64330 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4, Air Programs Branch, 345

Courtland Street, Atlanta, Georgia

30365.

Mississippi Department of

Environmental Quality, Bureau of

Pollution Control, Air Quality

Division, P.O. Box 10385, Jackson,

Mississippi 39289–0385.

Effective immediately, all requests,

applications, reports and other

correspondence required pursuant to

the newly delegated standards should

not be submitted to the Region 4 office,

but should instead be submitted to the

following address: Office of Pollution

Control, Mississippi Department of

Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 10385,

Jackson, Mississippi 39289–0385.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Scott M. Martin, Regulatory Planning

and Development Section, Air Programs

Branch, United States Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 4, 345

Courtland Street N.E., Atlanta, Georgia

30365, (404) 347–3555, x4216.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

301, in conjunction with Sections 110

and 111(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act as

amended November 15, 1990,

authorizes EPA to delegate authority to

implement and enforce the standards set

out in 40 CFR Part 60, (NSPS).

On November 10, 1981, EPA initially

delegated the authority for

implementation and enforcement of the

NSPS programs to the state of

Mississippi. On September 29, 1995,

Mississippi requested a delegation of

authority for implementation and

enforcement of the following NSPS

category found in 40 CFR Part 60.

Automobile and Light Duty Truck Surface

Coating Operations, as amended by 59 FR

51383 (October 11, 1994), as specified in 40

CFR 60, Subpart MM.

After a thorough review of the

request, the Regional Administrator

determined that such a delegation was

appropriate for this source category with

the conditions set forth in the original

delegation letter of November 30, 1981.

Mississippi sources subject to the

requirements of this subpart will now be

under the jurisdiction of Mississippi.

Since review of the pertinent

Mississippi laws, rules, and regulations

showed them to be adequate for the

implementation and enforcement of the

aforementioned category of NSPS, the

EPA hereby notifies the public that it

has delegated the authority for the

source category listed above on October

30, 1995. The Office of Management and

Budget has exempted this rule from the

requirements of section 6 of Executive

Order 12866.

Authority: This notice is issued under the

authority of sections 101, 111, and 301 of the

Clean Air Act, as Amended (42 U.S.C. 7401,

7411, and 7601).

Dated: November 22, 1995.

Patrick M. Tobin,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–30553 Filed 12–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 63

[AD–FRL–5335–3]

RIN 2060–AD98

National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants for

Shipbuilding and Ship Repair (Surface

Coating) Operations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This action promulgates

national emission standards for

hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP)

under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act

as amended in 1990 (CAA) for

shipbuilding and ship repair (surface

coating) operations. The NESHAP

requires existing and new major sources

to control emissions using the

maximum achievable control

technology (MACT) to control

hazardous air pollutants (HAP).

The MACT described herein is based

on maximum HAP limits for various

categories of marine coatings. Surface

coating operations at shipyards are the

focus of the NESHAP, and a variety of

HAP are used as solvents in marine

coatings. The HAP emitted by the

facilities covered by this final rule

include xylene, toluene, ethylbenzene,

methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl

ketone, ethylene glycol, and glycol

ethers. All of these pollutants can cause

reversible or irreversible toxic effects

following exposure. The potential toxic

effects include irritation of the eye,

nose, throat, and skin and damage to the

blood cells, heart, liver, and kidneys.

The final rule is estimated to reduce

baseline emissions of HAP by 24

percent or 318.5 megagrams per year

(Mg/yr) (350 tons per year (tpy)).

The emissions reductions achieved by

these standards, combined with the

emissions reductions achieved by

similar standards, will achieve the

primary goal of the CAA, which is to

‘‘enhance the quality of the Nation’s air

resources so as to promote the public

health and welfare and productive

capacity of its population’’. The intent

of this final regulation is to protect the

public health by requiring the maximum

degree of reduction in emissions of

volatile organic hazardous air pollutants

(VOHAP) from new and existing

sources, taking into consideration the

cost of achieving such emission

reduction, any nonair quality, health

and environmental impacts, and energy

requirements.

DATES: The effective date is December

15, 1995. Incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the director

of the Federal Register as of December

15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Background Information

Document. The background information

document (BID) for the promulgated

standards may be obtained from the U.S.

Department of Commerce, National

Technical Information Service (NTIS),

Springfield, Virginia, 22161, telephone

number (703) 487–4650. Please refer to

‘‘National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants for

Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Facilities

(Surface Coating)—Background

Information Document for Final

Standards,’’ EPA–453/R–95–016b. The

BID contains (1) a summary of the

changes made to the standards since

proposal and (2) a summary of all the

public comments made on the proposed

standards and the Administrator’s

response to the comments.

Electronic versions of the

promulgation BID as well as this final

rule are available for download from the

EPA’s Technology Transfer Network

(TTN), a network of electronic bulletin

boards developed and operated by the

Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards. The TTN provides

information and technology exchange in

various areas of air pollution control.

The service is free, except for the cost

of a phone call. Dial (919) 541–5742 for

data transfer of up to a 14,400 bits per

second. If more information on TTN is

needed, contact the systems operator at

(919) 541–5384.

Docket. Docket No. A–92–11,

containing supporting information used

in developing the promulgated

standards, is available for public

inspection and copying from 8 a.m. to

5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, at

the EPA’s Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center, Waterside Mall,

Room M–1500, Ground Floor, 401 M

Street SW, Washington, DC 20460. A

reasonable fee may be charged for

copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Mohamed Serageldin at (919) 541–2379,

Emission Standards Division (MD–13),

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

27711.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 64331

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under

Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial

review of NESHAP is available only by

the filing of a petition for review in the

U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of

Columbia Circuit within 60 days of

publication of this rule. Under Section

307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements

that are the subject of this action may

not be challenged later in civil or

criminal proceedings brought by the

EPA to enforce these requirements.

The information presented in this

preamble is organized as follows:

I. Regulatory Background and Purpose

II. The Standards

III. Summary of Impacts

IV. Significant Changes to the Proposed

Standards

A. Public Participation

B. Comments on the Proposed Standards

C. Significant Comments/Changes

V. Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG)

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

C. Executive Order 12866

D. Executive Order 12875

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

F. Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995

I. Regulatory Background and Purpose

Section 112 of the CAA requires the

EPA to evaluate and control HAP

emissions. The control of HAP is to be

achieved through promulgation of

emission standards under Sections

112(d) and (f), and of work practice

standards under Section 112(h) where

appropriate, for categories of sources

that emit HAP. Pursuant to Section

112(c) of the CAA, the EPA published

in the Federal Register the initial list of

source categories that emit HAP on July

16, 1992 (57 FR. 31576). This list

includes major and area sources of HAP

for which the EPA intends to issue

regulations between November 1992

and November 2000.

The CAA was created, in part, ‘‘to

protect and enhance the quality of the

Nation’s air resources so as to promote

the public health and welfare and

productive capacity of its population’’

42 U.S.C. § 7401(b). This final regulation

will protect the public health by

reducing emissions of HAP from surface

coating operations at shipbuilding and

ship repair facilities (shipyards).

Many shipyards are major sources of

HAP emissions, emitting over 23 Mg/yr

(25 tpy) of organic HAP, including

toluene, xylene, ethylbenzene,

methanol, methyl ethyl ketone, methyl

isobutyl ketone, ethylene glycol and

glycol ethers. All of these pollutants can

cause reversible or irreversible toxic

effects following exposure. The

potential toxic effects include irritation

of the eyes, nose, throat, and skin,

irritation and damage to the blood cells,

heart, liver, and kidneys. These adverse

health effects are associated with a wide

range of ambient concentrations and

exposure times and are influenced by

source-specific characteristics such as

emission rates and local meteorological

conditions. Health impacts are also

dependent on multiple factors that

affect human variability, such as

genetics, age, health status (e.g., the

presence of pre-existing disease), and

lifestyle.

The final standards will reduce

VOHAP emissions from shipyard

surface coating operations by 318.5 Mg/

yr (350 tpy) from a baseline level of

1,362 Mg/yr (1,497 tpy). No significant

economic impacts are associated with

the final standards. No firms or facilities

are at risk of closure as a result of the

final standards, and there will not be a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

II. The Standards

The final rule is applicable to all

existing and new shipbuilding and

repair facilities that are major sources of

HAP or are located at plant sites that are

major sources. Major source facilities

that are subject to this rule must not

apply any marine coating with a

VOHAP content in excess of the

applicable limit and must implement

the work practices required in the rule.

Section 112(a) of the CAA defines major

source as a source, or group of sources,

located within a contiguous area and

under common control that emits or has

the potential to emit, considering

controls, 9.1 Mg/yr (10 tpy) or more of

any individual HAP or 22.7 Mg/yr (25

tpy) or more of any combination of

HAP. Area sources are stationary

sources that do not qualify as ‘‘major.’’

The term ‘‘affected source’’ as used in

this rule means the total of all HAP

emission points at each shipbuilding

and ship repair facility that is subject to

the rule. ‘‘Potential to emit’’ is defined

in the Section 112 General Provisions

(40 CFR 63.2) as ‘‘the maximum

capacity of a stationary source to emit

a pollutant under its physical or

operational design.’’

To determine the applicability of this

rule to facilities that are within a

contiguous area of other HAP-emitting

emission sources that are not part of the

source category covered by this rule, the

owner or operator must determine

whether the plant site as a whole is a

major source. A formal HAP emissions

inventory must be used to determine if

total HAP emissions from all HAP

emission sources at the plant site meets

the definition of a major source. The

actual emissions of HAP from most

shipyards are substantially less than the

major source cutoff limits [i.e., 9.1 Mg/

yr (10 tpy) of any single HAP, or 22.8

Mg/yr (25 tpy) of all HAP combined]. If

the source becomes a synthetic minor

source through accepting enforceable

restrictions that ensure potential and

actual HAP emissions will be below the

major source cutoffs, the NESHAP does

not apply. See promulgation BID

Section 2.4 for additional details and

the associated recordkeeping provisions

(see ADDRESSES section of this

preamble).

Existing major sources may switch to

area source status by obtaining and

complying with a federally enforceable

limit on their potential to emit prior to

the ‘‘compliance date’’ of the regulation.

