Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0074-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Surface Coating of Plastic Parts and Products; Proposed Rule
Posted Date: 2002-12-04T05:00Z

Wednesday,

December
4,
2002
Part
II
Environmental
Protection
Agency
40
CFR
Part
63
National
Emission
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants:
Surface
Coating
of
Plastic
Parts
and
Products;
Proposed
Rule
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00001
Fmt
4717
Sfmt
4717
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72276
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
63
[
FRL
 
7385
 
7]

RIN
2060
 
AG57
National
Emission
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants:
Surface
Coating
of
Plastic
Parts
and
Products
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Proposed
rule.

SUMMARY:
This
action
proposes
national
emission
standards
for
hazardous
air
pollutants
(
NESHAP)
for
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
operations
located
at
major
sources
of
hazardous
air
pollutants
(
HAP).
The
proposed
standards
would
implement
section
112(
d)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA)
by
requiring
these
operations
to
meet
HAP
emission
standards
reflecting
the
application
of
the
maximum
achievable
control
technology
(
MACT).
The
proposed
rule
would
protect
air
quality
and
promote
the
public
health
by
reducing
emissions
of
HAP
emitted
in
the
largest
quantities
by
facilities
in
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products
source
category
to
include
methyl
ethyl
ketone
(
MEK),
methyl
isobutyl
ketone
(
MIBK),
toluene,
and
xylenes.
Exposure
to
these
substances
has
been
demonstrated
to
cause
adverse
health
effects
such
as
irritation
of
the
lung,
skin,
and
mucous
membranes,
and
effects
on
the
central
nervous
system,
liver,
and
heart.
In
general,
these
findings
have
only
been
shown
with
concentrations
higher
than
those
typically
in
the
ambient
air.
The
proposed
standards
would
reduce
nationwide
HAP
emissions
from
major
sources
in
this
source
category
by
approximately
80
percent.
DATES:
Comments.
Submit
comments
on
or
before
February
3,
2003.
Public
Hearing.
If
anyone
contacts
the
EPA
requesting
to
speak
at
a
public
hearing,
they
should
do
so
by
December
24,
2002.
If
requested,
a
public
hearing
will
be
held
within
approximately
30
days
following
publication
of
this
notice
in
the
Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES:
Comments.
By
U.
S.
Postal
Service,
written
comments
should
be
submitted
(
in
duplicate
if
possible)
to:
Air
and
Radiation
Docket
and
Information
Center
(
6102T),
Attention
Docket
Number
A
 
99
 
12,
U.
S.
EPA,
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20460.
In
person
or
by
courier,
deliver
comments
(
in
duplicate
if
possible)
to:
Air
and
Radiation
Docket
and
Information
Center
(
6102T),
Attention
Docket
Number
A
 
99
 
12,
U.
S.
EPA,
Public
Reading
Room,
Room
B102,
EPA
West
Building,
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW,
Washington
DC
20460.
The
EPA
requests
a
separate
copy
also
be
sent
to
the
contact
person
listed
in
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Public
Hearing.
If
a
public
hearing
is
held,
it
will
be
held
at
the
new
EPA
facility
complex
in
Research
Triangle
Park,
North
Carolina.
You
should
contact
Ms.
Janet
Eck,
Coatings
and
Consumer
Products
Group,
Emission
Standards
Division
(
C539
 
03),
U.
S.
EPA,
Research
Triangle
Park,
North
Carolina
27711,
telephone
number
(
919)
541
 
7946,
to
request
to
speak
at
a
public
hearing
or
to
find
out
if
a
hearing
will
be
held.
Docket.
Docket
No.
A
 
99
 
12
contains
supporting
information
used
in
developing
the
proposed
standards.
The
docket
is
located
at
the
U.
S.
EPA,
Public
Reading
Room,
Room
B102,
EPA
West
Building,
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW,
Washington
DC
20460,
and
may
be
inspected
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Ms.
Kim
Teal,
Coatings
and
Consumer
Products
Group,
Emission
Standards
Division
(
C539
 
03),
U.
S.
EPA,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27711;
telephone
number
(
919)
541
 
5580;
facsimile
number
(
919)
541
 
5689;
electronic
mail
(
e­
mail)
address:
teal.
kim@
epa.
gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
Comments.
Comments
and
data
may
be
submitted
by
e­
mail
to:
a­
and­
rdocket
epa.
gov.
Electronic
comments
must
be
submitted
as
an
ASCII
file
to
avoid
the
use
of
special
characters
and
encryption
problems
and
will
also
be
accepted
on
disks
in
WordPerfect
 
file
format.
All
comments
and
data
submitted
in
electronic
form
must
note
the
docket
number:
A
 
99
 
12.
No
confidential
business
information
(
CBI)
should
be
submitted
by
e­
mail.
Electronic
comments
may
be
filed
online
at
many
Federal
Depository
Libraries.
Commenters
wishing
to
submit
proprietary
information
for
consideration
must
clearly
distinguish
such
information
from
other
comments
and
clearly
label
it
as
CBI.
Send
submissions
containing
such
proprietary
information
directly
to
the
following
address,
and
not
to
the
public
docket,
to
ensure
that
proprietary
information
is
not
inadvertently
placed
in
the
docket:
Ms.
Kim
Teal,
c/
o
OAQPS
Document
Control
Officer
(
C404
 
02),
U.
S.
EPA,
109
TW
Alexander
Drive,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27709.
The
EPA
will
disclose
information
identified
as
CBI
only
to
the
extent
allowed
by
the
procedures
set
forth
in
40
CFR
part
2.
If
no
claim
of
confidentiality
accompanies
a
submission
when
it
is
received
by
EPA,
the
information
may
be
made
available
to
the
public
without
further
notice
to
the
commenter.
Public
Hearing.
Persons
interested
in
presenting
oral
testimony
or
inquiring
as
to
whether
a
hearing
is
to
be
held
should
contact
Ms.
Janet
Eck,
Coatings
and
Consumer
Products
Group,
Emission
Standards
Division
(
C539
 
03),
U.
S.
EPA,
Research
Triangle
Park,
North
Carolina
27711;
telephone
number
(
919)
541
 
7946
at
least
2
days
in
advance
of
the
public
hearing.
Persons
interested
in
attending
the
public
hearing
should
also
contact
Ms.
Eck
to
verify
the
time,
date,
and
location
of
the
hearing.
The
public
hearing
will
provide
interested
parties
the
opportunity
to
present
data,
views,
or
arguments
concerning
the
proposed
emission
standards.
Docket.
The
docket
is
an
organized
and
complete
file
of
all
the
information
considered
by
EPA
in
the
development
of
this
rulemaking.
The
docket
is
a
dynamic
file
because
material
is
added
throughout
the
rulemaking
process.
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
proposed
and
promulgated
standards
and
their
preambles,
the
contents
of
the
docket
will
serve
as
the
record
in
the
case
of
judicial
review.
(
See
section
307(
d)(
7)(
A)
of
the
CAA.)
The
regulatory
text
and
other
materials
related
to
this
rulemaking
are
available
for
review
in
the
docket
or
copies
may
be
mailed
on
request
from
the
Air
and
Radiation
Docket
and
Information
Center
by
calling
(
202)
566
 
1742.
A
reasonable
fee
may
be
charged
for
copying
docket
materials.
World
Wide
Web
(
WWW).
In
addition
to
being
available
in
the
docket,
an
electronic
copy
of
this
proposed
rule
will
also
be
available
on
the
WWW
through
the
Technology
Transfer
Network
(
TTN).
Following
signature
by
the
EPA
Administrator,
a
copy
of
the
proposed
rule
will
be
posted
on
the
TTN's
policy
and
guidance
page
for
newly
proposed
or
promulgated
rules
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
oarpg.
The
TTN
provides
information
and
technology
exchange
in
various
areas
of
air
pollution
control.
If
more
information
regarding
the
TTN
is
needed,
call
the
TTN
HELP
line
at
(
919)
541
 
5384.
Regulated
Entities.
The
source
category
definition
includes
facilities
that
apply
coatings
to
plastic
parts
and
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00002
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72277
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
products.
In
general,
facilities
that
coat
plastic
parts
and
products
are
covered
under
the
Standard
Industrial
Classification
(
SIC)
and
North
American
Industrial
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
codes
listed
in
Table
1.
However,
facilities
classified
under
other
SIC
or
NAICS
codes
may
be
subject
to
the
proposed
standards
if
they
meet
the
applicability
criteria.
Not
all
facilities
classified
under
the
SIC
and
NAICS
codes
in
the
following
table
will
be
subject
to
the
proposed
standards
because
some
of
the
classifications
cover
products
outside
the
scope
of
the
NESHAP
for
plastic
parts
and
products.

TABLE
1.
 
CATEGORIES
AND
ENTITIES
POTENTIALLY
REGULATED
BY
THE
PROPOSED
STANDARDS
Category
SIC
NAICS
Examples
of
potentially
regulated
entities
Industrial
......................................
2522
337214
...............................
Office
furniture,
except
wood.
3086
32614,
32615
.....................
Plastic
foam
products
(
e.
g.,
pool
floats,
wrestling
mats,
life
jackets
3089
326199
...............................
Plastic
products
not
elsewhere
classified
(
e.
g.,
name
plates,
coin
holders,
storage
boxes,
license
plate
housings,
cosmetic
caps,
cup
holders).
3579
333313
...............................
Office
machines.
3663
33422
.................................
Radio
and
television
broadcasting
and
communications
equipment
(
e.
g.,
cellular
telephones).
3711
336211
...............................
Motor
Vehicle
Body
Manufacturing.
3714
336399
...............................
Motor
vehicle
parts
and
accessories.
3715
336212
...............................
Truck
Trailer
Manufacturing.
3716
336213
...............................
Motor
Home
Manufacturing.
3792
336214
...............................
Travel
Trailer
and
Camper
Manufacturing.
3799
336999
...............................
Transportation
equipment
not
elsewhere
classified
(
e.
g.,
snowmobile
hoods,
running
boards,
tractor
body
panels,
personal
watercraft
parts).
3841
339111,
339112
.................
Medical
equipment
and
supplies.
3949
33992
.................................
Sporting
and
athletic
goods.
3993
33995
.................................
Signs
and
advertising
specialties.
3999
339999
...............................
Manufacturing
industries
not
elsewhere
classified
(
e.
g.,
bezels,
consoles,
panels,
lenses).
Federal,
State,
and
Local
Governments
................
.............................................
Government
owned
or
operated
facilities
that
perform
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating.
Examples
include
Department
of
Defense
facilities.

This
table
is
not
intended
to
be
exhaustive,
but
rather
provides
a
guide
for
readers
regarding
entities
likely
to
be
regulated
by
this
action.
To
determine
whether
your
coating
operation
is
regulated
by
this
action,
you
should
examine
the
applicability
criteria
in
§
63.4481
of
the
proposed
rule.
If
you
have
any
questions
regarding
the
applicability
of
this
action
to
a
particular
entity,
consult
the
person
listed
in
the
preceding
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT
section.
Outline.
The
information
presented
in
this
preamble
is
organized
as
follows:

I.
Background
A.
What
is
the
source
of
authority
for
development
of
NESHAP?
B.
What
criteria
are
used
in
the
development
of
NESHAP?
C.
What
are
the
health
effects
associated
with
HAP
emissions
from
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products?
II.
Summary
of
the
Proposed
Rule
A.
What
source
categories
and
subcategories
are
affected
by
this
proposed
rule?
B.
What
is
the
relationship
to
other
rules?
C.
What
are
the
primary
sources
of
emissions
and
what
are
the
emissions?
D.
What
is
the
affected
source?
E.
What
are
the
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
and
other
standards?
F.
What
are
the
testing
and
initial
compliance
requirements?
G.
What
are
the
continuous
compliance
provisions?
H.
What
are
the
notification,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
requirements?
III.
Rationale
for
Selecting
the
Proposed
Standards
A.
How
did
we
select
the
source
category
and
subcategories?
B.
How
did
we
select
the
regulated
pollutants?
C.
How
did
we
select
the
affected
source?
D.
How
did
we
determine
the
basis
and
level
of
the
proposed
standards
for
existing
and
new
sources?
E.
How
did
we
select
the
format
of
the
proposed
standards?
F.
How
did
we
select
the
testing
and
initial
compliance
requirements?
G.
How
did
we
select
the
continuous
compliance
requirements?
H.
How
did
we
select
the
notification,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
requirements?
I.
How
did
we
select
the
compliance
date?
IV.
Summary
of
Environmental,
Energy,
and
Economic
Impacts
A.
What
are
the
air
impacts?
B.
What
are
the
cost
impacts?
C.
What
are
the
economic
impacts?
D.
What
are
the
non­
air
health,
environmental,
and
energy
impacts?
V.
Administrative
Requirements
A.
Executive
Order
12866,
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review
B.
Executive
Order
13132,
Federalism
C.
Executive
Order
13175,
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments
D.
Executive
Order
13045,
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks
E.
Executive
Order
13211,
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
that
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use
F.
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
of
1995
G.
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA),
as
Amended
by
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
of
1996
(
SBREFA),
5
U.
S.
C.
601,
et
seq.
H.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
I.
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
I.
Background
A.
What
Is
the
Source
of
Authority
for
Development
of
NESHAP?

Section
112
of
the
CAA
requires
us
to
list
categories
and
subcategories
of
major
sources
and
area
sources
of
HAP
and
to
establish
NESHAP
for
the
listed
source
categories
and
subcategories.
The
Plastic
Parts
and
Products
(
Surface
Coating)
category
of
major
sources
was
listed
on
July
16,
1992
(
57
FR
31576)
under
the
Surface
Coating
Processes
industry
group.
Major
sources
of
HAP
are
those
that
emit
or
have
the
potential
to
emit
equal
to,
or
greater
than,
9.1
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00003
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72278
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
megagrams
per
year
(
Mg/
yr)
(
10
tons
per
year
(
tpy))
of
any
one
HAP
or
22.7
Mg/
yr
(
25
tpy)
of
any
combination
of
HAP.

B.
What
Criteria
Are
Used
in
the
Development
of
NESHAP?
Section
112
of
the
CAA
requires
that
we
establish
NESHAP
for
the
control
of
HAP
from
both
new
and
existing
major
sources.
The
CAA
requires
the
NESHAP
to
reflect
the
maximum
degree
of
reduction
in
emissions
of
HAP
that
is
achievable.
This
level
of
control
is
commonly
referred
to
as
the
MACT.
The
MACT
floor
is
the
minimum
control
level
allowed
for
NESHAP
and
is
defined
under
section
112(
d)(
3)
of
the
CAA.
In
essence,
the
MACT
floor
ensures
that
the
standard
is
set
at
a
level
that
assures
that
all
major
sources
achieve
the
level
of
control
at
least
as
stringent
as
that
already
achieved
by
the
better­
controlled
and
lower­
emitting
sources
in
each
source
category
or
subcategory.
For
new
sources,
the
MACT
floor
cannot
be
less
stringent
than
the
emission
control
that
is
achieved
in
practice
by
the
bestcontrolled
similar
source.
The
MACT
standards
for
existing
sources
can
be
less
stringent
than
standards
for
new
sources,
but
they
cannot
be
less
stringent
than
the
average
emission
limitation
achieved
by
the
bestperforming
12
percent
of
existing
sources
in
the
category
or
subcategory
(
or
the
best­
performing
five
sources
for
categories
or
subcategories
with
fewer
than
30
sources).
In
developing
MACT,
we
also
consider
control
options
that
are
more
stringent
than
the
floor.
We
may
establish
standards
more
stringent
than
the
floor
based
on
the
consideration
of
the
cost
of
achieving
the
emission
reductions,
any
non­
air
quality
health
and
environmental
impacts,
and
energy
requirements.

C.
What
Are
the
Health
Effects
Associated
With
HAP
Emissions
From
the
Surface
Coating
of
Plastic
Parts
and
Products?
The
major
HAP
emitted
from
the
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
industry
include
MEK,
MIBK,
toluene,
and
xylenes.
These
compounds
account
for
over
85
percent
of
the
nationwide
HAP
emissions
from
this
source
category.
Other
HAP
identified
in
emissions
include
ethylene
glycol
monobutyl
ether
(
EGBE)
and
glycol
ethers.
The
HAP
that
would
be
controlled
with
this
proposed
rule
are
associated
with
a
variety
of
adverse
health
effects.
These
adverse
health
effects
include
chronic
health
disorders
(
e.
g.,
birth
defects
and
effects
on
the
central
nervous
system,
liver,
and
heart),
and
acute
health
disorders
(
e.
g.,
irritation
of
the
lung,
skin,
and
mucous
membranes,
and
effects
on
the
central
nervous
system).
We
do
not
have
the
type
of
current
detailed
data
on
each
of
the
facilities
covered
by
the
proposed
emission
standards
for
this
source
category,
and
the
people
living
around
the
facilities,
that
would
be
necessary
to
conduct
an
analysis
to
determine
the
actual
population
exposures
to
the
HAP
emitted
from
these
facilities
and
potential
for
resultant
health
effects.
Therefore,
we
do
not
know
the
extent
to
which
the
adverse
health
effects
described
above
occur
in
the
populations
surrounding
these
facilities.
However,
to
the
extent
the
adverse
effects
do
occur,
the
proposed
rule
would
reduce
emissions
and
subsequent
exposures.

II.
Summary
of
the
Proposed
Rule
A.
What
Source
Categories
and
Subcategories
Are
Affected
By
This
Proposed
Rule?

The
proposed
rule
will
apply
to
you
if
you
own
or
operate
a
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
facility
that
is
a
major
source,
or
is
located
at
a
major
source,
or
is
part
of
a
major
source
of
HAP
emissions.
We
have
defined
a
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
facility
as
any
facility
engaged
in
the
surface
coating
of
any
plastic
part
or
product.
You
will
not
be
subject
to
the
proposed
rule
if
your
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
facility
is
located
at
an
area
source.
An
area
source
of
HAP
is
any
facility
that
has
the
potential
to
emit
HAP
but
is
not
a
major
source.
You
may
establish
area
source
status
by
limiting
the
source's
potential
to
emit
HAP
through
appropriate
mechanisms
available
through
your
permitting
authority.
The
source
category
does
not
include
research
or
laboratory
facilities
or
janitorial,
building,
and
facility
maintenance
operations,
or
hobby
shops
that
are
operated
for
personal
rather
than
commercial
purposes.
The
source
category
also
does
not
include
coating
of
magnet
wire,
coating
of
plastics
to
produce
fiberglass
boats
(
except
postmold
coating
of
personal
watercraft
or
their
parts),
or
the
extrusion
of
plastic
onto
a
part
or
product
to
form
a
coating.
Post­
mold
coating
of
personal
watercraft
and
their
parts
is
included
in
the
source
category.
This
source
category
also
does
not
include
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products
that
would
be
subject
to
certain
other
subparts
of
40
CFR
part
63.
In
particular,
it
does
not
include
the
following
coating
operations:
(
1)
Coating
operations
that
are
subject
to
the
aerospace
manufacturing
and
rework
facilities
NESHAP
(
40
CFR
part
63,
subpart
GG).
(
2)
Operations
coating
plastic
and
wood
that
are
subject
to
the
wood
furniture
NESHAP
(
40
CFR
part
63,
subpart
JJ).
(
3)
Operations
coating
plastic
and
metal
parts
of
large
appliances
that
are
subject
to
the
large
appliance
surface
coating
NESHAP
(
40
CFR
part
63,
subpart
NNNN,
67
FR
48254,
July
23,
2002).
(
4)
Operations
coating
plastic
and
metal
parts
of
metal
furniture
that
would
be
subject
to
the
proposed
metal
furniture
surface
coating
NESHAP
(
67
FR
20206,
April
24,
2002).
(
5)
Operations
coating
plastic
and
wood
parts
of
wood
building
products
that
would
be
subject
to
the
proposed
wood
building
products
surface
coating
NESHAP
(
67
FR
42400,
June
21,
2002).
(
6)
In­
mold
and
gel
coating
operations
in
manufacturing
of
reinforced
plastic
composites
that
are
subject
to
the
proposed
reinforced
plastics
composites
production
NESHAP
(
66
FR
40324,
August
2,
2001).
(
7)
Surface
coating
of
parts
that
are
pre­
assembled
from
plastic
and
metal
components,
where
greater
than
50
percent
of
the
surface
area
coated
is
metal
and
subject
to
the
proposed
NESHAP
for
the
surface
coating
of
miscellaneous
metal
parts
and
products
(
subpart
MMMM
of
part
63;
67
FR
52780,
August
13,
2002).
If
you
can
demonstrate
that
more
than
50
percent
of
the
surface
area
coated
is
comprised
of
metal,
then
you
would
need
to
demonstrate
compliance
only
with
the
proposed
NESHAP
for
miscellaneous
metal
parts
and
products
(
proposed
subpart
MMMM
of
part
63;
67
FR
52780,
August
13,
2002).
You
must
maintain
records
to
document
that
more
than
50
percent
of
the
surface
area
coated
is
metal.
We
have
established
four
subcategories
in
the
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
source
category:
(
1)
General
use
coating,
(
2)
thermoplastic
olefin
(
TPO)
coating,
(
3)
headlamp
coating,
and
(
4)
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating.
The
general
use
coating
subcategory
includes
all
plastic
parts
and
products
coating
operations
except
TPO,
headlamp,
and
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating.
This
includes
operations
that
coat
a
wide
variety
of
substrates,
surfaces,
and
types
of
plastic
parts,
as
well
as
more
specialized
coating
scenarios.
Each
subcategory
consists
of
all
coating
operations,
including
associated
surface
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00004
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72279
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
preparation,
equipment
cleaning,
mixing,
storage,
and
waste
handling.
As
discussed
in
section
III.
A.
of
this
preamble,
our
analysis
of
data
currently
available
to
us
indicates
that
while
subcategories
for
headlamp
coating,
TPO
coating,
and
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
are
appropriate,
there
is
no
need
for
further
subcategorization.
We
are,
however,
interested
in
public
comments
regarding
whether
there
is
additional
information
that
would
indicate
the
need
for
a
separate
subcategory
for
other
plastic
coating
operations.
Subcategorization
may
be
appropriate
in
operations
that
employ
separate
and
distinct
processes
for
which
there
is
no
technology
available
(
including
reformulation)
to
allow
compliance
with
the
general
use
limits.
We
welcome
public
comments
and
data
on
any
additional
separate
and
distinct
coating
operations,
including
facilityspecific
data
on
processes,
coating
and
cleaning
material
usage,
emissions,
and
control
techniques
that
may
require
consideration
for
subcategorization.
Late
in
development
of
the
proposed
rule,
Department
of
Defense
(
DoD)
stakeholders
approached
EPA
and
suggested
that
their
operations
are
distinctly
different
from
the
kinds
of
operations
addressed
in
these
standards.
Furthermore,
DoD
operations
may
present
unique
challenges
in
permitting,
demonstrating
compliance,
and
enforcement
of
potentially
overlapping
regulations.
The
DoD
stakeholders
suggested
that
a
separate
subcategory
or
source
category
dealing
with
multiple
surface
coating
operations
performed
by
DoD
civilian
and
military
personnel
or
performed
at
DoD
installations
may
be
appropriate.
Some
of
the
specific
concerns
expressed
by
DoD
stakeholders
include
the
requirement
to
purchase
materials
that
meet
military
specifications
for
their
surface
coating
operations.
Military
specifications
are
typically
based
on
the
coating's
performance
characteristics
(
e.
g.,
chemical
agent
resistance),
and
the
coatings
must
often
be
compatible
with
multiple
substrates.
These
materials
are
purchased
using
a
stock
number
which
could
represent
hundreds
of
different
formulations
that
meet
the
performance
specifications;
however,
the
HAP
content
of
such
materials
could
fluctuate
widely
between
formulations.
Additionally,
since
the
materials
may
be
used
at
the
maintenance
depot,
DoD
installation,
or
in
the
field,
the
options
available
to
achieve
emissions
reductions
(
e.
g.,
addon
control
technology)
could
be
limited.
Furthermore,
much
of
DoD
equipment
is
coated
as
an
assembled
product
comprised
of
as
many
as
five
different
substrates,
in
a
wide
range
of
shapes
and
sizes,
which
must
be
capable
of
serving
in
a
multitude
of
challenging
environments
and
situations.
We
are
currently
evaluating
the
need
for
a
DoD
source
category
or
subcategory,
and
we
request
comment
on
the
appropriate
approach
for
addressing
unique
DoD
coating
operations.
An
alternative
approach
to
establishing
separate
emission
limits
for
each
subcategory
would
be
to
establish
a
``
multi­
component''
emission
limit
for
the
entire
source
category.
A
multicomponent
approach
could
allow
sources
to
calculate
a
source­
specific
emission
limit
based
on
a
weightedaverage
using
the
MACT
limit
and
the
percentage
solids
for
each
component
of
the
limit.
The
source
would
then
calculate
its
emission
rate
to
determine
compliance
with
the
source­
specific
emission
limit.
The
source­
specific
emission
limit
would
be
calculated
as
follows:

Emission
Limit
=
[``
component
A''
MACT
limit)
×
(``
component
A''
%
solids)]+
[``
component
B''
MACT
limit)
×
(``
component
B''
%
solids)]

The
source's
emission
rate
would
be
calculated
as
follows:

Emission
Rate
Total
pounds
of
organic
HAP
emitted
ds
of
solids
used
=
Total
poun
The
source­
specific
approach
would
allow
averaging
between
the
different
components
of
the
multi­
component
emission
limit.
However,
there
would
be
some
additional
requirements.
In
addition
to
the
monitoring,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
requirements
included
in
these
proposed
standards,
the
multicomponent
emission
limit
approach
would
require
a
source
to
calculate
and
record
the
source­
specific
emission
limit
each
month.
The
calculation
would
reflect
a
rolling
12­
month
compliance
period
based
on
the
amount
of
coating
solids
used
for
each
separate
component
during
each
rolling
12­
month
period.
We
are
requesting
comments
on
the
feasibility,
and
burden
associated
with
each
of
the
approaches
(
i.
e.,
subcategory
or
multi­
component
emission
limits).
Comments
should
include
specific
examples
and
supporting
information
for
the
advantages
and
disadvantages
of
each
approach.
B.
What
Is
the
Relationship
to
Other
Rules?

Affected
sources
subject
to
the
proposed
rule
may
also
be
subject
to
other
rules
if
they
perform
surface
coating
of
parts
or
products
that
are
regulated
by
other
NESHAP.
For
example,
there
may
be
facilities
that
coat
plastic
and
metal
parts
using
the
same
or
different
coatings,
coating
application
processes,
and
conveyance
equipment,
either
simultaneously
or
at
alternative
times.
These
facilities
could
be
required
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
two
surface
coating
NESHAP
(
e.
g.,
proposed
subparts
MMMM
(
67
FR
52780,
August
13,
2002)
and
PPPP)
with
limits
based
on
different
units
(
i.
e.,
pounds
HAP
emitted
per
gallon
of
coating
solids
used
versus
pounds
HAP
emitted
per
pound
of
coating
solids
used)
and
possibly
different
compliance
dates.
Furthermore,
because
their
operations
may
not
be
dedicated
to
particular
parts
or
products
(
e.
g.,
job
shops
or
contract
coaters),
their
compliance
requirements
could
vary
over
time
due
to
fluctuations
in
their
operations.
These
types
of
facilities
may
present
unique
challenges
with
respect
to
permitting,
demonstrating
compliance
(
e.
g.,
possibly
dual
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements),
and
enforcement.
Historically,
EPA
has
handled
this
situation
by
giving
facilities
the
option
of
complying
with
the
NESHAP
with
the
most
stringent
emission
limits
(
i.
e.,
the
NESHAP
that
results
in
the
lowest
emissions
from
the
affected
source),
in
lieu
of
complying
with
each
otherwise
applicable
NESHAP.
This
option
would
require
sources
to
demonstrate
which
of
the
applicable
standards
is
the
most
stringent.
This
demonstration
is
necessary
because,
as
stated
previously,
the
emission
limits
may
be
expressed
in
different
units.
Under
this
compliance
option,
once
the
demonstration
is
made,
a
facility
would
ensure
that
all
coating
operations
covered
by
a
NESHAP
comply
with
the
single,
more
stringent
NESHAP.
This
option
allows
a
facility
operational
flexibility,
while
ensuring
that
the
facility
is
in
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
the
CAA
(
i.
e.,

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00005
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
EP04DE02.000</
MATH>
72280
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
achieving
emissions
reductions
consistent
with
section
112(
d)).
This
option
may
also
simplify
permitting
and
provide
clarity
for
compliance
and
enforcement.
The
EPA
believes
that
this
approach
towards
addressing
potentially
overlapping
regulations
is
appropriate
in
this
proposed
rule
and
solicits
comments
on
the
desirability
of
providing
such
a
compliance
option.
A
second
option
which
may
provide
facilities
with
the
desired
operational
flexibility
is
the
``
predominant
activity''
approach
which
was
shared
with
stakeholders
in
May
2001.
This
approach
would
allow
a
facility
to
determine
the
predominant
coating
activity
(
e.
g.,
plastic
parts)
among
all
the
coating
activities
that
are
subject
to
a
NESHAP
(
e.
g.,
plastic
parts
and
miscellaneous
metal
products)
and
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
NESHAP
established
for
the
source
category
represented
by
the
predominant
activity.
A
source
not
electing
to
comply
with
the
predominant
activity
option
would
continue
to
be
subject
to
separate
NESHAP
and
would
need
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
each
one.
Although
EPA
received
encouraging
feedback
for
a
predominant
activity
approach
from
many
stakeholders
(
e.
g.,
industry
representatives,
State
and
local
authorities),
there
were
few
suggestions
on
either
how
to
measure
and
document
predominant
(
e.
g.,
surface
area
coated,
volume
solids
used,
etc.)
or
the
appropriate
criteria
for
establishing
which
activity
is
predominant
(
e.
g.,
a
numerical
percent
of
the
facility's
surface
coating
operations
that
would
qualify
appropriately
as
predominant).
In
defining
a
predominant
activity
approach,
the
criteria
used
to
define
predominant
should,
for
practical
reasons,
minimize
fluctuation
of
the
predominant
activity
between
different
source
categories
at
job
shops/
contract
coaters.
In
addition,
the
basis
(
e.
g.,
surface
area
coated,
volume
solids
used,
etc.)
for
measuring
predominant
would
need
to
be
established
and
should
be
suitable
for
all
sources.
One
possible
way
to
help
minimize
fluctuation
over
time
in
what
is
identified
as
the
predominant
activity
would
be
to
base
predictions
about
which
activity
would
be
predominant
on
appropriate
records
for
the
most
recent
3
 
5
years.
Sources
would
then
comply
with
the
NESHAP
relevant
to
that
predominant
activity
under
its
operating
permit
and
would
have
the
opportunity
to
review
its
predominant
activity
designation,
and
modify
as
appropriate,
during
each
permit
renewal.
In
implementing
a
predominant
activity
option,
EPA
needs
to
balance
good
public
policy
(
avoiding
overlapping
regulations
where
feasible
and
sensible)
with
ensuring
emissions
reductions
consistent
with
the
legislative
mandate
of
sections
112(
d)(
3)
and
(
i)(
3)
of
the
CAA
(
i.
e.,
ensuring
emission
reductions
achieved
under
the
predominant
activity
option
are
comparable
to
those
achieved
through
compliance
with
each
applicable
NESHAP
separately).
We
specifically
request
comment
on
how
a
predominant
activity
approach
should
be
structured
to
ensure
that
emission
reductions
achieved
are
consistent
with
the
requirements
of
sections
112(
d)(
3)
and
(
i)(
3).
A
third
option
under
consideration
is
the
development
of
a
subcategory
for
facilities
with
coating
operations
that
would
otherwise
be
subject
to
more
than
one
coating
NESHAP.
Based
on
survey
data
collected
under
CAA
section
114,
we
would
establish
a
MACT
floor
that
reflects
HAP
emission
rates
from
the
relevant
coating
operations.
The
practical
advantages
associated
with
this
approach
are
similar
to
the
benefits
stated
for
the
more
stringent
NESHAP
approach
(
i.
e.,
simplification
of
permitting,
clarity
of
requirements,
and
achieving
mandated
emissions
reductions).
This
approach
may
also
limit
the
need
for
separate
tracking
systems
for
surface
coating
operations.
A
disadvantage
with
this
option
is
that
it
may
not
afford
facilities
as
much
operational
flexibility
as
the
other
two
options.
A
fourth
option
is
to
expand
the
definition
of
the
source
category
and
four
subcategories
currently
under
consideration
to
include
``
incidental''
surface
coating
operations
being
performed
on
other
substrates
(
e.
g.
metal)
that
meet
the
applicability
criteria
for
another
surface
coating
source
category.
Under
this
approach,
a
facility
could
demonstrate
that
a
specified
percentage
of
its
NESHAPregulated
surface
coating
activities
are
within
the
scope
of
a
specific
category
or
subcategory.
The
remaining
NESHAP­
regulated
coating
operations
would
be
considered
incidental
for
purposes
of
determining
which
category
or
subcategory
the
overall
operations
were
in,
as
they
would
represent
a
small
portion
of
the
total
coating
operations.
Once
this
demonstration
is
made,
all
NESHAP­
regulated
coating
operations
conducted
at
the
facility
would
be
included
in,
and
subject
to,
the
emission
limitations
for
the
primary
source
category.
We
request
comment
on
the
feasibility,
benefits,
and
disadvantages
associated
with
each
option
presented.
We
also
request
comment
on
additional
options
for
consideration.
For
all
options,
we
request
facility­
specific
data
that
would
support
the
recommended
option.
These
data
include
information
on
the
processes;
coating
and
cleaning
material
usage;
the
proportion
of
coating
and
cleaning
material
being
used
with
different
substrates;
and
the
difference
in
the
emission
reductions
achieved
based
on
complying
with
each
applicable
NESHAP
separately
and
the
option
being
recommended.
Additionally,
we
request
comment
and
supporting
documentation
on
the
criteria
(
e.
g.,
numerical
percentage)
and
basis
(
e.
g.,
surface
area
coated)
for
determining
predominant
activity
and
defining
incidental
operations.
Finally,
we
request
comment
on
the
burden
associated
with
monitoring,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
for
each
option.

