

electronically to the Board at RegComments@state.pa.us

and must also be received by the Board by March 22,

2010. A subject heading of the proposal and a return

name and address must be included in each transmission.

If an acknowledgement of electronic comments is not

received by the sender within 2 working days, the

comments should be retransmitted to the Board to ensure

receipt.

K. Public Hearings

The Board will hold public hearings in Pittsburgh,

Harrisburg and Norristown for the purpose of accepting

comments on this proposed rulemaking. The hearings will

be held as follows:

February 16, 2010

1 p.m.

Department of Environmental

Protection

Southwest Regional Office

Waterfront Conference Room A and B

400 Waterfront Drive

Pittsburgh, PA 15222-4745

February 17, 2010

1 p.m.

Department of Environmental

Protection

Rachel Carson State Office Building

Conference Room 105

400 Market Street

Harrisburg, PA 17105

February 18, 2010

1 p.m.

Department of Environmental

Protection

Southeast Regional Office

Delaware Conference Room

2 East Main Street

Norristown, PA 19401

Persons wishing to present testimony at a hearing are

requested to contact the Environmental Quality Board,

P. O. Box 8477, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8477, (717) 787-

4526, at least 1 week in advance of the hearing to reserve

a time to present testimony. Oral testimony is limited to

10 minutes for each witness. Witnesses are requested to

submit three written copies of their oral testimony to the

hearing Chairperson to aid in transcribing the hearing.

Organizations are limited to designating one witness to

present testimony on their behalf at each hearing.

Persons in need of accommodations as provided for in

the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 should

contact the Board at (717) 787-4526, or through the

Pennsylvania AT&T Relay Service at (800) 654-5984

(TDD), or (800) 654-5988 (voice users) to discuss how the

Board may accommodate their needs.

JOHN HANGER,

Chairperson

Fiscal Note: 7-449. No fiscal impact; (8) recommends

adoptions.

Annex A

TITLE 25. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

PART I. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

Subpart C. PROTECTION OF NATURAL

RESOURCES

ARTICLE III. AIR RESOURCES

CHAPTER 129. STANDARDS FOR SOURCES

SOURCES OF VOCs

§ 129.51. General.

(a) Equivalency. Compliance with §§ 129.52, 129.52a,

129.52b (Editor’s Note: The Department proposed to

424 PROPOSED RULEMAKING

PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN, VOL. 40, NO. 3, JANUARY 16, 2010
add § 129.52b at 39 Pa.B. 6460 (November 7, 2009),

129.52c (Editor’s Note: The Department proposed to

add § 129.52c at 39 Pa.B. 6061, 6067 (October 17,

2009.) and 129.54—129.73 may be achieved by alternative methods if the following exist:

*****

(3) Compliance by a method other than the use of a low

VOC coating or ink which meets the applicable emission

limitation in §§ 129.52, 129.52a, 129.52b, 129.52c,

129.67 and 129.73 [ (relating to surface coating processes; graphic arts systems; and aerospace manufacturing and rework) ] shall be determined on the

basis of equal volumes of solids.

*****

(6) The alternative compliance method is incorporated

into a plan approval or operating permit, or both, reviewed by the EPA, including the use of an air cleaning

device to comply with § 129.52, § 129.52a, § 129.52b,

§ 129.52c, § 129.67, § 129.68(b)(2) and (c)(2) or § 129.73.

*****

§ 129.52. Surface coating processes.

*****

(i) Beginning January 1, 2011, the requirements

and limits for metal furniture coatings, large appliance coatings and paper coatings are superseded

by the requirements and limits in §§ 129.52a and

129.52b (Editor’s Note: The Department proposed to

add § 129.52b at 39 Pa.B. 6460 (November 7, 2009)

(relating to control of VOC emissions from large

appliance and metal furniture surface coating processes; and control of VOC emissions from paper,

film and foil surface coating processes), respectively.

*****

(Editor’s Note: Section 129.52a is new and printed in

regular type to enhance readability.)

§ 129.52a. Control of VOC emissions from large appliance and metal furniture surface coating processes.

(a) Applicability. This section applies as follows:

(1) This section applies to the owner and operator of a

large appliance or metal furniture surface coating process

if the total actual VOC emissions from all large appliance

or metal furniture surface coating operations, including

related cleaning activities, at the facility are equal to or

greater than 15 pounds (6.8 kilograms) per day or 2.7

tons (2,455 kilograms) per 12-month rolling period, before

consideration of controls.