The ‘‘compliance date’’ for this

regulation is defined as December 16,

1996. New major sources are required to

comply with the NESHAP requirements

upon start up or the promulgation date,

whichever is later. Existing major

sources may switch to area source status

by obtaining and complying with a

federally enforceable limit on their

potential to emit that makes the facility

an area source prior to the ‘‘compliance

date’’ of the regulation. The compliance

date for this regulation is December 16,

1996. A facility that has not obtained

federally enforceable limits on its

potential to emit by the compliance

date, and that has not complied with the

NESHAP requirements, will be in

violation of the NESHAP. New major

sources are required to comply with the

NESHAP requirements upon start-up or

the promulgation date, whichever is

later. All sources that are major sources

for HAP on the compliance date are

required to comply permanently with

the NESHAP to ensure that the

maximum achievable reductions in

toxic emissions are achieved and

maintained. All major sources for HAP

on the ‘‘compliance date’’ are required

to comply permanently with the

NESHAP to ensure that the maximum

achievable reductions in toxic emissions

are achieved and maintained.

The final standards impose limits on

the VOHAP content of 23 types of

coatings used at shipyards. Compliance

with the VOHAP limits must be

demonstrated on a monthly basis. The

promulgated standards include four

compliance options to allow owners or

operators flexibility in demonstrating

compliance with the VOHAP limits. The

final standards also allow for an

alternative means of compliance other

than using compliant coatings, if

approved by the Administrator. The

Administrator shall approve the

alternative means of limiting emissions

if, in the Administrator’s judgment,
64332 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

(after control) emissions of VOHAP per

volume solids applied will be no greater

than those from the use of coatings that

comply with the applicable VOHAP

limits.

The final standards also require that

all handling and transfer of VOHAP

containing materials to and from

containers, tanks, vats, vessels, and

piping systems be conducted in a

manner that minimizes spills and other

factors leading to emissions. (This

requirement includes hand- or brushapplication of coatings.) In addition,

containers of thinning solvent or waste

that hold any VOHAP must be normally

closed (to minimize evaporation) unless

materials are being added to or removed

from them.

Owners or operators of existing

shipbuilding and ship repair (surface

coating) operations subject to the

requirements promulgated under

Section 112(d) of the CAA are required

to comply with the standards within 1

year from December 15, 1995. Owners

or operators of new shipbuilding and

ship repair (surface coating) operations

with initial startup before or after

December 15, 1996 are required to

comply with all requirements of the

standards upon startup. The first

requirement is the initial notification

due 6 months before start up.

III. Summary of Impacts

These standards will reduce

nationwide emissions of HAP from

shipbuilding and ship repair (surface

coating) operations by approximately

318.5 Mg (350 tons) in 1997 compared

to the emissions that would result in the

absence of the standards. These

standards will also reduce volatile

organic compounds (VOC) emissions

from those same shipbuilding and ship

repair (surface coating) operations by

approximately 837 Mg (920 tons) in

1997 compared to the emissions that

would result in the absence of the

standards. No significant adverse

secondary air, water, solid waste, or

energy impacts are anticipated from the

promulgation of these standards.

Implementation of this regulation is

expected to result in nationwide

annualized costs for existing shipyards

of about $2 million beyond baseline.

This estimation is based on an analysis

of the application of VOHAP limits on

marine coatings at all existing major

source facilities not currently controlled

to the level of the standards.

The economic impact analysis

conducted prior to proposal showed

that the economic impacts from the

proposed standard would be

insignificant. An update of the

economic impact analysis (due to

revisions to the final rule) indicates that

the original conclusion still holds true.

Implementation of the rule is not

expected to cause significant economic

impacts for the 35 major source facilities

in this industry.

IV. Significant Changes to the Proposed

Standards

A. Public Participation

The standards were proposed and the

preamble was published in the Federal

Register on December 6, 1994 (59 FR

62681). The preamble to the proposed

standards discussed the availability of

the regulatory text and proposal BID,

which described the regulatory

alternatives considered and the impacts

of those alternatives. Public comments

were solicited at the time of proposal,

and copies of the regulatory text and

BID were distributed to interested

parties. Electronic versions of the

preamble, regulation, and BID were

made available to interested parties via

the TTN (see SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this preamble).

To provide interested persons the

opportunity for oral presentation of

data, views, or arguments concerning

the proposed standards, a public

hearing was held on January 18, 1995 in

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

The public comment period was from

December 6, 1994 to February 17, 1995.

In all, 22 comment letters were received

(including one duplicate). The

comments have been carefully

considered, and changes have been

made to the proposed standards when

determined by the Administrator to be

appropriate.

B. Comments on the Proposed

Standards

Comments on the proposed standards

were received from 22 commenters; the

commenters were comprised mainly of

States, shipyard owners or operators,

marine coating manufacturers,

environmental groups, and trade

associations. A detailed discussion of

these comments and responses can be

found in the promulgation BID, which

is referred to in the ADDRESSES section

of this preamble. The summary of

comments and responses in the BID

serve as the basis for the revisions that

have been made to the standards

between proposal and promulgation.

(Some additional changes have been

made to clarify the standards and

improve their organization.) Most of the

comment letters contained multiple

comments. For summary purposes, the

comments were grouped into several

topic areas.

C. Significant Comments/Changes

Several changes have been made since

the proposal of these standards. The

majority of the changes have been made

to clarify portions of the rule that were

unclear to the commenters. A summary

of the major comments and changes is

presented below.

(1) Applicability to Coating

Manufacturers

Several commenters asked the EPA to

regulate the manufacture and sale of

marine coatings rather than the end

users (shipyards). While this approach

has some obvious advantages, the EPA

does not have authority to regulate (with

this NESHAP) the manufacture and sale

of coatings under Section 112(d). The

EPA plans to address requirements for

coating manufacturers under Section

183(e) of the CAA by March 1997

through either a national rule or a

control techniques guidelines (CTG).

(2) Number of Major Sources/MACT

Floor

Some commenters thought the EPA

underestimated the number of major

source shipyards, and thereby erred in

the MACT floor determination.

Although the EPA based the proposed

number of major sources on the best

available information at the time, there

has been recent additional information

provided by the Louisiana Department

of Environmental Quality (Louisiana

having more shipyards than any other

State) showing there are four other

shipyards with HAP emissions greater

than the major source cutoffs. At the

same time, however, the same

additional information indicated that

one of the shipyards identified in the

original list of 25 has HAP emissions

well below the major source cutoffs

(based on recent operating permit data).

This information along with other

State permit data on annual paint usage

and VOC/VOHAP emissions indicates

that there are 35 major sources, instead

of the estimated 25 discussed in the

proposal preamble. Even though 10

additional major sources have been

identified, the MACT floor would not

change. At proposal, the EPA based the

MACT floor on the control achieved by

the best-performing 5 sources, as

required by Section 112 (d)(3) of the

CAA when there are less than 30

sources in the category. If there are 35

sources in the category, the MACT floor

would be based on the best-performing

4.2 sources (12 percent of the 35) as

required by Section 112 (d)(3). Under

both situations, the MACT floor is the

same.

Another point to be considered is that

even if there are 45 major source
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 64333

shipyards, the best 12 percent is still

represented by the best 0.12 × 45 = 5.4

or best 5 yards. Both the MACT floor

and the associated marine coating

VOHAP limits would be identical. Since

the NESHAP proposal date, the Navy

has adopted VOC limits identical to (or

more stringent than) the 1992 California

limits for all Naval shipyards and Navyrelated work. Since at least two of the

Naval shipyards qualify as major

sources, if the MACT floor were to be

recalculated today, the limits would be

identical to the proposed (and

promulgated) limits, regardless of the

approach used to determine the mean or

median level of control. The Louisiana

limits, which are less stringent for the

major use categories of coatings, would

not enter into any of the floor

calculations.

Recent indications from the Navy and

other industry representatives reveal

that fewer affected sources exist today

because of base closings and

consolidation efforts. The original

estimation of 25 major source shipyards

was based on annual paint and solvent

usage, type of work conducted (new

construction versus repair), number of

employees, and type (size) of vessels

serviced. The (weighted) average HAP

concentration of all marine coatings is

an integral part of emissions estimates

and determining if a shipyard qualifies

as a major source facility. Other HAPemitting processes at most shipyards

such as welding, metal forming/cutting,

and abrasive blasting exist, but the vast

majority of HAP emissions come from

organic solvents used in marine paints

and solvents used for thinning and

cleaning.

(3) Elimination of Compliance Option 1

Proposed compliance option 1

required that each and every container

of coating be tested or certified prior to

application. Based on comments

pertaining to its impracticality and the

unrealistic costs associated with testing/

certifying every container of coating,

compliance option 1 was eliminated

from the final rule. The flow diagram

(included as Figure 1 in the regulation)

summarizing the various compliance

options was similarly revised and

simplified.

(4) Training Requirements

In the proposed rule, the EPA

required training and certification for all

personnel involved with paints and/or

solvents. There were several comments

regarding the inappropriate amount and

level of detail involved with the training

and annual personnel certifications.

Some commenters indicated that there

was a high turnover rate involving

personnel, and the proposed training

requirements would impose a

significant impact for very little

reduction in HAP emissions. The EPA

has determined that it is appropriate to

leave the details of training to the

individual shipyards who can best

define the real needs of their specific

locations and applications. Affected

sources are responsible for complying

with the standards, and it is in their

own best interest to ensure that workers

are aware of the associated

requirements. Therefore, all training

requirements related to painting/

thinning, handling/transfer of VOHAPcontaining materials, and certification of

all personnel involved with surface

coating operations have been eliminated

from the final rule.

(5) Definition of Pleasure Craft

A definition of pleasure craft has been

added to ensure that the standards

apply only to those coatings (and

solvents) used on commercial and

military vessels. Some commenters were

concerned that, as proposed, the rule

could be interpreted to regulate coatings

used on pleasure crafts. Other

commenters suggested that pleasure

crafts should be included. The EPA did

not intend to include coatings used on

pleasure crafts in these standards. Such

coatings (applications) will be

considered under the development of

the Boat Manufacturing NESHAP.

(6) Definition of Affected Source

The definition of affected source was

modified to ensure that the

requirements of the standards apply

only to those sources (major source

shipyards) with a minimum annual

marine coating usage of 1,000 L (264.2

gal). The primary focus of this NESHAP

is surface coating operations and this

clarification will minimize/eliminate

the impact on shipyards with minimal

surface coating emissions.

(7) Reporting and Notification Changes

Changes have also been made to the

notification and reporting schedules.

The initial notification deadline has

been extended from 120 to 180 days.

The frequency of reporting has also been

reduced from the proposed quarterly

requirement to semiannual. This change

was made to allow shipyards to be

consistent with current/upcoming Title

V permit requirements. The first

compliance certification report is due 6

months after the compliance date.