Standards
of
Performance
for
Industrial
Surface
Coating:
Surface
Coating
of
Plastic
Parts
for
Business
Machines
 
40
CFR
Part
60,
Subpart
TTT
The
new
source
performance
standards
(
NSPS)
for
plastic
parts
for
business
machines
apply
to
facilities
that
apply
coatings
to
plastic
parts
for
use
in
business
machines
that
began
construction,
reconstruction,
or
modification
after
January
8,
1986.
The
pollutants
regulated
are
volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC).
Emissions
of
VOC
are
limited
to
1.5
kilogram
VOC
per
liter
(
kg
VOC/
liter)
of
coating
solids
applied
for
primers
and
color
coats,
and
2.3
kg
VOC/
liter
of
coating
solids
applied
for
texture
coatings
and
touch­
up
coatings.
The
affected
facility
is
each
individual
spray
booth.
The
proposed
rule
differs
from
the
NSPS
in
three
ways.
First,
the
affected
source
for
the
proposed
rule
is
defined
broadly
as
the
collection
of
all
coating
operations
and
related
activities
and
equipment
at
the
facility,
whereas
the
affected
facility
for
the
NSPS
is
defined
narrowly
as
each
individual
spray
booth.
The
broader
definition
of
an
affected
source
allows
a
facility's
emissions
to
be
combined
for
compliance
purposes.
Second,
the
proposed
rule
regulates
organic
HAP.
While
most,
although
not
all,
organic
HAP
emitted
from
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
operations
are
VOC,
some
VOC
are
not
listed
as
HAP.
Therefore,
the
NSPS
regulate
a
potentially
different
range
of
pollutants
than
the
proposed
NESHAP.
Third,
the
HAP
emission
limitations
in
the
proposed
rule
are
based
on
the
amount
of
coating
solids
used
at
the
affected
source.
The
VOC
limitations
in
the
NSPS
are
based
on
the
amount
of
coating
solids
actually
applied
to
the
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00006
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72281
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
plastic
parts
and
products,
which
necessitates
estimates
of
transfer
efficiency
in
the
compliance
calculations.
Because
of
the
differences
between
the
NSPS
and
the
proposed
NESHAP,
compliance
with
either
rule
cannot
be
deemed
compliance
with
the
other.
A
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
operation
that
meets
the
applicability
requirements
of
both
the
NSPS
and
the
proposed
NESHAP
must
comply
with
both.
Overlapping
reporting,
recordkeeping,
and
monitoring
requirements
may
be
resolved
through
your
title
V
permit.

Aerospace
Manufacturing
and
Rework
Facilities
NESHAP
(
40
CFR
Part
63,
Subpart
GG)

The
aerospace
NESHAP
establish
HAP
and
VOC
emission
limitations
for
aerospace
manufacturing
and
rework
facilities
that
produce
or
repair
aerospace
vehicles
(
e.
g.,
airplanes,
helicopters,
space
vehicles)
or
vehicle
parts.
The
aerospace
NESHAP
apply
only
to
parts
and
assemblies
that
are
critical
to
the
aerospace
vehicle's
structural
integrity
or
flight
performance.
Therefore,
the
possibility
exists
that
some
facilities
would
be
subject
to
the
requirements
of
both
the
aerospace
NESHAP
and
the
proposed
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
NESHAP.
For
example,
a
facility
that
performs
maintenance
operations
consisting
of
both
exterior
and
interior
reconstruction
and
overhaul
of
commercial
airplanes
may
perform
coating
of
plastic
parts,
such
as
tray
tables
and
seat
panels,
that
are
not
considered
critical
to
the
structural
integrity
or
flight
performance.
These
parts
may
be
removed
from
the
airplane
and
painted
on­
site
to
cover
scratches
and
other
wear
marks
before
being
reinstalled.
Such
coating
activities
and
associated
equipment
would
be
subject
to
the
proposed
plastic
parts
and
products
coating
NESHAP.
We
do
not
foresee
that
any
conflicts
will
exist
between
the
requirements
for
the
aerospace
NESHAP
and
the
proposed
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
NESHAP.
If
a
plastic
part
that
is
critical
to
the
aerospace
vehicle's
structural
integrity
or
flight
performance
is
coated,
the
coating
operation
for
that
part
will
fall
under
the
aerospace
NESHAP.
Only
plastic
parts
that
are
not
critical
to
the
aerospace
vehicle's
structural
integrity
or
flight
performance
will
fall
under
the
proposed
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
NESHAP.
C.
What
Are
the
Primary
Sources
of
Emissions
and
What
Are
the
Emissions?

The
proposed
NESHAP
would
regulate
emissions
of
organic
HAP.
Available
emission
data
collected
during
the
development
of
the
proposed
NESHAP
show
that
the
primary
organic
HAP
emitted
from
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
operations
include
MEK,
MIBK,
toluene,
and
xylenes.
These
compounds
account
for
over
85
percent
of
this
source
category's
nationwide
organic
HAP
emissions.
Other
organic
HAP
emissions
identified
include
EGBE
and
glycol
ethers.
The
majority
of
organic
HAP
emissions
from
a
facility
engaged
in
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
operations
can
be
attributed
to
the
application,
drying,
and
curing
of
coatings.
The
remaining
emissions
are
primarily
from
cleaning
operations.
In
most
cases,
organic
HAP
emissions
from
mixing,
storage,
and
waste
handling
are
relatively
small.
The
organic
HAP
emissions
associated
with
coatings
(
the
term
``
coatings''
includes
protective
and
decorative
coatings
as
well
as
adhesives)
occur
due
to
volatilization
of
solvents
and
carriers.
Coatings
are
most
often
applied
either
by
using
a
spray
gun
in
a
spray
booth
or
by
dipping
the
substrate
in
a
tank
containing
the
coating.
In
a
spray
booth,
volatile
components
evaporate
from
the
coating
as
it
is
applied
to
the
part
and
from
the
overspray.
The
coated
part
then
passes
through
a
flash­
off
area
where
additional
volatiles
evaporate
from
the
coating.
Finally,
the
coated
part
passes
through
a
drying/
curing
oven,
or
is
allowed
to
air
dry,
where
the
remaining
volatiles
are
evaporated.
Organic
HAP
emissions
also
occur
from
the
activities
undertaken
during
cleaning
operations
where
solvent
is
used
to
remove
coating
residue
or
other
unwanted
materials.
Cleaning
in
this
industry
includes
cleaning
of
spray
guns
and
transfer
lines
(
e.
g.,
tubing
or
piping),
tanks,
and
the
interior
of
spray
booths.
Cleaning
also
includes
applying
solvents
to
manufactured
parts
prior
to
coating
application
and
to
equipment
(
e.
g.,
cleaning
rollers,
pumps,
conveyors,
etc.).
Mixing
and
storage
are
other
sources
of
emissions.
Organic
HAP
emissions
can
occur
from
displacement
of
organic
vapor­
laden
air
in
containers
used
to
store
organic
HAP
solvents
or
to
mix
coatings
containing
organic
HAP
solvents.
The
displacement
of
vaporladen
air
can
occur
during
the
filling
of
containers
and
can
be
caused
by
changes
in
temperature
or
barometric
pressure,
or
by
agitation
during
mixing.
Volatilization
of
organic
HAP
can
also
occur
during
waste
handling.

D.
What
Is
the
Affected
Source?
We
define
an
affected
source
as
a
stationary
source,
a
group
of
stationary
sources,
or
part
of
a
stationary
source
to
which
a
specific
emission
standard
applies.
The
proposed
standards
define
the
affected
source
as
the
collection
of
all
operations
associated
with
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products
within
each
of
the
four
subcategories
(
TPO,
headlamps,
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
and
general
use).
These
operations
include
preparation
of
a
coating
for
application
(
e.
g.,
mixing
with
thinners
or
other
additives);
surface
preparation
of
the
plastic
parts
and
products;
coating
application
and
flash­
off;
drying
and/
or
curing
of
applied
coatings;
cleaning
of
equipment
used
in
surface
coating;
storage
of
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials;
and
handling
and
conveyance
of
waste
materials
from
the
surface
coating
operations.
The
coating
operation
does
not
include
the
application
of
coatings
using
hand­
held
aerosol
containers.
A
few
facilities
have
coating
operations
in
more
than
one
subcategory.
For
example,
a
few
facilities
have
TPO
coating
operations
that
are
in
the
TPO
coating
subcategory
and
also
have
other
plastic
parts
and
products
coating
operations
that
are
in
the
general
use
coating
subcategory.
In
such
a
case,
the
facility
would
have
two
separate
affected
sources:
(
1)
The
collection
of
all
operations
associated
with
the
surface
coating
of
TPO,
and
(
2)
the
collection
of
all
operations
associated
with
general
use
coating.
Each
of
these
affected
sources
would
be
required
to
meet
the
emission
limits
that
apply
to
its
subcategory.
Another
example
of
a
facility
with
coating
operations
in
more
than
one
subcategory
would
be
a
facility
that
assembles
and
paints
motor
homes.
The
use
of
adhesives,
caulks,
sealants,
and
associated
materials
in
assembling
the
motor
home
would
be
in
the
general
use
coating
subcategory
and
would
constitute
one
affected
source.
The
use
of
coatings
and
associated
materials
in
painting
the
assembled
motor
home
would
be
in
the
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
subcategory
and
would
constitute
a
second
affected
source.

E.
What
Are
the
Emission
Limits,
Operating
Limits,
and
Other
Standards?
Emission
Limits.
We
are
proposing
to
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
from
each
existing
affected
source
using
the
emission
limits
in
Table
2.
The
proposed
emission
limits
for
each
new
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00007
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72282
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
or
reconstructed
affected
source
are
given
in
Table
3.

TABLE
2.
 
EMISSION
LIMITS
FOR
EXISTING
AFFECTED
SOURCES
For
any
affected
source
applying
coating
to
.
.
.
The
organic
HAP
emission
limit
you
must
meet,
in
kg
organic
HAP
emitted/
kg
coating
solids
used
(
lb
organic
HAP
source
emitted
lb
coating
solids
used),
is:

TPO
substrates
........................
0.23
Headlamps
...............................
0.45
Aassembled
on­
road
vehicles
1.34
Other
(
general
use)
plastic
parts
and
products.
0.16
TABLE
3.
 
EMISSION
LIMITS
FOR
NEW
OR
RECONSTRUCTED
AFFECTED
SOURCES
For
any
affected
source
applying
coating
to
.
.
.
The
organic
HAP
emission
limit
you
must
meet,
in
kg
organic
HAP
emitted/
kg
coating
solids
used
(
lb
organic
HAP
emitted/
lb
coating
solids
used),
is:

TPO
substrates
........................
0.17
Headlamps
...............................
0.26
Assembled
on­
road
vehicles
....
1.34
Other
(
general
use)
plastic
parts
and
products.
0.16
You
can
choose
from
several
compliance
options
in
the
proposed
rule
to
achieve
the
emission
limits.
You
could
comply
by
applying
materials
(
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials)
that
meet
the
emission
limits,
either
individually
or
collectively,
during
each
compliance
period.
You
could
also
use
a
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
to
meet
the
emission
limits.
You
could
also
comply
by
using
a
combination
of
both
approaches.
Operating
Limits.
If
you
reduce
emissions
by
using
a
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
(
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance),
the
proposed
operating
limits
would
apply
to
you.
These
limits
are
site­
specific
parameter
limits
that
you
determine
during
the
initial
performance
test
of
the
system.
For
capture
systems
that
are
not
permanent
total
enclosures,
you
would
establish
average
volumetric
flow
rates
or
duct
static
pressure
limits
for
each
capture
device
(
e.
g.,
a
hood
or
enclosure)
in
each
capture
system.
For
capture
systems
that
are
permanent
total
enclosures,
you
would
establish
limits
on
average
facial
velocity
or
pressure
drop
across
openings
in
the
enclosure.
For
thermal
oxidizers,
you
would
monitor
the
combustion
temperature.
For
catalytic
oxidizers,
you
would
monitor
the
temperature
immediately
before
and
after
the
catalyst
bed,
or
you
would
monitor
the
temperature
before
the
catalyst
bed
and
prepare
and
implement
an
inspection
and
maintenance
plan
that
includes
periodic
catalyst
activity
checks.
For
carbon
adsorbers
for
which
you
do
not
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
you
would
monitor
the
carbon
bed
temperature
and
the
amount
of
steam
or
nitrogen
used
to
desorb
the
bed.
For
condensers
for
which
you
do
not
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
you
would
monitor
the
outlet
gas
temperature
from
the
condenser.
For
concentrators,
you
would
monitor
the
temperature
of
the
desorption
stream
and
the
pressure
drop
across
the
concentrator.
The
site­
specific
parameter
limits
that
you
establish
must
reflect
operation
of
the
capture
system
and
control
device
during
a
performance
test
that
demonstrates
achievement
of
the
emission
limits
during
representative
operating
conditions.
Work
Practice
Standards.
If
you
use
an
emission
capture
system
and
control
device
for
compliance,
you
would
be
required
to
develop
and
implement
a
work
practice
plan
to
minimize
organic
HAP
emissions
from
mixing
operations,
storage
tanks
and
other
containers,
and
handling
operations
for
coatings,
thinners,
cleaning
materials,
and
waste
materials.
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device
for
compliance,
you
would
be
required
to
develop
and
operate
according
to
a
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plan
(
SSMP)
during
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
of
the
capture
system
and
control
device.
The
NESHAP
General
Provisions
at
40
CFR
part
63,
subpart
A,
codify
certain
procedures
and
criteria
for
all
40
CFR
part
63
NESHAP
and
would
apply
to
you
as
indicated
in
the
proposed
rule.
The
General
Provisions
contain
administrative
procedures,
preconstruction
review
procedures
for
new
sources,
and
procedures
for
conducting
compliance­
related
activities
such
as
notifications,
reporting
and
recordkeeping,
performance
testing,
and
monitoring.
The
proposed
rule
refers
to
individual
sections
of
the
General
Provisions
to
emphasize
key
sections
that
are
relevant.
However,
unless
specifically
overridden
in
the
proposed
rule,
all
of
the
applicable
General
Provisions
requirements
would
apply
to
you.

F.
What
Are
the
Testing
and
Initial
Compliance
Requirements?
Existing
affected
sources
would
have
to
be
in
compliance
with
the
final
rule
no
later
than
3
years
after
the
effective
date
of
the
final
rule.
New
and
reconstructed
sources
would
have
to
be
in
compliance
upon
initial
startup
of
the
affected
source
or
by
the
effective
date
of
the
final
rule,
whichever
is
later.
The
effective
date
is
the
date
on
which
the
final
rule
is
published
in
the
Federal
Register.
However,
affected
sources
would
not
be
required
to
demonstrate
compliance
until
the
end
of
the
initial
compliance
period
when
they
will
have
accumulated
the
necessary
records
to
document
the
rolling
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate.
Compliance
with
the
emission
limits
is
based
on
a
rolling
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate
determined
each
month.
Each
12­
month
period
is
a
compliance
period.
The
initial
compliance
period,
therefore,
is
the
12­
month
period
beginning
on
the
compliance
date.
If
the
compliance
date
occurs
on
any
day
other
than
the
first
day
of
a
month,
then
the
initial
compliance
period
begins
on
the
compliance
date
and
extends
through
the
end
of
that
month
plus
the
following
12
months.
We
have
defined
``
month''
as
a
calendar
month
or
a
pre­
specified
period
of
28
to
35
days
to
allow
for
flexibility
at
sources
where
data
are
based
on
a
business
accounting
period.
Being
``
in
compliance''
means
that
the
owner
or
operator
of
the
affected
source
meets
the
requirements
to
achieve
the
proposed
emission
limitations
during
the
initial
compliance
period.
However,
they
will
not
have
accumulated
the
records
for
the
rolling
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate
until
the
end
of
the
initial
compliance
period.
At
the
end
of
the
initial
compliance
period,
the
owner
or
operator
would
use
the
data
and
records
generated
to
determine
whether
or
not
the
affected
source
is
in
compliance
with
the
organic
HAP
emission
limit
and
other
applicable
requirements
for
that
period.
If
the
affected
source
does
not
meet
the
applicable
limit
and
other
requirements,
it
is
out
of
compliance.
Emission
Limits.
There
are
three
proposed
options
for
complying
with
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00008
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72283
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
the
proposed
emission
limits,
and
the
testing
and
initial
compliance
requirements
vary
accordingly.
You
may
choose
to
use
one
compliance
option
for
the
entire
affected
source,
or
you
may
use
different
compliance
options
for
different
coating
operations
within
the
affected
source.
You
may
also
use
different
compliance
options
for
the
same
coating
operation
at
different
times.

Option
1:
Compliant
Materials
This
option
is
a
pollution
prevention
option
that
allows
you
to
easily
demonstrate
compliance
by
using
low­
HAP
or
non­
HAP
coatings
and
other
materials.
If
you
use
coatings
that,
based
on
their
organic
HAP
content,
individually
meet
the
kg
(
pound
(
lb))
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
levels
in
the
applicable
emission
limits
and
you
use
non­
HAP
thinners
and
other
additives
and
cleaning
materials,
this
compliance
option
is
available
to
you.
For
this
option,
we
have
minimized
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements.
You
can
demonstrate
compliance
by
using
manufacturer's
formulation
data
and
readily
available
purchase
records
to
determine
the
organic
HAP
content
of
each
coating
or
other
material
and
the
amount
of
each
material
used.
You
would
not
need
to
perform
any
detailed
emission
rate
calculations.
If
you
demonstrate
compliance
based
on
the
coatings
and
other
materials
used,
you
would
demonstrate
that
the
organic
HAP
content
of
each
coating
meets
the
emission
limits
for
the
appropriate
subcategory
as
shown
in
Tables
2
and
3,
and
that
you
used
no
organic
HAP­
containing
thinners,
other
additives,
or
cleaning
materials.
For
example,
if
you
are
using
the
compliant
materials
option
and
your
existing
source
has
TPO
coating
operations,
headlamp
coating
operations,
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
operations,
and
general
use
coating
operations,
you
would
demonstrate
that:
(
1)
Each
coating
used
in
the
TPO
coating
operation
has
an
organic
HAP
content
no
greater
than
0.23
kg
(
0.23
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used;
(
2)
each
coating
used
in
the
headlamp
coating
operations
has
an
organic
HAP
content
no
greater
than
0.45
kg
(
0.45
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used;
(
3)
each
coating
used
in
the
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
operations
has
an
organic
HAP
content
no
greater
than
1.34
kg
(
1.34
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used;
(
4)
each
general
use
coating
has
an
organic
HAP
content
no
greater
than
0.16
kg
(
0.16
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used;
(
5)
and
that
you
used
no
organic
HAP­
containing
thinners,
other
additives,
or
cleaning
materials.
Note
that
``
no
organic
HAP''
is
not
intended
to
mean
absolute
zero.
Materials
that
contain
``
no
organic
HAP''
should
be
interpreted
to
mean
materials
that
contain
organic
HAP
levels
below
the
levels
specified
in
§
63.4541(
a)
of
the
proposed
rule,
which
are
typical
reporting
levels.
These
typical
reporting
levels
only
count
organic
HAP
that
are
present
at
0.1
percent
or
more
by
mass
for
Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration
(
OSHA)­
defined
carcinogens
and
at
1.0
percent
or
more
by
mass
for
other
compounds.
To
determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
and
the
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids,
you
could
rely
on
manufacturer's
formulation
data.
You
would
not
be
required
to
perform
tests
or
analysis
of
the
material
if
formulation
data
are
available.
Alternatively,
you
could
use
results
from
the
test
methods
listed
below.
You
may
also
use
alternative
test
methods
provided
you
get
EPA
approval
in
accordance
with
the
NESHAP
General
Provisions,
40
CFR
63.7(
f).
However,
if
there
is
any
inconsistency
between
the
test
method
results
(
either
EPA's
or
an
approved
alternative)
and
manufacturer's
data,
the
test
method
results
would
prevail
for
compliance
and
enforcement
purposes.
If
you
elect
to
perform
tests:
 
For
organic
HAP
content,
use
Method
311
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A.
 
The
proposed
rule
would
allow
you
to
use
nonaqueous
volatile
matter
as
a
surrogate
for
organic
HAP,
which
would
include
all
organic
HAP
plus
all
other
organic
compounds,
and
excluding
water.
If
you
choose
this
option,
use
Method
24
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A.
 
For
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids,
use
Method
24.

Option
2:
Compliance
Based
on
the
Emission
Rate
Without
Add­
on
Controls
This
option
is
a
pollution
prevention
option
where
you
can
demonstrate
compliance
based
on
the
organic
HAP
contained
in
the
mix
of
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
you
use.
This
option
allows
you
the
flexibility
to
use
some
individual
coatings
that
do
not,
by
themselves,
meet
the
kg
(
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
levels
in
the
applicable
emission
limits
if
you
use
other
low­
HAP
or
non­
HAP
coatings
such
that
overall
emissions
from
the
affected
source
over
a
12­
month
period
meet
the
emission
limits.
You
must
use
this
option
if
you
use
HAP­
containing
thinners,
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
and
do
not
have
add­
on
controls.
You
would
keep
track
of
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material,
and
the
amount
of
each
material
you
use
in
your
affected
source
each
month
of
the
compliance
period.
You
would
use
this
information
to
determine
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
all
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
divided
by
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
compliance
period.
You
would
demonstrate
that
your
emission
rate
(
in
kg
(
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used)
meets
the
applicable
emission
limit.
You
can
use
readily
available
purchase
records
and
manufacturer's
formulation
data
to
determine
the
amount
of
each
coating
or
other
material
you
used
and
the
organic
HAP
in
each
material.
The
proposed
rule
contains
equations
that
show
you
how
to
perform
the
calculations
to
demonstrate
compliance.
If
you
demonstrate
compliance
using
Option
2,
you
would
be
required
to:
 
Determine
the
quantity
of
each
coating,
thinner
and
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used.
 
Determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
each
coating,
thinner
and
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
using
the
same
types
of
data
and
methods
previously
described
for
Option
1.
You
may
rely
on
manufacturer's
formulation
data
or
you
may
choose
to
use
test
results
as
described
under
Option
1.
 
Determine
the
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating
using
the
same
types
of
data
or
methods
described
under
Option
1.
 
Calculate
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
all
materials
and
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
each
month.
You
may
subtract
from
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
the
amount
contained
in
waste
materials
you
send
to
a
hazardous
waste
treatment,
storage,
and
disposal
facility
regulated
under
40
CFR
part
262,
264,
265,
or
266.
 
Calculate
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
and
total
mass
of
coating
solids
for
the
initial
compliance
period
by
adding
together
all
the
monthly
values
for
mass
of
organic
HAP
and
for
mass
of
coating
solids
for
the
12
months
of
the
initial
compliance
period.
 
Calculate
the
ratio
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emitted
for
the
materials
used
to
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
(
kg
(
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
of
coating
solids
used)
for
the
initial
compliance
period.

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00009
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72284
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
 
Record
the
calculations
and
results
and
include
them
in
your
Notification
of
Compliance
Status.
Note
that
if
you
choose
to
use
this
option
for
a
particular
coating
operation
rather
than
for
an
entire
affected
source,
you
would
calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
using
just
the
materials
used
in
that
operation.
Similarly,
if
your
facility
has
multiple
affected
sources
using
this
option
(
e.
g.,
a
TPO
affected
source,
a
headlamp
affected
source,
an
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
affected
source,
and
a
general
use
affected
source),
you
would
do
a
separate
calculation
for
each
affected
source
to
show
that
each
affected
source
meets
its
emission
limit.

Option
3:
Emission
Rate
With
Add­
on
Controls
Option
This
option
allows
sources
to
use
a
capture
system
and
an
add­
on
pollution
control
device,
such
as
a
combustion
device
or
a
recovery
device,
to
meet
the
emission
limits.
While
we
believe
that,
based
on
typical
emission
characteristics,
most
sources
will
not
use
control
devices,
we
are
providing
this
option
for
sources
that
can
use
control
devices.
Fewer
than
10
percent
of
the
existing
sources
for
which
we
have
data
use
control
devices
and
may
continue
using
the
control
devices
for
compliance
with
the
proposed
standards.
Under
this
option,
testing
is
required
to
demonstrate
the
capture
system
and
control
device
efficiency.
Alternatively,
you
may
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance
to
demonstrate
the
amount
of
organic
HAP
collected
by
your
recovery
device.
The
proposed
rule
provides
equations
showing
you
how
to
use
records
of
materials
usage,
organic
HAP
contents
of
each
material,
capture
and
control
efficiencies,
and
coating
solids
content
to
calculate
your
emission
rate
during
the
compliance
period.
If
you
demonstrate
compliance
based
on
this
option,
you
would
demonstrate
that
your
emission
rate
considering
controls
(
in
kg
(
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
of
coating
solids
used)
is
less
than
the
applicable
emission
limit.
For
a
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
a
liquidliquid
material
balance,
your
testing
and
initial
compliance
requirements
would
be
as
follows:
 
Conduct
an
initial
performance
test
to
determine
the
capture
and
control
efficiencies
of
the
equipment
and
to
establish
operating
limits
to
be
achieved
on
a
continuous
basis.
The
performance
test
would
have
to
be
completed
no
later
than
the
compliance
date
for
existing
sources
and
180
days
after
the
compliance
date
for
new
and
reconstructed
sources.
 
Determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
each
coating
and
other
material,
and
the
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating
used
each
month
of
the
initial
compliance
period.
 
Calculate
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
all
coatings
and
other
materials,
and
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
each
month
in
the
controlled
operation
or
group
of
coating
operations.
You
may
subtract
from
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
the
amount
contained
in
waste
materials
you
send
to
a
hazardous
waste
treatment,
storage,
and
disposal
facility
regulated
under
40
CFR
part
262,
264,
265,
or
266.
 
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
emissions
from
the
controlled
coating
operations
each
month
using
the
capture
and
control
efficiencies
determined
during
the
performance
test,
and
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
materials
used
in
controlled
coating
operations
that
month.
 
Calculate
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
and
total
volume
of
coating
solids
for
the
initial
compliance
period
by
adding
together
all
the
monthly
values
for
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
and
for
mass
of
coating
solids
for
the
12
months
in
the
initial
compliance
period.
 
Calculate
the
ratio
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
to
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
initial
compliance
period.
 
Record
the
calculations
and
results
and
include
them
in
your
Notification
of
Compliance
Status.
 
Develop
and
implement
a
work
practice
plan
to
minimize
emissions
from
storage,
mixing,
and
handling
of
organic
HAP­
containing
materials.
Note
that
if
you
choose
to
use
this
option
for
a
particular
coating
operation
rather
than
for
the
entire
affected
source,
you
would
calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
using
just
the
materials
used
in
that
operation.
Similarly,
if
your
facility
has
multiple
affected
sources
using
this
option
(
e.
g.,
a
TPO
affected
source,
a
headlamp
affected
source,
an
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
affected
source,
and
a
general
use
affected
source),
you
would
do
a
separate
calculation
for
each
affected
source
to
show
that
each
affected
source
meets
its
emission
limit.
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
addon
control
device
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances,
you
would
use
specified
test
methods
to
determine
both
the
efficiency
of
the
capture
system
and
the
emission
reduction
efficiency
of
the
control
device.
To
determine
the
capture
efficiency,
you
would
either
verify
the
presence
of
a
permanent
total
enclosure
using
EPA
Method
204
of
40
CFR
part
51,
appendix
M
(
and
all
materials
must
be
applied
and
dried
within
the
enclosure);
or
use
one
of
three
protocols
in
§
63.4565
of
the
proposed
rule
to
measure
capture
efficiency.
If
you
have
a
permanent
total
enclosure
and
all
materials
are
applied
and
dried
within
the
enclosure
and
you
route
all
exhaust
gases
from
the
enclosure
to
a
control
device,
you
would
assume
100
percent
capture.
To
determine
the
emission
reduction
efficiency
of
the
control
device,
you
would
conduct
measurements
of
the
inlet
and
outlet
gas
streams.
The
test
would
consist
of
three
runs,
each
run
lasting
1
hour,
using
the
following
EPA
Methods
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A:
 
Method
1
or
1A
for
selection
of
the
sampling
sites.
 
Method
2,
2A,
2C,
2D,
2F,
or
2G
to
determine
the
gas
volumetric
flow
rate.
 
Method
3,
3A,
or
3B
for
gas
analysis
to
determine
dry
molecular
weight.
 
Method
4
to
determine
stack
moisture.
 