(2) The emission limits and other requirements of this

section supersede the emission limits and other requirements of § 129.52 (relating to surface coating processes)

for large appliance and metal furniture surface coating

processes.

(b) Existing RACT permit. The requirements of this

section supersede the requirements of a RACT permit

issued to the owner or operator of a source subject to

subsection (a)(1) prior to January 1, 2011, under

§§ 129.91—129.95 (relating to stationary sources of NOx

and VOCs) to control, reduce or minimize VOCs from a

large appliance or metal furniture surface coating operation, except to the extent the RACT permit contains more

stringent requirements.

(c) Emission limits. Beginning January 1, 2011, a

person subject to this section may not cause or permit the

emission into the outdoor atmosphere of VOCs from a

large appliance or metal furniture surface coating process, unless one of the following limitations is met:

(1) The VOC content of each as applied coating is equal

to or less than the limit specified in Table I or Table II

(relating to emission limits of VOCs for large appliance

surface coatings; and emission limits of VOCs for metal

furniture surface coatings).

(i) The VOC content of the as applied coating, expressed in units of weight of VOC per volume of coating

solids, shall be calculated as follows:

VOC = (Wo)(Dc)/Vn

Where:

VOC = VOC content in lb VOC/gal of coating solids

Wo = Weight percent of VOC (Wv-Ww-Wex)

Wv = Weight percent of total volatiles (100%-weight percent solids)

Ww = Weight percent of water

Wex = Weight percent of exempt solvent(s)

Dc = Density of coating, lb/gal, at 25° C

Vn = Volume percent of solids of the as applied coating

(ii) The VOC content of a dip coating, expressed in

units of weight of VOC per volume of coating solids, shall

be calculated on a 30-day rolling average basis using the

following equation:

i (Woi × Dci × Qi) + J (WoJ × DdJ × QJ)

VOCA = i (Vni × Qi

)

Where:

VOCA = VOC content in lb VOC/gal of coating solids for a

dip coating, calculated on a 30-day rolling average basis

Woi = Percent VOC by weight of each as supplied coating

(i) added to the dip coating process, expressed as a

decimal fraction (that is 55% = 0.55)

Dci = Density of each as supplied coating (i) added to the

dip coating process, in pounds per gallon

Qi = Quantity of each as supplied coating (i) added to the

dip coating process, in gallons

Vni = Percent solids by volume of each as supplied coating

(i) added to the dip coating process, expressed as a

decimal fraction

WoJ = Percent VOC by weight of each thinner (J) added to

the dip coating process, expressed as a decimal fraction

DdJ = Density of each thinner (J) added to the dip coating

process, in pounds per gallon

QJ = Quantity of each thinner (J) added to the dip coating

process, in gallons

(iii) Sampling and testing shall be done in accordance

with the procedures and test methods specified in Chapter 139 (relating to sampling and testing).

(2) The overall weight of VOCs emitted to the atmosphere is reduced through the use of vapor recovery or

incineration or another method that is acceptable under

§ 129.51(a) (relating to general). The overall efficiency of

a control system, as determined by the test methods and

procedures specified in Chapter 139, may be no less than

90% or may be no less than the equivalent efficiency as

calculated by the following equation, whichever is less

stringent:

O = (1  E/V) × 100

PROPOSED RULEMAKING 425

PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN, VOL. 40, NO. 3, JANUARY 16, 2010
Where:

V = The VOC content of the as applied coating, in lb

VOC/gal of coating solids.

E = The Table I or Table II limit in lb VOC /gal of coating

solids.

O = The overall required control efficiency.

(d) Compliance monitoring procedures. The owner or

operator of a facility subject to this section shall maintain

records sufficient to demonstrate compliance with this

section. At a minimum, the owner or operator shall

maintain daily records of:

(1) The following parameters for each coating, thinner,

component and cleaning solvent as supplied:

(i) Name and identification number.

(ii) Volume used.

(iii) Mix ratio.

(iv) Density or specific gravity.

(v) Weight percent of total volatiles, water, solids and

exempt solvents.

(vi) Volume percent of solids for each Table I or Table

II coating used in the surface coating process.

(2) The VOC content of each coating, thinner, component and cleaning solvent as supplied.

(3) The VOC content of each as applied coating or

cleaning solvent.

(e) Recordkeeping and reporting requirements. The

records required under subsection (d) shall be maintained

for 2 years and submitted to the Department on request.

(f) Coating application methods. A person subject to

this section may not cause or permit the emission into the

outdoor atmosphere of VOCs from the application of large

appliance or metal furniture surface coatings, unless the

coatings are applied using one or more of the following

coating application methods:

(1) Electrostatic coating.