(8) Exemptions

Several commenters recommended

that the EPA adopt some of the

exemptions provided in various State

regulations. Since the MACT floor was

based on three shipyards located in

California and those yards have

exemptions similar to those requested,

the EPA determined there would be no

significant impact and adopted the

following exemptions:

a. Any individual coating with annual

usage less than 200 liters (52.8 gallons)

is exempt from the requirements of the

standards (i.e., the applicable VOHAP

limit). The total amount of all coatings

exempted in any given year cannot

exceed 1,000 liters (264.2 gallons); and

b. Any coating applied via

nonrefillable hand-held aerosol cans is

exempt from the requirements of the

standards.

(9) Revision of Equations

The equations used with compliance

options 2 and 3 (proposed options 3 and

4) have been changed so that

calculations are based on volume solids.

The revised equations require the

VOHAP limits based on volume solids

be used in place of the VOHAP limits

based on volume of coating less water

and non-HAP exempt solvents. This

change was made to provide a uniform

basis for calculating emission

reductions (i.e., associated with

thinning additions or add-on control

devices).

(10) Weather-related VOHAP limits

The proposal preamble requested

comments on how to handle thinning

issues for various climatic conditions.

The EPA reviewed the comments and

collected additional information on both

cold-and hot/humid-weather thinning

practices. As a result of this

information, cold-weather VOHAP

limits are included as part of the final

rule. If the temperature is below 4.5°C

(40°F) at the time the coating is applied

and the source needs to thin that coating

beyond the applicable VOHAP limit, the

date, time, and temperature (including

units) must be documented, and the

applicable cold-weather VOHAP limit

may be used. The cold-weather VOHAP

limits on a solids basis were increased

equivalently, but the actual values vary

for each coating category. The coldweather VOHAP limits are applicable

only to as-supplied coatings that are

greater than 40 percent solids by

volume.

With regards to hot/humid weather

conditions, the data and responses to

Section 114 information requests sent

by EPA to nine shipyards and other

information received did not provide a

basis for including a humid weather

thinning allowance. Respondents

identified meteorological conditions

under which coatings must be thinned
64334 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

or not applied at all. Only one shipyard,

which uses large quantities of waterbased preconstruction primer,

maintained that a humid weather

thinning allowance should be adopted.

However, the shipyard did not explain

how hydrocarbon-based thinners would

relate to its water-based operation.

Hot and humid weather conditions

appear to inhibit coating operations

work less frequently than does cold

weather. The different responses can

best be understood as they relate to the

specifications for thinning under

different climatic conditions, which are

dependent on paint type and

manufacturer. Some coating

formulations lose at high temperature

more organic solvent than others which

could lead to thickening (increase in

viscosity) of the paint. This occurs

where the rate of application is low and

paint containers remain uncovered.

Nevertheless, beginning in September

1994, shipyards performing work for the

Navy in humid climates such as

Louisiana, Florida, and Virginia are

required by the Navy to use paints with

VOHAP contents levels that are in

compliance with the limits in the

NESHAP, without provision for

additional thinning. There is no reason

that VOHAP limits that are achievable

for paints used by the Navy cannot also

be achieved for paints used by

commercial shipyards located in humid

climates and that, therefore, a thinning

allowance for hot/humid weather

conditions is not necessary. If

conditions necessitate application of

small amount of noncompliant coatings,

the regulation provides a low usage

exemption of 1,000 liters of coating per

year.

D. Minor Changes

This section contains a list of several

of the minor changes to the final rule.

A discussion of these changes can be

found in the promulgation BID. (See

ADDRESSES section of this preamble.)

(1) Revisions to definitions and

phrasing have been made to clarify the

regulation.

(2) Based on comments received and

on changes to the notification and

recordkeeping and reporting

requirements, those sections of the

standard have been reorganized and

overlapping requirements clarified or

eliminated.

(3) Table 2, which contains the

VOHAP limits for the various coating

categories, has been simplified to

contain only one set of units (metric).

The conversion factor for English units

is included as a footnote to the table.

V. Control Techniques Guidelines

(CTG)

Section 183(b)(4) of the CAA requires

the Administrator to issue a CTG

document for limiting VOC and

particulate matter emissions from

coatings (paints) and solvents used in

the shipbuilding and ship repair

industry. Since VOHAP emissions from

this industry are generally a subset of

VOC emissions, the control techniques

evaluated for the MACT standard are

also applicable to VOC emissions.

Therefore, the EPA has developed the

CTG concurrently with the NESHAP

and will be issuing final guidance under

a separate notice. As explained in the

proposal notice (AD–FR– ), no CTG

is being issued for particulate matter

emissions.

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

The Docket is an organized and

complete file of all the information

considered by the EPA in the

development of this rulemaking. The

Docket is a dynamic file, since material

is added throughout the rulemaking

development. The docketing system is

intended to allow members of the public

and industries involved to readily

identify and locate documents so that

they can effectively participate in the

rulemaking process. Along with the

statement of basis and purpose of the

proposed and promulgated standards

and the EPA responses to significant

comments, the contents of the Docket

will serve as the record in case of

judicial review [see 42 U.S.C.

7607(d)(7)(A)].

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) is currently reviewing the

information collection request (ICR)

requirements contained in this rule

under the provisions of the Paperwork

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

and has assigned OMB control number

2060–0330 and EPA ICR number 1712.2.

The information required to be

collected by this rule is needed as part

of the overall compliance and

enforcement program. It is necessary to

identify the regulated entities who are

subject to the rule and to ensure their

compliance with the rule. The

recordkeeping and reporting

requirements are mandatory and are

being established under authority of

Section 114 of the Act. All information

submitted to the EPA for which a claim

of confidentiality is made will be

safeguarded according to the EPA

policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1,

Part 2, Subpart B—Confidentiality of

Information (see 40 CFR part 2; 41 FR

36902, September 1, 1976; amended by

43 FR 39999, September 8, 1978; 43 FR

42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR

17674, March 23, 1979).

The total annual reporting and

recordkeeping burden for this collection

averaged over the first 3 years is

estimated to be $26,218 per year. The

average burden, per respondent, is 772

hours per year. This estimate includes

the time needed to review instructions;

develop, acquire, install, and utilize

technology and systems for the purposes

of collecting, validating, and verifying

information, processing and

maintaining information, and disclosing

and providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information. The total time,

effort, or financial resources expended

by persons to generate, maintain, retain,

or disclose or provide information to or

for a Federal agency. This includes the

time needed to review instructions;

develop, acquire, install, and utilize

technology and systems for the purposes

of collecting, validating, and verifying

information, processing and

maintaining information, and disclosing

and providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information. The rule

requires an initial one-time notification

from each respondent and subsequent

notification every 6 months to indicate

their compliance status. At the time of

the initial notification each respondent

would also be required to submit an

implementation plan that describes

compliance procedures. A respondent

would also be required to keep

necessary records of data to determine

compliance with the standards in the

regulation. The data would be recorded

monthly. A report would need to be

submitted semi-annually by each

respondent. There would be an

estimated 35 respondents to the

proposed collection requirements.

Send comments on the EPA’s need for

this information, the accuracy of the

provided burden estimates, and any

suggested methods for minimizing

respondent burden, including through

the use of automated collection

techniques to the Director, OPPE
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 64335

Regulatory Information Division; U. S.

Environmental Protection Agency

(2136); 401 M Street SW.; Washington,

DC 20460; and to the Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Office of Management and Budget, 725

17th Street NW.; Washington, DC 20503;

marked ‘‘Attention: Desk Officer for

EPA.’’ Include the OMB number and the

EPA ICR number in any

correspondence.

C. Executive Order 12866:

Administrative Designation and

Regulatory Analysis

Under Executive Order 12866 [58 FR

51735 (October 4, 1993)], the EPA is

required to judge whether a regulation

is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to

OMB review and the requirements of

this Executive Order to prepare a

regulatory impact analysis (RIA). The

Order defines ‘‘significant regulatory

action’’ as one that is likely to result in

a rule that may (1) have an annual effect

on the economy of $100 million or more

or adversely affect in a material way the

economy, a sector of the economy,

productivity, competition, jobs, the

environment, public health or safety, or

State, local, or tribal governments or

communities; (2) create a serious

inconsistency or otherwise interfere

with an action taken or planned by

another agency; (3) materially alter the

budgetary impact of entitlements,

grants, user fees, or loan programs, or

the rights and obligation of recipients

thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy

issues arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in the Executive Order.

Pursuant to the terms of Executive

Order 12866, it has been determined

that this rule is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ and is therefore not

subject to OMB review.

D. Executive Order 12875

To reduce the burden of federal

regulations on States and small

governments, the President issued

Executive Order 12875 on October 26,

1993, entitled Enhancing the

Intergovernmental Partnership. In

particular, this executive order is

designed to require agencies to assess

the effects of regulations that are not

required by statute and that create

mandates upon State, local, or tribal

governments. Two methods exist for

complying with the requirements of the

executive order: (1) Assure that funds

necessary to pay direct costs of

compliance with a regulation are

provided, or (2) provide OMB a

description of the communications and

consultations with State/local/tribal

governments, the nature of their

concerns, any written submission from

them, and the EPA’s position supporting

the need to issue the regulation.

The EPA has always been concerned

about the effect of the cost of regulations

on small entities; the EPA has consulted

with and sought input from public

entities to explain costs and burdens

they may incur.

The EPA advised interested parties on

July 16, 1992 (57 FR 21592), of the

categories considered as major and area

sources of HAP, and shipbuilding and

ship repair (surface coating) industry

was listed as a category of both major

and area sources. The EPA made

significant effort to hear from all levels

of interest and all segments of the

shipbuilding and ship repair industry.

To facilitate comments and input, the

EPA conducted comprehensive mailouts

of draft and proposal package materials

in 1993 and 1994 to shipyards,

Department of the Navy (Naval Sea

Systems Command), marine coating

manufacturers, and State and local

government officials. All were given

opportunity to comment on the

presented regulatory development

activities of the standard. Throughout

the regulatory development process and

more specifically in consultation

meetings, industry representatives from

commercial/private shipyards, the U.S.

Navy, and various trade associations

were given an opportunity to comment

on the proposed regulatory approach

and the MACT alternatives being

developed. The major topic areas

resulting from these discussions

included the need for cold-weather

thinning limits, flexibility in

compliance approaches, and the need

for additional data regarding certain

coating categories (i.e., inorganic zincs).

Some of these meetings were held at

EPA, while others were conducted at

shipyard locations. In addition,

individual consultations were

conducted with three local (air quality

management) districts in California

regarding the use of the mass of

VOHAP/volume of solids for

determining compliance when the

coating is thinned.