Method
25
or
25A
to
determine
organic
volatile
matter
concentration.
Alternatively,
any
other
test
method
or
data
that
have
been
validated
according
to
the
applicable
procedures
in
Method
301
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A,
and
approved
by
the
Administrator,
could
be
used.
If
you
use
a
solvent
recovery
system,
you
could
choose
to
determine
the
overall
control
efficiency
using
a
liquidliquid
material
balance
instead
of
conducting
an
initial
performance
test.
If
you
use
the
material
balance
alternative,
you
would
be
required
to
measure
the
amount
of
all
materials
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operations
served
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
each
month
of
the
initial
compliance
period
and
determine
the
total
volatile
matter
contained
in
these
materials.
You
would
also
measure
the
amount
of
volatile
matter
recovered
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
each
month
of
the
initial
compliance
period.
Then
you
would
compare
the
amount
recovered
to
the
amount
used
to
determine
the
overall
control
efficiency
each
month
and
apply
this
efficiency
to
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
materials
used
to
determine
total
organic
HAP
emissions
for
the
month.
You
would
total
these
12
monthly
organic
HAP
emission
values
and
divide
by
the
total
of
the
12
monthly
values
for
coating
solids
used
to
calculate
the
emission
rate
for
the
12­
month
initial
compliance
period.
You
would
record
the
calculations
and
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00010
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72285
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
results
and
include
them
in
your
Notification
of
Compliance
Status.
Operating
Limits.
As
mentioned
above,
you
would
establish
operating
limits
as
part
of
the
initial
performance
test
of
a
capture
system
and
control
device
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquidliquid
material
balances.
The
operating
limits
are
the
minimum
or
maximum
(
as
applicable)
values
achieved
for
capture
systems
and
control
devices
during
the
most
recent
performance
test,
conducted
under
representative
conditions,
that
demonstrated
compliance
with
the
emission
limits.
The
proposed
rule
specifies
the
parameters
to
monitor
for
the
types
of
emission
control
systems
commonly
used
in
the
industry.
You
would
be
required
to
install,
calibrate,
maintain,
and
continuously
operate
all
monitoring
equipment
according
to
manufacturer's
specifications
and
ensure
that
the
continuous
parameter
monitoring
systems
(
CPMS)
meet
the
requirements
in
§
63.4568
of
the
proposed
rule.
If
you
use
control
devices
other
than
those
identified
in
the
proposed
rule,
you
would
submit
the
operating
parameters
to
be
monitored
to
the
Administrator
for
approval.
The
authority
to
approve
the
parameters
to
be
monitored
is
retained
by
EPA
and
is
not
delegated
to
States.
If
you
use
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer,
you
would
continuously
monitor
the
appropriate
temperature
and
record
it
at
least
every
15
minutes.
For
thermal
oxidizers,
the
temperature
monitor
is
placed
in
the
firebox
or
in
the
duct
immediately
downstream
of
the
firebox
before
any
substantial
heat
exchange
occurs.
The
operating
limit
would
be
the
average
temperature
measured
during
the
performance
test
and
for
each
consecutive
3­
hour
period,
the
average
temperature
would
have
to
be
at
or
above
this
limit.
For
catalytic
oxidizers,
temperature
monitors
are
placed
immediately
before
and
after
the
catalyst
bed.
The
operating
limits
would
be
the
average
temperature
just
before
the
catalyst
bed
and
the
average
temperature
difference
across
the
catalyst
bed
during
the
performance
test.
For
each
3­
hour
period,
the
average
temperature
and
the
average
temperature
difference
would
have
to
be
at
or
above
these
limits.
Alternatively,
you
would
be
allowed
to
meet
only
the
temperature
limit
before
the
catalyst
bed
if
you
develop
and
implement
an
inspection
and
maintenance
plan
for
the
catalytic
oxidizer.
If
you
use
a
carbon
adsorber
and
do
not
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
to
demonstrate
compliance,
you
would
monitor
the
carbon
bed
temperature
after
each
regeneration
and
the
total
amount
of
steam
or
nitrogen
used
to
desorb
the
bed
for
each
regeneration.
The
operating
limits
would
be
the
carbon
bed
temperature
at
the
time
the
carbon
bed
is
returned
to
service
(
not
to
be
exceeded)
and
the
amount
of
steam
or
nitrogen
used
for
desorption
(
to
be
met
as
a
minimum).
If
you
use
a
condenser
and
do
not
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
to
demonstrate
compliance,
you
would
monitor
the
outlet
gas
temperature
to
ensure
that
the
air
stream
is
being
cooled
to
a
low
enough
temperature.
The
operating
limit
would
be
the
average
condenser
outlet
gas
temperature
measured
during
the
performance
test
and
for
each
consecutive
3­
hour
period
the
average
temperature
would
have
to
be
at
or
below
this
limit.
If
you
use
a
concentrator,
you
would
monitor
the
temperature
of
the
desorption
concentrate
stream
and
the
pressure
drop
across
the
concentrator.
These
values
would
be
recorded
at
least
once
every
15
minutes.
The
operating
limits
would
be
the
average
temperature
(
to
be
met
as
a
minimum)
and
the
average
pressure
drop
(
not
to
be
exceeded)
measured
during
the
performance
test.
For
each
capture
system
that
is
not
a
permanent
total
enclosure,
you
would
establish
operating
limits
for
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure
for
each
enclosure
or
capture
device.
The
operating
limit
would
be
the
average
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure
during
the
performance
test,
to
be
met
as
a
minimum.
For
each
capture
system
that
is
a
permanent
total
enclosure,
the
operating
limit
would
require
the
average
facial
velocity
of
air
through
all
natural
draft
openings
to
be
at
least
200
feet
per
minute
or
the
pressure
drop
across
the
enclosure
to
be
at
least
0.007
inches
water.
Work
Practices.
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device
for
compliance,
you
would
be
required
to
develop
and
implement
on
an
ongoing
basis
a
work
practice
plan
for
minimizing
organic
HAP
emissions
from
storage,
mixing,
material
handling,
and
waste
handling
operations.
This
plan
would
include
a
description
of
all
steps
taken
to
minimize
emissions
from
these
sources
(
e.
g.,
using
closed
storage
containers,
practices
to
minimize
emissions
during
filling
and
transfer
of
contents
from
containers,
using
spill
minimization
techniques,
placing
solvent­
laden
cloths
in
closed
containers
immediately
after
use,
etc.).
You
would
have
to
make
the
plan
available
for
inspection
if
the
Administrator
requests
to
see
it.
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device
for
compliance,
you
would
be
required
to
develop
and
operate
according
to
a
SSMP
during
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
of
the
capture
system
and
control
device.

G.
What
Are
the
Continuous
Compliance
Provisions?
Emission
Limits.
If
you
use
the
compliant
materials
option
(
Option
1),
you
would
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
if
each
coating
meets
the
applicable
emission
limit
and
you
use
no
organic
HAP­
containing
thinners,
other
additives,
or
cleaning
materials.
If
you
use
the
emission
rate
without
addon
controls
option
(
Option
2),
you
would
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
if,
for
each
12­
month
compliance
period,
the
ratio
of
kg
(
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
to
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
is
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit.
You
would
follow
the
same
procedures
for
calculating
the
organic
HAP
emitted
to
coating
solids
ratio
that
you
used
for
the
initial
compliance
period.
For
each
coating
operation
on
which
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device
(
Option
3)
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
you
would
use
the
continuous
parameter
monitoring
results
for
the
month
as
part
of
the
determination
of
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions.
If
the
monitoring
results
indicate
no
deviations
from
the
operating
limits
and
there
were
no
bypasses
of
the
control
device,
you
would
assume
the
capture
system
and
control
device
are
achieving
the
same
percent
emission
reduction
efficiency
as
they
did
during
the
most
recent
performance
test
in
which
compliance
was
demonstrated.
You
would
then
apply
this
percent
reduction
to
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
materials
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operations
to
determine
the
emissions
from
those
operations
during
the
month.
If
there
were
any
deviations
from
the
operating
limits
during
the
month
or
any
bypasses
of
the
control
device,
you
would
account
for
them
in
the
calculation
of
the
monthly
emissions
by
assuming
the
capture
system
and
control
device
were
achieving
zero
emission
reduction
during
the
periods
of
deviation.
Then
you
would
determine
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
by
dividing
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
for
the
12­
month
compliance
period
by
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
12­
month
compliance
period.
Every
month,
you
would
calculate
the
emission
rate
for
the
previous
12­
month
period.

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00011
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72286
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
For
each
coating
operation
on
which
you
use
a
solvent
recovery
system
and
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance
each
month,
you
would
use
the
liquidliquid
material
balance
to
determine
control
efficiency.
To
determine
the
overall
control
efficiency,
you
must
measure
the
amount
of
all
materials
used
during
each
month
and
determine
the
volatile
matter
content
of
these
materials.
You
must
also
measure
the
amount
of
volatile
matter
recovered
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
calculate
the
overall
control
efficiency,
and
apply
it
to
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
materials
used
to
determine
total
organic
HAP
emissions
each
month.
Then
you
would
determine
the
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate
in
the
same
manner
described
above.
Operating
Limits.
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device,
the
proposed
rule
would
require
you
to
achieve
on
a
continuous
basis
the
operating
limits
you
establish
during
the
performance
test.
If
the
continuous
monitoring
shows
that
the
capture
system
and
control
device
are
operating
outside
the
range
of
values
established
during
the
performance
test,
you
have
deviated
from
the
established
operating
limits.
If
you
operate
a
capture
system
and
control
device
with
bypass
lines
that
could
allow
emissions
to
bypass
the
control
device,
you
would
have
to
demonstrate
that
captured
organic
HAP
emissions
within
the
affected
source
are
being
routed
to
the
control
device
by
monitoring
for
potential
bypass
of
the
control
device.
You
may
choose
from
the
following
four
monitoring
procedures:
 
Flow
control
position
indicator
to
provide
a
record
of
whether
the
exhaust
stream
is
directed
to
the
control
device;
 
Car­
seal
or
lock­
and­
key
valve
closures
to
secure
the
bypass
line
valve
in
the
closed
position
when
the
control
device
is
operating;
 
Valve
closure
monitoring
to
ensure
any
bypass
line
valve
or
damper
is
closed
when
the
control
device
is
operating;
or
 
Automatic
shutdown
system
to
stop
the
coating
operation
when
flow
is
diverted
from
the
control
device.
A
deviation
would
occur
for
any
period
of
time
the
bypass
monitoring
indicates
that
emissions
are
not
routed
to
the
control
device.
Work
Practices.
If
you
use
an
emission
capture
system
and
control
device
for
compliance,
you
would
be
required
to
implement,
on
an
ongoing
basis,
the
work
practice
plan
you
developed
during
the
initial
compliance
period.
If
you
did
not
develop
a
plan
for
reducing
organic
HAP
emissions
or
you
do
not
implement
the
plan,
this
would
be
a
deviation
from
the
work
practice
standard.
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device
for
compliance,
you
would
be
required
to
operate
according
to
your
SSMP
during
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
of
the
capture
system
and
control
device.

H.
What
Are
the
Notification,
Recordkeeping,
and
Reporting
Requirements?
You
are
required
to
comply
with
the
applicable
requirements
in
the
NESHAP
General
Provisions,
subpart
A
of
40
CFR
part
63,
as
described
in
the
proposed
rule.
The
General
Provisions
notification
requirements
include:
initial
notifications,
notification
of
performance
test
if
you
are
complying
using
a
capture
system
and
control
device,
notification
of
compliance
status,
and
additional
notifications
required
for
affected
sources
with
continuous
monitoring
systems.
The
General
Provisions
also
require
certain
records
and
periodic
reports.
Initial
Notifications.
If
you
own
or
operate
an
existing
affected
source,
you
must
send
a
notification
to
the
EPA
Regional
Office
in
the
region
where
your
facility
is
located
and
to
your
State
agency
no
later
than
1
year
after
the
final
rule
is
published
in
the
Federal
Register.
For
new
and
reconstructed
sources,
you
must
send
the
notification
within
120
days
after
the
date
of
initial
startup
or
120
days
after
publication
of
the
final
rule,
whichever
is
later.
That
report
notifies
us
and
your
State
agency
that
you
have
an
existing
affected
source
that
is
subject
to
the
proposed
standards
or
that
you
have
constructed
a
new
affected
source.
Thus,
it
allows
you
and
the
permitting
authority
to
plan
for
compliance
activities.
You
would
also
need
to
send
a
notification
of
planned
construction
or
reconstruction
of
a
source
that
would
be
subject
to
the
proposed
rule
and
apply
for
approval
to
construct
or
reconstruct.
Notification
of
Performance
Test.
If
you
demonstrate
compliance
by
using
a
capture
system
and
control
device
for
which
you
do
not
conduct
a
liquidliquid
material
balance,
you
would
conduct
a
performance
test.
The
performance
test
would
be
required
no
later
than
the
compliance
date
for
an
existing
affected
source.
For
a
new
or
reconstructed
affected
source,
the
performance
test
would
be
required
no
later
than
180
days
after
startup
or
180
days
after
Federal
Register
publication
of
the
final
rule,
whichever
is
later.
You
must
notify
us
(
or
the
delegated
State
or
local
agency)
at
least
60
calendar
days
before
the
performance
test
is
scheduled
to
begin
and
submit
a
report
of
the
performance
test
results
no
later
than
60
days
after
the
test.
Notification
of
Compliance
Status.
You
must
submit
a
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
within
30
days
after
the
end
of
the
initial
12­
month
compliance
period.
In
the
notification,
you
must
certify
whether
each
affected
source
has
complied
with
the
proposed
standards,
identify
the
option(
s)
you
used
to
demonstrate
initial
compliance,
summarize
the
data
and
calculations
supporting
the
compliance
demonstration,
and
provide
information
on
any
deviations
from
the
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
or
other
requirements.
If
you
elect
to
comply
by
using
a
capture
system
and
control
device
for
which
you
conduct
performance
tests,
you
must
provide
the
results
of
the
tests.
Your
notification
must
also
include
the
measured
range
of
each
monitored
parameter,
the
operating
limits
established
during
the
performance
test,
and
information
showing
whether
the
source
has
complied
with
its
operating
limits
during
the
initial
compliance
period.
Recordkeeping
Requirements.
You
must
keep
records
of
reported
information
and
all
other
information
necessary
to
document
compliance
with
the
proposed
rule
for
5
years.
As
required
under
the
General
Provisions,
records
for
the
2
most
recent
years
must
be
kept
on­
site;
the
other
3
years'
records
may
be
kept
off­
site.
Records
pertaining
to
the
design
and
operation
of
the
control
and
monitoring
equipment
must
be
kept
for
the
life
of
the
equipment.
Depending
on
the
compliance
option
that
you
choose,
you
may
need
to
keep
records
of
the
following:
 
Organic
HAP
content
or
volatile
organic
matter
content
and
coating
solids
content
(
for
all
compliance
options).
 
Quantity
of
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
each
compliance
period
(
for
all
compliance
options).
 
For
the
emission
rate
(
with
or
without
add­
on
controls)
compliance
options,
calculations
of
your
emission
rate
for
each
12­
month
compliance
period.
 
All
documentation
supporting
initial
notifications
and
notifications
of
compliance
status.
If
you
demonstrate
compliance
by
using
a
capture
system
and
control
device,
you
must
keep
records
of
the
following:
 
All
required
measurements,
calculations,
and
supporting
documentation
needed
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
standards.

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00012
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72287
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
 
All
results
of
performance
tests
and
parameter
monitoring.
 
All
information
necessary
to
demonstrate
conformance
with
your
plan
for
minimizing
emissions
from
mixing,
storage,
and
waste
handling
operations.
 
All
information
necessary
to
demonstrate
conformance
with
the
affected
source's
SSMP
when
the
plan
procedures
are
followed.
 
The
occurrence
and
duration
of
each
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
of
the
emission
capture
system
and
control
device.
 
Actions
taken
during
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
that
are
different
from
the
procedures
specified
in
the
affected
source's
SSMP.
 
Each
period
during
which
a
CPMS
is
malfunctioning
or
inoperative
(
including
out­
of­
control
periods).
The
proposed
rule
would
require
you
to
collect
and
keep
records
according
to
certain
minimum
data
requirements
for
the
CPMS.
Failure
to
collect
and
keep
the
specified
minimum
data
would
be
a
deviation
that
is
separate
from
any
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
or
work
practice
standards.
Deviations,
as
determined
from
these
records,
would
need
to
be
recorded
and
also
reported.
A
deviation
is
any
instance
when
any
requirement
or
obligation
established
by
the
proposed
rule
including,
but
not
limited
to,
the
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
and
work
practice
standards,
is
not
met.
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device
to
reduce
organic
HAP
emissions,
you
would
have
to
make
your
SSMP
available
for
inspection
if
the
Administrator
requests
to
see
it.
The
plan
would
stay
in
your
records
for
the
life
of
the
affected
source
or
until
the
source
is
no
longer
subject
to
the
proposed
standards.
If
you
revise
the
plan,
you
would
need
to
keep
the
previous
superseded
versions
on
record
for
5
years
following
the
revision.
Periodic
Reports.
Each
reporting
year
is
divided
into
two
semiannual
reporting
periods.
If
no
deviations
occur
during
a
semiannual
reporting
period,
you
would
submit
a
semiannual
report
stating
that
the
affected
source
has
been
in
continuous
compliance.
If
deviations
occur,
you
would
include
them
in
the
report
as
follows:
 
Report
each
deviation
from
the
emission
limit.
 
Report
each
deviation
from
the
work
practice
standards
if
you
use
an
emission
capture
system
and
control
device.
 
If
you
use
an
emission
capture
system
and
control
device
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances,
report
each
deviation
from
an
operating
limit
and
each
time
a
bypass
line
diverts
emissions
from
the
control
device
to
the
atmosphere.
 
Report
other
specific
information
on
the
periods
of
time
the
deviations
occurred.
You
would
also
have
to
include
in
each
semiannual
report
an
identification
of
the
compliance
option(
s)
you
used
for
each
affected
source
and
any
time
periods
when
you
changed
to
another
compliance
option.
Other
Reports.
You
would
be
required
to
submit
reports
for
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
of
the
capture
system
and
control
device.
If
the
procedures
you
follow
during
any
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
are
inconsistent
with
your
plan,
you
would
report
those
procedures
with
your
semiannual
reports
in
addition
to
immediate
reports
required
by
40
CFR
63.10(
d)(
5)(
ii).

III.
Rationale
for
Selecting
the
Proposed
Standards
A.
How
Did
We
Select
the
Source
Category
and
Subcategories?

The
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products
is
a
source
category
that
is
on
the
list
of
source
categories
to
be
regulated
because
it
contains
major
sources
which
emit
or
have
the
potential
to
emit
at
least
9.07
Mg
(
10
tons)
of
any
one
HAP
or
at
least
22.7
Mg
(
25
tons)
of
any
combination
of
HAP
annually.
The
proposed
rule
would
control
organic
HAP
emissions
from
both
new
and
existing
major
sources.
Area
sources
are
not
being
regulated
under
this
proposed
rule.
The
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
category
consists
of
facilities
that
apply
protective
or
decorative
coatings
and
adhesive
coatings
to
plastic
parts
and
products
through
a
post­
mold
coating
process.
The
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products
includes
any
facility
engaged
in
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
or
products,
including
panels,
housings,
bases,
covers,
and
other
components
formed
of
synthetic
polymers.
We
use
the
plastic
parts
and
products
lists
contained
in
the
SIC
and
NAICS
code
descriptions
to
describe
the
vast
array
of
plastic
parts
and
products.
Due
to
the
broad
scope
of
the
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
source
category,
the
source
category
definition
likewise
needs
to
be
broad
in
order
to
include
the
varieties
of
operations
and
activities
that
might
occur
at
these
facilities.
However,
a
broad
description
has
the
potential
to
unintentionally
include
surface
coating
operations
that
we
would
not
consider
to
be
part
of
the
source
category.
We
intend
the
source
category
to
include
facilities
for
which
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products
is
either
their
principal
activity
or
an
integral
part
of
a
production
process
that
is
the
principal
activity.
Most
coating
operations
are
located
at
plant
sites
that
are
dedicated
to
these
activities.
However,
some
may
be
located
at
sites
for
which
some
other
activity
is
principal,
such
as
automobile
assembly
plants
that
coat
plastic
automobile
parts
or
accessories
off
the
assembly
line.
Colocated
surface
coating
operations
comparable
to
the
types
and
sizes
of
the
dedicated
plastic
parts
surface
coating
facilities,
in
terms
of
the
coating
operation
and
applicable
emission
control
techniques,
are
included
in
the
source
category.
We
reviewed
the
available
data
and
information
to
identify
a
descriptor
common
to
sources
we
intended
to
include
in
the
category
that
would
further
help
to
describe
the
category.
Based
on
our
review,
we
believe
the
quantity
of
coating
used
is
the
most
equitable
descriptor
for
purposes
of
defining
the
scope
of
the
category.
Other
descriptors
that
could
have
been
used
but
were
rejected
because
they
would
either
be
too
difficult
to
implement
or
they
are
not
as
equitable
as
coating
usage
include
production
rate,
quantity
of
emissions,
and
solvent
usage.
In
selecting
the
quantity
of
coating
used,
we
found
that
facilities
in
the
source
category
for
which
data
were
available
to
us
reported
annual
coating
usage
of
at
least
100
gallons
per
year.
Those
facilities
that
reported
below
this
amount
used
coatings
to
assist
in
or
repair
minor
defects
during
product
assembly
operations,
and
the
surface
coating
operations
were
not
integral
to
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating.
Therefore,
the
MACT
floor
determination
and
the
estimated
environmental,
energy,
cost,
and
economic
impacts
were
based
on
facilities
that
used
greater
than
100
gallons
per
year.
We
are
not
aware
of
any
surface
coating
operation
at
a
major
source
that
is
dedicated
to
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
that
is
using
less
than
100
gallons
per
year
and,
thus,
did
not
evaluate
whether
the
MACT
level
of
control
would
be
appropriate
for
such
operations
if
they
exist.
The
source
category
does
not
include
research
or
laboratory
facilities
or
janitorial,
building,
and
facility
maintenance
operations,
or
hobby
shops
that
are
operated
for
personal
rather
than
commercial
purposes.
The
source
category
also
does
not
include
coating
of
magnet
wire,
coating
of
plastics
to
produce
fiberglass
boats
(
except
the
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00013
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72288
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
post­
mold
coating
of
personal
watercraft
or
their
parts),
or
the
extrusion
of
plastic
onto
a
plastic
part
or
product
to
form
a
coating.
These
activities
and
operations
are
not
comparable
to
the
types
and
sizes
of
the
dedicated
facilities
in
terms
of
coating
operations
and
applicable
control
techniques
and
are
regulated
or
are
being
considered
for
regulation
as
part
of
other
source
categories.
Thus,
they
are
not
considered
to
be
within
the
scope
of
the
source
category.
The
postmold
coating
of
personal
watercraft
and
their
parts
is
considered
within
the
scope
of
the
source
category.
The
source
category
also
does
not
include
certain
other
coatings
of
plastic
parts
and
products
that
are
already
being,
or
would
be,
regulated
by
another
NESHAP
as
part
of
a
different
source
category.
We
want
to
avoid
overlap
of
source
categories
where
coating
of
the
same
part
would
be
subject
to
multiple
rules.
Subcategory
Selection.
The
statute
gives
us
discretion
to
determine
if
and
how
to
subcategorize.
Once
the
floor
has
been
determined
for
new
or
reconstructed
and
existing
affected
sources
for
a
source
category
or
subcategory,
we
must
set
MACT
standards
that
are
no
less
stringent
than
the
MACT
floor.
Such
standards
must
then
be
met
by
all
sources
within
the
source
category
or
subcategory.
A
subcategory
is
a
group
of
similar
sources
within
a
given
source
category.
As
part
of
the
regulatory
development
process,
we
evaluate
the
similarities
and
differences
between
industry
segments
or
groups
of
facilities
comprising
a
source
category.
In
establishing
subcategories,
we
consider
factors
such
as
process
operations
(
type
of
process,
raw
materials,
chemistry/
formulation
data,
associated
equipment,
and
final
products);
emission
characteristics
(
amount
and
type
of
HAP);
control
device
applicability;
and
opportunities
for
pollution
prevention.
We
may
also
consider
existing
regulations
or
guidance
from
States
and
other
regulatory
agencies
in
determining
subcategories.
After
reviewing
survey
responses
from
the
industry,
facility
site
visit
reports,
and
information
received
from
stakeholders
meetings,
we
found
that
the
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
industry
could
be
grouped
into
four
subcategories:
(
1)
General
use
coating,
(
2)
TPO
coating,
(
3)
headlamp
coating,
and
(
4)
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating.
The
general
use
coating
subcategory
includes
all
plastic
parts
and
products
coating
operations
except
TPO,
headlamp,
and
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating.
This
includes
operations
that
coat
a
wide
variety
of
substrates,
surfaces,
and
types
of
plastic
parts,
as
well
as
more
specialized
coating
scenarios.
Each
of
the
subcategories
includes
coating
operations,
including
associated
surface
preparation,
equipment
cleaning,
mixing
and
storage,
and
waste
handling.
The
TPO
coating
is
considered
a
separate
subcategory
from
other
plastic
parts
and
products
coating
operations
because
the
surface
coating
of
TPO
substrates
requires
the
use
of
an
adhesion
promoter
in
order
to
apply
subsequent
coatings
to
the
substrate.
The
adhesion
promoters
required
in
TPO
coating
operations
contain
significant
levels
of
organic
HAP
because
these
materials
contain
organic
HAP
solvents
that
are
capable
of
wetting
the
TPO
substrate
and
swelling
the
rubber
content
of
the
substrate.
Wetting
of
the
substrate
requires
a
solvent
in
the
adhesion
promoter
that
spreads
out
over
the
substrate,
and
this
is
dictated
by
the
surface
tension
of
the
substrate
and
the
solvent.
The
surface
tensions
of
organic
HAP
solvents
such
as
toluene,
xylene,
and
other
aromatics
are
ideal
for
wetting
TPO
while
other
non­
HAP
solvents
have
surface
tensions
too
high
to
allow
the
adhesion
promoter
to
spread
out
over
the
TPO
part.
In
conjunction
with
adequate
wetting
of
the
TPO,
the
solvents
in
the
adhesion
promoter
must
be
capable
of
migrating
through
the
surface
of
the
TPO
substrate
to
swell
the
rubber
content
(
elastomer)
in
the
TPO.
It
is
this
optimum
swelling
of
the
rubber
content
in
the
TPO
and
the
subsequent
entanglement
of
the
elastomer
with
the
paint
that
provides
the
adhesion
necessary
to
coat
TPO
successfully.
Many
non­
HAP
solvents
either
evaporate
too
quickly
to
adequately
migrate
through
and
swell
the
rubber
or
the
solvents
swell
the
rubber
content
of
the
TPO
to
the
point
of
distortion
of
the
part.
Therefore,
the
adhesion
promoters
used
in
TPO
coating
operations
often
contain
high
levels
of
organic
HAP
solvents
to
achieve
adequate
wetting
of
the
substrate,
swelling
of
the
rubber,
and
ultimately,
adhesion
of
the
paint
to
the
substrate.
The
need
to
use
these
HAP­
containing
materials
would
make
it
technically
difficult
for
existing
facilities
coating
TPO
to
achieve
the
lower
emission
rates
established
by
facilities
that
do
not
coat
TPO.
In
summary,
the
technical
differences
in
the
type
of
coatings
required
due
to
the
nature
of
the
TPO
substrate
warrant
a
separate
subcategory
for
TPO
coating.
Headlamp
coating
is
considered
as
a
separate
subcategory
because
these
coating
operations
require
specialized
reflective
argent
coatings
and
hard
clear
coatings
to
meet
U.
S.
Department
of
Transportation
Motor
Vehicle
Safety
Standards
for
reflectivity,
brightness,
color,
and
other
performance
criteria.
The
reflective
argent
coatings
often
used
in
automotive
headlamp
coating
operations
contain
significant
levels
of
organic
HAP
because
these
coatings
achieve
the
required
reflective
aluminum
appearance
with
aluminum
pigments
contained
in
the
coating.
These
coatings
require
the
use
of
aromatic
or
aliphatic
HAP
solvents
in
order
to
allow
the
aluminum
pigments
to
rise
to
the
surface
correctly
to
create
the
reflective
finish
required
by
Federal
safety
standards.
The
hard
clear
coatings
often
used
in
automotive
headlamp
coating
operations,
such
as
the
thermal
cure
and
silicone
hardcoat
technologies,
are
required
to
provide
the
polycarbonate
headlamp
substrate
with
necessary
abrasion
and
scratch
resistance.
Polycarbonate
is
currently
the
only
plastic
substrate
approved
by
the
National
Highway
Traffic
Safety
Administration
for
use
in
automotive
headlamps
because
this
material
is
shatter
resistant
and
resists
high
levels
of
heat.
The
hard
clear
coatings
used
on
the
polycarbonate
headlamps
require
the
use
of
certain
organic
HAP
solvents,
such
as
butyl
cellosolve,
in
these
coatings
to
avoid
etching
of
the
substrate
surface.
Other
non­
HAP
solvents
can
etch
the
surface
of
the
polycarbonate
which
would
deflect
light
and
create
performance
and
safety
concerns
for
the
final
headlamp
product.
The
need
to
use
these
materials
would
make
it
technically
difficult
for
existing
facilities
coating
automotive
headlamps
to
achieve
the
lower
emission
rates
established
by
facilities
that
do
not
coat
headlamps.
In
summary,
technical
differences
in
the
type
of
coatings
required
to
meet
unique
end­
product
requirements
warrant
a
separate
subcategory
for
headlamp
coating.
Assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
is
considered
a
separate
subcategory
because
these
coating
operations
are
performed
on
fully­
assembled
vehicles
that
may
contain
heat
sensitive
parts.
In
addition,
fully
assembled
on­
road
vehicles
are
physically
larger
than
the
other
parts
and
products
coated
in
this
source
category.
The
large
size
and
presence
of
heat
sensitive
parts
make
certain
lower­
HAP
technologies,
such
as
heat­
cured
waterborne
coatings,
not
feasible
for
use
on
fully
assembled
onroad
vehicles
and
make
it
technically
difficult
for
these
sources
to
achieve
the
same
emission
level
as
sources
that
do
not
coat
assembled
on­
road
vehicles.
The
problems
associated
with
coating
of
assembled
on­
road
vehicles
were
first
raised
by
recreational
vehicle
manufacturers
that
build
motor
homes
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00014
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72289
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
and
travel
trailers.
The
EPA
recognized
that
the
same
problems
(
i.
e.,
large
part
size
and
heat
sensitive
components)
would
be
encountered
by
other
facilities
that
coat
plastic
bodies
on
other
types
of
assembled
on­
road
vehicles.
In
addition,
some
facilities
coat
a
mix
of
assembled
on­
road
vehicles
including
automobiles,
recreational
vehicles,
public
transportation
vehicles,
and
fleet
trucks.
Therefore,
EPA
decided
to
include
all
of
these
in
the
assembled
onroad
vehicle
subcategory
and
not
limit
the
subcategory
to
just
recreational
vehicles.
The
on­
road
vehicle
subcategory
is
limited
to
only
surface
coating
on
fully
assembled
on­
road
vehicles
in
order
to
avoid
an
overlap
with
source
categories
that
include
assembly­
line
coating
operations
at
automobile,
light­
duty
truck,
and
heavyduty
truck
manufacturing
facilities.
The
EPA
also
recognizes
that
most
assembled
on­
road
vehicles
are
a
mix
of
plastic
and
metal
body
components.
An
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
operation
is
considered
part
of
this
subcategory
if
greater
than
50
percent
of
the
surface
being
coated
on
a
vehicle
is
plastic.

B.
How
Did
We
Select
the
Regulated
Pollutants?
Available
emission
data
collected
during
the
development
of
the
proposed
NESHAP
show
that
the
primary
organic
HAP
emitted
from
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products
include
MEK,
MIBK,
toluene,
and
xylenes.
These
compounds
account
for
more
than
85
percent
of
this
category's
nationwide
organic
HAP
emissions.
Other
organic
HAP
emissions
include
EGBE
and
other
glycol
ethers.
However,
many
other
organic
HAP
are
used,
or
can
be
used,
in
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials.
Therefore,
the
proposed
rule
would
regulate
emissions
of
all
organic
HAP.
Although
most
of
the
coatings
used
in
this
source
category
do
not
contain
inorganic
HAP,
a
few
special
purpose
coatings
used
by
a
few
facilities
in
this
source
category
contain
inorganic
HAP
such
as
chromium
and
lead.
No
inorganic
HAP
were
reported
in
cleaning
materials.
If
coatings
are
applied
by
spraying,
inorganic
HAP
components
remain
as
solids
in
the
dry
coating
film
on
the
parts
being
coated
or
are
deposited
onto
the
walls,
floor,
and
grates
of
the
spray
booths
in
which
they
are
applied.
Some
of
the
inorganic
HAP
particles
would
be
entrained
in
the
spray
booth
exhaust
air.
Although
these
emissions
have
not
been
quantified,
we
believe
that
the
inorganic
HAP
emission
levels
are
very
low.
Furthermore,
emissions
of
these
materials
to
the
atmosphere
are
minimal
because
very
few
of
the
facilities
in
this
source
category
use
spray
application
techniques
to
apply
coatings
that
contain
inorganic
HAP
compounds.
At
this
time,
it
does
not
appear
that
emissions
of
inorganic
HAP
from
this
source
category
warrant
Federal
regulation.

C.
How
Did
We
Select
the
Affected
Source?
In
selecting
the
affected
source(
s)
for
emission
standards,
our
primary
goal
is
to
ensure
that
MACT
is
applied
to
HAPemitting
operations
or
activities
within
the
source
category
being
regulated.
The
affected
source
also
serves
to
establish
where
new
source
MACT
applies
under
a
particular
standard.
Specifically,
the
General
Provisions
in
subpart
A
of
40
CFR
part
63
define
the
terms
``
construction''
and
``
reconstruction''
with
reference
to
the
term
``
affected
source''
(
40
CFR
63.2)
and
provide
that
new
source
MACT
applies
when
construction
or
reconstruction
of
an
affected
source
occurs
(
40
CFR
63.5).
The
collection
of
equipment
and
activities
evaluated
in
determining
MACT
(
including
the
MACT
floor)
is
used
in
defining
the
affected
source.
When
emission
standards
are
based
on
a
collection
of
emissions
sources
or
total
facility
emissions,
we
select
an
affected
source
based
on
that
same
collection
of
emission
sources
or
the
total
facility
as
well.
This
approach
for
defining
the
affected
source
broadly
is
particularly
appropriate
for
industries
where
a
single
emission
standard
encompassing
multiple
emission
points
within
the
plant
provides
the
opportunity
and
incentive
for
owners
and
operators
to
utilize
control
strategies
that
are
more
cost
effective
than
if
separate
standards
were
established
for
each
emission
point
within
a
facility.
The
affected
source
for
these
proposed
standards
is
broadly
defined
to
include
all
operations
associated
with
the
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products
and
the
cleaning
of
products,
substrates
or
coating
operation
equipment
in
a
subcategory
(
i.
e.,
TPO
coating,
headlamp
coating,
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating,
or
general
use
coating).
These
operations
include
storage
and
mixing
of
coatings
and
other
materials;
surface
preparation
of
the
plastic
parts
and
products
prior
to
coating
application;
coating
application
and
flash­
off,
drying
and
curing
of
applied
coatings;
cleaning
operations;
and
waste
handling
operations.
A
few
facilities
have
coating
operations
in
more
than
one
subcategory.
For
example,
a
few
facilities
have
TPO
coating
operations
that
are
in
the
TPO
coating
subcategory
and
also
have
other
plastic
parts
and
products
coating
operations
that
are
in
the
general
use
coating
subcategory.
In
such
a
case,
the
facility
would
have
two
separate
affected
sources:
(
1)
The
collection
of
all
operations
associated
with
the
surface
coating
of
TPO,
and
(
2)
the
collection
of
all
operations
associated
with
general
use
coating.
Each
of
these
affected
sources
would
be
required
to
meet
the
emission
limits
that
apply
to
its
subcategory.
In
selecting
the
affected
source,
we
considered,
for
each
operation,
the
extent
to
which
HAP­
containing
materials
are
used
and
the
amount
of
HAP
that
are
emitted.
Cleaning
and
coating
application,
flash­
off,
and
curing/
drying
operations
account
for
the
majority
of
HAP
emissions
at
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
operations.
These
operations
are
included
in
the
affected
source.
Mixing,
storage,
and
waste
handling
operations
are
included
in
the
affected
source.
Because
we
are
assuming
that
all
the
organic
HAP
in
the
materials
entering
the
affected
source
are
volatilized
(
emitted),
emissions
from
operations
occurring
within
the
affected
source
(
e.
g.,
mixing
operations
and
storage)
are
accounted
for
in
the
estimate
of
total
materials
usage
at
the
affected
source.
A
broad
definition
of
the
affected
source
was
selected
to
provide
maximum
flexibility
in
complying
with
the
proposed
emission
limits
for
organic
HAP.
In
planning
its
compliance,
each
facility
can
select
among
available
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials,
as
well
as
the
use
of
emissions
capture
and
add­
on
control
systems,
to
comply
with
the
emission
limits
for
each
subcategory
in
the
most
cost­
effective
manner.
Additional
information
on
the
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
operations
selected
for
regulation,
and
other
operations,
are
included
in
the
docket
for
the
proposed
standards.