(2) Roller coating.

(3) Flow coating.

(4) Dip coating, including electrodeposition.

(5) High volume-low pressure (HVLP) spray.

(6) Brush coating.

(7) Other coating application method, if approved in

writing by the Department prior to use.

(i) The coating application method must be capable of

achieving a transfer efficiency equivalent to or better

than that achieved by the methods listed in paragraphs

(1)—(6).

(ii) The request for approval must be submitted in

writing.

(g) Exempt coatings and coating operations. The VOC

coating content limits in Table I and Table II do not apply

to the following types of coatings and coating operations:

(1) Stencil coatings.

(2) Safety-indicating coatings.

(3) Solid-film lubricants.

(4) Electric-insulating coatings.

(5) Thermal-conducting coatings.

(6) Touch-up and repair coatings.

(7) Coating applications using hand-held aerosol cans.

(8) A coating used exclusively for determining product

quality and commercial acceptance and other small quantity coatings, if the coating meets the following criteria:

(i) The quantity of coating used does not exceed 50

gallons per year for a single coating and a total of 200

gallons per year for all coatings combined for the facility.

(ii) The owner or operator of the facility requests, in

writing, and the Department approves, in writing, the

exemption prior to use of the coating.

(h) Work practice requirements for coating-related activities. The owner or operator of a large appliance or

metal furniture surface coating process subject to this

section shall comply with the following work practices for

coating-related activities:

(1) Store all VOC-containing coatings, thinners and

coating-related waste materials in closed containers.

(2) Ensure that mixing and storage containers used for

VOC-containing coatings, thinners and coating-related

waste materials are kept closed at all times except when

depositing or removing these materials.

(3) Minimize spills of VOC-containing coatings, thinners and coating-related waste materials and clean up

spills immediately.

(4) Convey VOC-containing coatings, thinners and

coating-related waste materials from one location to

another in closed containers or pipes.

(i) Work practice requirements for cleaning materials.

The owner or operator of a large appliance or metal

furniture surface coating process subject to this section

shall comply with the following work practices for cleaning materials:

(1) Store all VOC-containing cleaning materials and

used shop towels in closed containers.

(2) Ensure that mixing and storage containers used for

VOC-containing cleaning materials are kept closed at all

times except when depositing or removing these materials.

(3) Minimize spills of VOC-containing cleaning materials and clean up spills immediately.

(4) Convey VOC-containing cleaning materials from

one location to another in closed containers or pipes.

(5) Minimize VOC emissions from cleaning of storage,

mixing and conveying equipment.

Table I

Emission Limits of VOCs for Large Appliance

Surface Coatings

Weight of VOC per Volume of Coating Solids,

as Applied

Coating Type Baked Air Dried

kg/l lb/gal kg/l lb/gal

General, One

Component

0.40 3.3 0.40 3.3

General,

Multi-Component

0.40 3.3 0.55 4.5

Extreme High Gloss 0.55 4.62 0.55 4.5

Extreme Performance 0.55 4.62 0.55 4.62

Heat Resistant 0.55 4.62 0.55 4.62

Metallic 0.55 4.62 0.55 4.62

Pretreatment 0.55 4.62 0.55 4.62

Solar Absorbent 0.55 4.62 0.55 4.62

426 PROPOSED RULEMAKING

PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN, VOL. 40, NO. 3, JANUARY 16, 2010
Table II

Emission Limits of VOCs for Metal Furniture

Surface Coatings

Weight of VOC per Volume of Coating Solids,

as Applied

Coating Type Baked Air Dried

kg/l lb/gal kg/l lb/gal

General, One

Component

0.40 3.3 0.40 3.3

General,

Multi-Component

0.40 3.3 0.55 4.5

Extreme High Gloss 0.61 5.06 0.55 4.5

Extreme Performance 0.61 5.06 0.61 5.06

Heat Resistant 0.61 5.06 0.61 5.06

Metallic 0.61 5.06 0.61 5.06

Pretreatment 0.61 5.06 0.61 5.06

Solar Absorbent 0.61 5.06 0.61 5.06

[Pa.B. Doc. No. 10-104. Filed for public inspection January 15, 2010, 9:00 a.m.]

FISH AND BOAT

COMMISSION

[ 58 PA. CODE CHS. 61 AND 65 ]

Fishing

The Fish and Boat Commission (Commission) proposes

to amend Chapters 61 and 65 (relating to seasons, sizes

and creel limits; and special fishing regulations). The

Commission is publishing this proposed rulemaking under the authority of 30 Pa.C.S. (relating to the Fish and

Boat Code) (code).