The EPA addressed many of the

suggestions and comments received

from State and local agencies during the

public comment period, many of which

will reduce the impact to small

businesses. Some of these suggestions

resulted in changes to the rule,

including modification of the definition

of pleasure craft to clarify that the

standards apply only to coatings (and

solvents) used on commercial and

military vessels and not to boats in nonmilitary shipyards less than 20 meters

in length; modification of the definition

of affected source to ensure that the

requirements of the standards apply

only to those sources (major source

shipyards) with a minimum annual

marine coating usage of 1,000 Liters

(264.2 gallons); exemption of any

individual coating with annual usage

less than 200 liters (52.8 gallons) (i.e.,

the applicable VOHAP limit);

exemption of any coating applied via

nonrefillable hand-held aerosol cans;

making the equations used to determine

thinning allowance the same for all

options to provide a uniform basis for

calculating emission reductions (i.e.,

associated with thinning additions or

add-on control devices); extension of

the initial notification deadline from

120 to 180 days and reduction of the

frequency of reporting from the

proposed quarterly requirement to

semiannual, which allows shipyards to

be consistent with current/upcoming

Title V permit requirements;

reorganization and clarification of the

notification and recordkeeping and

reporting requirement, including

revision of the definitions and phrasing

to ensure that the terminology is

understandable; and the addition of 10

major sources based on data provided

by Louisiana and Texas State agencies.

Some of the other major concerns that

were noted in the State and/or local

agency comments and that were

considered by the EPA in developing

the proposed and final rule involved

realistic work practice standards,

multiple compliance options to provide

flexibility for shipyard owners/operators

and State regulators, and streamlining

(or eliminating) any overlapping

recordkeeping and reporting

requirements. Documentation of all

meetings and public comments can be

found in Docket A–92–11.

The EPA has considered the purpose

and intent of Executive Order 12875 and

has determined that shipbuilding and

ship repair facility NESHAP are needed.

The rule is generally required by statute

under Section 112 of the CAA because

shipbuilding and ship repair facilities

emit significant quantities of air

pollutants. Through meetings and

consultations during project

development and proposal, efforts were

made to inform entities of the costs

required to comply with the regulation;

in addition, modifications were made to

reduce the burden to small entities.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires the EPA to

consider potential impacts of proposed

regulations on small business ‘‘entities.’’

If a preliminary analysis indicates that

a proposed regulation would have a
64336 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

significant economic impact on 20

percent or more of small entities, then

a regulatory flexibility analysis must be

prepared. The EPA’s analysis of these

impacts was provided in the preamble

to the proposed rule (59 FR 62681) and

no negative impacts for small businesses

will result from the changes

incorporated into the final rule.

Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C.

605(b), I hereby certify that this rule will

not have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small

business entities.

F. Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for

Federal agencies to assess the effects of

their regulatory actions on State, local,

and tribal governments and the private

sector. Under Section 202 of the UMRA,

the EPA generally must prepare a

written statement including a costbenefit analysis, for proposed and final

rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may

result in expenditures to State, local,

and tribal governments, in the aggregate,

or to the private sector, of $100 million

or more in any 1 year. Before

promulgating an EPA rule for which a

written statement is needed, Section 205

of the UMRA generally requires EPA to

identify and consider a reasonable

number of regulatory alternatives and

adopt the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule.

The provisions of Section 205 do not

apply when they are inconsistent with

applicable law. Moreover, Section 205

allows EPA to adopt an alternative other

than the least costly, most cost-effective

or least burdensome alternative if the

Administrator publishes with the final

rule an explanation why that alternative

was not adopted. Before EPA establishes

any regulatory requirements that may

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments, including tribal

governments, it must have developed

under Section 203 of the UMRA a small

government agency plan. The plan must

provide for notifying potentially

affected small governments, enabling

officials of affected small governments

to have meaningful and timely input in

the development of EPA regulatory

proposals with significant Federal

intergovernmental mandates and

informing, educating, and advising

small governments on compliance with

the regulatory requirements.

The EPA has determined that the

action promulgated today does not

include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector. Therefore, the

requirements of the Unfunded Mandates

Act do not apply to this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Marine coating limits,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Shipbuilding and ship

repair standards.

Dated: November 14, 1995.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of

the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION

STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR

POLLUTANTS FOR SHIPBUILDING

AND SHIP REPAIR (SURFACE

COATING)

1. The authority citation for part 63

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Sections 101, 112, 114, 116, and

301 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et

seq., as amended by Pub. L. 101–549, 104

Stat. 2399).

2. Section 63.14 is amended by

adding paragraph (b)(4) through (b)(14)

to read as follows:

§ 63.14 Incorporation by reference.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(4) ASTM D523–89, Standard Test

Method for Specular Gloss, IBR

approved for § 63.782.

(5) ASTM D1475–90, Standard Test

Method for Density of Paint, Varnish,

Lacquer, and Related Products, IBR

approved for § 63.788 appendix A.

(6) ASTM D2369–93, Standard Test

Method for Volatile Content of Coatings,

IBR approved for § 63.788 appendix A.

(7) ASTM D3912–80, Standard Test

Method for Chemical Resistance of

Coatings Used in Light-Water Nuclear

Power Plants, IBR approved for

§ 63.782.

(8) ASTM D4017–90, Standard Test

Method for Water and Paints and Paint

Materials by Karl Fischer Method, IBR

approved for § 63.788 appendix A.

(9) ASTM D4082–89, Standard Test

Method for Effects of Gamma Radiation

on Coatings for Use in Light-Water

Nuclear Power Plants, IBR approved for

§ 63.782.

(10) ASTM D4256–89 [reapproved

1994], Standard Test Method for

Determination of the Decontaminability

of Coatings Used in Light-Water Nuclear

Power Plants, IBR approved for

§ 63.782.

(11) ASTM D3792–91, Standard Test

Method for Water Content of WaterReducible Paints by Direct Injection into

a Gas Chromatograph, IBR approved for

§ 63.788 appendix A.

(12) ASTM D3257–93, Standard Test

Methods for Aromatics in Mineral

Spirits by Gas Chromatography, IBR

approved for § 63.786(b).

(13) ASTM E260–91, Standard

Practice for Packed Column Gas

Chromatography, IBR approved for

§ 63.786(b).

(14) ASTM E180–93, Standard

Practice for Determining the Precision of

ASTM Methods for Analysis and

Testing of Industrial Chemicals, IBR

approved for § 63.786(b).

3. Part 63 is amended by adding

subpart II to read as follows:

Subpart II—National Emission

Standards for Shipbuilding and Ship

Repair (Surface Coating)

Secs.

63.780 Relationship of subpart II to subpart

A of this part.

63.781 Applicability.

63.782 Definitions.

63.783 Standards.

63.784 Compliance dates.

63.785 Compliance procedures.

63.786 Test methods and procedures.

63.787 Notification requirements.

63.788 Recordkeeping and reporting

requirements.

Table 1 to Subpart II of Part 63—General

Provisions of Applicability to Subpart II

Table 2 to Subpart II of Part 63—Volatile

Organic HAP (VOHAP) Limits for Marine

Coatings

Table 3 to Subpart II of Part 63—Summary

of Recordkeeping and Reporting

Requirements

Appendix A to Subpart II of Part 63—VOC

Data Sheet

Appendix B to Subpart II of Part 63—

Maximum Allowable Thinning Rates As

a Function of As Supplied VOC Content

and Thinner Density

Subpart II—National Emission

Standards for Shipbuilding and Ship

Repair (Surface Coating)

§ 63.780 Relationship of subpart II to

subpart A of this part.

Table 1 of this subpart specifies the

provisions of subpart A of this part that

apply to owners and operators of

sources subject to the provisions of this

subpart.

§ 63.781 Applicability.

(a) The provisions of this subpart

apply to shipbuilding and ship repair

operations at any facility that is a major

source.

(b) The provisions of this subpart do

not apply to coatings used in volumes

of less than 200 liters (52.8 gallons) per
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 64337

year, provided the total volume of

coating exempt under this paragraph

does not exceed 1,000 liters per year

(264 gallons per year) at any facility.

Coatings exempt under this paragraph

shall be clearly labeled as ‘‘low-usage

exempt,’’ and the volume of each such

coating applied shall be maintained in

the facility’s records.

(c) The provisions of this subpart do

not apply to coatings applied with

hand-held, nonrefillable, aerosol

containers or to unsaturated polyester

resin (i.e., fiberglass lay-up) coatings.

Coatings applied to suitably prepared

fiberglass surfaces for protective or

decorative purposes are subject to this

subpart.

(d) The provisions in subpart A of this

part pertaining to startups, shutdowns,

and malfunctions and continuous

monitoring do not apply to this source

category unless an add-on control

system is used to comply with this

subpart in accordance with § 63.783(c).

§ 63.782 Definitions.

Terms used in this subpart are

defined in the Clean Air Act (CAA), in

subpart A of part 63, or in this section

as follows:

Add-on control system means an air

pollution control device such as a

carbon absorber or incinerator that

reduces pollution in an air stream by

destruction or removal prior to

discharge to the atmosphere.

Affected source means any

shipbuilding or ship repair facility

having surface coating operations with a

minimum 1,000 liters (L) (264 gallons

[gal]) annual marine coating usage that

is subject to this subpart.

Air flask specialty coating means any

special composition coating applied to

interior surfaces of high pressure

breathing air flasks to provide corrosion

resistance and that is certified safe for

use with breathing air supplies.

Antenna specialty coating means any

coating applied to equipment through

which electromagnetic signals must

pass for reception or transmission.

Antifoulant specialty coating means

any coating that is applied to the

underwater portion of a vessel to

prevent or reduce the attachment of

biological organisms and that is

registered with the EPA as a pesticide

under the Federal Insecticide,

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.

As applied means the condition of a

coating at the time of application to the

substrate, including any thinning

solvent.

As supplied means the condition of a

coating before any thinning, as sold and

delivered by the coating manufacturer to

the user.

Batch means the product of an

individual production run of a coating

manufacturer’s process. A batch may

vary in composition from other batches

of the same product.

Bitumens mean black or brown

materials that are soluble in carbon

disulfide and consist mainly of

hydrocarbons.

Bituminous resin coating means any

coating that incorporates bitumens as a

principal component and is formulated

primarily to be applied to a substrate or

surface to resist ultraviolet radiation

and/or water.