D.
How
Did
We
Determine
the
Basis
and
Level
of
the
Proposed
Standards
for
Existing
and
New
Sources?
The
MACT
floor
analysis
was
performed
using
a
sourcewide
emission
rate
approach
for
each
of
the
four
subcategories:
(
1)
General
use
coating,
(
2)
TPO
coating,
(
3)
headlamp
coating,
and
(
4)
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating.
Because
organic
HAP
emissions
from
an
affected
source
are
directly
related
to
the
materials
used,
and
since
it
is
very
difficult
to
estimate
the
emissions
that
occur
in
any
one
area
within
the
affected
source,
an
emission
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00015
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72290
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
rate
approach
for
affected
sources
in
each
subcategory
is
the
most
feasible
way
to
determine
emission
limits.
The
emission
rate
approach
covers
the
emissions
from
all
areas
within
the
affected
source
for
each
subcategory,
including
the
application
and
curing
process,
equipment
cleaning
and
surface
preparation
operations,
mixing
and
storage
of
organic
HAP
materials,
and
waste
handling.
The
broad
emission
rate
approach
will
allow
for
the
maximum
flexibility
for
those
affected
sources
in
the
general
use
coating
subcategory
that
perform
many
different
types
of
coating
applications
and
coat
many
different
types
of
parts
during
a
given
year.
It
would
be
very
difficult
to
define
and
set
limits
on
each
individual
coating
step
within
every
coating
process.
Also,
such
rules
would
allow
no
flexibility
and
might
not
be
technically
feasible
for
every
source.
An
emission
limit
that
includes
all
coating
operations
within
an
affected
source
allows
an
owner/
operator
to
determine
how
to
most
efficiently
and
cost
effectively
meet
the
emission
limit
for
each
subcategory.
To
determine
the
existing
and
new
source
MACT
floor
for
each
subcategory,
we
determined
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
facility
in
units
of
kg
(
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
of
coating
solids
used
for
each
subcategory.
We
then
ranked
the
sources
in
each
subcategory
from
lowest
to
highest
emission
rate
to
identify
the
best­
performing
sources.
We
used
information
obtained
from
industry
survey
responses
and
subsequent
changes
and
clarifications
received
from
the
facilities
to
estimate
the
sourcewide
organic
HAP
emission
rate
from
each
survey
respondent.
In
the
relatively
few
cases
where
a
facility
had
coating
operations
in
more
than
one
subcategory
(
e.
g.,
a
TPO
coating
operation,
headlamp
coating
operation,
or
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
operation,
and
a
general
use
coating
operation),
we
calculated
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
subcategory
separately.
For
facilities
that
reported
no
add­
on
control
devices,
we
calculated
total
organic
HAP
emissions
by
assuming
that
the
organic
HAP
components
in
all
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
are
emitted.
If
add­
on
control
devices
were
reported,
their
capture
and
control
efficiencies
were
taken
into
account.
Sources
included
in
the
population
for
determining
the
MACT
floor
emission
limits
were
those
facilities
that
are
identified
as
major
sources
based
on
their
potential
to
emit,
and
those
that
were
identified
as
``
synthetic
minor''
sources.
For
each
of
the
four
subcategories,
the
best­
performing
12
percent
of
sources
(
or
the
best
five
sources)
were
the
sources
with
the
lowest
calculated
organic
HAP
emission
rates.
The
average,
or
arithmetic
mean,
of
the
bestperforming
12
percent
of
sources
(
or
best
five
sources)
was
calculated
to
determine
the
MACT
floor
level
for
each
subcategory.
For
the
general
use
coating
subcategory,
the
average
of
the
bestperforming
12
percent
of
existing
sources
was
determined
to
be
0.16
kg
(
0.16
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
For
the
TPO
coating
subcategory,
the
average
of
the
bestperforming
five
existing
sources
was
0.23
kg
(
0.23
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
For
the
headlamp
coating
subcategory,
the
average
of
the
best­
performing
five
existing
sources
was
0.45
kg
(
0.45
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
For
the
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
subcategory,
the
average
of
the
best­
performing
five
existing
sources
was
1.34
kg
(
1.34
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
The
facilities
represented
by
the
average
MACT
floor
emission
level
for
each
of
the
subcategories
were
reviewed
to
assess
the
achievability
of
the
emission
levels
for
the
range
of
sources
in
the
subcategory.
The
parameters
that
were
considered
in
the
review
included
coating
types
and
technologies,
application
methods,
curing
temperatures,
substrates,
regulatory
and
performance
specifications,
location
by
state,
part
types,
industry
sectors
and
amounts
of
materials
used.
The
review
resulted
in
the
determination
that
there
were
no
differences
in
the
ability
of
sources
within
a
given
subcategory
to
achieve
the
existing
source
MACT
floor
emission
levels,
and
therefore,
it
appears
that
all
sources
could
achieve
the
existing
source
MACT
floor
emission
rate
for
their
subcategory.
The
MACT
floor
memorandum
in
the
docket
includes
additional
details
of
our
review.
We
request
comment
on
the
analysis
and
our
conclusions.
The
new
source
MACT
floor
level
for
the
general
use
coating
subcategory
was
determined
to
be
the
same
as
the
MACT
floor
level
for
existing
sources.
For
the
general
use
coating
subcategory,
the
facilities
whose
emission
rates
were
lower
than
the
existing
source
floor
(
0.16
kg
(
0.16
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used)
were
evaluated
to
determine
whether
one
of
them
could
be
considered
the
bestperforming
similar
source
and
represent
the
diversity
of
operations
included
in
the
subcategory.
We
evaluated
whether
a
single
source
with
a
lower
emission
rate
was
sufficiently
similar
to
all
other
operations
in
the
subcategory
in
terms
of
parts
coated,
coating
types,
and
application
methods
used.
No
single
source
with
an
emission
rate
lower
than
the
existing
source
MACT
floor
emission
rate
represented
the
full
range
of
variability
in
the
subcategory.
For
example,
some
of
the
facilities
with
the
lowest
emission
rates
used
only
one
or
two
types
of
coatings
with
a
narrow
range
of
types
of
parts
and
coating
application
methods.
Because
a
new
facility
might
need
to
use
a
variety
of
coating
types
and
technologies,
we
rejected
facilities
using
only
one
or
two
types
of
coatings
with
a
limited
range
of
coated
parts
and
application
methods
as
similar
sources
for
the
purpose
of
setting
a
floor
for
new
sources.
Therefore,
the
new
source
MACT
floor
is
determined
to
be
the
same
as
the
MACT
floor
for
existing
sources.
You
may
refer
to
the
MACT
floor
memorandum
in
the
docket
for
additional
details.
The
new
source
MACT
floor
levels
for
the
TPO
coating
and
headlamp
coating
subcategories
are
more
stringent
than
the
existing
source
MACT
floor
levels
for
these
subcategories.
For
the
TPO
coating
subcategory,
the
best­
performing
single
source
achieves
an
emission
level
of
0.17
kg
(
0.17
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
The
facility
is
using
a
waterborne
TPO
coating
process.
Available
information
indicates
that
waterborne
coatings
are
feasible
for
TPO
substrates,
including
TPO
used
in
external
parts
such
as
bumpers,
and
can
meet
performance
specifications
for
the
coated
parts.
When
designing
a
new
source,
it
would
be
feasible
to
design
the
TPO
coating
operations
to
use
a
waterborne
coating
process,
or
otherwise
control
emissions
to
achieve
the
emission
level
of
the
bestperforming
individual
source
in
this
subcategory.
Therefore,
the
MACT
floor
for
new
sources
in
the
TPO
subcategory
is
determined
to
be
0.17
kg
(
0.17
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
For
the
headlamp
coating
subcategory,
the
identification
of
bestperforming
similar
source
was
conducted
by
reviewing
the
emission
rates
for
existing
headlamp
coating
sources,
excluding
any
organic
HAP
and
solids
from
adhesives
that
are
used
in
these
operations.
The
two
bestperforming
headlamp
coating
sources
both
use
low­
HAP,
high­
solids
adhesives
in
the
headlamp
operation
to
do
final
assembly
of
the
headlamp.
While
the
use
of
these
adhesives
is
representative
of
the
operations
at
these
existing
sources,
it
is
unclear
whether
new
sources
in
the
headlamp
coating
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00016
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72291
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
subcategory
would
be
performing
final
assembly
of
the
headlamps
or
would
only
be
coating
one
component
of
the
headlamp
body.
The
use
of
adhesives
in
headlamp
coating
operations
is
purely
dependent
upon
individual
customer
needs
and
business
decisions
on
whether
to
assemble
the
headlamps
at
the
same
site.
New
headlamp
sources
with
lower
emission
rates
that
include
adhesives
do
not
represent
a
similar
source
that
would
establish
a
new
source
level
for
the
range
of
new
sources
in
the
subcategory.
The
two
bestperforming
similar
sources
in
the
headlamp
subcategory
achieve
emission
rates
(
excluding
adhesives)
of
0.034
kg
(
0.034
lb)
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
and
0.26
kg
(
0.26
lb)
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
The
source
that
is
achieving
the
emission
rate
of
0.034
kg
(
0.034
lb)
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
has
total
enclosures
and
add­
on
control
devices
on
a
portion
of
its
headlamp
coating
operation.
It
is
uncertain
whether
other
new
headlamp
coating
sources
would
be
able
to
use
enclosures
and
add­
on
control
devices
and
achieve
this
emission
rate.
Typical
organics
stream
concentrations
estimated
for
sources
in
this
subcategory
are
generally
too
low
to
make
the
use
of
enclosures
and
control
devices
technically
feasible.
However,
the
source
that
is
achieving
the
emission
rate
of
0.26
kg
(
0.26
lb)
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
coats
automotive
headlamps
using
low­
HAP,
ultra
violet
(
UV)­
cure
clearcoat
technology
and
low­
HAP,
vacuum
metallizing
technology
on
polycarbonate
substrate.
Although
this
emission
rate
is
not
achievable
for
existing
sources
that
do
not
currently
have
the
capability
to
use
UV­
cure
clearcoat
technology
or
vacuum
metallizing
technology,
it
would
be
feasible
to
design
a
new
headlamp
coating
process
to
use
similar
low­
HAP,
UV­
cure
clearcoats
and
low­
HAP,
vacuum
metallizing
technology,
or
otherwise
control
emissions
to
achieve
the
emission
level
of
this
bestperforming
similar
source
in
the
headlamp
subcategory.
Therefore,
the
MACT
floor
for
new
sources
in
the
headlamp
coating
subcategory
is
determined
to
be
0.26
kg
(
0.26
lb)
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
The
new
source
MACT
floor
level
for
the
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
subcategory
was
determined
to
be
the
same
as
the
MACT
floor
level
for
existing
sources.
For
this
coating
subcategory,
the
facilities
whose
emission
rates
were
lower
than
the
existing
source
floor
(
1.34
kg
(
1.34
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used)
were
evaluated
to
determine
whether
one
of
them
could
be
considered
the
best­
performing
similar
source
(
and
sufficiently
representative
of
the
diversity
of
operations
encompassing
the
subcategory).
Some
of
the
variables
considered
were
the
types
of
vehicles
coated
(
e.
g.,
motorhomes
or
towable
RVs),
the
amount
of
the
vehicle
coated
(
either
fully
painted
or
only
partially
painted),
whether
multiple
colors
of
basecoat
were
used
and
the
overall
ratio
of
basecoat
to
clearcoat,
and
whether
or
not
repair
coating
operations
were
performed.
Given
the
diversity
of
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
operations
observed
during
EPA
site
visits
and
among
the
facilities
present
in
the
MACT
database,
EPA
has
determined
that
the
sources
with
emission
rates
lower
than
the
existing
source
MACT
floor
emission
rate
are
not
representative
of
the
possible
range
of
new
sources
in
the
subcategory.
For
example,
some
facilities
may
use
only
a
single
color
of
basecoat
per
vehicle,
while
others
may
use
up
to
four
colors
of
basecoat
in
more
elaborate
color
schemes.
Some
facilities
may
apply
a
single
layer
of
clearcoat
while
others
may
apply
two
or
three
layers
for
a
more
durable
finish.
Additionally,
some
facilities
may
perform
a
combination
of
these
during
a
single
compliance
period.
Given
the
variability
in
these
factors,
EPA
does
not
believe
that
any
single
source
with
a
lower
emission
rate
than
the
existing
source
floor
represents
a
similar
source
for
the
full
range
of
variability
for
this
subcategory.
Therefore,
the
new
source
MACT
floor
is
determined
to
be
the
same
as
the
MACT
floor
for
existing
sources.
After
the
MACT
floors
have
been
determined
for
new
and
existing
sources
in
a
source
category
or
subcategory,
we
must
set
emission
standards
that
are
technically
achievable
and
no
less
stringent
than
the
floors.
Such
standards
must
then
be
met
by
all
sources
within
the
category
or
subcategory.
We
identify
and
consider
any
reasonable
regulatory
alternatives
that
are
``
beyond­
the­
floor,''
taking
into
account
emissions
reductions,
cost,
non­
air
quality
health
and
environmental
impacts,
and
energy
requirements.
These
alternatives
may
be
different
for
new
and
existing
sources
because
of
different
MACT
floors,
and
separate
standards
may
be
established
for
new
and
existing
sources.
No
options
beyond
the
MACT
floor
could
be
identified
for
the
general
use
coating
subcategory
that
would
be
technically
feasible
for
all
new
or
existing
facilities
in
the
subcategory.
For
the
TPO
coating
subcategory,
the
use
of
a
waterborne
coating
technology
was
identified
as
a
beyond­
the­
floor
option
for
existing
sources
to
be
considered.
There
are
currently
at
least
two
existing
sources
that
coat
TPO
using
waterborne
adhesion
promoters
and
other
coatings,
and
the
new
source
MACT
floor
(
0.17
kg
(
0.17
lb)
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used)
is
based
on
a
facility
using
the
waterborne
TPO
coating
process.
We
considered
the
beyond­
the­
floor
option
of
requiring
other
existing
sources
coating
TPO
to
switch
their
TPO
coating
operations
to
the
waterborne
process.
However,
requiring
existing
sources
to
switch
to
waterborne
coating
technology
would
require
many
costly
retrofits
to
an
existing
TPO
coating
operation,
including
the
addition
of
special
pretreatment
steps
prior
to
coating
application,
the
installation
of
curing
ovens
that
aren't
currently
available
at
all
existing
TPO
facilities,
a
lengthening
of
the
coating
line
to
allow
for
increased
drying/
flash­
off
time
required
for
waterborne
coatings,
and
a
switch
to
stainless
steel
spray
guns
and
lines
to
prevent
corrosion
of
equipment.
Information
from
an
existing
TPO
source
that
retrofitted
its
existing
coating
lines
to
allow
for
waterborne
TPO
coating
indicates
that
their
cost
to
switch
to
waterborne
coating
was
approximately
$
9
million.
The
HAP
emissions
reductions
that
would
be
achieved
by
a
typical
existing
source
complying
with
the
MACT
floor
for
TPO
coating
sources
would
be
approximately
75
percent
reduction.
If
the
same
typical
existing
source
achieved
the
beyond
the
floor
level
of
0.17
kg
(
0.17
lb)
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used,
it
would
achieve
approximately
an
additional
7
percent
emission
reduction.
Without
having
information
on
the
benefits
that
would
be
achieved
by
further
reducing
emissions
beyond­
thefloor
we
do
not
believe
the
additional
cost
of
going
beyond
the
floor
is
warranted
at
this
time
without
a
further
evaluation
of
risk.
Therefore,
we
are
not
requiring
beyond­
the­
floor
levels
of
emissions
reductions
at
this
time.
After
implementation
of
these
standards,
we
will
evaluate
the
remaining
health
and
environmental
risks
that
may
be
posed
as
a
result
of
exposure
to
emissions
from
the
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
source
category.
At
that
time,
we
will
determine
whether
the
additional
costs
are
warranted
in
light
of
the
available
risk
information.
For
the
headlamp
coating
subcategory,
we
considered
two
low­
HAP
technologies
as
beyond­
the­
floor
options
for
existing
sources.
These
technologies
are
UV­
cure
clearcoat
and
vacuum
metallizing.
There
are
currently
two
existing
sources
that
use
UV­
cure
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00017
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72292
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
clearcoats
and
one
existing
source
that
uses
vacuum
metallizing
to
obtain
the
necessary
reflectivity
for
the
headlamps.
The
new
source
MACT
floor
for
headlamp
coating
(
0.26
kg
(
0.26
lb)
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used)
is
based
on
a
facility
using
both
technologies
to
coat
automotive
headlamps.
We
considered
the
beyond­
the­
floor
option
of
requiring
other
existing
sources
to
switch
their
coating
operations
to
either
of
these
low­
HAP
technologies.
However,
based
on
industry
information,
requiring
existing
sources
to
switch
to
UV­
cure
clearcoats
or
vacuum
metallizing
could
require
costly
retrofits
to
an
existing
headlamp
coating
operation.
The
switch
to
UVcure
clearcoat
technology
could
require
extensive
modifications
to
coating
line
design
as
well
as
the
installation
of
UVlamps
to
cure
the
coatings.
Furthermore,
since
UV­
cure
processes
do
not
have
production
capacities
as
high
as
thermal­
cure
clearcoat
processes,
existing
sources
could
be
required
to
build
additional
coating
lines
to
maintain
the
same
production
capacity,
and
this
would
require
more
floor
space.
The
switch
to
vacuum
metallizing
from
liquid
argent
coatings
could
require
extensive
modifications
to
the
coating
line
design
and
raw
materials
used,
as
well
as
the
purchase
and
installation
of
vacuum
metallizing
equipment.
A
single
vacuum
metallizing
chamber
can
produce
approximately
500,000
headlamp
lens
bodies
a
year
and
could
cost
approximately
$
2
million
per
chamber.
Many
sources
could
need
multiple
chambers.
In
addition
to
the
purchase
and
installation
of
vacuum
metallizing
chambers,
existing
sources
would
need
to
purchase
more
expensive
raw
plastic
materials
(
i.
e.,
thermoplastics)
in
order
to
achieve
the
beyond­
the­
floor
level
of
0.26
kg
(
0.26
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
Vacuum
metallizing
requires
an
absolutely
smooth
surface
for
proper
reflectivity,
and
this
can
be
achieved
with
thermoplastics.
Less
expensive
thermoset
plastics
that
can
be
used
in
liquid
argent
coating
processes
do
not
produce
the
necessary
surface
to
vacuum
metallize,
without
a
pre­
coating
step
that
would
result
in
additional
HAP
emissions.
For
an
existing
facility
to
switch
to
vacuum
metallizing
from
liquid
argent
coating
without
adding
a
pre­
coating
step,
the
cost
of
thermoplastic
raw
materials
could
be
three
times
the
cost
of
thermoset
materials.
Therefore,
assuming
existing
headlamp
coating
sources
would
require
at
least
two
vacuum
metallizing
chambers
and
a
switch
to
thermoplastic
raw
materials,
retrofitting
an
existing
headlamp
source
could
result
in
capital
costs
of
at
least
$
4
million
for
the
metallizing
chambers
and
an
annual
material
purchase
cost
of
three
times
current
annual
material
costs.
These
costs
do
not
account
for
additional
process
line
modifications,
oven
replacements,
and
testing
requirements
that
will
vary
in
cost
from
source
to
source.
The
HAP
emission
reductions
that
would
be
achieved
by
a
typical
existing
source
complying
with
the
MACT
floor
for
headlamp
coating
sources
would
be
approximately
78
percent
reduction.
The
incremental
emission
reduction
that
would
be
achieved
for
the
same
typical
source
to
reduce
its
emissions
to
the
beyond­
the­
floor
level
would
be
approximately
9
percent.
Without
having
information
on
the
benefits
that
would
be
achieved
by
further
reducing
emissions
beyond­
the­
floor,
we
do
not
believe
the
additional
cost
of
going
beyond
the
floor
is
warranted
at
this
time
without
a
further
evaluation
of
risk.
Therefore,
we
are
not
requiring
beyond­
the­
floor
levels
of
emission
reductions
at
this
time.
After
implementation
of
these
standards,
we
will
evaluate
the
remaining
health
and
environmental
risks
that
may
be
posed
as
a
result
of
exposure
to
emissions
from
the
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
source
category.
At
that
time,
we
will
determine
whether
the
additional
costs
are
warranted
in
light
of
the
available
risk
information.
No
options
beyond
the
MACT
floor
could
be
identified
for
the
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
subcategory
that
would
be
technically
feasible
for
all
new
or
existing
facilities
in
the
subcategory.
Add­
on
controls
were
also
reviewed
to
determine
if
a
facility
using
add­
on
controls
would
represent
a
technically
feasible
beyond­
the­
floor
option
for
all
new
or
existing
sources
in
any
of
the
four
subcategories.
Add­
on
controls
are
used
at
a
few
individual
facilities
in
the
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
source
category
and
three
of
its
four
subcategories.
No
add­
on
controls
are
used
in
the
assembled
off­
road
vehicle
subcategory.
However,
based
on
typical
organics
stream
concentrations
estimated
for
typical
facilities
in
the
four
subcategories,
add­
on
control
techniques
are
generally
not
technically
feasible.
Therefore,
add­
on
control
techniques
were
not
considered
as
a
beyond­
the­
floor
option.
For
existing
sources,
we
based
the
proposed
standards
on
the
existing
source
MACT
floors
for
each
of
the
four
subcategories.
As
described
earlier,
we
determined
that
beyond­
the­
floor
options
were
not
technically
or
economically
feasible
for
all
existing
sources.
For
the
same
reasons,
we
based
the
proposed
standards
for
new
sources
on
the
new
source
MACT
floor.
The
MACT
levels
of
control
for
new
and
existing
sources
can
be
achieved
in
several
different
ways.
Many
sources
would
be
able
to
use
lower­
HAP
coatings,
although
they
may
not
be
available
to
meet
the
needs
of
every
source.
If
a
source
is
also
using
cleaning
materials
that
contain
organic
HAP,
then
it
may
be
able
to
switch
to
lower­
HAP
or
non­
HAP
cleaning
materials,
which
are
widely
available,
to
reduce
the
sourcewide
organic
HAP
emissions
rate
to
the
MACT
level.
Other
available
options
might
be
the
use
of
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices
to
reduce
emissions.
We
note
here
that
our
assumption,
used
in
the
development
of
the
MACT
floors,
that
100
percent
of
the
organic
HAP
in
the
materials
used
are
emitted
by
the
affected
source
would
not
apply
when
the
source
sends
organic
HAPcontaining
waste
materials
to
a
facility
for
treatment
or
disposal.
We
made
that
assumption
because
the
industry
survey
responses
provided
little
information
as
to
the
amount
of
organic
HAP
recovered
and
recycled
or
treated
and
disposed.
We,
therefore,
concluded
that
offsite
or
onsite
treatment
and
disposal
may
not
be
common
within
the
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
industry.
We
recognize,
however,
that
some
facilities
may
conduct
such
activities
and
should
be
allowed
to
account
for
such
activities
in
determining
their
emissions.
Thus,
the
proposed
rule
allows
you
to
reduce
the
organic
HAP
emissions
by
the
amount
of
any
organic
HAP
contained
in
waste
treated
or
disposed
at
a
hazardous
waste
treatment,
storage,
and
disposal
facility
that
is
regulated
under
40
CFR
part
262,
264,
265,
or
266.

E.
How
Did
We
Select
the
Format
of
the
Proposed
Standards?
We
selected
the
format
of
the
proposed
standards
to
be
an
emission
rate
expressed
in
terms
of
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
mass
of
coating
solids
used.
The
emission
rate
format
would
allow
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
operation
owners
and
operators
flexibility
in
choosing
any
combination
of
means
(
including
coating
reformulation,
use
of
lower­
HAP
or
non­
HAP
materials,
solvent
elimination,
work
practices,
and
add­
on
control
devices)
that
is
workable
for
their
particular
situation
to
comply
with
the
emission
limits.
We
selected
mass
of
coating
solids
used
as
a
component
of
the
proposed
format
to
normalize
the
rate
of
organic
HAP
emissions
across
all
sizes
and
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00018
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72293
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
types
of
facilities.
We
also
selected
kg
(
lb)
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
because
this
is
consistent
with
the
data
generally
available
in
this
industry
through
Material
Safety
Data
Sheets
and
other
manufacturers'
formulation
data.
Considering
the
primary
means
of
compliance
is
likely
to
be
the
use
of
low­
and
no­
organic
HAP
coatings
and
other
materials,
this
format
best
ensures
that
comparable
levels
of
control
are
achieved
by
all
affected
sources.
Also,
this
format
allows
sources
flexibility
to
use
a
combination
of
emission
capture
and
control
systems,
as
well
as
low­
HAP
content
coatings
and
other
materials.
Other
choices
for
the
format
of
the
proposed
standards
that
we
considered,
but
rejected,
included
a
usage
limit
(
mass
per
unit
time)
and
a
never­
to­
beexceeded
limit
on
the
organic
HAP
content
of
each
coating,
solvent,
or
cleaning
material.
As
it
is
not
our
intent
to
limit
a
facility's
production
under
these
proposed
standards,
we
rejected
a
usage
limit.
We
also
rejected
a
never­
tobe
exceeded
organic
HAP
content
limit
in
order
to
provide
for
averaging
of
HAP
emissions
from
the
materials
used
during
the
compliance
period.
In
this
decision,
we
considered
the
nature
of
the
available
data,
as
well
as
the
need
to
allow
for
seasonal
variations
and
frequent
changes
in
some
coating
operations,
such
as
job
shops.
Finally,
we
rejected
a
percent
reduction
limit
as
most
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
facilities
are
not
expected
to
use
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices
for
compliance.
In
lieu
of
emission
standards,
section
112(
h)
of
the
CAA
allows
work
practice
standards
or
other
requirements
to
be
established
when
a
pollutant
cannot
be
emitted
through
a
conveyance
or
capture
system,
or
when
measurement
is
not
practicable
because
of
technological
and
economic
limitations.
Many
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
facilities
use
some
type
of
work
practice
measure
to
reduce
HAP
emissions
from
mixing,
cleaning,
storage,
and
waste
handling
areas
as
part
of
their
standard
operating
procedures.
They
use
these
measures
to
decrease
solvent
usage
and
minimize
exposure
to
workers.
However,
we
do
not
have
data
to
quantify
accurately
the
emissions
reductions
achievable
by
the
work
practice
measures.
The
level
of
emissions
depends
on
the
type
of
equipment
and
the
work
practices
used
at
the
facility
and
would
be
very
sitespecific
For
example,
emissions
from
solvent­
laden
rags
used
to
clean
spray
booths
would
depend
on
the
method
used
to
isolate
and
store
such
rags.
In
addition
to
lacking
adequate
data
and
information
to
quantify
an
emissions
level
for
such
operations,
it
is
not
practicable
to
measure
emissions
from
these
operations
since
they
often
occur
in
large
open
areas
not
amenable
to
testing.
Therefore,
work
practice
standards
are
appropriate
for
such
operations
under
section
112(
h)
of
the
CAA.
Under
the
compliance
options
where
emissions
are
reduced
by
using
low­
or
no­
HAP
materials,
the
compliance
determination
procedure
assumes
that
all
the
organic
HAP
in
the
materials
entering
the
affected
source
are
volatilized
(
emitted).
Therefore,
emissions
from
operations
occurring
within
the
affected
source
(
e.
g.,
mixing
operations)
are
accounted
for
in
the
determination
of
total
materials
usage
and
emission
rate
at
the
affected
source.
This
may
not
be
true
when
you
comply
by
using
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices,
particularly
if
some
coating
operations
at
your
facility
use
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices
and
others
do
not.
In
this
case,
you
might
determine
usage
of
coatings
and
other
materials
in
the
controlled
coating
operations
by
some
method
other
than
total
solvent
purchase
records.
It
is
possible
that
emissions
from
mixing
and
transport
of
the
materials
prior
to
their
use
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
might
not
be
included
in
your
usage
and
emission
rate
calculations.
Emissions
from
mixing,
storage,
and
waste
handling
operations
are
often
not
routed
to
the
control
devices
and
would
not
be
practicable
to
measure
for
inclusion
in
a
determination
of
compliance
with
the
emission
limit.
Therefore,
the
proposed
rule
would
require
development
and
implementation
of
an
emission
reduction
work
practice
plan
to
assure
that
emissions
are
reduced
from
such
operations.

F.
How
Did
We
Select
the
Testing
and
Initial
Compliance
Requirements?
The
proposed
standards
would
allow
you
to
choose
among
several
options
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
proposed
standards
for
organic
HAP:
compliant
materials
(
i.
e.,
coatings
and
other
materials
with
low
or
no
organic
HAP);
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option;
or
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option.
Compliant
Materials
Option.
You
would
be
required
to
document
the
organic
HAP
content
of
all
coatings
(
general
use,
TPO,
headlamp,
and
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coatings)
on
an
as­
received
basis
and
show
that
each
is
less
than
the
applicable
emission
limit.
You
would
also
have
to
show
that
each
thinner,
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
on
an
as­
received
basis
contains
no
organic
HAP.
Note
that
``
no
organic
HAP''
is
not
intended
to
mean
absolute
zero.
Materials
that
contain
``
no
organic
HAP''
should
be
interpreted
to
mean
materials
that
contain
organic
HAP
levels
below
0.1
percent
by
mass
for
OSHA­
defined
carcinogens
and
1.0
percent
by
mass
for
other
compounds.
You
may
use
manufacturer's
formulation
data
to
demonstrate
the
HAP
content
of
each
material
and
the
solids
content
of
each
coating.
If
you
choose
to
use
test
data,
you
would
use
the
following
procedures
on
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
in
the
condition
it
is
in
when
it
is
received
from
its
manufacturer
or
supplier
and
before
any
alteration.
If
you
recycle
or
reclaim
coatings,
thinners,
cleaning
materials,
or
other
additives
at
your
facility,
you
do
not
need
to
demonstrate
that
these
materials
meet
the
emission
limit,
provided
they
were
initially
demonstrated
to
comply
with
the
compliant
material
option.
Method
311
is
the
method
developed
by
EPA
for
determining
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
coatings
and
has
been
used
in
previous
surface
coating
NESHAP.
We
have
not
identified
any
other
methods
that
provide
advantages
over
Method
311
for
use
in
the
proposed
standards
for
determining
organic
HAP
content.
Method
24
is
the
method
developed
by
EPA
for
determining
the
mass
fraction
of
volatile
matter
for
coatings
and
can
be
used
if
you
choose
to
determine
the
nonaqueous
volatile
matter
content
as
a
surrogate
for
organic
HAP.
In
past
standards,
VOC
emission
control
measures
have
been
implemented
in
coating
industries,
with
Method
24
as
the
compliance
method.
We
have
not
identified
any
other
methods
that
provide
advantages
over
Method
24
for
use
in
the
proposed
standards.
Method
24
is
the
method
specified
for
determining
the
coating
solids
content
of
each
coating.
We
have
not
identified
any
other
methods
that
provide
advantages
over
Method
24
for
use
in
the
proposed
standards.
Emission
Rate
Without
Add­
on
Controls
Option.
To
demonstrate
initial
compliance
using
this
option,
you
would
calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
one
or
more
coating
operations
in
each
affected
source,
based
on
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
all
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaners,
and
the
mass
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
compliance
period.
You
would
demonstrate
that
your
emission
rate
does
not
exceed
the
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00019
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72294
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
applicable
emission
limit
for
the
affected
source.
You
would
determine
the
HAP
content
from
manufacturer's
formulation
data
or
by
using
EPA
Method
24
or
311
as
discussed
previously.
Emission
Rate
With
Add­
on
Controls
Option.
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
device
for
which
you
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
you
would
be
required
to
conduct
an
initial
performance
test
of
the
system
to
determine
its
overall
control
efficiency
using
EPA
Method
25
or
25A
depending
on
the
type
of
control
device
and
the
outlet
concentration.
You
would
also
need
to
determine
the
capture
efficiency
of
the
capture
system
using
EPA
Methods
204
and
204A
through
204F.
For
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
you
would
determine
the
quantity
of
volatile
matter
applied
and
the
quantity
recovered
during
the
initial
compliance
period
to
determine
its
overall
control
efficiency.
For
both
cases,
the
overall
control
efficiency
would
be
combined
with
the
monthly
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
and
other
materials
used
to
calculate
the
monthly
organic
HAP
emissions
in
kg
(
lb)
HAP
emitted.
The
monthly
amount
(
kg
(
lb))
of
coating
solids
used
would
also
be
determined.
These
values
would
be
combined
to
calculate
your
emission
rate
for
the
12­
month
compliance
period
according
to
equations
in
the
proposed
rule.
You
would
demonstrate
that
your
emission
rate
does
not
exceed
the
applicable
emission
limit
for
the
affected
source.
If
you
conduct
a
performance
test,
you
would
also
determine
parameter
operating
limits
during
the
test.
The
proposed
test
methods
for
the
performance
test
have
been
required
in
many
NSPS
for
industrial
surface
coating
sources
under
40
CFR
part
60
and
NESHAP
under
40
CFR
part
63.
We
have
not
identified
any
other
methods
that
provide
advantages
over
these
methods.