A. Effective Date

The proposed rulemaking, if approved on final-form

rulemaking, will go into effect immediately upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.

B. Contact Person

For further information on the proposed rulemaking,

contact Laurie E. Shepler, Esq., P. O. Box 67000, Harrisburg, PA 17106-7000, (717) 705-7810. This proposed rulemaking is available on the Commission’s web site at

www.fish.state.pa.us.

C. Statutory Authority

The proposed amendment to § 61.1 (relating to Commonwealth inland waters) is published under the statutory authority of section 2102(b) of the code (relating to

rules and regulations). The proposed amendment to

§ 65.24 (relating to miscellaneous special regulations) is

published under the statutory authority of section 2307(a)

of the code (relating to waters limited for specific purposes).

D. Purpose and Background

The proposed rulemaking is designed to improve, enhance and update the Commission’s fishing regulations.

The specific purpose of the proposed amendments is

described in more detail under the summary of proposals.

E. Summary of Proposals

(1) Amendment to § 61.1. The Commission recently

adopted an amendment to § 61.2 (relating to Delaware

River and River Estuary) that reduces the creel limit for

American shad on the West Branch and the entire

Delaware River mainstem from the confluence of the East

and West Branches downstream to the Commodore Barry

Bridge from six to three. This change went into effect on

January 9, 2010, upon publication of an order at 40 Pa.B.

254.

Upon further review of its regulations, however, the

Commission has determined that an amendment to

§ 61.1 is also needed. This section provides for a daily

limit for American shad of six on all inland waters that

are not covered by other sections within Chapter 61.

Section 61.2, which is applicable only to those Delaware

River tributaries from the mouths of the tributaries

upstream to the limit of the tidal influence, does not cover

large tributaries upriver of the tidal influence, such as

the Lackawaxen River in Pike County. It is likely that a

limited number of shad enter the larger tributaries

upriver of the tidal influence. Currently, the limit for

American shad on those Delaware River tributaries is six

under § 61.1. The Commission proposes an amendment

to this section to reduce the creel limit to three as set

forth in Annex A to be consistent with § 61.2.

The Executive Director of the Commission, acting under the authority of § 65.25 (relating to temporary

changes to fishing regulations), already has taken immediate action to amend § 61.1 to be consistent with § 61.2.

This temporary modification went into effect on January

1, 2010. See 39 Pa.B. 7165 (December 19, 2009).

(2) Amendment to § 65.24. On October 26, 2009, Act 40

of 2009 went into effect. This act amends section 2907.2

of the code (relating to Lake Erie fishing permits), to

provide that a Lake Erie permit is required to fish in

Lake Erie, Presque Isle Bay and their tributaries, including waters that flow into those tributaries, instead of ‘‘the

Pennsylvania waters of Lake Erie, Presque Isle Bay and

their tributaries’’ only. This amendment requires anglers

to procure a Lake Erie fishing permit to fish in Conneaut

Creek, Turkey Creek and their tributaries when previously one was not required because although these

streams begin in this Commonwealth, they enter Lake

Erie in Ohio. Although a Lake Erie permit will be

required to fish these streams, Act 40 also provides that

proceeds derived from their sale may now be used to fund

projects on those waters.

The Commission’s regulation in § 65.24 currently provides that a Lake Erie permit is not required on Conneaut Creek, Turkey Creek and their tributaries. To be

consistent with the new law, this section must be

amended to remove that language.

In addition, the Commission currently applies the

seasons, sizes and creels limits applicable to Lake Erie

and its tributaries under § 69.12 (relating to seasons,

sizes and creel limits—Lake Erie and Lake Erie tributaries) to the portion of Conneaut Creek that flows through

Erie County. However, the Commission applies the seasons, sizes and creel limits applicable to Commonwealth

inland waters under § 61.1 to the portion of Conneaut

Creek and its tributaries that flow through Crawford

County except with regard to salmon and steelhead that

are addressed in § 65.24. To be consistent with the new

law, § 65.24 must be amended to remove the existing

language. With this change, the Commission will apply

the Lake Erie seasons, sizes and creel limits to the entire

length of Conneaut Creek and its tributaries. The Commission is actively developing a viable steelhead fishery

in Conneaut Creek by annually stocking smolts. Accordingly, the Commission proposes that § 65.24 be amended

to read as set forth in Annex A.

PROPOSED RULEMAKING 427

PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN, VOL. 40, NO. 3, JANUARY 16, 2010