Certify means, in reference to the

volatile organic compounds (VOC)

content or volatile organic hazardous air

pollutants (VOHAP) content of a

coating, to attest to the VOC content as

determined through analysis by Method

24 of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60 or

through use of forms and procedures

outlined in appendix A of this subpart,

or to attest to the VOHAP content as

determined through an Administratorapproved test method. In the case of

conflicting results, Method 24 of

Appendix A to 40 CFR part 60 shall take

precedence over the forms and

procedures outlined in appendix A to

this subpart for the options in which

VOC is used as a surrogate for VOHAP.

Coating means any material that can

be applied as a thin layer to a substrate

and which cures to form a continuous

solid film.

Cold-weather time period means any

time during which the ambient

temperature is below 4.5°C (40°F) and

coating is to be applied.

Container of coating means the

container from which the coating is

applied, including but not limited to a

bucket or pot.

Cure volatiles means reaction

products which are emitted during the

chemical reaction which takes place in

some coating films at the cure

temperature. These emissions are other

than those from the solvents in the

coating and may, in some cases,

comprise a significant portion of total

VOC and/or VOHAP emissions.

Epoxy means any thermoset coating

formed by reaction of an epoxy resin

(i.e., a resin containing a reactive

epoxide with a curing agent).

Exempt compounds means specified

organic compounds that are not

considered VOC due to negligible

photochemical reactivity. Exempt

compounds are specified in 40 CFR

51.100(s).

Facility means all contiguous or

adjoining property that is under

common ownership or control,

including properties that are separated

only by a road or other public right-ofway.

General use coating means any

coating that is not a specialty coating.

Hazardous air pollutants (HAP)

means any air pollutant listed in or

pursuant to section 112(b) of the CAA.

Heat resistant specialty coating means

any coating that during normal use must

withstand a temperature of at least

204°C (400°F).

High-gloss specialty coating means

any coating that achieves at least 85

percent reflectance on a 60 degree meter

when tested by ASTM Method D523

(incorporation by reference—see

§ 63.14).

High-temperature specialty coating

means any coating that during normal

use must withstand a temperature of at

least 426°C (800°F).

Inorganic zinc (high-build) specialty

coating means a coating that contains

960 grams per liter (8 pounds per

gallon) or more elemental zinc

incorporated into an inorganic silicate

binder that is applied to steel to provide

galvanic corrosion resistance. (These

coatings are typically applied at more

than 2 mil dry film thickness.)

Major source means any source that

emits or has the potential to emit, in the

aggregate, 9.1 megagrams per year (10

tons per year) or more of any HAP or

22.7 megagrams per year (25 tons per

year) or more of any combination of

HAP.

Maximum allowable thinning ratio

means the maximum volume of thinner

that can be added per volume of coating

without violating the standards of

§ 63.783(a), as determined using

Equation 1 of this subpart.

Military exterior specialty coating or

Chemical Agent Resistant Coatings

(‘‘CARC’’) means any exterior topcoat

applied to military or U.S. Coast Guard

vessels that are subject to specific

chemical, biological, and radiological

washdown requirements.

Mist specialty coating means any low

viscosity, thin film, epoxy coating

applied to an inorganic zinc primer that

penetrates the porous zinc primer and

allows the occluded air to escape

through the paint film prior to curing.

Navigational aids specialty coating

means any coating applied to Coast

Guard buoys or other Coast Guard

waterway markers when they are

recoated aboard ship at their usage site

and immediately returned to the water.

Nonskid specialty coating means any

coating applied to the horizontal

surfaces of a marine vessel for the

specific purpose of providing slip

resistance for personnel, vehicles, or

aircraft.
64338 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Nonvolatiles (or volume solids) means

substances that do not evaporate

readily. This term refers to the filmforming material of a coating.

Normally closed means a container or

piping system is closed unless an

operator is actively engaged in adding or

removing material.

Nuclear specialty coating means any

protective coating used to seal porous

surfaces such as steel (or concrete) that

otherwise would be subject to intrusion

by radioactive materials. These coatings

must be resistant to long-term (service

life) cumulative radiation exposure

(ASTM D4082–89 [incorporation by

reference—see § 63.14]), relatively easy

to decontaminate (ASTM D4256–89

[reapproved 1994] [incorporation by

reference—see § 63.14]), and resistant to

various chemicals to which the coatings

are likely to be exposed (ASTM D3912–

80 [incorporation by reference—see

§ 63.14]). [For nuclear coatings, see the

general protective requirements

outlined by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission in a report entitled ‘‘U.S.

Atomic Energy Commission Regulatory

Guide 1.54’’ dated June 1973, available

through the Government Printing Office

at (202) 512–2249 as document number

A74062–00001.]

Operating parameter value means a

minimum or maximum value

established for a control device or

process parameter that, if achieved by

itself or in combination with one or

more other operating parameter values,

determines that an owner or operator

has complied with an applicable

emission limitation or standard.

Organic zinc specialty coating means

any coating derived from zinc dust

incorporated into an organic binder that

contains more than 960 grams of

elemental zinc per liter (8 pounds per

gallon) of coating, as applied, and that

is used for the expressed purpose of

corrosion protection.

Pleasure craft means any marine or

fresh-water vessel used by individuals

for noncommercial, nonmilitary, and

recreational purposes that is less than

20 meters in length. A vessel rented

exclusively to or chartered by

individuals for such purposes shall be

considered a pleasure craft.

Pretreatment wash primer specialty

coating means any coating that contains

a minimum of 0.5 percent acid, by mass,

and is applied only to bare metal to etch

the surface and enhance adhesion of

subsequent coatings.

Repair and maintenance of

thermoplastic coating of commercial

vessels (specialty coating) means any

vinyl, chlorinated rubber, or bituminous

resin coating that is applied over the

same type of existing coating to perform

the partial recoating of any in-use

commercial vessel. (This definition does

not include coal tar epoxy coatings,

which are considered ‘‘general use’’

coatings.)

Rubber camouflage specialty coating

means any specially formulated epoxy

coating used as a camouflage topcoat for

exterior submarine hulls and sonar

domes. Sealant for thermal spray

aluminum means any epoxy coating

applied to thermal spray aluminum

surfaces at a maximum thickness of 1

dry mil.

Ship means any marine or fresh-water

vessel used for military or commercial

operations, including self-propelled

vessels, those propelled by other craft

(barges), and navigational aids (buoys).

This definition includes, but is not

limited to, all military and Coast Guard

vessels, commercial cargo and passenger

(cruise) ships, ferries, barges, tankers,

container ships, patrol and pilot boats,

and dredges. For purposes of this

subpart, pleasure crafts and offshore oil

and gas drilling platforms are not

considered ships.

Shipbuilding and ship repair

operations means any building, repair,

repainting, converting, or alteration of

ships.

Special marking specialty coating

means any coating that is used for safety

or identification applications, such as

markings on flight decks and ships’

numbers.

Specialty coating means any coating

that is manufactured and used for one

of the specialized applications

described within this list of definitions.

Specialty interior coating means any

coating used on interior surfaces aboard

U.S. military vessels pursuant to a

coating specification that requires the

coating to meet specified fire retardant

and low toxicity requirements, in

addition to the other applicable military

physical and performance requirements.

Tack specialty coating means any thin

film epoxy coating applied at a

maximum thickness of 2 dry mils to

prepare an epoxy coating that has dried

beyond the time limit specified by the

manufacturer for the application of the

next coat.

Thinner means a liquid that is used to

reduce the viscosity of a coating and

that evaporates before or during the cure

of a film.

Thinning ratio means the volumetric

ratio of thinner to coating, as supplied.

Thinning solvent: see Thinner.

Undersea weapons systems specialty

coating means any coating applied to

any component of a weapons system

intended to be launched or fired from

under the sea.

Volatile organic compounds (VOC) is

as defined in § 51.100(s) of this chapter.

Volatile organic hazardous air

pollutants (VOHAP) means any

compound listed in or pursuant to

section 112(b) of the CAA that contains

carbon, excluding metallic carbides and

carbonates. This definition includes

VOC listed as HAP and exempt

compounds listed as HAP.

Weld-through preconstruction primer

(specialty coating) means a coating that

provides corrosion protection for steel

during inventory, is typically applied at

less than 1 mil dry film thickness, does

not require removal prior to welding, is

temperature resistant (burn back from a

weld is less than 1.25 centimeters [0.5

inch]), and does not normally require

removal before applying film-building

coatings, including inorganic zinc highbuild coatings. When constructing new

vessels, there may be a need to remove

areas of weld-through preconstruction

primer due to surface damage or

contamination prior to application of

film-building coatings.

§ 63.783 Standards.

(a) No owner or operator of any

existing or new affected source shall

cause or allow the application of any

coating to a ship with an as-applied

VOHAP content exceeding the

applicable limit given in Table 2 of this

subpart, as determined by the

procedures described in § 63.785 (c)(1)

through (c)(4). For the compliance

procedures described in § 63.785 (c)(1)

through (c)(3), VOC shall be used as a

surrogate for VOHAP, and Method 24 of

Appendix A to 40 CFR part 60 shall be

used as the definitive measure for

determining compliance. For the

compliance procedure described in

§ 63.785(c)(4), an alternative test method

capable of measuring independent

VOHAP shall be used to determine

compliance. The method must be

submitted to and approved by the

Administrator.

(b) Each owner or operator of a new

or existing affected source shall ensure

that:

(1) All handling and transfer of

VOHAP-containing materials to and

from containers, tanks, vats, drums, and

piping systems is conducted in a

manner that minimizes spills.

(2) All containers, tanks, vats, drums,

and piping systems are free of cracks,

holes, and other defects and remain

closed unless materials are being added

to or removed from them.

(c) Approval of alternative means of

limiting emissions. (1) The owner or

operator of an affected source may apply

to the Administrator for permission to

use an alternative means (such as an
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 64339

add-on control system) of limiting

emissions from coating operations. The

application must include:

(i) An engineering material balance

evaluation that provides a comparison

of the emissions that would be achieved

using the alternative means to those that

would result from using coatings that

comply with the limits in Table 2 of this

subpart, or the results from an emission

test that accurately measures the capture

efficiency and control device efficiency

achieved by the control system and the

composition of the associated coatings

so that the emissions comparison can be

made;

(ii) A proposed monitoring protocol

that includes operating parameter

values to be monitored for compliance

and an explanation of how the operating

parameter values will be established

through a performance test; and

(iii) Details of appropriate

recordkeeping and reporting

procedures.

(2) The Administrator shall approve

the alternative means of limiting

emissions if, in the Administrator’s

judgment, postcontrol emissions of

VOHAP per volume applied solids will

be no greater than those from the use of

coatings that comply with the limits in

Table 2 of this subpart.