G.
How
Did
We
Select
the
Continuous
Compliance
Requirements?
To
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
either
the
compliant
materials
option
or
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option,
you
would
need
records
of
the
data
and
calculations
supporting
your
determination
of
the
organic
HAP
content
and
solids
content
of
each
material
used.
You
would
also
need
records
of
the
quantity
of
coatings
and
other
materials
used.
For
the
compliant
materials
option,
you
would
demonstrate
compliance
for
each
material
used.
For
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option,
you
would
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
applicable
12­
month
emission
limit
on
a
monthly
basis
using
data
from
the
previous
12
months
of
operation.
If
you
use
the
emission
rate
with
addon
controls
option,
you
would
also
be
required
to
continuously
monitor
operating
parameters
of
capture
systems
and
control
devices
and
maintain
records
of
this
monitoring.
We
selected
the
following
requirements
based
on
reasonable
cost,
ease
of
execution,
and
usefulness
of
the
resulting
data
to
both
the
owners
or
operators
and
EPA
for
ensuring
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limits
and/
or
operating
limits.
We
are
proposing
that
certain
parameters
be
continuously
monitored
for
the
types
of
capture
systems
and
control
devices
commonly
used
in
the
industry.
These
monitoring
parameters
have
been
used
in
other
standards
for
similar
industries
and
control
devices.
The
values
of
these
parameters
are
established
during
the
initial
or
most
recent
performance
test
that
demonstrates
compliance.
These
values
are
your
operating
limits
for
the
capture
system
and
control
device.
You
would
be
required
to
determine
3­
hour
average
values
for
most
monitored
parameters
for
the
controlled
coating
operations
within
the
affected
source.
We
selected
this
averaging
period
to
reflect
operating
conditions
during
the
performance
test
to
ensure
the
control
system
is
continuously
operating
at
the
same
or
better
control
level
as
during
a
performance
test
demonstrating
compliance
with
the
emission
limits.
If
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances,
you
would
need
records
of
the
quantity
of
volatile
matter
used
and
the
quantity
recovered
by
the
solvent
recovery
system.
You
would
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
emission
limit
on
a
monthly
basis
using
data
from
the
previous
12
months
of
operation.

H.
How
Did
We
Select
the
Notification,
Recordkeeping,
and
Reporting
Requirements?
You
would
be
required
to
comply
with
the
applicable
requirements
in
the
NESHAP
General
Provisions,
subpart
A
of
40
CFR
part
63,
as
described
in
Table
2
of
the
proposed
subpart
PPPP.
We
evaluated
the
General
Provisions
requirements
and
included
those
we
determined
to
be
the
minimum
notification,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
necessary
to
ensure
compliance
with,
and
effective
enforcement
of,
the
proposed
standards,
modifying
them
as
appropriate
for
the
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
source
category.

I.
How
Did
We
Select
the
Compliance
Date?
You
would
be
allowed
3
years
to
comply
with
the
final
standards
for
existing
affected
sources.
This
is
the
maximum
period
allowed
by
the
CAA.
We
believe
that
3
years
for
compliance
is
necessary
to
allow
adequate
time
to
accommodate
the
variety
of
compliance
methods
that
existing
sources
may
use.
Most
sources
in
this
category
would
need
this
3­
year
maximum
amount
of
time
to
develop
and
test
reformulated
coatings,
particularly
those
that
may
opt
to
comply
using
a
different
loweremitting
coating
technology.
We
want
to
encourage
the
use
of
these
pollution
prevention
technologies.
In
addition,
time
would
be
needed
to
establish
records
management
systems
required
for
enforcement
purposes.
Some
sources
may
need
the
time
to
purchase
and
install
emission
capture
and
control
systems.
In
such
cases,
you
would
need
to
obtain
permits
for
the
use
of
add­
on
controls,
which
will
require
time
for
approval
from
the
permitting
authority.
The
CAA
requires
that
new
or
reconstructed
affected
sources
comply
with
standards
immediately
upon
startup
or
the
effective
date
of
the
final
rule,
whichever
is
later.

IV.
Summary
of
Environmental,
Energy,
and
Economic
Impacts
For
the
purpose
of
assessing
impacts,
we
assumed
that
all
sources
would
convert
to
liquid
coatings,
thinners,
and
other
additives
with
lower
organic
HAP
content
than
those
presently
used
and
would
convert
to
lower­
HAP
or
no­
HAP
cleaning
materials
rather
than
using
add­
on
control
devices,
except
for
those
already
using
add­
on
control
devices.

A.
What
Are
the
Air
Impacts?
The
1997
nationwide
baseline
organic
HAP
emissions
for
the
202
major
source
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
facilities
of
which
EPA
is
aware
are
estimated
to
be
9,820
tpy.
Implementation
of
the
emission
limitations
as
proposed
would
reduce
these
emissions
by
approximately
80
percent
to
2,260
tpy.
In
addition,
the
proposed
emission
limitations
will
not
result
in
any
significant
secondary
air
impacts.
We
expect
that
the
majority
of
facilities
will
switch
to
low­
or
noorganic
HAP­
containing
materials
to
comply
with
the
standards
rather
than
installing
add­
on
control
devices.
Thus,
increases
in
electricity
consumption
(
which
could
lead
to
increases
in
emissions
of
nitrogen
oxides,
sulfur
dioxide,
carbon
monoxide,
and
carbon
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00020
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72295
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
dioxide
from
electric
utilities)
will
be
minimal.

B.
What
Are
the
Cost
Impacts?
The
total
capital
cost
(
including
monitoring
costs)
for
existing
sources
is
estimated
to
be
approximately
$
803,830.
The
nationwide
annual
cost
(
including
monitoring,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
costs)
for
existing
sources
is
approximately
$
10.7
million
per
year.
Costs
for
new
sources
were
based
on
an
estimate
of
six
new
sources
being
constructed
within
5
years
after
promulgation
of
the
final
standards.
The
total
capital
cost
(
including
monitoring
costs)
for
new
sources
is
$
28,000.
The
total
annual
cost
(
including
monitoring,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
costs)
for
new
sources
is
estimated
to
be
approximately
$
194,000
per
year.
Cost
estimates
are
based
on
information
available
to
the
Administrator
and
presented
in
the
economic
analysis
of
this
rule.
The
costs
are
calculated
assuming
that
the
majority
of
sources
would
comply
by
using
lower
HAP­
containing
or
non­
HAP
coatings
and
cleaning
materials
because
such
materials
are
generally
available,
and
add­
on
controls
would
not
be
technically
feasible
for
typical
facilities.
Waterborne
coatings
are
a
type
of
potentially
lower­
HAP
coating
which
could
be
used
by
facilities
and
may
contribute
to
higher
costs
due
to
increased
drying
times
or
temperatures
that
may
be
needed
for
waterborne
coatings.
However,
the
data
available
in
the
plastic
parts
ICR
database
did
not
indicate
any
definite
relationship
between
coating
types
and
drying
times
or
curing
temperatures.
We
also
assumed
that
facilities
presently
equipped
with
add­
on
controls
would
continue
to
operate
those
control
devices
and
capture
systems
and
would
perform
the
required
performance
tests
and
parameter
monitoring.
During
development
of
the
proposed
emission
limitations,
limited
information
was
available
on
the
costs
associated
with
the
switch
to
low­
HAP
or
non­
HAP
coatings
and
cleaning
materials.
Thus,
we
request
comment
on
the
assumptions
and
methodology
used
to
determine
these
costs.
Any
comments
should
provide
detailed
information
that
includes
identification
of
the
coatings
or
cleaning
materials
(
and
associated
costs)
currently
being
used
and
the
coatings
or
cleaning
materials
(
and
associated
costs)
that
would
be
used
to
comply
with
the
proposed
emission
limitations,
as
well
as
the
basis
for
the
cost
information.
You
may
refer
to
the
Determination
of
Baseline
Emissions
and
Costs
and
Emissions
Impacts
for
New
and
Existing
Sources
in
the
Plastic
Parts
and
Products
Surface
Coating
Source
Category
memorandum
in
the
docket
for
additional
details.

C.
What
Are
the
Economic
Impacts?
We
prepared
an
economic
impacts
analysis
(
EIA)
to
evaluate
the
impacts
the
proposed
rule
would
have
on
the
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
industry,
consumers,
and
society.
Economic
impacts
were
calculated
on
a
facility­
specific
basis,
as
well
as
on
a
market
segment
basis
(
e.
g.,
automobile
manufacturing,
sporting
goods,
electronics
equipment,
etc.).
Economic
impact
indicators
examined
included
price,
output,
and
employment
impacts.
The
EIA
shows
that
the
expected
price
increase
for
affected
plastic
parts
and
products
would
be
less
than
0.1
percent
as
a
result
of
the
proposed
standards.
Therefore,
we
do
not
expect
any
adverse
impact
to
occur
for
those
industries
that
produce
or
consume
plastic
parts
and
products
such
as
home
appliances,
computer
hardware
producers,
motor
vehicle
manufacturers,
and
recreational
vehicle
manufacturers.
The
distribution
of
costs
across
plastic
parts
and
products
production
facilities
is
slanted
toward
the
lower
impact
levels
with
many
facilities
incurring
costs
related
only
to
annually
recurring
monitoring,
reporting,
and
recordkeeping
activities.
The
EIA
indicates
that
these
regulatory
costs
are
expected
to
represent
only
0.25
percent
of
the
value
of
coating
services,
which
should
not
cause
producers
to
cease
or
alter
their
current
operations.
Hence,
no
firms
or
facilities
are
at
risk
of
closures
because
of
the
proposed
standards.

D.
What
Are
the
Non­
air
Health,
Environmental,
and
Energy
Impacts?
Based
on
information
from
the
industry
survey
responses,
we
found
no
indication
that
the
use
of
low­
organic
HAP
content
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
at
affected
sources
would
result
in
any
increase
or
decrease
in
non­
air
health,
environmental,
and
energy
impacts.
There
would
be
no
change
in
the
utility
requirements
associated
with
the
use
of
these
materials,
so
there
would
be
no
change
in
the
amount
of
energy
consumed
as
a
result
of
the
material
conversion.
We
estimate
that
the
proposed
emission
limitations
will
have
a
minimal
impact
on
water
quality
because
only
a
few
facilities
are
expected
to
comply
by
making
process
modifications
or
by
using
add­
on
control
devices
that
would
generate
wastewater.
However,
because
many
low­
HAP
and
no­
HAP
materials
are
waterborne,
an
increase
in
wastewater
generation
from
cleaning
activities
may
result.
Although
additional
wastewater
may
be
generated
by
facilities
switching
to
waterborne
coatings,
the
amount
of
wastewater
generated
by
these
facilities
is
not
expected
to
increase
significantly.
We
also
estimate
that
the
proposed
emission
limitations
will
result
in
a
decrease
in
the
amount
of
both
solid
and
hazardous
waste
from
facilities,
as
the
majority
of
facilities
will
be
using
lower
organic
HAP­
containing
materials
which
will
result
in
a
decrease
in
the
amount
of
waste
materials
that
would
have
to
be
disposed
of
as
hazardous.
In
addition,
we
expect
that
the
majority
of
facilities
will
comply
by
using
low­
HAP
or
no­
organic
HAP­
containing
materials
rather
than
add­
on
control
devices.
Thus,
there
will
be
little
or
no
increase
in
energy
usage
caused
by
the
operation
of
add­
on
controls.

V.
Administrative
Requirements
A.
Executive
Order
12866,
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review
Under
Executive
Order
12866
(
58
FR
51735,
October
4,
1993),
EPA
must
determine
whether
the
regulatory
action
is
``
significant''
and
therefore
subject
to
review
by
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
and
the
requirements
of
the
Executive
Order.
The
Executive
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,
OMB
has
notified
EPA
that
it
considers
this
a
``
significant
regulatory
action''
within
the
meaning
of
the
Executive
Order.
The
EPA
has
submitted
this
action
to
OMB
for
review.
Changes
made
in
response
to
OMB
suggestions
or
recommendations
will
be
documented
in
the
public
record.

B.
Executive
Order
13132,
Federalism
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
``
Federalism''
(
64
FR
43255,
August
10,

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00021
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72296
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
1999),
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
State
and
local
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
federalism
implications.''
``
Policies
that
have
federalism
implications''
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government.''
Under
section
6
of
Executive
Order
13132,
EPA
may
not
issue
a
regulation
that
has
federalism
implications,
that
imposes
substantial
direct
compliance
costs,
and
that
is
not
required
by
statute,
unless
the
Federal
government
provides
the
funds
necessary
to
pay
the
direct
compliance
costs
incurred
by
State
and
local
governments,
or
EPA
consults
with
State
and
local
officials
early
in
the
process
of
developing
the
proposed
regulation.
The
EPA
also
may
not
issue
a
regulation
that
has
federalism
implications
and
that
preempts
State
law,
unless
the
Agency
consults
with
State
and
local
officials
early
in
the
process
of
developing
the
proposed
regulation.
This
proposed
rule
does
not
have
federalism
implications.
It
will
not
have
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13132.
Pursuant
to
the
terms
of
Executive
Order
13132,
it
has
been
determined
that
this
proposed
rule
does
not
have
``
federalism
implications''
because
it
does
not
meet
the
necessary
criteria.
Thus,
the
requirements
of
section
6
of
the
Executive
Order
do
not
apply
to
this
proposed
rule.

C.
Executive
Order
13175,
Consultation
and
Coordination
With
Indian
Tribal
Governments
Executive
Order
13175,
entitled
``
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments''
(
65
FR
67249,
November
6,
2000),
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
tribal
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
tribal
implications.''
This
proposed
rule
does
not
have
tribal
implications.
It
will
not
have
substantial
direct
effects
on
tribal
governments,
or
the
relationship
between
the
Federal
government
and
Indian
tribes,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
between
the
Federal
government
and
Indian
tribes,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
No
tribal
governments
own
or
operate
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
facilities.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13175
does
not
apply
to
this
proposed
rule.
EPA
specifically
solicits
additional
comment
on
this
proposed
rule
from
tribal
officials.

D.
Executive
Order
13045,
Protection
of
Children
From
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks
Executive
Order
13045,
``
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks''
(
62
FR
19885,
April
23,
1997)
applies
to
any
rule
that:
(
1)
Is
determined
to
be
``
economically
significant''
as
defined
under
Executive
Order
12866,
and
(
2)
concerns
an
environmental
health
or
safety
risk
that
EPA
has
reason
to
believe
may
have
a
disproportionate
effect
on
children.
If
the
regulatory
action
meets
both
criteria,
EPA
must
evaluate
the
environmental
health
or
safety
effects
of
the
planned
rule
on
children,
and
explain
why
the
planned
regulation
is
preferable
to
other
potentially
effective
and
reasonably
feasible
alternatives
considered
by
the
Agency.
The
EPA
interprets
Executive
Order
13045
as
applying
only
to
those
regulatory
actions
that
are
based
on
health
or
safety
risks,
such
that
the
analysis
required
under
section
5
 
501
of
the
Executive
Order
has
the
potential
to
influence
the
regulation.
This
proposed
rule
is
not
subject
to
Executive
Order
13045
because
it
does
not
establish
environmental
standards
based
on
an
assessment
of
health
or
safety
risks.
No
children's
risk
analysis
was
performed
because
no
alternative
technologies
exist
that
would
provide
greater
stringency
at
a
reasonable
cost.
Furthermore,
this
proposed
rule
has
been
determined
not
to
be
``
economically
significant''
as
defined
under
Executive
Order
12866.

E.
Executive
Order
13211,
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
That
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use
This
proposed
rule
is
not
a
``
significant
energy
action''
as
defined
in
Executive
Order
13211,
``
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
that
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use''
(
66
FR
28355,
May
22,
2001)
because
it
is
not
likely
to
have
a
significant
adverse
effect
on
the
supply,
distribution,
or
use
of
energy.
Further,
we
have
concluded
that
this
proposed
rule
is
not
likely
to
have
any
adverse
energy
effects.
Affected
sources
are
expected
to
comply
with
the
proposed
rule
through
pollution
prevention
rather
than
end­
of­
pipe
controls,
and
therefore,
there
would
be
no
increase
in
energy
usage.

F.
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
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,
EPA
generally
must
prepare
a
written
statement,
including
a
cost­
benefit
analysis,
for
proposed
and
final
rules
with
``
Federal
mandates''
that
may
result
in
expenditures
to
State,
local,
and
tribal
governments,
in
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
leastcostly
most
cost­
effective,
or
leastburdensome
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
this
proposed
rule
does
not
contain
a
Federal
mandate
that
may
result
in
expenditures
of
$
100
million
or
more
for
State,
local,
and
tribal
governments,
in
the
aggregate,
or
the
private
sector
in
any
1
year.
The
maximum
total
annual
cost
of
this
proposed
rule
for
any
1
year
has
been
estimated
to
be
slightly
less
than
$
11
million.
Thus,
today's
proposed
rule
is
not
subject
to
the
requirements
of
sections
202
and
205
of
the
UMRA.
In
addition,
EPA
has
determined
that
this
proposed
rule
contains
no
regulatory
requirements
that
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00022
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72297
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
might
significantly
or
uniquely
affect
small
governments
because
it
contains
no
requirements
that
apply
to
such
governments
or
impose
obligations
upon
them.
Therefore,
today's
proposed
rule
is
not
subject
to
the
requirements
of
section
203
of
the
UMRA.

G.
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA),
as
Amended
by
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
of
1996
(
SBREFA),
5
U.
S.
C.
601,
et
seq.
The
RFA
generally
requires
an
agency
to
prepare
a
regulatory
flexibility
analysis
of
any
rule
subject
to
notice
and
comment
rulemaking
requirements
under
the
Administrative
Procedures
Act
or
any
other
statute
unless
the
agency
certifies
that
the
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
Small
entities
include
small
businesses,
small
organizations,
and
small
governmental
jurisdictions.
For
purposes
of
assessing
the
impacts
of
today's
proposed
rule
on
small
entities,
small
entity
is
defined
as:
(
1)
A
small
business
whose
parent
company
has
fewer
than
500
or
1,000
employees,
depending
on
the
size
definition
for
the
affected
NAICS
Code;
(
2)
a
small
governmental
jurisdiction
that
is
a
government
of
a
city,
county,
town,
school
district
or
special
district
with
a
population
of
less
than
50,000;
and
(
3)
a
small
organization
that
is
any
not­
forprofit
enterprise
that
is
independently
owned
and
operated
and
is
not
dominant
in
its
field.
It
should
be
noted
that
companies
in
32
NAICS
codes
are
affected
by
this
proposed
rule,
and
the
small
business
definition
applied
to
each
industry
by
NAICS
code
is
that
listed
in
the
Small
Business
Administration
size
standards
(
13
CFR
part
121).
After
considering
the
economic
impacts
of
today's
proposed
rule
on
small
entities,
I
certify
that
this
action
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities.
We
have
determined
that
67
of
the
130
firms,
or
51
percent
of
the
total,
affected
by
this
proposed
rule
may
be
small
entities.
While
the
number
of
small
firms
appears
to
be
a
large
proportion
of
the
total
number
of
affected
firms,
the
small
firms
only
experience
21
percent
of
the
total
national
compliance
cost
of
$
11
million
(
1997
$).
Of
the
67
affected
small
firms,
only
three
firms
are
estimated
to
have
compliance
costs
that
exceed
1
percent
of
their
revenues.
The
maximum
impact
on
any
affected
small
entity
is
a
compliance
cost
of
1.8
percent
of
its
sales.
Finally,
while
there
is
a
difference
between
the
median
compliance
cost­
tosales
estimates
for
the
affected
small
and
large
firms
(
0.08
percent
compared
to
0.01
percent
for
the
large
firms,
and
0.03
percent
across
all
affected
firms),
no
adverse
economic
impacts
are
expected
for
either
small
or
large
firms
affected
by
the
proposed
rule.
Therefore,
the
affected
small
firms
are
not
disproportionately
affected
by
this
proposed
rule
as
compared
to
the
affected
large
firms.
Although
this
proposed
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities,
EPA
nonetheless
has
tried
to
reduce
the
impact
of
this
proposed
rule
on
small
entities.
The
Agency
has
also
reached
out
to
small
entities
as
part
of
our
outreach
to
affected
industries.
Representatives
of
small
entities
have
participated
in
stakeholder
meetings
held
during
the
last
3
years
as
well
as
site
visits
conducted
by
the
EPA
for
data
gathering
purposes.
Small
entities
will
be
afforded
extensive
flexibility
in
demonstrating
compliance
through
pollution
prevention
rather
than
the
use
of
add­
on
control
technology.
We
are
proposing
compliance
options
which
give
small
entities
flexibility
in
choosing
the
most
cost­
effective
and
least
burdensome
alternative
for
their
operation.
For
example,
a
facility
could
purchase
and
use
low­
HAP
coatings
and
other
materials
(
i.
e.,
pollution
prevention)
that
meet
the
proposed
standards
instead
of
using
add­
on
capture
and
control
systems.
This
method
of
compliance
can
be
demonstrated
with
minimum
burden
by
using
purchase
and
usage
records.
No
testing
of
materials
would
be
required,
as
the
facility
owner
could
show
that
their
coatings
and
other
materials
meet
the
emission
limits
by
providing
formulation
data
supplied
by
the
manufacturer.
We
continue
to
be
interested
in
the
potential
impacts
of
the
proposed
standards
on
small
entities
and
welcome
comments
on
issues
related
to
such
impacts.

H.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
The
information
collection
requirements
in
this
proposed
rule
have
been
submitted
for
approval
to
OMB
under
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act,
44
U.
S.
C.
3501,
et
seq.
An
Information
Collection
Request
(
ICR)
document
has
been
prepared
by
EPA
(
ICR
No.
2044.01)
and
a
copy
may
be
obtained
from
Susan
Auby
by
mail
at
U.
S.
EPA,
Office
of
Environmental
Information,
Collection
Strategies
Division
(
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW.,
Washington
DC
20460,
by
e­
mail
at
auby.
susan@
epa.
gov,
or
by
calling
(
202)
566
 
1672.
A
copy
may
also
be
downloaded
off
the
Internet
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
icr.
The
information
collection
requirements
are
not
effective
until
OMB
approves
them.
The
information
collection
requirements
are
based
on
notification,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
requirements
in
the
NESHAP
General
Provisions
(
40
CFR
part
63,
subpart
A),
which
are
mandatory
for
all
operators
subject
to
national
emission
standards.
These
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
are
specifically
authorized
by
section
114
of
the
CAA
(
42
U.
S.
C.
7414).
All
information
submitted
to
EPA
pursuant
to
the
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
for
which
a
claim
of
confidentiality
is
made
is
safeguarded
according
to
Agency
policies
set
forth
in
40
CFR
part
2,
subpart
B.
The
proposed
standards
would
require
maintaining
records
of
all
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
data
and
calculations
used
to
determine
compliance.
This
information
includes
the
volume
used
during
each
compliance
period,
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP,
density,
and
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids.
If
an
add­
on
control
device
is
used,
records
must
be
kept
of
the
capture
efficiency
of
the
capture
system,
destruction
or
removal
efficiency
of
the
add­
on
control
device,
and
the
monitored
operating
parameters.
In
addition,
records
must
be
kept
of
each
calculation
of
the
affected
source's
emissions
for
each
12­
month
compliance
period
and
all
data,
calculations,
test
results,
and
other
supporting
information
used
to
determine
this
value.
The
monitoring,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
burden
in
the
3rd
year
after
the
effective
date
of
the
promulgated
rule
is
estimated
to
be
118,835
labor
hours
at
a
cost
of
$
5.4
million
for
new
and
existing
sources.
This
estimate
includes
the
cost
of
determining
and
recording
organic
HAP
content,
solids
content,
and
density,
as
needed,
of
the
regulated
materials,
and
developing
a
system
for
determining
and
recording
the
amount
of
each
material
used
and
performing
the
calculations
needed
for
demonstrating
compliance.
For
those
affected
sources
using
an
add­
on
control
device
to
comply,
the
costs
also
include
a
one­
time
performance
test
and
report
(
with
repeat
tests
where
needed)
of
the
add­
on
control
device,
one­
time
purchase
and
installation
of
CPMS,
one­
time
submission
of
a
SSMP,
and
any
required
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
reports.
Total
capital/
startup
costs
associated
with
the
monitoring
requirements
over
the
3­
year
period
of
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00023
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72298
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
the
ICR
are
estimated
at
$
133,000,
with
operation
and
maintenance
costs
of
$
655
per
year.
Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
part
9
and
48
CFR
chapter
15.
Comments
are
requested
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.
By
U.
S.
Postal
Service,
send
comments
on
the
ICR
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
EPA
(
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW.,
Washington
DC
20460;
or
by
courier,
send
comments
on
the
ICR
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
EPA
(
2822T),
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW.,
Room
6143,
Washington
DC
20460
(
202
566
 
1700);
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
St.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20503,
marked
``
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.''
Include
the
ICR
number
in
any
correspondence.
Since
OMB
is
required
to
make
a
decision
concerning
the
ICR
between
30
and
60
days
after
December
4,
2002,
a
comment
to
OMB
is
best
assured
of
having
its
full
effect
if
OMB
receives
it
by
January
3,
2003.
The
final
rule
will
respond
to
any
OMB
or
public
comments
on
the
information
collection
requirements
contained
in
this
proposal.

I.
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
Section
12(
d)
of
the
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
of
1995
(
NTTAA),
Public
Law
104
 
113,
section
12(
d)
(
15
U.
S.
C.
272
note)
directs
EPA
to
use
voluntary
consensus
standards
(
VCS)
in
its
regulatory
and
procurement
activities
unless
to
do
so
would
be
inconsistent
with
applicable
law
or
otherwise
impractical.
The
VCS
are
technical
standards
(
e.
g.,
materials
specifications,
test
methods,
sampling
procedures,
and
business
practices)
developed
or
adopted
by
one
or
more
voluntary
consensus
bodies.
The
NTTAA
directs
EPA
to
provide
Congress,
through
annual
reports
to
OMB,
with
explanations
when
the
Agency
does
not
use
available
and
applicable
VCS.
This
proposed
rulemaking
involves
technical
standards.
The
EPA
proposes
in
this
rule
to
use
EPA
Methods
1,
1A,
2,
2A,
2C,
2D,
2F,
2G,
3,
3A,
3B,
4,
24,
25,
25A,
204,
204A
 
F,
and
311.
Consistent
with
the
NTTAA,
EPA
conducted
searches
to
identify
VCS
in
addition
to
these
EPA
methods.
No
applicable
VCS
were
identified
for
EPA
Methods
1A,
2A,
2D,
2F,
2G,
204,
204A
 
F,
and
311.
The
search
and
review
results
have
been
documented
and
are
placed
in
the
docket
(
Docket
No.
A
 
99
 
12)
for
this
proposed
rule.
Six
VCS:
ASTM
D1475
 
90,
ASTM
D2369
 
95,
ASTM
D3792
 
91,
ASTM
D4017
 
96a,
ASTM
D4457
 
85
(
Reapproved
91),
and
ASTM
D5403
 
93
are
already
incorporated
by
reference
in
EPA
Method
24.
In
addition,
we
are
separately
specifying
the
use
of
ASTM
D1475
 
98,
``
Standard
Test
Method
for
Density
of
Liquid
Coatings,
Inks,
and
Related
Products,''
for
measuring
the
density
of
individual
coating
components,
such
as
organic
solvents.
Five
VCS:
ASTM
D1979
 
91,
ASTM
D3432
 
89,
ASTM
D4747
 
87,
ASTM
D4827
 
93,
and
ASTM
PS9
 
94
are
incorporated
by
reference
in
EPA
Method
311.
The
VCS
ASTM
D4457
 
85
(
Reapproved
1996),
``
Standard
Test
Method
for
Determination
of
Dichloromethane
(
Methylene
chloride)
and
1,1,1­
Trichloroethane
(
Methyl
chloroform)
in
Paints
and
Coatings
by
Direct
Injection
into
a
Gas
Chromatograph,''
is
not
a
complete
alternative
to
EPA
Method
311,
but
is
an
acceptable
alternative
to
EPA
Method
311
for
the
following
two
HAP:
(
1)
Dichloromethane
(
methylene
chloride)
and
(
2)
1,1,1­
Trichlorethane
(
methyl
chloroform).
Therefore,
EPA
will
incorporate
by
reference
ASTM
D4457
into
40
CFR
63.14
in
the
future.
In
addition
to
the
VCS
EPA
proposes
to
use
in
this
proposed
rule,
the
search
for
emission
measurement
procedures
identified
17
other
VCS.
The
EPA
determined
that
13
of
these
17
standards
were
impractical
alternatives
to
EPA
test
methods
for
the
purposes
of
this
proposed
rulemaking.
Therefore,
EPA
does
not
propose
to
adopt
these
standards
today.
(
See
docket
A
 
99
 
12
for
further
information
on
the
methods.)
The
following
four
of
the
17
VCS
identified
in
this
search
were
not
available
at
the
time
the
review
was
conducted
for
the
purposes
of
this
proposed
rulemaking
because
they
are
under
development
by
a
voluntary
consensus
body:
ASME/
BSR
MFC
13M,
``
Flow
Measurement
by
Velocity
Traverse,''
for
EPA
Method
2
(
and
possibly
1);
ASME/
BSR
MFC
12M,
``
Flow
in
Closed
Conduits
Using
Multiport
Averaging
Pitot
Primary
Flowmeters,''
for
EPA
Method
2;
ISO/
DIS
12039,
``
Stationary
Source
Emissions
 
Determination
of
Carbon
Monoxide,
Carbon
Dioxide,
and
Oxygen
 
Automated
Methods,''
for
EPA
Method
3A;
and
ISO/
PWI
17895,
``
Paints
and
Varnishes
 
Determination
of
the
Volatile
Organic
Compound
Content
of
Water­
based
Emulsion
Paints,''
for
EPA
Method
24.
While
we
are
not
proposing
to
include
these
four
VCS
in
today's
proposal,
the
EPA
will
consider
the
VCS
when
finalized.
The
EPA
takes
comment
on
the
compliance
demonstration
requirements
in
this
proposed
rulemaking
and
specifically
invites
the
public
to
identify
potentially­
applicable
VCS.
Commentors
should
also
explain
why
this
proposed
rule
should
adopt
these
VCS
in
lieu
of
or
in
addition
to
EPA's
method.
Emission
test
methods
submitted
for
evaluation
should
be
accompanied
by
a
basis
for
the
recommendation,
including
method
validation
data
and
the
procedure
used
to
validate
the
candidate
method
(
if
a
method
other
than
Method
301,
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A,
was
used).
Sections
63.4541,
63.4551,
63.4561,
63.4565,
and
63.4566
of
the
proposed
standards
list
the
EPA
testing
methods
included
in
the
proposed
standards.
Under
40
CFR
63.7(
f)
of
the
General
Provisions,
a
source
may
apply
to
EPA
for
permission
to
use
alternative
test
methods
in
place
of
any
of
the
EPA
testing
methods.