(3) The Administrator may condition

approval on operation, maintenance,

and monitoring requirements to ensure

that emissions from the source are no

greater than those that would otherwise

result from this subpart. § 63.784

Compliance dates.

(a) Each owner or operator of an

existing affected source shall comply

within 1 year after the effective date of

this subpart.

(b) Each owner or operator of an

existing unaffected area source that

increases its emissions of (or its

potential to emit) HAP such that the

source becomes a major source that is

subject to this subpart shall comply

within 1 year after the date of becoming

a major source.

(c) Each owner or operator of a new

or reconstructed source shall comply

with this subpart according to the

schedule in § 63.6(b).

§ 63.785 Compliance procedures.

(a) For each batch of coating that is

received by an affected source, the

owner or operator shall (see Figure 1 of

this section for a flow diagram of the

compliance procedures):

(1) Determine the coating category

and the applicable VOHAP limit as

specified in § 63.783(a).

(2) Certify the as-supplied VOC

content of the batch of coating. The

owner or operator may use a

certification supplied by the

manufacturer for the batch, although the

owner or operator retains liability

should subsequent testing reveal a

violation. If the owner or operator

performs the certification testing, only

one of the containers in which the batch

of coating was received is required to be

tested.

(b)(1) In lieu of testing each batch of

coating, as applied, the owner or

operator may determine compliance

with the VOHAP limits using any

combination of the procedures

described in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2),

(c)(3), and (c)(4) of this section. The

procedure used for each coating shall be

determined and documented prior to

application.

(2) The results of any compliance

demonstration conducted by the

affected source or any regulatory agency

using Method 24 shall take precedence

over the results using the procedures in

paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), or (c)(3) of this

section.

(3) The results of any compliance

demonstration conducted by the

affected source or any regulatory agency

using an approved test method to

determine VOHAP content shall take

precedence over the results using the

procedures in paragraph (c)(4) of this

section.

(c)(1) Coatings to which thinning

solvent will not be added. For coatings

to which thinning solvent (or any other

material) will not be added under any

circumstance or to which only water is

added, the owner or operator of an

affected source shall comply as follows:

(i) Certify the as-applied VOC content

of each batch of coating.

(ii) Notify the persons responsible for

applying the coating that no thinning

solvent may be added to the coating by

affixing a label to each container of

coating in the batch or through another

means described in the implementation

plan required in § 63.787(b).

(iii) If the certified as-applied VOC

content of each batch of coating used

during a calendar month is less than or

equal to the applicable VOHAP limit in

§ 63.783(a) (either in terms of g/L of

coating or g/L of solids), then

compliance is demonstrated for that

calendar month, unless a violation is

revealed using Method 24 of Appendix

A to 40 CFR part 60.

(2) Coatings to which thinning solvent

will be added—coating-by-coating

compliance. For a coating to which

thinning solvent is routinely or

sometimes added, the owner or operator

shall comply as follows:

(i) Prior to the first application of each

batch, designate a single thinner for the

coating and calculate the maximum

allowable thinning ratio (or ratios, if the

affected source complies with the coldweather limits in addition to the other

limits specified in Table 2 of this

subpart) for each batch as follows:

R

V m

D

s VOC

th

= ( )( ) VOHAP limit − Eqn. 1

where:

R=Maximum allowable thinning ratio

for a given batch (L thinner/L

coating as supplied);

Vs=Volume fraction of solids in the

batch as supplied (L solids/L

coating as supplied);

VOHAP limit=Maximum allowable asapplied VOHAP content of the

coating (g VOHAP/L solids);

mVOC=VOC content of the batch as

supplied [g VOC (including cure

volatiles and exempt compounds on

the HAP list)/L coating (including

water and exempt compounds) as

supplied];

Dth=Density of the thinner (g/L).

If Vs is not supplied directly by the

coating manufacturer, the owner or

operator shall determine Vs as follows:

V

m

D s volatiles

avg

= −1 Eqn. 2

where:

mvolatiles=Total volatiles in the batch,

including VOC, water, and exempt

compounds (g/L coating); and

Davg=Average density of volatiles in the

batch (g/L).

The procedures specified in

§ 63.786(d) may be used to determine

the values of variables defined in this

paragraph. In addition, the owner or

operator may choose to construct

nomographs, based on Equation 1 of this

subpart, similar or identical to the one

provided in appendix B of this subpart

as a means of easily estimating the

maximum allowable thinning ratio.

(ii) Prior to the first application of

each batch, notify painters and other

persons, as necessary, of the designated

thinner and maximum allowable

thinning ratio(s) for each batch of the

coating by affixing a label to each

container of coating or through another

means described in the implementation

plan required in § 63.787(b).

(iii) By the 15th day of each calendar

month, determine the volume of each

batch of the coating used, as supplied,

during the previous month.

(iv) By the 15th day of each calendar

month, determine the total allowable

volume of thinner for the coating used

during the previous month as follows:
64340 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

V R V R V th b i cold b cold i

i

n

i

n

= × ( ) + × ( ) −

= =

∑ ∑

1 1

Eqn. 3

where:

Vth=Total allowable volume of thinner

for the previous month (L thinner);

Vb=Volume of each batch, as supplied

and before being thinned, used

during non-cold-weather days of

the previous month (L coating as

supplied);

Rcold=Maximum allowable thinning ratio

for each batch used during coldweather days (L thinner/L coating

as supplied);

Vb-cold=Volume of each batch, as

supplied and before being thinned,

used during cold-weather days of

the previous month (L coating as

supplied);

i=Each batch of coating; and

n=Total number of batches of the

coating.

(v) By the 15th day of each calendar

month, determine the volume of thinner

actually used with the coating during

the previous month.

(vi) If the volume of thinner actually

used with the coating [paragraph

(c)(3)(v) of this section] is less than or

equal to the total allowable volume of

thinner for the coating [paragraph

(c)(3)(iv) of this section], then

compliance is demonstrated for the

coating for the previous month, unless

a violation is revealed using Method 24

of Appendix A to 40 CFR part 60.

(3) Coatings to which the same

thinning solvent will be added—group

compliance. For coatings to which the

same thinning solvent (or other

material) is routinely or sometimes

added, the owner or operator shall

comply as follows:

(i) Designate a single thinner to be

added to each coating during the month

and ‘‘group’’ coatings according to their

designated thinner.

(ii) Prior to the first application of

each batch, calculate the maximum

allowable thinning ratio (or ratios, if the

affected source complies with the coldweather limits in addition to the other

limits specified in Table 2 of this

subpart) for each batch of coating in the

group using the equations in paragraph

(c)(2) of this section.

(iii) Prior to the first application of

each ‘‘batch,’’ notify painters and other

persons, as necessary, of the designated

thinner and maximum allowable

thinning ratio(s) for each batch in the

group by affixing a label to each

container of coating or through another

means described in the implementation

plan required in § 63.787(b).

(iv) By the 15th day of each calendar

month, determine the volume of each

batch of the group used, as supplied,

during the previous month.

(v) By the 15th day of each calendar

month, determine the total allowable

volume of thinner for the group for the

previous month using Equation 3 of this

subpart.

(vi) By the 15th day of each calendar

month, determine the volume of thinner

actually used with the group during the

previous month.

(vii) If the volume of thinner actually

used with the group [paragraph (c)(3)(vi)

of this section] is less than or equal to

the total allowable volume of thinner for

the group [paragraph (c)(3)(v) of this

section], then compliance is

demonstrated for the group for the

previous month, unless a violation is

revealed using Method 24 of Appendix

A to 40 CFR part 60.

(4) Demonstration of compliance

through an alternative (i.e., other than

Method 24 of Appendix A to 40 CFR

part 60) test method. The owner or

operator shall comply as follows:

(i) Certify the as-supplied VOHAP

content (g VOHAP/L solids) of each

batch of coating.

(ii) If no thinning solvent will be

added to the coating, the owner or

operator of an affected source shall

follow the procedure described in

§ 63.785(c)(1), except that VOHAP

content shall be used in lieu of VOC

content.

(iii) If thinning solvent will be added

to the coating, the owner or operator of

an affected source shall follow the

procedure described in § 63.785(c)(2) or

(3), except that in Equation 1 of this

subpart: the term ‘‘mVOC’’ shall be

replaced by the term ‘‘mVOHAP,’’ defined

as the VOHAP content of the coating as

supplied (g VOHAP/L coating) and the

term ‘‘Dth’’ shall be replaced by the term

‘‘Dth(VOHAP)’’ defined as the average

density of the VOHAP thinner(s) (g/L).

(d) A violation revealed through any

approved test method shall result in a

1-day violation for enforcement

purposes. A violation revealed through

the recordkeeping procedures described

in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this

section shall result in a 30-day violation

for enforcement purposes, unless the

owner or operator provides sufficient

data to demonstrate the specific days

during which noncompliant coatings

were applied.

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 64341

BILLING CODE 6560–50–C
64342 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

§ 63.786 Test methods and procedures.

(a) For the compliance procedures

described in § 63.785(c) (1) through

(c)(3), Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60,

appendix A, is the definitive method for

determining the VOC content of

coatings, as supplied or as applied.

When a coating or thinner contains

exempt compounds that are volatile

HAP or VOHAP, the owner or operator

shall ensure, when determining the

VOC content of a coating, that the mass

of these exempt compounds is included.

(b) For the compliance procedure

described in § 63.785(c)(4), the

Administrator must approve the test

method for determining the VOHAP

content of coatings and thinners. As part

of the approval, the test method must

meet the specified accuracy limits

indicated below for sensitivity,

duplicates, repeatability, and

reproducibility coefficient of variation

each determined at the 95 percent

confidence limit. Each percentage value

below is the corresponding coefficient

of variation multiplied by 2.8 as in the

ASTM Method E180–93: Standard

Practice for Determining the Precision of

ASTM Methods for Analysis and

Testing of Industrial Chemicals

(incorporation by reference—see

§ 63.14).

(1) Sensitivity. The overall sensitivity

must be sufficient to identify and

calculate at least one mass percent of

the compounds of interest based on the

original sample. The sensitivity is

defined as ten times the noise level as

specified in ASTM Method D3257–93:

Standard Test Methods for Aromatics in

Mineral Spirits by Gas Chromatography

(incorporation by reference—see

§ 63.14). In determining the sensitivity,

the level of sample dilution must be

factored in.

(2) Repeatability. First, at the 0.1–5

percent analyte range the results would

be suspect if duplicates vary by more

than 6 percent relative and/or day to

day variation of mean duplicates by the

same analyst exceeds 10 percent

relative. Second, at greater than 5

percent analyte range the results would

be suspect if duplicates vary by more

than 5 percent relative and/or day to

day variation of duplicates by the same

analyst exceeds 5 percent relative.

(3) Reproducibility. First, at the 0.1–

5 percent analyte range the results

would be suspect if lab to lab variation

exceeds 60 percent relative. Second, at

greater than 5 percent range the results

would be suspect if lab to lab variation

exceeds 20 percent relative.

(4) Any test method should include

information on the apparatus, reagents

and materials, analytical procedure,

procedure for identification and

confirmation of the volatile species in

the mixture being analyzed, precision

and bias, and other details to be

reported. The reporting should also

include information on quality

assurance (QA) auditing.

(5) Multiple and different analytical

techniques must be used for positive

identification if the components in a

mixture under analysis are not known.

In such cases a single column gas

chromatograph (GC) may not be

adequate. A combination of equipment

may be needed such as a GC/mass

spectrometer or GC/infrared system. (If

a GC method is used, the operator must

use practices in ASTM Method E260–

91: Standard Practice for Gas

Chromatography [incorporation by

reference—see § 63.14].)

(c) A coating manufacturer or the

owner or operator of an affected source

may use batch formulation data as a test

method in lieu of Method 24 of

Appendix A to 40 CFR part 60 to certify

the as-supplied VOC content of a

coating if the manufacturer or the owner

or operator has determined that batch

formulation data have a consistent and

quantitatively known relationship to

Method 24 results. This determination

shall consider the role of cure volatiles,

which may cause emissions to exceed

an amount based solely upon coating

formulation data. Notwithstanding such

determination, in the event of

conflicting results, Method 24 of

appendix A of 40 CFR part 60 shall take

precedence.

(d) Each owner or operator of an

affected source shall use or ensure that

the manufacturer uses the form and

procedures mentioned in appendix A of

this subpart to determine values for the

thinner and coating parameters used in

Equations 1 and 2 of this subpart. The

owner or operator shall ensure that the

coating/thinner manufacturer (or

supplier) provides information on the

VOC and VOHAP contents of the

coatings/thinners and the procedure(s)

used to determine these values.

§ 63.787 Notification requirements.

(a) Each owner or operator of an

affected source shall comply with all

applicable notification requirements in

§ 63.9(a) through (d) and (i) through (j),

with the exception that the deadline

specified in § 63.9(b) (2) and (3) shall be

extended from 120 days to 180 days.

Any owner or operator that receives

approval pursuant to § 63.783(c) to use

an add-on control system to control

coating emissions shall comply with the

applicable requirements of § 63.9(e)

through (h).

(b) Implementation plan. The

provisions of § 63.9(a) apply to the

requirements of this paragraph.

(1) Each owner or operator of an

affected source shall:

(i) Prepare a written implementation

plan that addresses each of the subject

areas specified in paragraph (b)(3) of

this section; and

(ii) Not later than 180 days after the

effective date of this subpart, submit the

implementation plan to the

Administrator for approval along with

the notification required by § 63.9(b) (2)

or (5), as applicable.

(2) The Administrator may require

revisions to the initial plan where the

Administrator finds that the plan does

not adequately address each subject area

listed in paragraph (b)(3) of this section

or that the requirements in the plan are

unclear.

(3) Implementation plan contents.

Each implementation plan shall address

the following subject areas:

(i) Coating compliance procedures.

The implementation plan shall include

the compliance procedure(s) under

§ 63.785(c) that the source intends to

use.

(ii) Recordkeeping procedures. The

implementation plan shall include the

procedures for maintaining the records

required under § 63.788, including the

procedures for gathering the necessary

data and making the necessary

calculations.

(iii) Transfer, handling, and storage

procedures. The implementation plan

shall include the procedures for

ensuring compliance with § 63.783(b).

(4) Major sources that intend to

become area sources by the compliance

date. Existing major sources that intend

to become area sources by the

compliance date December 16, 1996

may choose to submit, in lieu of the

implementation plan required under

paragraph (b)(1) of this section, a

statement that, by the compliance date,

the major source intends to obtain and

comply with federally enforceable limits

on their potential to emit which make

the facility an area source. § 63.788

Recordkeeping and reporting

requirements.

(a) Each owner or operator of an

affected source shall comply with the

applicable recordkeeping and reporting

requirements in § 63.10 (a), (b), (d), and

(f). Any owner that receives approval

pursuant to § 63.783(c) to use an add-on

control system to control coating

emissions shall also comply with the

applicable requirements of § 63.10 (c)

and (e). A summary of recordkeeping

and reporting requirements is provided

in Table 3 of this subpart.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 64343

(b) Recordkeeping requirements. (1)

Each owner or operator of an unaffected

major source, as described in

§ 63.781(b), shall record the total

volume of coating applied at the source

to ships. Such records shall be compiled

monthly and maintained for a minimum

of 5 years.

(2) Each owner or operator of an

affected source shall compile records on

a monthly basis and maintain those

records for a minimum of 5 years. At a

minimum, these records shall include:

(i) All documentation supporting

initial notification;

(ii) A copy of the affected source’s

approved implementation plan;

(iii) The volume of each low-usageexempt coating applied;

(iv) Identification of the coatings

used, their appropriate coating

categories, and the applicable VOHAP

limit;

(v) Certification of the as-supplied

VOC content of each batch of coating;

(vi) A determination of whether

containers meet the standards as

described in § 63.783(b)(2); and

(vii) The results of any Method 24 of

appendix A to 40 CFR part 60 or

approved VOHAP measurement test

conducted on individual containers of

coating, as applied.

(3) The records required by paragraph

(b)(2) of this section shall include

additional information, as determined

by the compliance procedure(s)

described in § 63.785(c) that each

affected source followed:

(i) Coatings to which thinning solvent

will not be added. The records

maintained by facilities demonstrating

compliance using the procedure

described in § 63.785(c)(1) shall contain

the following information:

(A) Certification of the as-applied

VOC content of each batch of coating;

and

(B) The volume of each coating

applied.

(ii) Coatings to which thinning solvent

will be added—coating-by-coating

compliance. The records maintained by

facilities demonstrating compliance

using the procedure described in

§ 63.785(c)(2) shall contain the

following information:

(A) The density and mass fraction of

water and exempt compounds of each

thinner and the volume fraction of

solids (nonvolatiles) in each batch,

including any calculations;

(B) The maximum allowable thinning

ratio (or ratios, if the affected source

complies with the cold-weather limits

in addition to the other limits specified

in Table 2 of this subpart for each batch

of coating, including calculations;

(C) If an affected source chooses to

comply with the cold-weather limits,

the dates and times during which the

ambient temperature at the affected

source was below 4.5°C (40°F) at the

time the coating was applied and the

volume used of each batch of the

coating, as supplied, during these dates;

(D) The volume used of each batch of

the coating, as supplied;

(E) The total allowable volume of

thinner for each coating, including

calculations; and

(F) The actual volume of thinner used

for each coating.

(iii) Coatings to which the same

thinning solvent will be added—group

compliance. The records maintained by

facilities demonstrating compliance

using the procedure described in

§ 63.785(c)(3) shall contain the

following information:

(A) The density and mass fraction of

water and exempt compounds of each

thinner and the volume fraction of

solids in each batch, including any

calculations;

(B) The maximum allowable thinning

ratio (or ratios, if the affected source

complies with the cold-weather limits

in addition to the other limits specified

in Table 2 of this subpart) for each batch

of coating, including calculations;

(C) If an affected source chooses to

comply with the cold-weather limits,

the dates and times during which the

ambient temperature at the affected

source was below 4.5°C (40°F) at the

time the coating was applied and the

volume used of each batch in the group,

as supplied, during these dates;

(D) Identification of each group of

coatings and their designated thinners;

(E) The volume used of each batch of

coating in the group, as supplied;

(F) The total allowable volume of

thinner for the group, including

calculations; and

(G) The actual volume of thinner used

for the group.

(iv) Demonstration of compliance

through an alternative (i.e., non-Method

24 in appendix A to 40 CFR part 60) test

method. The records maintained by

facilities demonstrating compliance

using the procedure described in

§ 63.785(c)(4) shall contain the

following information:

(A) Identification of the

Administrator-approved VOHAP test

method or certification procedure;

(B) For coatings to which the affected

source does not add thinning solvents,

the source shall record the certification

of the as-supplied and as-applied

VOHAP content of each batch and the

volume of each coating applied;

(C) For coatings to which the affected

source adds thinning solvent on a

coating-by-coating basis, the source

shall record all of the information

required to be recorded by paragraph

(b)(3)(ii) of this section; and

(D) For coatings to which the affected

source adds thinning solvent on a group

basis, the source shall record all of the

information required to be recorded by

paragraph (b)(3)(iii) of this section.

(4) If the owner or operator of an

affected source detects a violation of the

standards specified in § 63.783, the

owner or operator shall, for the

remainder of the reporting period

during which the violation(s) occurred,

include the following information in his

or her records:

(i) A summary of the number and

duration of deviations during the

reporting period, classified by reason,

including known causes for which a

Federally-approved or promulgated

exemption from an emission limitation

or standard may apply.

(ii) Identification of the data

availability achieved during the

reporting period, including a summary

of the number and total duration of

incidents that the monitoring protocol

failed to perform in accordance with the

design of the protocol or produced data

that did not meet minimum data

accuracy and precision requirements,

classified by reason.

(iii) Identification of the compliance

status as of the last day of the reporting

period and whether compliance was

continuous or intermittent during the

reporting period.

(iv) If, pursuant to paragraph (b)(4)(iii)

of this section, the owner or operator

identifies any deviation as resulting

from a known cause for which no

Federally-approved or promulgated

exemption from an emission limitation

or standard applies, the monitoring

report shall also include all records that

the source is required to maintain that

pertain to the periods during which

such deviation occurred and:

(A) The magnitude of each deviation;

(B) The reason for each deviation;

(C) A description of the corrective

action taken for each deviation,

including action taken to minimize each

deviation and action taken to prevent

recurrence; and

(D) All quality assurance activities

performed on any element of the

monitoring protocol.