List
of
Subjects
in
40
CFR
Part
63
Environmental
protection,
Administrative
practice
and
procedure,
Air
pollution
control,
Hazardous
substances,
Intergovernmental
relations,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.

Dated:
November
8,
2002.
Christine
Todd
Whitman,
Administrator.

For
the
reasons
stated
in
the
preamble,
title
40,
chapter
I,
part
63
of
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
is
proposed
to
be
amended
as
follows:

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00024
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72299
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
PART
63
 
[
AMENDED]

1.
The
authority
citation
for
part
63
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
7401,
et
seq.

2.
Part
63
is
amended
by
adding
subpart
PPPP
to
read
as
follows:

Subpart
PPPP
 
National
Emission
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants:
Surface
Coating
of
Plastic
Parts
and
Products
What
This
Subpart
Covers
Sec.
63.4480
What
is
the
purpose
of
this
subpart?
63.4481
Am
I
subject
to
this
subpart?
63.4482
What
parts
of
my
plant
does
this
subpart
cover?
63.4483
When
do
I
have
to
comply
with
this
subpart?

Emission
Limitations
63.4490
What
emission
limits
must
I
meet?
63.4491
What
are
my
options
for
meeting
the
emission
limits?
63.4492
What
operating
limits
must
I
meet?
63.4493
What
work
practice
standards
must
I
meet?

General
Compliance
Requirements
63.4500
What
are
my
general
requirements
for
complying
with
this
subpart?
63.4501
What
parts
of
the
General
Provisions
apply
to
me?

Notifications,
Reports,
and
Records
63.4510
What
notifications
must
I
submit?
63.4520
What
reports
must
I
submit?
63.4530
What
records
must
I
keep?
63.4531
In
what
form
and
for
how
long
must
I
keep
my
records?

Compliance
Requirements
for
the
Compliant
Material
Option
63.4540
By
what
date
must
I
conduct
the
initial
compliance
demonstration?
63.4541
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?
63.4542
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?

Compliance
Requirements
for
the
Emission
Rate
Without
Add­
On
Controls
Option
63.4550
By
what
date
must
I
conduct
the
initial
compliance
demonstration?
63.4551
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?
63.4552
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?

Compliance
Requirements
for
the
Emission
Rate
With
Add­
On
Controls
Option
63.4560
By
what
date
must
I
conduct
performance
tests
and
other
initial
compliance
demonstrations?
63.4561
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance?
63.4562
[
Reserved]
63.4563
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?
63.4564
What
are
the
general
requirements
for
performance
tests?
63.4565
How
do
I
determine
the
emission
capture
system
efficiency?
63.4566
How
do
I
determine
the
add­
on
control
device
emission
destruction
or
removal
efficiency?
63.4567
How
do
I
establish
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
operating
limits
during
the
performance
test?
63.4568
What
are
the
requirements
for
continuous
parameter
monitoring
system
installation,
operation,
and
maintenance?

Other
Requirements
and
Information
63.4580
Who
implements
and
enforces
this
subpart?
63.4581
What
definitions
apply
to
this
subpart?

Tables
to
Subpart
PPPP
of
Part
63
Table
1
to
Subpart
PPPP
of
Part
63
 
Operating
Limits
if
Using
the
Emission
Rate
with
Add­
On
Controls
Option.
Table
2
to
Subpart
PPPP
of
Part
63
 
Applicability
of
General
Provisions
to
Subpart
PPPP
of
Part
63.
Table
3
to
Subpart
PPPP
of
Part
63
 
Default
Organic
HAP
Mass
Fraction
of
Solvents
and
Solvent
Blends.
Table
4
to
Subpart
PPPP
of
Part
63
 
Default
Organic
HAP
Mass
Fraction
for
Petroleum
Solvent
Groups.

Subpart
PPPP
 
National
Emission
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants:
Surface
Coating
of
Plastic
Parts
and
Products
What
This
Subpart
Covers
§
63.4480
What
is
the
purpose
of
this
subpart?
This
subpart
establishes
national
emission
standards
for
hazardous
air
pollutants
(
NESHAP)
for
plastic
parts
and
products
surface
coating
facilities.
This
subpart
also
establishes
requirements
to
demonstrate
initial
and
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations.

§
63.4481
Am
I
subject
to
this
subpart?
(
a)
Plastic
parts
and
products
include,
but
are
not
limited
to,
plastic
components
of
the
following
types
of
products
as
well
as
the
products
themselves:
motor
vehicle
parts
and
accessories
for
automobiles,
trucks,
recreational
vehicles;
sporting
and
recreational
goods;
toys;
business
machines;
laboratory
and
medical
equipment;
and
household
and
other
consumer
products.
Except
as
provided
in
paragraph
(
c)
of
this
section,
the
source
category
to
which
this
subpart
applies
is
the
surface
coating
of
any
plastic
part
or
product,
as
described
in
paragraph
(
a)(
1)
of
this
section,
and
it
includes
the
subcategories
listed
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
2)
through
(
5)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Surface
coating
is
the
application
of
coating
to
a
substrate
using,
for
example,
spray
guns
or
dip
tanks,
and
associated
activities,
such
as
surface
preparation,
cleaning,
mixing,
and
storage,
etc.
(
2)
The
general
use
coating
subcategory
includes
all
coating
operations
that
are
not
headlamp
coating
operations,
thermoplastic
olefin
(
TPO)
coating
operations,
or
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
operations.
(
3)
The
headlamp
coating
subcategory
includes
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
components
of
the
body
of
an
automotive
headlamp;
typical
coatings
used
are
reflective
argent
coatings
and
clear
topcoats.
(
4)
The
TPO
coating
subcategory
includes
the
surface
coating
of
TPO
substrates;
typical
coatings
used
are
adhesion
promoters,
primers,
color
coatings,
clear
coatings
and
topcoats.
The
coating
of
TPO
substrates
on
fully
assembled
on­
road
vehicles
is
not
included
in
the
TPO
coating
subcategory.
(
5)
The
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
subcategory
includes
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
on
fully
assembled
motor
vehicles
and
trailers
intended
for
on­
road
use,
including,
but
not
limited
to,
plastic
parts
on:
automobiles
and
light
trucks
that
have
been
repaired
after
a
collision
or
otherwise
repainted,
fleet
delivery
trucks,
and
motor
homes
and
other
recreational
vehicles
(
including
camping
trailers
and
fifth
wheels).
The
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
subcategory
does
not
include
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
prior
to
their
attachment
to
an
on­
road
vehicle
on
an
original
equipment
manufacturer's
(
OEM)
assembly
line.
The
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
subcategory
also
does
not
include
the
use
of
adhesives,
sealants,
and
caulks
used
in
assembling
on­
road
vehicles.
(
b)
You
are
subject
to
this
subpart
if
you
own
or
operate
a
new,
reconstructed,
or
existing
affected
source,
as
defined
in
§
63.4482,
that
uses
100
gallons
per
year,
or
more,
of
coatings
in
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products
defined
in
paragraph
(
a)
of
this
section;
and
that
is
a
major
source,
is
located
at
a
major
source,
or
is
part
of
a
major
source
of
emissions
of
hazardous
air
pollutants
(
HAP).
A
major
source
of
HAP
emissions
is
any
stationary
source
or
group
of
stationary
sources
located
within
a
contiguous
area
and
under
common
control
that
emits
or
has
the
potential
to
emit
any
single
HAP
at
a
rate
of
9.07
megagrams
(
Mg)
(
10
tons)
or
more
per
year
or
any
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
21:
41
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00025
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72300
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
1
Proposed
at
67
FR
20206,
April
24,
2002.
2
Proposed
at
67
FR
42400,
June
21,
2002.
3
Proposed
at
66
FR
40323,
August
2,
2001.
4
Proposed
at
67
FR
62780,
August
13,
2002.
5
Proposed
at
67
FR
52780,
August
13,
2002.
6
Proposed
at
67
FR
52780,
August
13,
2002.
combination
of
HAP
at
a
rate
of
22.68
Mg
(
25
tons)
or
more
per
year.
(
c)
This
subpart
does
not
apply
to
surface
coating
that
meets
the
criteria
of
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
through
(
12)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Surface
coating
conducted
at
a
source
that
uses
only
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
that
contain
no
organic
HAP,
as
determined
according
to
§
63.4541(
a).
(
2)
Surface
coating
of
plastic
subject
to
the
NESHAP
for
aerospace
manufacturing
and
rework
facilities
(
subpart
GG
of
this
part).
(
3)
Surface
coating
of
plastic
and
wood
subject
to
the
NESHAP
for
wood
furniture
manufacturing
facilities
(
subpart
JJ
of
this
part).
(
4)
Surface
coating
of
plastic
and
metal
subject
to
the
NESHAP
for
large
appliance
surface
coating
(
subpart
NNNN
of
this
part).
(
5)
Surface
coating
of
plastic
and
metal
subject
to
the
NESHAP
for
metal
furniture
surface
coating.
1
(
6)
Surface
coating
of
plastic
and
wood
subject
to
the
NESHAP
for
wood
building
products
surface
coating.
2
(
7)
In­
mold
coating
operations
or
gel
coating
operations
in
the
manufacture
of
reinforced
plastic
composite
parts
subject
to
the
NESHAP
for
reinforced
plastics
composites
production.
3
(
8)
Surface
coating
of
parts
that
are
pre­
assembled
from
plastic
and
metal
components,
where
greater
than
50
percent
of
the
coatings
(
by
volume,
determined
on
a
rolling
12­
month
basis)
are
applied
to
the
metal
surfaces,
and
where
the
source
is
subject
to
the
NESHAP
for
miscellaneous
metal
parts
surface
coating.
4
If
your
source
is
subject
to
the
NESHAP
for
miscellaneous
metal
parts
surface
coating
5
and
you
can
demonstrate
that
more
than
50
percent
of
coatings
are
applied
to
metal
surfaces,
then
compliance
with
the
NESHAP
for
miscellaneous
metal
parts
surface
coating
6
constitutes
compliance
with
subpart
PPPP.
You
must
maintain
records
(
such
as
coating
usage
or
surface
area)
to
document
that
more
than
50
percent
of
coatings
are
applied
to
metal
surfaces.
(
9)
Surface
coating
that
occurs
at
research
or
laboratory
facilities
or
is
part
of
janitorial,
building,
and
facility
maintenance
operations,
or
hobby
shops
that
are
operated
for
personal
rather
than
commercial
purposes.
(
10)
Surface
coating
of
magnet
wire.
(
11)
Surface
coating
of
fiberglass
boats
or
parts
of
fiberglass
boats
where
the
facility
is
subject
to
the
requirements
for
fiberglass
boat
manufacturing
facilities
in
the
NESHAP
for
boat
manufacturing
(
subpart
VVVV
of
this
part),
except
where
the
surface
coating
of
the
boat
is
a
post­
mold
coating
operation
performed
on
personal
watercraft
or
parts
of
personal
watercraft.
This
subpart
applies
to
post­
mold
coating
operations
performed
on
personal
watercraft
or
parts
of
personal
watercraft.
For
the
purposes
of
this
subpart,
a
personal
watercraft
is
defined
as
a
vessel
(
boat)
which
uses
an
inboard
motor
powering
a
water
jet
pump
as
its
primary
source
of
motive
power
and
which
is
designed
to
be
operated
by
a
person
or
persons
sitting,
standing,
or
kneeling
on
the
vessel,
rather
than
in
the
conventional
manner
of
sitting
or
standing
inside
the
vessel.
(
12)
Operations
where
plastic
is
extruded
onto
the
plastic
part
or
product
to
form
a
coating.
(
d)
If
you
own
or
operate
an
affected
source
that
is
subject
to
this
subpart
and
at
the
same
affected
source
you
also
perform
surface
coating
subject
to
any
other
NESHAP
in
this
part,
you
may
choose
to
be
subject
to
the
requirements
of
the
more
stringent
of
the
subparts
for
the
entire
surface
coating
facility.
If
you
choose
to
be
subject
to
the
requirements
of
another
subpart
and
demonstrate
that,
by
doing
so,
your
facility­
wide
HAP
emissions
in
kilograms
(
kg)
per
year
(
tons
per
year)
from
surface
coating
operations
will
be
less
than
or
equal
to
the
emissions
achieved
by
complying
separately
with
all
applicable
subparts,
compliance
with
the
more
stringent
NESHAP
will
constitute
compliance
with
this
subpart.

§
63.4482
What
parts
of
my
plant
does
this
subpart
cover?
(
a)
This
subpart
applies
to
each
new,
reconstructed,
and
existing
affected
source
within
each
of
the
four
subcategories
listed
in
§
63.4481(
a).
(
b)
The
affected
source
is
the
collection
of
all
of
the
items
listed
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
through
(
4)
of
this
section
that
are
used
for
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products
within
each
subcategory:
(
1)
All
coating
operations
as
defined
in
§
63.4581;
(
2)
All
storage
containers
and
mixing
vessels
in
which
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
are
stored
or
mixed;
(
3)
All
manual
and
automated
equipment
and
containers
used
for
conveying
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials;
and
(
4)
All
storage
containers
and
all
manual
and
automated
equipment
and
containers
used
for
conveying
waste
materials
generated
by
a
coating
operation.
(
c)
An
affected
source
is
a
new
source
if
it
meets
the
criteria
in
paragraph
(
c)(
1)
of
this
section
and
the
criteria
in
either
paragraph
(
c)(
2)
or
(
3)
of
this
section.
(
1)
You
commenced
the
construction
of
the
source
after
December
4,
2002,
by
installing
new
coating
equipment.
(
2)
The
new
coating
equipment
is
used
to
coat
plastic
parts
and
products
at
a
source
where
no
plastic
parts
surface
coating
was
previously
performed.
(
3)
The
new
coating
equipment
is
used
to
perform
plastic
parts
and
products
coating
in
a
subcategory
that
was
not
previously
performed.
(
d)
An
affected
source
is
reconstructed
if
you
meet
the
criteria
as
defined
in
§
63.2.
(
e)
An
affected
source
is
existing
if
it
is
not
new
or
reconstructed.

§
63.4483
When
do
I
have
to
comply
with
this
subpart?

The
date
by
which
you
must
comply
with
this
subpart
is
called
the
compliance
date.
The
compliance
date
for
each
type
of
affected
source
is
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)
through
(
c)
of
this
section.
The
compliance
date
begins
the
initial
compliance
period
during
which
you
conduct
the
initial
compliance
demonstration
described
in
§
§
63.4540,
63.4550,
and
63.4560.
(
a)
For
a
new
or
reconstructed
affected
source,
the
compliance
date
is
the
applicable
date
in
paragraph
(
a)(
1)
or
(
2)
of
this
section:
(
1)
If
the
initial
startup
of
your
new
or
reconstructed
affected
source
is
before
[
DATE
OF
PUBLICATION
OF
FINAL
RULE
IN
THE
Federal
Register],
the
compliance
date
is
[
DATE
OF
PUBLICATION
OF
FINAL
RULE
IN
THE
Federal
Register].
(
2)
If
the
initial
startup
of
your
new
or
reconstructed
affected
source
occurs
after
[
DATE
OF
PUBLICATION
OF
FINAL
RULE
IN
THE
Federal
Register],
the
compliance
date
is
the
date
of
initial
startup
of
your
affected
source.
(
b)
For
an
existing
affected
source,
the
compliance
date
is
the
date
3
years
after
[
DATE
OF
PUBLICATION
OF
FINAL
RULE
IN
THE
Federal
Register].
(
c)
For
an
area
source
that
increases
its
emissions
or
its
potential
to
emit
such
that
it
becomes
a
major
source
of
HAP
emissions,
the
compliance
date
is
specified
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
For
any
portion
of
the
source
that
becomes
a
new
or
reconstructed
affected
source
subject
to
this
subpart,
the
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00026
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72301
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
compliance
date
is
the
date
of
initial
startup
of
the
affected
source
or
[
DATE
OF
PUBLICATION
OF
FINAL
RULE
IN
THE
Federal
Register],
whichever
is
later.
(
2)
For
any
portion
of
the
source
that
becomes
an
existing
affected
source
subject
to
this
subpart,
the
compliance
date
is
the
date
1
year
after
the
area
source
becomes
a
major
source
or
3
years
after
[
DATE
OF
PUBLICATION
OF
FINAL
RULE
IN
THE
Federal
Register],
whichever
is
later.
(
d)
You
must
meet
the
notification
requirements
in
§
63.4510
according
to
the
dates
specified
in
that
section
and
in
subpart
A
of
this
part.
Some
of
the
notifications
must
be
submitted
before
the
compliance
dates
described
in
paragraphs
(
a)
through
(
c)
of
this
section.

Emission
Limitations
§
63.4490
What
emission
limits
must
I
meet?

(
a)
For
a
new
or
reconstructed
affected
source,
you
must
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
the
atmosphere
from
the
affected
source
to
the
applicable
limit
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
through
(
4)
of
this
section,
determined
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4541,
§
63.4551,
or
§
63.4561.
(
1)
For
each
new
general
use
coating
affected
source,
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
no
more
than
0.16
kg
(
0.16
pound
(
lb))
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
during
each
12­
month
compliance
period.
(
2)
For
each
new
headlamp
coating
affected
source,
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
no
more
than
0.26
kg
(
0.26
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
during
each
12­
month
compliance
period.
(
3)
For
each
new
TPO
coating
affected
source,
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
no
more
than
0.17
kg
(
0.17
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
during
each
12­
month
compliance
period.
(
4)
For
each
new
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
affected
source,
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
no
more
than
1.34
kg
(
1.34
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
of
coating
solids
used
during
each
12­
month
compliance
period.
(
b)
For
an
existing
affected
source,
you
must
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
the
atmosphere
from
the
affected
source
to
the
applicable
limit
specified
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
through
(
4)
of
this
section,
determined
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4541,
§
63.4551,
or
§
63.4561.
(
1)
For
each
existing
general
use
coating
affected
source,
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
no
more
than
0.16
kg
(
0.16
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
during
each
12­
month
compliance
period.
(
2)
For
each
existing
headlamp
coating
affected
source,
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
no
more
than
0.45
kg
(
0.45
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
during
each
12­
month
compliance
period.
(
3)
For
each
existing
TPO
coating
affected
source,
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
no
more
than
0.23
kg
(
0.23
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
during
each
12­
month
compliance
period.
(
4)
For
each
existing
assembled
onroad
vehicle
coating
affected
source,
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
no
more
than
1.34
kg
(
1.34
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
of
coating
solids
used
during
each
12­
month
compliance
period.

§
63.4491
What
are
my
options
for
meeting
the
emission
limits?
You
must
include
all
coatings
(
as
defined
in
§
63.4581),
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
affected
source
when
determining
whether
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
is
equal
to
or
less
than
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490.
To
make
this
determination,
you
must
use
at
least
one
of
the
three
compliance
options
listed
in
paragraphs
(
a)
through
(
c)
of
this
section.
You
may
apply
any
of
the
compliance
options
to
an
individual
coating
operation,
or
to
multiple
coating
operations
as
a
group,
or
to
the
entire
affected
source.
You
may
use
different
compliance
options
for
different
coating
operations,
or
at
different
times
on
the
same
coating
operation.
However,
you
may
not
use
different
compliance
options
at
the
same
time
on
the
same
coating
operation.
If
you
switch
between
compliance
options
for
any
coating
operation
or
group
of
coating
operations,
you
must
document
this
switch
as
required
by
§
63.4530(
c),
and
you
must
report
it
in
the
next
semiannual
compliance
report
required
in
§
63.4520.
(
a)
Compliant
material
option.
Demonstrate
that
the
organic
HAP
content
of
each
coating
used
in
the
coating
operation(
s)
is
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
and
that
each
thinner,
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
contains
no
organic
HAP.
You
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
§
§
63.4540,
63.4541,
and
63.4542
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
applicable
emission
limit
using
this
option.
(
b)
Emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option.
Demonstrate
that,
based
on
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation(
s),
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
coating
operation(
s)
is
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
calculated
as
a
rolling
12­
month
emission
rate
and
determined
on
a
monthly
basis.
You
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
§
§
63.4550,
63.4551,
and
63.4552
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
emission
limit
using
this
option.
(
c)
Emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option.
Demonstrate
that,
based
on
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation(
s),
and
the
emissions
reductions
achieved
by
emission
capture
systems
and
add­
on
controls,
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
coating
operation(
s)
is
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
calculated
as
a
rolling
12­
month
emission
rate
and
determined
on
a
monthly
basis.
If
you
use
this
compliance
option,
you
must
also
demonstrate
that
all
emission
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices
for
the
coating
operation(
s)
meet
the
operating
limits
required
in
§
63.4492,
except
for
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4561(
j),
and
that
you
meet
the
work
practice
standards
required
in
§
63.4493.
You
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
§
§
63.4560
through
63.4568
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
and
work
practice
standards
using
this
option.

§
63.4492
What
operating
limits
must
I
meet?
(
a)
For
any
coating
operation(
s)
on
which
you
use
the
compliant
material
option
or
the
emission
rate
without
addon
controls
option,
you
are
not
required
to
meet
any
operating
limits.
(
b)
For
any
controlled
coating
operation(
s)
on
which
you
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option,
except
those
for
which
you
use
a
solvent
recovery
system
and
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance
according
to
§
63.4561(
j),
you
must
meet
the
operating
limits
specified
in
table
1
of
this
subpart.
These
operating
limits
apply
to
the
emission
capture
and
control
systems
on
the
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
use
this
option,
and
you
must
establish
the
operating
limits
during
the
performance
test
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4567.
You
must
meet
the
operating
limits
at
all
times
after
you
establish
them.
(
c)
If
you
use
an
add­
on
control
device
other
than
those
listed
in
table
1
of
this
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00027
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72302
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
subpart,
or
wish
to
monitor
an
alternative
parameter
and
comply
with
a
different
operating
limit,
you
must
apply
to
the
Administrator
for
approval
of
alternative
monitoring
under
§
63.8(
f).

§
63.4493
What
work
practice
standards
must
I
meet?
(
a)
For
any
coating
operation(
s)
on
which
you
use
the
compliant
material
option
or
the
emission
rate
without
addon
controls
option,
you
are
not
required
to
meet
any
work
practice
standards.
(
b)
If
you
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option,
you
must
develop
and
implement
a
work
practice
plan
to
minimize
organic
HAP
emissions
from
the
storage,
mixing,
and
conveying
of
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
in,
and
waste
materials
generated
by,
the
controlled
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
use
this
option;
or
you
must
meet
an
alternative
standard
as
provided
in
paragraph
(
c)
of
this
section.
The
plan
must
specify
practices
and
procedures
to
ensure
that,
at
a
minimum,
the
elements
specified
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
through
(
5)
of
this
section
are
implemented.
(
1)
All
organic­
HAP­
containing
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
cleaning
materials,
and
waste
materials
must
be
stored
in
closed
containers.
(
2)
Spills
of
organic­
HAP­
containing
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
cleaning
materials,
and
waste
materials
must
be
minimized.
(
3)
Organic­
HAP­
containing
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
cleaning
materials,
and
waste
materials
must
be
conveyed
from
one
location
to
another
in
closed
containers
or
pipes.
(
4)
Mixing
vessels
which
contain
organic­
HAP­
containing
coatings
and
other
materials
must
be
closed
except
when
adding
to,
removing,
or
mixing
the
contents.
(
5)
Emissions
of
organic
HAP
must
be
minimized
during
cleaning
of
storage,
mixing,
and
conveying
equipment.
(
c)
As
provided
in
§
63.6(
g),
we,
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA),
may
choose
to
grant
you
permission
to
use
an
alternative
to
the
work
practice
standards
in
this
section.

General
Compliance
Requirements
§
63.4500
What
are
my
general
requirements
for
complying
with
this
subpart?
(
a)
You
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
in
this
subpart
as
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Any
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
use
the
compliant
material
option
or
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option,
as
specified
in
§
63.4491(
a)
and
(
b),
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490
at
all
times.
(
2)
Any
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option,
as
specified
in
§
63.4491(
c),
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
as
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
2)(
i)
through
(
iii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
The
coating
operation(
s)
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490
at
all
times
except
during
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction.
(
ii)
The
coating
operation(
s)
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
operating
limits
for
emission
capture
systems
and
addon
control
devices
required
by
§
63.4492
at
all
times
except
during
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction,
and
except
for
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4561(
j).
(
iii)
The
coating
operation(
s)
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
work
practice
standards
in
§
63.4493
at
all
times.
(
b)
You
must
always
operate
and
maintain
your
affected
source,
including
all
air
pollution
control
and
monitoring
equipment
you
use
for
purposes
of
complying
with
this
subpart,
according
to
the
provisions
in
§
63.6(
e)(
1)(
i).
(
c)
If
your
affected
source
uses
an
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device,
you
must
develop
and
implement
a
written
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plan
according
to
the
provisions
in
§
63.6(
e)(
3).
The
plan
must
address
the
startup,
shutdown,
and
corrective
actions
in
the
event
of
a
malfunction
of
the
emission
capture
system
or
the
add­
on
control
device.
The
plan
must
also
address
any
coating
operation
equipment
that
may
cause
increased
emissions
or
that
would
affect
capture
efficiency
if
the
process
equipment
malfunctions,
such
as
conveyors
that
move
parts
among
enclosures.

§
63.4501
What
parts
of
the
General
Provisions
apply
to
me?

Table
2
of
this
subpart
shows
which
parts
of
the
General
Provisions
in
§
§
63.1
through
63.15
apply
to
you.

Notifications,
Reports,
and
Records
§
63.4510
What
notifications
must
I
submit?

(
a)
General.
You
must
submit
the
notifications
in
§
§
63.7(
b)
and
(
c),
63.8(
f)(
4),
and
63.9(
b)
through
(
e)
and
(
h)
that
apply
to
you
by
the
dates
specified
in
those
sections,
except
as
provided
in
paragraphs
(
b)
and
(
c)
of
this
section.
(
b)
Initial
notification.
You
must
submit
the
Initial
Notification
required
by
§
63.9(
b)
for
a
new
or
reconstructed
affected
source
no
later
than
120
days
after
initial
startup
or
120
days
after
[
DATE
OF
PUBLICATION
OF
FINAL
RULE
IN
THE
Federal
Register],
whichever
is
later.
For
an
existing
affected
source,
you
must
submit
the
Initial
Notification
no
later
than
1
year
after
[
DATE
OF
PUBLICATION
OF
FINAL
RULE
IN
THE
Federal
Register].
(
c)
Notification
of
compliance
status.
You
must
submit
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
required
by
§
63.9(
h)
no
later
than
30
calendar
days
following
the
end
of
the
initial
compliance
period
described
in
§
63.4540,
§
63.4550,
or
§
63.4560
that
applies
to
your
affected
source.
The
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
must
contain
the
information
specified
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
through
(
9)
of
this
section
and
in
§
63.9(
h).
(
1)
Company
name
and
address.
(
2)
Statement
by
a
responsible
official
with
that
official's
name,
title,
and
signature,
certifying
the
truth,
accuracy,
and
completeness
of
the
content
of
the
report.
(
3)
Date
of
the
report
and
beginning
and
ending
dates
of
the
reporting
period.
The
reporting
period
is
the
initial
compliance
period
described
in
§
63.4540,
§
63.4550,
or
§
63.4560
that
applies
to
your
affected
source.
(
4)
Identification
of
the
compliance
option
or
options
specified
in
§
63.4491
that
you
used
on
each
coating
operation
in
the
affected
source
during
the
initial
compliance
period.
(
5)
Statement
of
whether
or
not
the
affected
source
achieved
the
emission
limitations
for
the
initial
compliance
period.
(
6)
If
you
had
a
deviation,
include
the
information
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
6)(
i)
and
(
ii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
A
description
and
statement
of
the
cause
of
the
deviation.
(
ii)
If
you
failed
to
meet
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
include
all
the
calculations
you
used
to
determine
the
kg
(
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
You
do
not
need
to
submit
information
provided
by
the
materials
suppliers
or
manufacturers,
or
test
reports.
(
7)
For
each
of
the
data
items
listed
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
7)(
i)
through
(
iv)
of
this
section
that
is
required
by
the
compliance
option(
s)
you
used
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
emission
limit,
include
an
example
of
how
you
determined
the
value,
including
calculations
and
supporting
data.
Supporting
data
can
include
a
copy
of
the
information
provided
by
the
supplier
or
manufacturer
of
the
example
coating
or
material,
or
a
summary
of
the
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00028
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72303
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
results
of
testing
conducted
according
to
§
63.4541(
a),
(
b),
or
(
c).
You
do
not
need
to
submit
copies
of
any
test
reports.
(
i)
Mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
for
one
coating,
for
one
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
for
one
cleaning
material.
(
ii)
Mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
one
coating.
(
iii)
Density
for
one
coating,
one
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
one
cleaning
material,
except
that
if
you
use
the
compliant
material
option,
only
the
example
coating
density
is
required.
(
iv)
The
amount
of
waste
materials
and
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
the
waste
materials
for
which
you
are
claiming
an
allowance
in
Equation
1
of
§
63.4551.
(
8)
The
calculation
of
kg
(
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used
for
the
compliance
option(
s)
you
used,
as
specified
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
8)(
i)
through
(
iii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
For
the
compliant
material
option,
provide
an
example
calculation
of
the
organic
HAP
content
for
one
coating,
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4541.
(
ii)
For
the
emission
rate
without
addon
controls
option,
provide
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
for
each
month;
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
each
month;
and
the
calculation
of
the
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate,
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1C,
2,
and
3,
respectively,
of
§
63.4551.
(
iii)
For
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option,
provide
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
for
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
each
month,
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1C
of
§
63.4551;
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
each
month
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.4551;
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
each
month
by
emission
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices,
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1D
of
§
63.4561
and
Equations
2,
3,
and
3A
through
3C
of
§
63.4561,
as
applicable;
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
each
month,
using
Equation
4
of
§
63.4561;
and
the
calculation
of
the
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate,
using
Equation
5
of
§
63.4561.
(
9)
For
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option,
you
must
include
the
information
specified
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
9)(
i)
through
(
iv)
of
this
section,
except
that
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
9)(
i)
through
(
iii)
of
this
section
do
not
apply
to
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
conduct
liquidliquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4561(
j).
(
i)
For
each
emission
capture
system,
a
summary
of
the
data
and
copies
of
the
calculations
supporting
the
determination
that
the
emission
capture
system
is
a
permanent
total
enclosure
(
PTE)
or
a
measurement
of
the
emission
capture
system
efficiency.
Include
a
description
of
the
protocol
followed
for
measuring
capture
efficiency,
summaries
of
any
capture
efficiency
tests
conducted,
and
any
calculations
supporting
the
capture
efficiency
determination.
If
you
use
the
data
quality
objective
(
DQO)
or
lower
confidence
limit
(
LCL)
approach,
you
must
also
include
the
statistical
calculations
to
show
you
meet
the
DQO
or
LCL
criteria
in
appendix
A
to
subpart
KK
of
this
part.
You
do
not
need
to
submit
complete
test
reports.
(
ii)
A
summary
of
the
results
of
each
add­
on
control
device
performance
test.
You
do
not
need
to
submit
complete
test
reports.
(
iii)
A
list
of
each
emission
capture
system's
and
add­
on
control
device's
operating
limits
and
a
summary
of
the
data
used
to
calculate
those
limits.
(
iv)
A
statement
of
whether
or
not
you
developed
and
implemented
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4493.

§
63.4520
What
reports
must
I
submit?
(
a)
Semiannual
compliance
reports.
You
must
submit
semiannual
compliance
reports
for
each
affected
source
according
to
the
requirements
of
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
through
(
7)
of
this
section.
The
semiannual
compliance
reporting
requirements
may
be
satisfied
by
reports
required
under
other
parts
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA),
as
specified
in
paragraph
(
a)(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Dates.
Unless
the
Administrator
has
approved
a
different
schedule
for
submission
of
reports
under
§
63.10(
a),
you
must
prepare
and
submit
each
semiannual
compliance
report
according
to
the
dates
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)(
i)
through
(
iv)
of
this
section.
Note
that
the
information
reported
for
each
of
the
months
in
the
reporting
period
will
be
based
on
the
last
12
months
of
data
prior
to
the
date
of
each
monthly
calculation.
(
i)
The
first
semiannual
compliance
report
must
cover
the
first
semiannual
reporting
period
which
begins
the
day
after
the
end
of
the
initial
compliance
period
described
in
§
63.4540,
§
63.4550,
or
§
63.4560
that
applies
to
your
affected
source
and
ends
on
June
30
or
December
31,
whichever
occurs
first
following
the
end
of
the
initial
compliance
period.
(
ii)
Each
subsequent
semiannual
compliance
report
must
cover
the
subsequent
semiannual
reporting
period
from
January
1
through
June
30
or
the
semiannual
reporting
period
from
July
1
through
December
31.
(
iii)
Each
semiannual
compliance
report
must
be
postmarked
or
delivered
no
later
than
July
31
or
January
31,
whichever
date
is
the
first
date
following
the
end
of
the
semiannual
reporting
period.
(
iv)
For
each
affected
source
that
is
subject
to
permitting
regulations
pursuant
to
40
CFR
part
70
or
40
CFR
part
71,
and
if
the
permitting
authority
has
established
dates
for
submitting
semiannual
reports
pursuant
to
40
CFR
70.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A)
or
40
CFR
71.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A),
you
may
submit
the
first
and
subsequent
compliance
reports
according
to
the
dates
the
permitting
authority
has
established
instead
of
according
to
the
date
specified
in
paragraph
(
a)(
1)(
iii)
of
this
section.
(
2)
Inclusion
with
title
V
report.
Each
affected
source
that
has
obtained
a
title
V
operating
permit
pursuant
to
40
CFR
part
70
or
40
CFR
part
71
must
report
all
deviations
as
defined
in
this
subpart
in
the
semiannual
monitoring
report
required
by
40
CFR
70.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A)
or
40
CFR
71.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A).
If
an
affected
source
submits
a
semiannual
compliance
report
pursuant
to
this
section
along
with,
or
as
part
of,
the
semiannual
monitoring
report
required
by
40
CFR
70.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A)
or
40
CFR
71.6(
a)(
3)(
iii)(
A),
and
the
semiannual
compliance
report
includes
all
required
information
concerning
deviations
from
any
emission
limitation
in
this
subpart,
its
submission
will
be
deemed
to
satisfy
any
obligation
to
report
the
same
deviations
in
the
semiannual
monitoring
report.
However,
submission
of
a
semiannual
compliance
report
shall
not
otherwise
affect
any
obligation
the
affected
source
may
have
to
report
deviations
from
permit
requirements
to
the
permitting
authority.
(
3)
General
requirements.
The
semiannual
compliance
report
must
contain
the
information
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
3)(
i)
through
(
v)
of
this
section,
and
the
information
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
4)
through
(
7)
and
(
c)(
1)
of
this
section
that
is
applicable
to
your
affected
source.
(
i)
Company
name
and
address.
(
ii)
Statement
by
a
responsible
official
with
that
official's
name,
title,
and
signature,
certifying
the
truth,
accuracy,
and
completeness
of
the
content
of
the
report.
(
iii)
Date
of
report
and
beginning
and
ending
dates
of
the
reporting
period.
The
reporting
period
is
the
6­
month
period
ending
on
June
30
or
December
31.
Note
that
the
information
reported
for
each
of
the
6
months
in
the
reporting
period
will
be
based
on
the
last
12
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00029
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72304
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
months
of
data
prior
to
the
date
of
each
monthly
calculation.
(
iv)
Identification
of
the
compliance
option
or
options
specified
in
§
63.4491
that
you
used
on
each
coating
operation
during
the
reporting
period.
If
you
switched
between
compliance
options
during
the
reporting
period,
you
must
report
the
beginning
and
ending
dates
you
used
each
option.
(
v)
If
you
used
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
or
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
compliance
option
(
§
63.4491(
b)
or
(
c)),
the
calculation
results
for
each
rolling
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate
during
the
6­
month
reporting
period.
(
4)
No
deviations.
If
there
were
no
deviations
from
the
emission
limitations
in
§
§
63.4490,
63.4492,
and
63.4493
that
apply
to
you,
the
semiannual
compliance
report
must
include
a
statement
that
there
were
no
deviations
from
the
emission
limitations
during
the
reporting
period.
If
you
used
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option
and
there
were
no
periods
during
which
the
continuous
parameter
monitoring
systems
(
CPMS)
were
out­
ofcontrol
as
specified
in
§
63.8(
c)(
7),
the
semiannual
compliance
report
must
include
a
statement
that
there
were
no
periods
during
which
the
CPMS
were
out­
of­
control
during
the
reporting
period.
(
5)
Deviations:
Compliant
material
option.
If
you
used
the
compliant
material
option
and
there
was
a
deviation
from
the
applicable
HAP
content
requirements
in
§
63.4490,
the
semiannual
compliance
report
must
contain
the
information
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
5)(
i)
through
(
iv)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Identification
of
each
coating
used
that
deviated
from
the
applicable
emission
limit,
and
each
thinner,
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
that
contained
organic
HAP,
and
the
dates
and
time
periods
each
was
used.
(
ii)
The
calculation
of
the
organic
HAP
content
(
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4541)
for
each
coating
identified
in
paragraph
(
a)(
5)(
i)
of
this
section.
You
do
not
need
to
submit
background
data
supporting
this
calculation
(
e.
g.,
information
provided
by
coating
suppliers
or
manufacturers,
or
test
reports).
(
iii)
The
determination
of
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
for
each
thinner,
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
identified
in
paragraph
(
a)(
5)(
i)
of
this
section.
You
do
not
need
to
submit
background
data
supporting
this
calculation
(
e.
g.,
information
provided
by
material
suppliers
or
manufacturers,
or
test
reports).
(
iv)
A
statement
of
the
cause
of
each
deviation.
(
6)
Deviations:
Emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option.
If
you
used
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option
and
there
was
a
deviation
from
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
the
semiannual
compliance
report
must
contain
the
information
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
6)(
i)
through
(
iii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
The
beginning
and
ending
dates
of
each
compliance
period
during
which
the
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490.
(
ii)
The
calculations
used
to
determine
the
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
compliance
period
in
which
the
deviation
occurred.
You
must
submit
the
calculations
for
Equations
1,
1A
through
1C,
2,
and
3
of
§
63.4551;
and
if
applicable,
the
calculation
used
to
determine
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
waste
materials
according
to
§
63.4551(
e)(
4).
You
do
not
need
to
submit
background
data
supporting
these
calculations
(
e.
g.,
information
provided
by
materials
suppliers
or
manufacturers,
or
test
reports).
(
iii)
A
statement
of
the
cause
of
each
deviation.
(
7)
Deviations:
Emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option.
If
you
used
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option
and
there
was
a
deviation
from
an
emission
limitation
(
including
any
periods
when
emissions
bypassed
the
add­
on
control
device
and
were
diverted
to
the
atmosphere),
the
semiannual
compliance
report
must
contain
the
information
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
7)(
i)
through
(
xiv)
of
this
section.
This
includes
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
during
which
deviations
occurred.
(
i)
The
beginning
and
ending
dates
of
each
compliance
period
during
which
the
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490.
(
ii)
The
calculations
used
to
determine
the
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
compliance
period
in
which
a
deviation
occurred.
You
must
provide
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
for
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
each
month,
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1C
of
§
63.4551;
and,
if
applicable,
the
calculation
used
to
determine
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
waste
materials
according
to
§
63.4551(
e)(
4);
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
each
month,
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.4551;
the
calculation
of
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
each
month
by
emission
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices,
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1D
of
§
63.4561,
and
Equations
2,
3,
and
3A
through
3C
of
§
63.4561,
as
applicable;
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
each
month,
using
Equation
4
of
§
63.4561;
and
the
calculation
of
the
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate,
using
Equation
5
of
§
63.4561.
You
do
not
need
to
submit
the
background
data
supporting
these
calculations
(
e.
g.,
information
provided
by
materials
suppliers
or
manufacturers,
or
test
reports).
(
iii)
The
date
and
time
that
each
malfunction
started
and
stopped.
(
iv)
A
brief
description
of
the
CPMS.
(
v)
The
date
of
the
latest
CPMS
certification
or
audit.
(
vi)
The
date
and
time
that
each
CPMS
was
inoperative,
except
for
zero
(
low­
level)
and
high­
level
checks.
(
vii)
The
date,
time,
and
duration
that
each
CPMS
was
out­
of­
control,
including
the
information
in
§
63.8(
c)(
8).
(
viii)
The
date
and
time
period
of
each
deviation
from
an
operating
limit
in
Table
1
of
this
subpart;
date
and
time
period
of
any
bypass
of
the
add­
on
control
device;
and
whether
each
deviation
occurred
during
a
period
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
or
during
another
period.
(
ix)
A
summary
of
the
total
duration
of
each
deviation
from
an
operating
limit
in
Table
1
of
this
subpart
and
each
bypass
of
the
add­
on
control
device
during
the
semiannual
reporting
period,
and
the
total
duration
as
a
percent
of
the
total
source
operating
time
during
that
semiannual
reporting
period.
(
x)
A
breakdown
of
the
total
duration
of
the
deviations
from
the
operating
limits
in
Table
1
of
this
subpart
and
bypasses
of
the
add­
on
control
device
during
the
semiannual
reporting
period
into
those
that
were
due
to
startup,
shutdown,
control
equipment
problems,
process
problems,
other
known
causes,
and
other
unknown
causes.
(
xi)
A
summary
of
the
total
duration
of
CPMS
downtime
during
the
semiannual
reporting
period
and
the
total
duration
of
CPMS
downtime
as
a
percent
of
the
total
source
operating
time
during
that
semiannual
reporting
period.
(
xii)
A
description
of
any
changes
in
the
CPMS,
coating
operation,
emission
capture
system,
or
add­
on
control
device
since
the
last
semiannual
reporting
period.
(
xiii)
For
each
deviation
from
the
work
practice
standards,
a
description
of
the
deviation,
the
date
and
time
period
of
the
deviation,
and
the
actions
you
took
to
correct
the
deviation.

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00030
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72305
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
(
xiv)
A
statement
of
the
cause
of
each
deviation.
(
b)
Performance
test
reports.
If
you
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option,
you
must
submit
reports
of
performance
test
results
for
emission
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices
no
later
than
60
days
after
completing
the
tests
as
specified
in
§
63.10(
d)(
2).
(
c)
Startup,
shutdown,
malfunction
reports.
If
you
used
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option
and
you
had
a
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
during
the
semiannual
reporting
period,
you
must
submit
the
reports
specified
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
If
your
actions
were
consistent
with
your
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plan,
you
must
include
the
information
specified
in
§
63.10(
d)
in
the
semiannual
compliance
report
required
by
paragraph
(
a)
of
this
section.
(
2)
If
your
actions
were
not
consistent
with
your
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plan,
you
must
submit
an
immediate
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
report
as
described
in
paragraph
(
c)(
2)(
i)
and
(
ii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
You
must
describe
the
actions
taken
during
the
event
in
a
report
delivered
by
facsimile,
telephone,
or
other
means
to
the
Administrator
within
2
working
days
after
starting
actions
that
are
inconsistent
with
the
plan.
(
ii)
You
must
submit
a
letter
to
the
Administrator
within
7
working
days
after
the
end
of
the
event,
unless
you
have
made
alternative
arrangements
with
the
Administrator
as
specified
in
§
63.10(
d)(
5)(
ii).
The
letter
must
contain
the
information
specified
in
§
63.10(
d)(
5)(
ii).

§
63.4530
What
records
must
I
keep?
You
must
collect
and
keep
records
of
the
data
and
information
specified
in
this
section.
Failure
to
collect
and
keep
these
records
is
a
deviation
from
the
applicable
standard.
(
a)
A
copy
of
each
notification
and
report
that
you
submitted
to
comply
with
this
subpart,
and
the
documentation
supporting
each
notification
and
report.
(
b)
A
current
copy
of
information
provided
by
materials
suppliers
or
manufacturers,
such
as
manufacturer's
formulation
data,
or
test
data
used
to
determine
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
and
density
for
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive
and
cleaning
material,
and
the
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating.
If
you
conducted
testing
to
determine
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP,
density,
or
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids,
you
must
keep
a
copy
of
the
complete
test
report.
If
you
use
information
provided
to
you
by
the
manufacturer
or
supplier
of
the
material
that
was
based
on
testing,
you
must
keep
the
summary
sheet
of
results
provided
to
you
by
the
manufacturer
or
supplier.
You
are
not
required
to
obtain
the
test
report
or
other
supporting
documentation
from
the
manufacturer
or
supplier.
(
c)
For
each
compliance
period,
the
records
specified
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
through
(
4)
of
this
section.
(
1)
A
record
of
the
coating
operations
on
which
you
used
each
compliance
option
and
the
time
periods
(
beginning
and
ending
dates
and
times)
you
used
each
option.
(
2)
For
the
compliant
material
option,
a
record
of
the
calculation
of
the
organic
HAP
content
for
each
coating,
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4541.
(
3)
For
the
emission
rate
without
addon
controls
option,
a
record
of
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
for
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
each
month,
using
Equations
1,
1A
through
1C,
and
2
of
§
63.4551
and,
if
applicable,
the
calculation
used
to
determine
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
waste
materials
according
to
§
63.4551(
e)(
4);
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
each
month
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.4551;
and
the
calculation
of
each
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate,
using
Equation
3
of
§
63.4551.
(
4)
For
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option,
records
of
the
calculations
specified
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
4)(
i)
through
(
v)
of
this
section.
(
i)
The
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
for
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
each
month,
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1C
of
§
63.4551;
and
if
applicable,
the
calculation
used
to
determine
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
waste
materials
according
to
§
63.4551(
e)(
4);
(
ii)
The
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
each
month,
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.4551;
(
iii)
The
calculation
of
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
by
emission
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices,
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1D
of
§
63.4561
and
Equations
2,
3,
and
3A
through
3C
of
§
63.4561,
as
applicable;
(
iv)
The
calculation
of
each
month's
organic
HAP
emission
rate,
using
Equation
4
of
§
63.4561;
and
(
v)
The
calculation
of
each
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate,
using
Equation
5
of
§
63.4561.
(
d)
A
record
of
the
name
and
volume
of
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
each
compliance
period.
If
you
are
using
the
compliant
material
option
for
all
coatings
at
the
source,
you
may
maintain
purchase
records
for
each
material
used
rather
than
a
record
of
the
volume
used.
(
e)
A
record
of
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
for
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
each
compliance
period.
(
f)
A
record
of
the
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating
used
during
each
compliance
period.
(
g)
If
you
use
either
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
or
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
compliance
option,
the
density
for
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
each
compliance
period.
(
h)
If
you
use
an
allowance
in
Equation
1
of
§
63.4551
for
organic
HAP
contained
in
waste
materials
sent
to
or
designated
for
shipment
to
a
treatment,
storage,
and
disposal
facility
(
TSDF)
according
to
§
63.4551(
e)(
4),
you
must
keep
records
of
the
information
specified
in
paragraphs
(
h)(
1)
through
(
3)
of
this
section.
(
1)
The
name
and
address
of
each
TSDF
to
which
you
sent
waste
materials
for
which
you
use
an
allowance
in
Equation
1
of
§
63.4551,
a
statement
of
which
subparts
under
40
CFR
parts
262,
264,
265,
and
266
apply
to
the
facility,
and
the
date
of
each
shipment.
(
2)
Identification
of
the
coating
operations
producing
waste
materials
included
in
each
shipment
and
the
month
or
months
in
which
you
used
the
allowance
for
these
materials
in
Equation
1
of
§
63.4551.
(
3)
The
methodology
used
in
accordance
with
§
63.4551(
e)(
4)
to
determine
the
total
amount
of
waste
materials
sent
to
or
the
amount
collected,
stored,
and
designated
for
transport
to
a
TSDF
each
month;
and
the
methodology
to
determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
these
waste
materials.
This
must
include
the
sources
for
all
data
used
in
the
determination,
methods
used
to
generate
the
data,
frequency
of
testing
or
monitoring,
and
supporting
calculations
and
documentation,
including
the
waste
manifest
for
each
shipment.
(
i)
[
Reserved]
(
j)
You
must
keep
records
of
the
date,
time,
and
duration
of
each
deviation.
(
k)
If
you
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option,
you
must
keep
the
records
specified
in
paragraphs
(
k)(
1)
through
(
8)
of
this
section.
(
1)
For
each
deviation,
a
record
of
whether
the
deviation
occurred
during
a
period
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction.

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00031
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72306
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
(
2)
The
records
in
§
63.6(
e)(
3)(
iii)
through
(
v)
related
to
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction.
(
3)
The
records
required
to
show
continuous
compliance
with
each
operating
limit
specified
in
Table
1
of
this
subpart
that
applies
to
you.
(
4)
For
each
capture
system
that
is
a
PTE,
the
data
and
documentation
you
used
to
support
a
determination
that
the
capture
system
meets
the
criteria
in
Method
204
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51
for
a
PTE
and
has
a
capture
efficiency
of
100
percent,
as
specified
in
§
63.4565(
a).
(
5)
For
each
capture
system
that
is
not
a
PTE,
the
data
and
documentation
you
used
to
determine
capture
efficiency
according
to
the
requirements
specified
in
§
§
63.4564
and
63.4565(
b)
through
(
e),
including
the
records
specified
in
paragraphs
(
k)(
5)(
i)
through
(
iii)
of
this
section
that
apply
to
you.
(
i)
Records
for
a
liquid­
to­
uncaptured
gas
protocol
using
a
temporary
total
enclosure
or
building
enclosure.
Records
of
the
mass
of
total
volatile
hydrocarbon
(
TVH)
as
measured
by
Method
204A
or
F
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51
for
each
material
used
in
the
coating
operation,
and
the
total
TVH
for
all
materials
used
during
each
capture
efficiency
test
run,
including
a
copy
of
the
test
report.
Records
of
the
mass
of
TVH
emissions
not
captured
by
the
capture
system
that
exited
the
temporary
total
enclosure
or
building
enclosure
during
each
capture
efficiency
test
run,
as
measured
by
Method
204D
or
E
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51,
including
a
copy
of
the
test
report.
Records
documenting
that
the
enclosure
used
for
the
capture
efficiency
test
met
the
criteria
in
Method
204
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51
for
either
a
temporary
total
enclosure
or
a
building
enclosure.
(
ii)
Records
for
a
gas­
to­
gas
protocol
using
a
temporary
total
enclosure
or
a
building
enclosure.
Records
of
the
mass
of
TVH
emissions
captured
by
the
emission
capture
system
as
measured
by
Method
204B
or
C
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51
at
the
inlet
to
the
add­
on
control
device,
including
a
copy
of
the
test
report.
Records
of
the
mass
of
TVH
emissions
not
captured
by
the
capture
system
that
exited
the
temporary
total
enclosure
or
building
enclosure
during
each
capture
efficiency
test
run
as
measured
by
Method
204D
or
E
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51,
including
a
copy
of
the
test
report.
Records
documenting
that
the
enclosure
used
for
the
capture
efficiency
test
met
the
criteria
in
Method
204
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51
for
either
a
temporary
total
enclosure
or
a
building
enclosure.
(
iii)
Records
for
an
alternative
protocol.
Records
needed
to
document
a
capture
efficiency
determination
using
an
alternative
method
or
protocol
as
specified
in
§
63.4565(
e),
if
applicable.
(
6)
The
records
specified
in
paragraphs
(
k)(
6)(
i)
and
(
ii)
of
this
section
for
each
add­
on
control
device
organic
HAP
destruction
or
removal
efficiency
determination
as
specified
in
§
63.4566.
(
i)
Records
of
each
add­
on
control
device
performance
test
conducted
according
to
§
§
63.4564
and
63.4566.
(
ii)
Records
of
the
coating
operation
conditions
during
the
add­
on
control
device
performance
test
showing
that
the
performance
test
was
conducted
under
representative
operating
conditions.
(
7)
Records
of
the
data
and
calculations
you
used
to
establish
the
emission
capture
and
add­
on
control
device
operating
limits
as
specified
in
§
63.4567
and
to
document
compliance
with
the
operating
limits
as
specified
in
Table
1
of
this
subpart.
(
8)
A
record
of
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4493
and
documentation
that
you
are
implementing
the
plan
on
a
continuous
basis.

§
63.4531
In
what
form
and
for
how
long
must
I
keep
my
records?
(
a)
Your
records
must
be
in
a
form
suitable
and
readily
available
for
expeditious
review,
according
to
§
63.10(
b)(
1).
Where
appropriate,
the
records
may
be
maintained
as
electronic
spreadsheets
or
as
a
database.
(
b)
As
specified
in
§
63.10(
b)(
1),
you
must
keep
each
record
for
5
years
following
the
date
of
each
occurrence,
measurement,
maintenance,
corrective
action,
report,
or
record.
(
c)
You
must
keep
each
record
on
site
for
at
least
2
years
after
the
date
of
each
occurrence,
measurement,
maintenance,
corrective
action,
report,
or
record,
according
to
§
63.10(
b)(
1).
You
may
keep
the
records
off
site
for
the
remaining
3
years.

Compliance
Requirements
for
the
Compliant
Material
Option
§
63.4540
By
what
date
must
I
conduct
the
initial
compliance
demonstration?
You
must
complete
the
initial
compliance
demonstration
for
the
initial
compliance
period
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4541.
The
initial
compliance
period
begins
on
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483
and
ends
on
the
last
day
of
the
12th
month
following
the
compliance
date.
If
the
compliance
date
occurs
on
any
day
other
than
the
first
day
of
a
month,
then
the
initial
compliance
period
extends
through
that
month
plus
the
next
12
months.
The
initial
compliance
demonstration
includes
the
calculations
according
to
§
63.4541
and
supporting
documentation
showing
that
during
the
initial
compliance
period,
you
used
no
coating
with
an
organic
HAP
content
that
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
and
that
you
used
no
thinners,
other
additives,
or
cleaning
materials
that
contained
organic
HAP
as
determined
according
to
§
63.4541(
a).

§
63.4541
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?
You
may
use
the
compliant
material
option
for
any
individual
coating
operation,
for
any
group
of
coating
operations
in
the
affected
source,
or
for
all
the
coating
operations
in
the
affected
source.
You
must
use
either
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option
or
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option
for
any
coating
operation
in
the
affected
source
for
which
you
do
not
use
this
option.
To
demonstrate
initial
compliance
using
the
compliant
material
option,
the
coating
operation
or
group
of
coating
operations
must
use
no
coating
with
an
organic
HAP
content
that
exceeds
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490
and
must
use
no
thinner
or
other
additive,
or
cleaning
material
that
contains
organic
HAP
as
determined
according
to
this
section.
Any
coating
operation
for
which
you
use
the
compliant
material
option
is
not
required
to
meet
the
operating
limits
or
work
practice
standards
required
in
§
§
63.4492
and
63.4493,
respectively.
You
must
conduct
a
separate
initial
compliance
demonstration
for
each
general
use
coating,
TPO
coating,
headlamp
coating,
and
assembled
onroad
vehicle
coating
affected
source.
You
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
this
section.
Use
the
procedures
in
this
section
on
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
in
the
condition
it
is
in
when
it
is
received
from
its
manufacturer
or
supplier
and
prior
to
any
alteration.
You
do
not
need
to
redetermine
the
HAP
content
of
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
that
are
reclaimed
onsite
and
reused
in
the
coating
operation
for
which
you
use
the
compliant
material
option,
provided
these
materials
in
their
condition
as
received
were
demonstrated
to
comply
with
the
compliant
material
option.
(
a)
Determine
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
for
each
material
used.
You
must
determine
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
for
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
the
compliance
period
by
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00032
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72307
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
using
one
of
the
options
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
through
(
5)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Method
311
(
appendix
A
to
40
CFR
part
63).
You
may
use
Method
311
for
determining
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP.
Use
the
procedures
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)(
i)
and
(
ii)
of
this
section
when
performing
a
Method
311
test.
(
i)
Count
each
organic
HAP
that
is
measured
to
be
present
at
0.1
percent
by
mass
or
more
for
Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration
(
OSHA)­
defined
carcinogens
as
specified
in
29
CFR
1910.1200(
d)(
4)
and
at
1.0
percent
by
mass
or
more
for
other
compounds.
For
example,
if
toluene
(
not
an
OSHA
carcinogen)
is
measured
to
be
0.5
percent
of
the
material
by
mass,
you
do
not
have
to
count
it.
Express
the
mass
fraction
of
each
organic
HAP
you
count
as
a
value
truncated
to
four
places
after
the
decimal
point
(
e.
g.,
0.3791).
(
ii)
Calculate
the
total
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
the
test
material
by
adding
up
the
individual
organic
HAP
mass
fractions
and
truncating
the
result
to
three
places
after
the
decimal
point
(
e.
g.,
0.763).
(
2)
Method
24
(
appendix
A
to
40
CFR
part
60).
For
coatings,
you
may
use
Method
24
to
determine
the
mass
fraction
of
nonaqueous
volatile
matter
and
use
that
value
as
a
substitute
for
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP.
(
3)
Alternative
method.
You
may
use
an
alternative
test
method
for
determining
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
once
the
Administrator
has
approved
it.
You
must
follow
the
procedure
in
§
63.7(
f)
to
submit
an
alternative
test
method
for
approval.
(
4)
Information
from
the
supplier
or
manufacturer
of
the
material.
You
may
rely
on
information
other
than
that
generated
by
the
test
methods
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
through
(
3)
of
this
section,
such
as
manufacturer's
formulation
data,
if
it
represents
each
organic
HAP
that
is
present
at
0.1
percent
by
mass
or
more
for
OSHAdefined
carcinogens
as
specified
in
29
CFR
1910.1200(
d)(
4)
and
at
1.0
percent
by
mass
or
more
for
other
compounds.
For
example,
if
toluene
(
not
an
OSHA
carcinogen)
is
0.5
percent
of
the
material
by
mass,
you
do
not
have
to
count
it.
If
there
is
a
disagreement
between
such
information
and
results
of
a
test
conducted
according
to
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
through
(
3)
of
this
section,
then
the
test
method
results
will
take
precedence.
(
5)
Solvent
blends.
Solvent
blends
may
be
listed
as
single
components
for
some
materials
in
data
provided
by
manufacturers
or
suppliers.
Solvent
blends
may
contain
organic
HAP
which
must
be
counted
toward
the
total
organic
HAP
mass
fraction
of
the
materials.
When
test
data
and
manufacturer's
data
for
solvent
blends
are
not
available,
you
may
use
the
default
values
for
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
these
solvent
blends
listed
in
Table
3
or
4
of
this
subpart.
If
you
use
the
tables,
you
must
use
the
values
in
Table
3
for
all
solvent
blends
that
match
Table
3
entries,
and
you
may
only
use
Table
4
if
the
solvent
blends
in
the
materials
you
use
do
not
match
any
of
the
solvent
blends
in
Table
3
and
you
only
know
whether
the
blend
is
aliphatic
or
aromatic.
However,
if
the
results
of
a
Method
311
test
indicate
higher
values
than
those
listed
on
Table
3
or
4
of
this
subpart,
the
Method
311
results
will
take
precedence.
(
b)
Determine
the
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating.
You
must
determine
the
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
(
pounds
of
coating
solids
per
pound
of
coating)
for
each
coating
used
during
the
compliance
period
by
a
test
or
by
information
provided
by
the
supplier
or
the
manufacturer
of
the
material,
as
specified
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
through
(
3)
of
this
section.
If
test
results
obtained
according
to
paragraph
(
b)(
1)
or
(
2)
of
this
section
do
not
agree
with
the
information
obtained
under
paragraph
(
b)(
3)
of
this
section,
the
test
results
will
take
precedence.
(
1)
Method
24
(
appendix
A
to
40
CFR
part
60).
You
may
use
Method
24
for
determining
the
mass
fraction
of
solids
of
coatings.
(
2)
Alternative
method.
You
may
use
an
alternative
test
method
for
determining
the
solids
content
of
each
coating
once
the
Administrator
has
approved
it.
You
must
follow
the
procedure
in
§
63.7(
f)
to
submit
an
alternative
test
method
for
approval.
(
3)
Information
from
the
supplier
or
manufacturer
of
the
material.
You
may
obtain
the
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating
from
the
supplier
or
manufacturer.
If
there
is
disagreement
between
such
information
and
the
test
method
results,
then
the
test
method
results
will
take
precedence.
(
c)
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
content
of
each
coating.
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
content,
kg
(
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used,
of
each
coating
used
during
the
compliance
period,
using
Equation
1
of
this
section:

H
W
S
Eq
c
c
c
=
(
.
1)

Where:
Hc
=
organic
HAP
content
of
the
coating,
kg
(
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
Wc
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coating,
lb
organic
HAP
per
lb
coating,
determined
according
to
paragraph
(
a)
of
this
section.
Sc
=
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids,
lb
coating
solids
per
lb
coating,
determined
according
to
paragraph
(
b)
of
this
section.
(
d)
Compliance
demonstration.
The
calculated
organic
HAP
content
for
each
coating
used
during
the
initial
compliance
period
must
be
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490;
and
each
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
the
initial
compliance
period
must
contain
no
organic
HAP,
determined
according
to
paragraph
(
a)
of
this
section.
You
must
keep
all
records
required
by
§
§
63.4530
and
63.4531.
As
part
of
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
required
in
§
63.4510,
you
must
identify
the
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
used
the
compliant
material
option
and
submit
a
statement
that
the
coating
operation(
s)
was
(
were)
in
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
during
the
initial
compliance
period
because
you
used
no
coatings
for
which
the
organic
HAP
content
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
and
you
used
no
thinners,
other
additives,
or
cleaning
materials
that
contained
organic
HAP,
determined
according
to
the
procedures
in
paragraph
(
a)
of
this
section.

§
63.4542
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?
(
a)
For
each
compliance
period
to
demonstrate
continuous
compliance,
you
must
use
no
coating
for
which
the
organic
HAP
content
(
determined
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4541)
exceeds
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
and
use
no
thinner
or
other
additive,
or
cleaning
material
that
contains
organic
HAP,
determined
according
to
§
63.4541(
a).
A
compliance
period
consists
of
12
months.
Each
month,
after
the
end
of
the
initial
compliance
period
described
in
§
63.4540,
is
the
end
of
a
compliance
period
consisting
of
that
month
and
the
preceding
11
months.
(
b)
If
you
choose
to
comply
with
the
emission
limitations
by
using
the
compliant
material
option,
the
use
of
any
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
or
cleaning
material
that
does
not
meet
the
criteria
specified
in
paragraph
(
a)
of
this
section
is
a
deviation
from
the
emission
limitations
that
must
be
reported
as
specified
in
§
§
63.4510(
c)(
6)
and
63.4520(
a)(
5).
(
c)
As
part
of
each
semiannual
compliance
report
required
by
§
63.4520,
you
must
identify
the
coating
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00033
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
EP04DE02.001</
MATH>
72308
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
operation(
s)
for
which
you
used
the
compliant
material
option.
If
there
were
no
deviations
from
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
submit
a
statement
that
the
coating
operation(
s)
was
(
were)
in
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
during
the
reporting
period
because
you
used
no
coatings
for
which
the
organic
HAP
content
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
and
you
used
no
thinner
or
other
additive,
or
cleaning
material
that
contained
organic
HAP,
determined
according
to
§
63.4541(
a).
(
d)
You
must
maintain
records
as
specified
in
§
§
63.4530
and
63.4531.

Compliance
Requirements
for
the
Emission
Rate
Without
Add­
On
Controls
Option
§
63.4550
By
what
date
must
I
conduct
the
initial
compliance
demonstration?
You
must
complete
the
initial
compliance
demonstration
for
the
initial
compliance
period
according
to
the
requirements
of
§
63.4551.
The
initial
compliance
period
begins
on
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483
and
ends
on
the
last
day
of
the
12th
month
following
the
compliance
date.
If
the
compliance
date
occurs
on
any
day
other
than
the
first
day
of
a
month,
then
the
initial
compliance
period
extends
through
the
end
of
that
month
plus
the
next
12
months.
You
must
determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
and
mass
of
coating
solids
used
each
month
and
then
calculate
a
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate
at
the
end
of
the
initial
12­
month
compliance
period.
The
initial
compliance
demonstration
includes
the
calculations
according
to
§
63.4551
and
supporting
documentation
showing
that
during
the
initial
compliance
period
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
was
equal
to
or
less
than
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490.