(c) Reporting requirements. Before the

60th day following completion of each

6-month period after the compliance

date specified in § 63.784, each owner

or operator of an affected source shall

submit a report to the Administrator for

each of the previous 6 months. The

report shall include all of the

information that must be retained

pursuant to paragraphs (b) (2) through

(3) of this section, except for that
64344 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

information specified in paragraphs

(b)(2) (i) through (ii), (b)(2)(v),

(b)(3)(i)(A), (b)(3)(ii)(A), and

(b)(3)(iii)(A). If a violation at an affected

source is detected, the source shall also

report the information specified in

paragraph (b)(4) of this section for the

reporting period during which the

violation(s) occurred. To the extent

possible, the report shall be organized

according to the compliance

procedure(s) followed each month by

the affected source.

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART II OF PART 63—GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABILITY TO SUBPART II

Reference Applies to

subpart II Comment

63.1(a)(1)–(3) ......... Yes. .........

63.1(a)(4) ............... Yes .......... Subpart II clarifies the applicability of each paragraph in subpart A to sources subject to subpart II.

63.1(a)(5)–(7) ......... Yes.

63.1(a)(8) ............... No ............ Discusses State programs.

63.1(a)(9)–(14) ....... Yes.

63.1(b)(1) ............... Yes .......... § 63.781 specifies applicability in more detail.

63.1(b)(2)–(3) ......... Yes.

63.1(c)–(e) ............. Yes.

63.2 ........................ Yes .......... Additional terms are defined in § 63.782; when overlap between subparts A and II occurs, subpart II takes

precedence.

63.3 ........................ Yes .......... Other units used in subpart II are defined in that subpart.

63.4 ........................ Yes.

63.5(a)–(c) ............. Yes.

63.5(d) ................... Yes .......... Except information on control devices and control efficiencies should not be included in the application unless an add-on control system is or will be used to comply with subpart II in accordance with § 63.783(c).

63.5(e)–(f) .............. Yes.

63.6(a)–(b) ............. Yes.

63.6(c)–(d) ............. Yes .......... Except § 63.784(a) specifies the compliance date for existing affected sources.

63.6(e)–(f) .............. No ............ If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system) is used to comply with subpart

II in accordance with § 63.783(c), then these paragraphs do apply.

63.6(g) ................... No ............ § 63.783(c) specifies procedures for application and approval of alternative means of limiting emissions.

63.6(h) ................... No ............ Subpart II does not contain any opacity or visible emission standards.

63.6(i)–(j) ............... Yes.

63.7 ........................ No ............ If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system) is used to comply with subpart

II in accordance with § 63.783(c), then this section does apply.

63.8 ........................ No ............ If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system) is used to comply with subpart

II in accordance with § 63.783(c), then this section does apply.

63.9(a)–(d) ............. Yes .......... § 63.787(a) extends the initial notification deadline to 180 days. § 63.787(b) requires an implementation plan

to be submitted with the initial notification.

63.9(e) ................... No ............ If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system) is used to comply with subpart

II in accordance with § 63.783(c), then this paragraph does apply.

63.9(f) .................... No ............ Subpart II does not contain any opacity or visible emission standards

63.9(g)–(h) ............. No ............ If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system) is used to comply with subpart

II in accordance with § 63.783(c) then these paragraphs do apply.

63.9(i)–(j) ............... Yes.

63.10(a)–(b) ........... Yes .......... § 63.788(b)–(c) list additional recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

63.10(c) .................. No ............ If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system) is used to comply with subpart

II in accordance with § 63.783(c), then this paragraph does apply.

63.10(d) ................. Yes.

63.10(e) ................. No ............ If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system) is used to comply with subpart

II in accordance with § 63.783(c), then this paragraph does apply.

63.10(f) .................. Yes.

63.11 ...................... No ............ If an alternative means of limiting emissions (e.g., an add-on control system) is used to comply with subpart

II in accordance with § 63.783(c), then this section does apply.

63.12–63.15 ........... Yes.

TABLE 2 TO SUBPART II OF PART 63.—VOLATILE ORGANIC HAP (VOHAP) LIMITS FOR MARINE COATINGS

Coating category

VOHAP limits a b c

Grams/liter

coating

(minus

water and

exempt

compounds)

Grams/liter solids d

t ≥ 4.5° C t < 4.5° C e

General use ............................................................................................................................................. 340 571 728

Specialty:

Air flask ................................................................................................................................................. 340 571 728

Antenna ................................................................................................................................................ 530 1,439

Antifoulant ............................................................................................................................................. 400 765 971

Heat resistant ....................................................................................................................................... 420 841 1,069

High-gloss ............................................................................................................................................. 420 841 1,069

High-temperature .................................................................................................................................. 500 1,237 1,597
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 64345

TABLE 2 TO SUBPART II OF PART 63.—VOLATILE ORGANIC HAP (VOHAP) LIMITS FOR MARINE COATINGS—Continued

Coating category

VOHAP limits a b c

Grams/liter

coating

(minus

water and

exempt

compounds)

Grams/liter solids d

t ≥ 4.5° C t < 4.5° C e

Inorganic zinc high-build ...................................................................................................................... 340 571 728

Military exterior ..................................................................................................................................... 340 571 728

Mist ....................................................................................................................................................... 610 2,235

Navigational aids .................................................................................................................................. 550 1,597

Nonskid ................................................................................................................................................. 340 571 728

Nuclear ................................................................................................................................................. 420 841 1,069

Organic zinc ......................................................................................................................................... 360 630 802

Pretreatment wash primer .................................................................................................................... 780 11,095

Repair and maint. of thermoplastics .................................................................................................... 550 1,597

Rubber camouflage .............................................................................................................................. 340 571 728

Sealant for thermal spray aluminum .................................................................................................... 610 2,235

Special marking .................................................................................................................................... 490 1,178

Specialty interior ................................................................................................................................... 340 571 728

Tack coat .............................................................................................................................................. 610 2,235

Undersea weapons systems ................................................................................................................ 340 571 728

Weld-through precon. primer ............................................................................................................... 650 2,885

aThe limits are expressed in two sets of equivalent units. Either set of limits may be used for the compliance procedure described in

§ 63.785(c)(1), but only the limits expressed in units of g/L solids (nonvolatiles) shall be used for the compliance procedures described

§ 63.785(c) (2) through (4).

bVOC (including exempt compounds listed as HAP) shall be used as a surrogate for VOHAP for those compliance procedures described in

§ 63.785(c) (1) through (3).

cTo convert from g/L to lb/gal, multiply by (3.785 L/gal)(1/453.6 lb/g) or 1/120. For compliance purposes, metric units define the standards.

dVOHAP limits expressed in units of mass of VOHAP per volume of solids were derived from the VOHAP limits expressed in units of mass of

VOHAP per volume of coating assuming the coatings contain no water or exempt compounds and that the volumes of all components within a

coating are additive. eThese limits apply during cold-weather time periods, as defined in § 63.782. Cold-weather allowances are not given to coatings in categories

that permit over a 40 percent VOHAP content by volume. Such coatings are subject to the same limits regardless of weather conditions.

TABLE 3 TO SUBPART II OF PART 63.—SUMMARY OF RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS a b c

Requirement

All Opts. Option 1 Option 2 Option 3

Rec Rep Rec Rep Rec Rep Rec Rep

Notification (§ 63.9(a)–(d)) ................................................................................................ X X

Implementation plan (§ 63.787(b)) d .................................................................................. X X

Volume of coating applied at unaffected major sources (§ 63.781(b)) ............................ X

Volume of each low-usage-exempt coating applied at affected sources (§ 63.781(c)) ... X X

ID of the coatings used, their appropriate coating categories, and the applicable

VOHAP limit .................................................................................................................. X X

Determination of whether containers meet the standards described in § 63.783(b)(2) ... X X

Results of M–24 or other approved tests ......................................................................... X X

Certification of the as-supplied VOC content of each batch ............................................ X

Certification of the as-applied VOC content of each batch .............................................. X

Volume of each coating applied ....................................................................................... X X

Density of each thinner and volume fraction of solids in each batch .............................. X X

Maximum allowable thinning ratio(s) for each batch ........................................................ X X X X

Volume used of each batch, as supplied ......................................................................... X X X X

Total allowable volume of thinner ..................................................................................... X X X X

Actual volume of thinner used .......................................................................................... X X X X

Identification of each group of coatings and designated thinners ................................... X X

aAffected sources that comply with the cold-weather limits must record and report additional information, as specified in § 63.788(b)(3) (ii)(C),

(iii)(C), and (iv)(D). bAffected sources that detect a violation must record and report additional information, as specified in § 63.788(b)(4). cOPTION 4: the recordkeeping and reporting requirements of Option 4 are identical to those of Options 1, 2, or 3, depending on whether and

how thinners are used. However, when using Option 4, the term ‘‘VOHAP’’ shall be used in lieu of the term ‘‘VOC,’’ and the owner or operator

shall record and report the Administrator-approved VOHAP test method or certification procedure. d Major sources that intend to become area sources by the compliance date may, in lieu of submitting an implementation plan, choose to submit a statement of intent as specified in § 63.787(b)(4).
64346 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

* Incorporation by reference—see § 63.14.

1Adapted from EPA–340/1–86–016 (July 1986),

p. II–2.

2The subscript ‘‘s’’ denotes each value is for the

coating ‘‘as supplied’’ by the manufacturer.

3Explain the other method used under

‘‘Remarks.’’

Appendix A to Subpart II of Part 63—VOC

Data Sheet 1

Properties of the Coating ‘‘As Supplied’’ by

the Manufacturer 2

Coating Manufacturer: llllllllll

Coating Identification: llllllllll

Batch Identification: lllllllllll

Supplied To: llllllllllllll

Properties of the coating as supplied 1 to

the customer:

A. Coating Density: (Dc)s ll g/L

[ ] ASTM D1475–90 * [ ] Other 3

B. Total Volatiles: (mv)s ll Mass Percent

[ ] ASTM D2369–93 * [ ] Other 3

C. Water Content: 1. (mw)s ll Mass Percent

[ ] ASTM D3792–91 * [ ] ASTM

D4017–90 * [ ] Other 3

2. (vw)s ll Volume Percent

[ ] Calculated [ ] Other 3

D. Organic Volatiles: (mo)s ll Mass Percent

E. Nonvolatiles: (vn)s ll Volume Percent

[ ] Calculated [ ] Other 3

F. VOC Content (VOC)s:

1. ll g/L solids (nonvolatiles)

2. ll g/L coating (less water and exempt

compounds)

G. Thinner Density: Dth ll g/L

ASTM ll [ ] Other 3

Remarks: (use reverse side)

Signed: lllllll Date: ll

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 241 / Friday, December 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 64347

[FR Doc. 95–29748 Filed 12–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–C