§
63.4551
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?
You
may
use
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option
for
any
individual
coating
operation,
for
any
group
of
coating
operations
in
the
affected
source,
or
for
all
the
coating
operations
in
the
affected
source.
You
must
use
either
the
compliant
material
option
or
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option
for
any
coating
operation
in
the
affected
source
for
which
you
do
not
use
this
option.
To
demonstrate
initial
compliance
using
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option,
the
coating
operation
or
group
of
coating
operations
must
meet
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
but
is
not
required
to
meet
the
operating
limits
or
work
practice
standards
in
§
§
63.4492
and
63.4493,
respectively.
You
must
conduct
a
separate
initial
compliance
demonstration
for
each
general
use
coating,
TPO
coating,
headlamp
coating,
and
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
affected
source.
You
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
this
section.
When
calculating
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
according
to
this
section,
do
not
include
any
coatings,
thinners
or
other
additives,
or
cleaning
materials
used
on
coating
operations
for
which
you
use
the
compliant
material
option
or
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option
or
coating
operations
in
a
different
affected
source
in
a
different
subcategory.
You
do
not
need
to
redetermine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
or
cleaning
materials
that
have
been
reclaimed
onsite
and
reused
in
the
coating
operation
for
which
you
use
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option.
(
a)
Determine
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
for
each
material.
Determine
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
for
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
each
month
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4541(
a).
(
b)
Determine
the
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids.
Determine
the
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
(
pounds
of
solids
per
pound
of
coating)
for
each
coating
used
during
each
month
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4541(
b).
(
c)
Determine
the
density
of
each
material.
Determine
the
density
of
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
each
month
from
test
results
using
ASTM
Method
D1475
 
98,
information
from
the
supplier
or
manufacturer
of
the
material,
or
reference
sources
providing
density
or
specific
gravity
data
for
pure
materials.
If
there
is
disagreement
between
ASTM
Method
D1475
 
98
test
results
and
other
such
information
sources,
the
test
results
will
take
precedence.
(
d)
Determine
the
volume
of
each
material
used.
Determine
the
volume
(
gallons)
of
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
each
month
by
measurement
or
usage
records.
(
e)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions.
The
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
is
the
combined
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
all
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
each
month
minus
the
organic
HAP
in
certain
waste
materials.
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
using
Equation
1
of
this
section.

H
A
B
C
R
Eq
e
w
=
+
+
 
(
.
1)

Where:
He
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
during
the
month,
lb.
A
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
during
the
month,
lb,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1A
of
this
section.
B
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
and
other
additives
used
during
the
month,
lb,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1B
of
this
section.
C
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
month,
lb,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1C
of
this
section.
Rw
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
waste
materials
sent
or
designated
for
shipment
to
a
hazardous
waste
TSDF
for
treatment
or
disposal
during
the
month,
lb,
determined
according
to
paragraph
(
e)(
4)
of
this
section.
(
You
may
assign
a
value
of
zero
to
Rw
if
you
do
not
wish
to
use
this
allowance.)
(
1)
Calculate
the
lb
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
during
the
month
using
Equation
1A
of
this
section:

A
Vol
D
W
Eq
c
i
i
m
c
i
c
i
=
(
)(
)(
)

=
 
,
,
,
(
.

1
1A)

Where:

A
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
during
the
month,
lb.
Volc,
i
=
total
volume
of
coating,
i,
used
during
the
month,
gallons.
Dc,
i
=
density
of
coating,
i,
lb
coating
per
gallon
coating.
Wc,
i
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
coating,
i,
lb
organic
HAP
per
lb
coating.
m
=
number
of
different
coatings
used
during
the
month.

(
2)
Calculate
the
lb
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
and
other
additives
used
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00034
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
EP04DE02.002</
MATH>
EP04DE02.003</
MATH>
72309
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
during
the
month
using
Equation
1B
of
this
section:

B
Vol
D
W
Eq
t
j
j
n
t
j
t
j
=
(
)(
)(
)

=
 
,
,
,
(
.

1
1B)

Where:
B
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
and
other
additives
used
during
the
month,
lb.
Volt,
j
=
total
volume
of
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
used
during
the
month,
gallons.
Dt,
j
=
density
of
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
lb
per
gallon.
Wt,
j
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
lb
organic
HAP
per
lb
thinner.
n
=
number
of
different
thinners
or
other
additives
used
during
the
month.
(
3)
Calculate
the
lb
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
month
using
Equation
1C
of
this
section:

C
Vol
D
W
Eq
s
k
k
p
s
k
s
k
=
(
)(
)(
)

=
 
,
,
,
(
.

1
1C)

Where:
C
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
month,
lb.
Vols,
k
=
total
volume
of
cleaning
material,
k,
used
during
the
month,
gallons.
Ds,
k
=
density
of
cleaning
material,
k,
lb
per
gallon.
Ws,
k
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
cleaning
material,
k,
lb
organic
HAP
per
lb
material.
p
=
number
of
different
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
month.
(
4)
If
you
choose
to
account
for
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
waste
materials
sent
or
designated
for
shipment
to
a
hazardous
waste
TSDF
in
Equation
1
of
this
section,
then
you
must
determine
it
according
to
paragraphs
(
e)(
4)(
i)
through
(
iv)
of
this
section.
(
i)
You
may
include
in
the
determination
only
waste
materials
that
are
generated
by
coating
operations
in
the
affected
source
for
which
you
use
Equation
1
of
this
section
and
that
will
be
treated
or
disposed
of
by
a
facility
that
is
regulated
as
a
TSDF
under
40
CFR
part
262,
264,
265,
or
266.
The
TSDF
may
be
either
off­
site
or
on­
site.
You
may
not
include
organic
HAP
contained
in
wastewater.
(
ii)
You
must
determine
either
the
amount
of
the
waste
materials
sent
to
a
TSDF
during
the
month
or
the
amount
collected
and
stored
during
the
month
and
designated
for
future
transport
to
a
TSDF.
Do
not
include
in
your
determination
any
waste
materials
sent
to
a
TSDF
during
a
month
if
you
have
already
included
them
in
the
amount
collected
and
stored
during
that
month
or
a
previous
month.
(
iii)
Determine
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
the
waste
materials
specified
in
paragraph
(
e)(
4)(
ii)
of
this
section.
(
iv)
You
must
document
the
methodology
you
use
to
determine
the
amount
of
waste
materials
and
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
they
contain,
as
required
in
§
63.4530(
h).
To
the
extent
that
waste
manifests
include
this,
they
may
be
used
as
part
of
the
documentation
of
the
amount
of
waste
materials
and
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
them.
(
f)
Calculate
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used.
Determine
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used,
lb,
which
is
the
combined
mass
of
coating
solids
for
all
coatings
used
during
each
month
using
Equation
2
of
this
section:

M
Vol
D
M
Eq
st
c
i
i
m
c
i
s
i
=
(
)(
)(
)

=
 
,
,
,
(
.

1
2)

Where:
Mst
=
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
month,
lb.
Volc,
i
=
total
volume
of
coating,
i,
used
during
the
month,
gallons.
Dc,
i
=
density
of
coating,
i,
lbs
per
gallon
coating,
determined
according
to
63.4551(
c).
Ms,
i
=
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
coating,
i,
lbs
solids
per
lb
coating,
determined
according
to
§
63.4541(
b).
m
=
number
of
coatings
used
during
the
month.
(
g)
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
12­
month
compliance
period,
kg
(
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used,
using
Equation
3
of
this
section:

H
H
M
Eq
yr
e
y
st
y
=
=

=
 

 
1
12
1
12
(
.
3)

Where:
Hyr
=
average
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
12­
month
compliance
period,
kg
(
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used.
He
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
from
all
materials
used
during
month,
y,
lb,
as
calculated
by
Equation
1
of
this
section.
Mst
=
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
during
month,
y,
lb,
as
calculated
by
Equation
2
of
this
section.
y
=
identifier
for
months.

(
h)
Compliance
demonstration.
The
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
initial
12­
month
compliance
period
must
be
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490.
You
must
keep
all
records
as
required
by
§
§
63.4530
and
63.4531.
As
part
of
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
required
by
§
63.4510,
you
must
identify
the
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
used
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option
and
submit
a
statement
that
the
coating
operation(
s)
was
(
were)
in
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
during
the
initial
compliance
period
because
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
was
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
determined
according
to
the
procedures
in
this
section.

§
63.4552
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?

(
a)
To
demonstrate
continuous
compliance,
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
compliance
period,
determined
according
to
§
63.4551(
a)
through
(
g),
must
be
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490.
A
compliance
period
consists
of
12
months.
Each
month
after
the
end
of
the
initial
compliance
period
described
in
§
63.4550
is
the
end
of
a
compliance
period
consisting
of
that
month
and
the
preceding
11
months.
You
must
perform
the
calculations
in
§
63.4551(
a)
through
(
g)
on
a
monthly
basis
using
data
from
the
previous
12
months
of
operation.
(
b)
If
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
any
12­
month
compliance
period
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
this
is
a
deviation
from
the
emission
limitation
for
that
compliance
period
and
must
be
reported
as
specified
in
§
§
63.4510(
c)(
6)
and
63.4520(
a)(
6).

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00035
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
EP04DE02.004</
MATH>
EP04DE02.005</
MATH>
EP04DE02.006</
MATH>
EP04DE02.007</
MATH>
72310
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
(
c)
As
part
of
each
semiannual
compliance
report
required
by
§
63.4520,
you
must
identify
the
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
used
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option.
If
there
were
no
deviations
from
the
emission
limitations,
you
must
submit
a
statement
that
the
coating
operation(
s)
was
(
were)
in
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
during
the
reporting
period
because
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
compliance
period
was
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
determined
according
to
§
63.4551(
a)
through
(
g).
(
d)
You
must
maintain
records
as
specified
in
§
§
63.4530
and
63.4531.

Compliance
Requirements
for
the
Emission
Rate
With
Add­
On
Controls
Option
§
63.4560
By
what
date
must
I
conduct
performance
tests
and
other
initial
compliance
demonstrations?
(
a)
New
and
reconstructed
affected
sources.
For
a
new
or
reconstructed
affected
source,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
of
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
through
(
4)
of
this
section.
(
1)
All
emission
capture
systems,
addon
control
devices,
and
CPMS
must
be
installed
and
operating
no
later
than
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483.
Except
for
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
conduct
liquidliquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4561(
j),
you
must
conduct
a
performance
test
of
each
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
according
to
§
§
63.4564,
63.4565,
and
63.4566
and
establish
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4492
no
later
than
180
days
after
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483.
For
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4561(
j),
you
must
initiate
the
first
material
balance
no
later
than
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483.
(
2)
You
must
develop
and
begin
implementing
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4493
no
later
than
the
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483.
(
3)
You
must
complete
the
initial
compliance
demonstration
for
the
initial
compliance
period
according
to
the
requirements
of
§
63.4561.
The
initial
compliance
period
begins
on
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483
and
ends
on
the
last
day
of
the
12th
month
following
the
compliance
date.
If
the
compliance
date
occurs
on
any
day
other
than
the
first
day
of
a
month,
then
the
initial
compliance
period
extends
through
the
end
of
that
month
plus
the
next
12
months.
You
must
determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
and
mass
of
coatings
solids
used
each
month
and
then
calculate
a
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate
at
the
end
of
the
initial
12­
month
compliance
period.
The
initial
compliance
demonstration
includes
the
results
of
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
performance
tests
conducted
according
to
§
§
63.4564,
63.4565,
and
63.4566;
results
of
liquidliquid
material
balances
conducted
according
to
§
63.4561(
j);
calculations
according
to
§
63.4561
and
supporting
documentation
showing
that
during
the
initial
compliance
period
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
was
equal
to
or
less
than
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490;
the
operating
limits
established
during
the
performance
tests
and
the
results
of
the
continuous
parameter
monitoring
required
by
§
63.4568;
and
documentation
of
whether
you
developed
and
implemented
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4493.
(
4)
You
do
not
need
to
comply
with
the
operating
limits
for
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
required
by
§
63.4492
until
after
you
have
completed
the
performance
tests
specified
in
paragraph
(
a)(
1)
of
this
section.
Instead,
you
must
maintain
a
log
detailing
the
operation
and
maintenance
of
the
emission
capture
system,
add­
on
control
device,
and
continuous
parameter
monitors
during
the
period
between
the
compliance
date
and
the
performance
test.
You
must
begin
complying
with
the
operating
limits
for
your
affected
source
on
the
date
you
complete
the
performance
tests
specified
in
paragraph
(
a)(
1)
of
this
section.
The
requirements
in
this
paragraph
do
not
apply
to
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4561(
j).
(
b)
Existing
affected
sources.
For
an
existing
affected
source,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
of
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
through
(
3)
of
this
section.
(
1)
All
emission
capture
systems,
addon
control
devices,
and
CPMS
must
be
installed
and
operating
no
later
than
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483.
Except
for
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
conduct
liquidliquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4561(
j),
you
must
conduct
a
performance
test
of
each
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
according
to
the
procedures
in
§
§
63.4564,
63.4565,
and
63.4566
and
establish
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4492
no
later
than
the
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483.
For
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4561(
j),
you
must
initiate
the
first
material
balance
no
later
than
the
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483.
(
2)
You
must
develop
and
begin
implementing
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4493
no
later
than
the
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483.
(
3)
You
must
complete
the
compliance
demonstration
for
the
initial
compliance
period
according
to
the
requirements
of
§
63.4561.
The
initial
compliance
period
begins
on
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4483
and
ends
on
the
last
day
of
the
12th
month
following
the
compliance
date.
If
the
compliance
date
occurs
on
any
day
other
than
the
first
day
of
a
month,
then
the
initial
compliance
period
extends
through
the
end
of
that
month
plus
the
next
12
months.
You
must
determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
and
mass
of
coatings
solids
used
each
month
and
then
calculate
a
12­
month
organic
HAP
emission
rate
at
the
end
of
the
initial
12­
month
compliance
period.
The
initial
compliance
demonstration
includes
the
results
of
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
performance
tests
conducted
according
to
§
§
63.4564,
63.4565,
and
63.4566;
results
of
liquidliquid
material
balances
conducted
according
to
§
63.4561(
j);
calculations
according
to
§
63.4561
and
supporting
documentation
showing
that
during
the
initial
compliance
period
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
was
equal
to
or
less
than
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490;
the
operating
limits
established
during
the
performance
tests
and
the
results
of
the
continuous
parameter
monitoring
required
by
§
63.4568;
and
documentation
of
whether
you
developed
and
implemented
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4493.

§
63.4561
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance?
(
a)
You
may
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option
for
any
coating
operation,
for
any
group
of
coating
operations
in
the
affected
source,
or
for
all
of
the
coating
operations
in
the
affected
source.
You
may
include
both
controlled
and
uncontrolled
coating
operations
in
a
group
for
which
you
use
this
option.
You
must
use
either
the
compliant
material
option
or
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option
for
any
coating
operation
in
the
affected
source
for
which
you
do
not
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option.
To
demonstrate
initial
compliance,
the
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option
must
meet
the
applicable
emission
limitations
in
§
§
63.4490,

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00036
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72311
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
63.4492,
and
63.4493.
You
must
conduct
a
separate
initial
compliance
demonstration
for
each
general
use
coating,
TPO
coating,
headlamp
coating
and
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
affected
source.
You
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
this
section.
When
calculating
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
according
to
this
section,
do
not
include
any
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
or
cleaning
materials
used
on
coating
operations
for
which
you
use
the
compliant
material
option
or
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option
or
coating
operations
in
a
different
affected
source
in
a
different
subcategory.
You
do
not
need
to
redetermine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
or
cleaning
materials
that
have
been
reclaimed
onsite
and
reused
in
the
coatings
operation(
s)
for
which
you
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option.
(
b)
Compliance
with
operating
limits.
Except
as
provided
in
§
63.4560(
a)(
4),
and
except
for
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
according
to
the
requirements
of
paragraph
(
j)
of
this
section,
you
must
establish
and
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
during
the
initial
compliance
period
with
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4492,
using
the
procedures
specified
in
§
§
63.4567
and
63.4568.
(
c)
Compliance
with
work
practice
requirements.
You
must
develop,
implement,
and
document
your
implementation
of
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4493
during
the
initial
compliance
period,
as
specified
in
§
63.4530.
(
d)
Compliance
with
emission
limits.
You
must
follow
the
procedures
in
paragraphs
(
e)
through
(
n)
of
this
section
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490
for
each
affected
source
in
each
subcategory.
(
e)
Determine
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP,
density,
volume
used,
and
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids.
Follow
the
procedures
specified
in
§
63.4551(
a)
through
(
d)
to
determine
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP,
density,
and
volume
of
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
each
month;
and
the
mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating
used
during
each
month.
(
f)
Calculate
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
before
add­
on
controls.
Using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4551,
calculate
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
before
add­
on
controls
from
all
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
each
month
in
the
coating
operation
or
group
of
coating
operations
for
which
you
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option.
(
g)
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
each
controlled
coating
operation.
Determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
reduced
for
each
controlled
coating
operation
during
each
month.
The
emission
reduction
determination
quantifies
the
total
organic
HAP
emissions
that
pass
through
the
emission
capture
system
and
are
destroyed
or
removed
by
the
add­
on
control
device.
Use
the
procedures
in
paragraph
(
h)
of
this
section
to
calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
each
controlled
coating
operation
using
an
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances.
For
each
controlled
coating
operation
using
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
use
the
procedures
in
paragraph
(
j)
of
this
section
to
calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
reduction.
(
h)
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
each
controlled
coating
operation
not
using
liquid­
liquid
material
balance.
For
each
controlled
coating
operation
using
an
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquidliquid
material
balances,
calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
reduction,
using
Equation
1
of
this
section.
The
calculation
applies
the
emission
capture
system
efficiency
and
add­
on
control
device
efficiency
to
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
that
are
used
in
the
coating
operation
served
by
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
during
each
month.
For
any
period
of
time
a
deviation
specified
in
§
63.4563(
c)
or
(
d)
occurs
in
the
controlled
coating
operation,
including
a
deviation
during
a
period
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction,
then
you
must
assume
zero
efficiency
for
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device.
Equation
1
of
this
section
treats
the
materials
used
during
such
a
deviation
as
if
they
were
used
on
an
uncontrolled
coating
operation
for
the
time
period
of
the
deviation.

H
A
B
C
H
CE
DRE
Eq
C
C
C
C
UNC
=
+
+
 
(
)
×
 
 
 
 
100
100
(
.
1)

Where:

HC
=
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
month,
lb.
AC
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
month,
lb,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1A
of
this
section.
BC
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
and
other
additives
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
month,
lb,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1B
of
this
section.
CC
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
month,
lb,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1C
of
this
section.
HUNC
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
all
deviations
specified
in
§
63.4563(
c)
and
(
d)
that
occurred
during
the
month
in
the
controlled
coating
operation,
lb,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1D
of
this
section.
CE
=
capture
efficiency
of
the
emission
capture
system
vented
to
the
add­
on
control
device,
percent.
Use
the
test
methods
and
procedures
specified
in
§
§
63.4564
and
63.4565
to
measure
and
record
capture
efficiency.
DRE
=
organic
HAP
destruction
or
removal
efficiency
of
the
add­
on
control
device,
percent.
Use
the
test
methods
and
procedures
in
§
§
63.4564
and
63.4566
to
measure
and
record
the
organic
HAP
destruction
or
removal
efficiency.
(
1)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation,
lb,
using
Equation
1A
of
this
section:

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00037
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
EP04DE02.008</
MATH>
72312
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
A
Vol
D
W
Eq
C
ci
i
m
c
i
c
i
=
(
)(
)(
)

=
 
,
,
,
(
.

1
1A)

Where:
AC
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
month,
lb.
Volc,
i
=
total
volume
of
coating,
i,
used
during
the
month,
gallons.
Dc,
i
=
density
of
coating,
i,
lb
per
gallon.
Wc,
i
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
coating,
i,
lb
per
lb.
m
=
number
of
different
coatings
used.
(
2)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
and
other
additives
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation,
lb
using
Equation
1B
of
this
section.

B
Vol
D
W
Eq
C
tj
j
n
t
j
t
j
=
(
)(
)(
)

=
 
,
,
,
(
.

1
1B)

Where:

BC
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
and
other
additives
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
month,
lb.
Volt,
j
=
total
volume
of
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
used
during
the
month,
gallons.
Dt,
j
=
density
of
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
lb
per
gallon.
Wt,
j
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
lb
per
lb.
n
=
number
of
different
thinners
and
other
additives
used.

(
3)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
month,
lb,
using
Equation
1C
of
this
section.

C
Vol
D
W
Eq
C
sk
k
p
s
k
s
k
=
(
)(
)(
)

=
 
,
,
,
(
.

1
1C)

Where:
CC
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
month,
lb.
Vols,
k
=
total
volume
of
cleaning
material,
k,
used
during
the
month,
gallons.
Ds,
k
=
density
of
cleaning
material,
k,
lb
per
gallon.
Ws,
k
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
cleaning
material,
k,
lb
per
lb.
p
=
number
of
different
cleaning
materials
used.
(
4)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
deviations
specified
in
§
63.4563(
c)
and
(
d),
using
Equation
1D
of
this
section.

H
Vol
D
W
Eq
UNC
h
h
q
h
h
=
(
)(
)(
)

=
 

1
(
.
1D)

Where:
HUNC
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
all
deviations
specified
in
§
63.4563(
c)
and
(
d)
that
occurred
during
the
month
in
the
controlled
coating
operation,
lb.
Volh
=
total
volume
of
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
or
cleaning
material,
h,
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
deviations,
gallons.
Dh
=
density
of
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
or
cleaning
material,
h,
lb
per
gallon.
Wh
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
or
cleaning
material,
h,
lb
organic
HAP
per
lb
coating.
q
=
number
of
different
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used.
(
i)
[
Reserved]
(
j)
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
each
controlled
coating
operation
using
liquid­
liquid
material
balances.
For
each
controlled
coating
operation
using
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances,
calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
by
applying
the
volatile
organic
matter
collection
and
recovery
efficiency
to
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
that
are
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
each
month.
Perform
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance
for
each
month
as
specified
in
paragraphs
(
j)(
1)
through
(
6)
of
this
section.
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
as
specified
in
paragraph
(
j)(
7)
of
this
section.
(
1)
For
each
solvent
recovery
system,
install,
calibrate,
maintain,
and
operate
according
to
the
manufacturer's
specifications,
a
device
that
indicates
the
cumulative
amount
of
volatile
organic
matter
recovered
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
each
month.
The
device
must
be
initially
certified
by
the
manufacturer
to
be
accurate
to
within
±
2.0
percent
of
the
mass
of
volatile
organic
matter
recovered.
(
2)
For
each
solvent
recovery
system,
determine
the
mass
of
volatile
organic
matter
recovered
for
the
month,
based
on
measurement
with
the
device
required
in
paragraph
(
j)(
1)
of
this
section.
(
3)
Determine
the
mass
fraction
of
volatile
organic
matter
for
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
in
the
coating
operation
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00038
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
EP04DE02.009</
GPH>
EP04DE02.010</
MATH>
EP04DE02.011</
MATH>
EP04DE02.012</
MATH>
72313
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
lb
volatile
organic
matter
per
lb
coating.
You
may
determine
the
volatile
organic
matter
mass
fraction
using
Method
24
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A,
or
an
EPA
approved
alternative
method,
or
you
may
use
information
provided
by
the
manufacturer
or
supplier
of
the
coating.
In
the
event
of
any
inconsistency
between
information
provided
by
the
manufacturer
or
supplier
and
the
results
of
Method
24
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A,
or
an
approved
alternative
method,
the
test
method
results
will
govern.
(
4)
Determine
the
density
of
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
lb
per
gallon,
according
to
§
63.4551(
c).
(
5)
Measure
the
volume
of
each
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
gallons.
(
6)
Each
month,
calculate
the
solvent
recovery
system's
volatile
organic
matter
collection
and
recovery
efficiency,
using
Equation
2
of
this
section:

R
M
Vol
D
WV
Vol
D
WV
Vol
D
WV
Eq
v
VR
i
i
ci
j
j
t
j
j
n
k
k
sk
k
p
i
m
=
+
+
=
=
=
 
 
 
100
1
1
1
,
,
,
(
.
2)

Where:
RV
=
volatile
organic
matter
collection
and
recovery
efficiency
of
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
percent.
MVR
=
mass
of
volatile
organic
matter
recovered
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
lb.
Voli
=
volume
of
coating,
i,
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
gallons.
Di
=
density
of
coating,
i,
lb
per
gallon.
WVc,
i
=
mass
fraction
of
volatile
organic
matter
for
coating,
i,
lb
volatile
organic
matter
per
lb
coating.
Volj
=
volume
of
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
gallons.
Dj
=
density
of
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
lb
per
gallon.
WVt,
j
=
mass
fraction
of
volatile
organic
matter
for
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
lb
volatile
organic
matter
per
lb
thinner
or
other
additive.
Volk
=
volume
of
cleaning
material,
k,
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
gallons.
Dk
=
density
of
cleaning
material,
k,
lb
per
gallon.
WVs,
k
=
mass
fraction
of
volatile
organic
matter
for
cleaning
material,
k,
lb
volatile
organic
matter
per
lb
cleaning
material.
m
=
number
of
different
coatings
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month.
n
=
number
of
different
thinners
and
other
additives
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month.
p
=
number
of
different
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month.
(
7)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
using
Equation
3
of
this
section
and
according
to
paragraphs
(
j)(
7)(
i)
through
(
iii)
of
this
section:

H
A
B
C
R
Eq
CSR
CSR
CSR
CSR
V
=
+
+
(
)
 
 
 
 
100
(
.
3)

Where:

HCSR
=
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
using
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance
during
the
month,
lb.
ACSR
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system,
lb,
calculated
using
Equation
3A
of
this
section.
BCSR
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
and
other
additives
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system,
lb,
calculated
using
Equation
3B
of
this
section.
CCSR
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system,
lb,
calculated
using
Equation
3C
of
this
section.
RV
=
volatile
organic
matter
collection
and
recovery
efficiency
of
the
solvent
recovery
system,
percent,
from
Equation
2
of
this
section.

(
i)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system,
lb,
using
Equation
3A
of
this
section:

A
=
Vol
D
W
(
Eq.
3A)
CSR
c,
i
c,
i
c,
i
i=
1
m
(
)(
)(
)

Where:

ACSR
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
lb.
Volc,
i
=
total
volume
of
coating,
i,
used
during
the
month
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system,
gallons.
Dc,
i
=
density
of
coating,
i,
lb
per
gallon.

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
22:
11
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00039
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
EP04DE02.013</
MATH>
EP04DE02.014</
MATH>
EP04DE02.015</
MATH>
72314
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
Wc,
i
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
coating,
i,
lb
organic
HAP
per
lb
coating.
m
=
number
of
different
coatings
used.
(
ii)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
and
other
additives
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system,
lb,
using
Equation
3B
of
this
section:

B
Vol
D
W
Eq
CSR
t
j
t
j
t
j
j
n
=
(
)(
)(
)

=
 
,
,
,
(
.
3B)

1
Where:

BCSR
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
and
other
additives
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
lb.
Volt,
j
=
total
volume
of
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
used
during
the
month
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system,
gallons.
Dt,
j
=
density
of
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
lb
per
gallon.
Wt,
j
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
thinner
or
other
additive,
j,
lb
organic
HAP
per
lb
thinner
or
other
additive.
n
=
number
of
different
thinners
and
other
additives
used.

(
iii)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
lb,
using
Equation
3C
of
this
section.

C
=
Vol
D
W
(
Eq.
3C)
CSR
s,
k
s,
k
s,
k
k=
1
p
(
)(
)(
)

Where:
CCSR
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
month,
lb.
Vols,
k
=
total
volume
of
cleaning
material,
k,
used
during
the
month
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system,
gallons.
Ds,
k
=
density
of
cleaning
material,
k,
lb
per
gallon.
Ws,
k
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
cleaning
material,
k,
lb
organic
HAP
per
lb
cleaning
material.
p
=
number
of
different
cleaning
materials
used.
(
k)
Calculate
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used.
Determine
the
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used,
pounds,
which
is
the
combined
mass
of
coating
solids
for
all
the
coatings
used
during
each
month
in
the
coating
operation
or
group
of
coating
operations
for
which
you
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option,
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.4551.
(
l)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
for
each
month.
Determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions,
lb,
during
each
month,
using
Equation
4
of
this
section:

H
H
H
H
Eq
HAP
e
C
i
i
q
CSR
j
j
r
=
 
(
) 
(
)
=
=
 
 
,
,
(
.

1
1
4)

Where:

HHAP
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
for
the
month,
lb.
He
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
before
add­
on
controls
from
all
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
month,
lb,
determined
according
to
paragraph
(
f)
of
this
section.
HC,
i
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
controlled
coating
operation,
i,
not
using
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
during
the
month,
lb,
from
Equation
1
of
this
section.
HCSR,
j
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
coating
operation,
j,
controlled
by
a
solvent
recovery
system
using
a
liquidliquid
material
balance,
during
the
month,
lb,
from
Equation
3
of
this
section.
q
=
Number
of
controlled
coating
operations
not
using
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance.
r
=
Number
of
coating
operations
controlled
by
a
solvent
recovery
system
using
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance.
(
m)
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
12­
month
compliance
period.
Determine
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
12­
month
compliance
period,
kg
(
lb)
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
(
lb)
coating
solids
used,
using
Equation
5
of
this
section:

H
H
M
Eq
annual
HAP
y
y
st
y
y
=
=

=
 

 
,

,
(
.
1
12
1
12
5)

Where:
Hannual
=
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
12­
month
compliance
period,
kg
of
organic
HAP
emitted
per
kg
coating
solids
used
(
lb
organic
HAP
emitted
per
lb
coating
solids
used).
HHAP,
y
=
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
month,
y,
determined
according
to
Equation
4
of
this
section.
Mst,
y
=
total
mass
of
coating
solids
used
during
month,
y,
lb,
from
Equation
2
of
§
63.4551.
y
=
identifier
for
months.
(
n)
Compliance
demonstration.
To
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limit,
calculated
using
Equation
5
of
this
section,
must
be
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
for
each
subcategory
in
§
63.4490.
You
must
keep
all
records
as
required
by
§
§
63.4530
and
63.4531.
As
part
of
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
required
by
§
63.4510,
you
must
identify
the
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
used
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option
and
submit
a
statement
that
the
coating
operation(
s)
was
(
were)
in
compliance
with
the
emission
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
22:
11
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00040
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
EP04DE02.016</
MATH>
EP04DE02.017</
MATH>
EP04DE02.018</
MATH>
EP04DE02.019</
MATH>
72315
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
limitations
during
the
initial
compliance
period
because
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
was
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
and
you
achieved
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4492
and
the
work
practice
standards
required
by
§
63.4493.

§
63.4562
[
Reserved.]

§
63.4563
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?

(
a)
To
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
compliance
period,
determined
according
to
the
procedures
in
§
63.4561,
must
be
equal
to
or
less
than
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490
for
that
subcategory.
A
compliance
period
consists
of
12
months.
Each
month
after
the
end
of
the
initial
compliance
period
described
in
§
63.4560
is
the
end
of
a
compliance
period
consisting
of
that
month
and
the
preceding
11
months.
You
must
perform
the
calculations
in
§
63.4561
on
a
monthly
basis
using
data
from
the
previous
12
months
of
operation.
(
b)
If
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
any
12­
month
compliance
period
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
this
is
a
deviation
from
the
emission
limitation
for
that
compliance
period
and
must
be
reported
as
specified
in
§
§
63.4510(
b)(
6)
and
63.4520(
a)(
7).
(
c)
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
each
operating
limit
required
by
§
63.4492
that
applies
to
you,
as
specified
in
Table
1
of
this
subpart.
(
1)
If
an
operating
parameter
is
out
of
the
allowed
range
specified
in
Table
1
of
this
subpart,
this
is
a
deviation
from
the
operating
limit
that
must
be
reported
as
specified
in
§
§
63.4510(
b)(
6)
and
63.4520(
a)(
7).
(
2)
If
an
operating
parameter
deviates
from
the
operating
limit
specified
in
Table
1
of
this
subpart,
then
you
must
assume
that
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
were
achieving
zero
efficiency
during
the
time
period
of
the
deviation.
For
the
purposes
of
completing
the
compliance
calculations
specified
in
§
§
63.4561(
h),
you
must
treat
the
materials
used
during
a
deviation
on
a
controlled
coating
operation
as
if
they
were
used
on
an
uncontrolled
coating
operation
for
the
time
period
of
the
deviation
as
indicated
in
Equation
1
of
§
63.4561.
(
d)
You
must
meet
the
requirements
for
bypass
lines
in
§
63.4568(
b)
for
controlled
coating
operations
for
which
you
do
not
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances.
If
any
bypass
line
is
opened
and
emissions
are
diverted
to
the
atmosphere
when
the
coating
operation
is
running,
this
is
a
deviation
that
must
be
reported
as
specified
in
§
§
63.4510(
b)(
6)
and
63.4520(
a)(
7).
For
the
purposes
of
completing
the
compliance
calculations
specified
in
§
§
63.4561(
h),
you
must
treat
the
materials
used
during
a
deviation
on
a
controlled
coating
operation
as
if
they
were
used
on
an
uncontrolled
coating
operation
for
the
time
period
of
the
deviation
as
indicated
in
Equation
1
of
§
63.4561.
(
e)
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
work
practice
standards
in
§
63.4493.
If
you
did
not
develop
a
work
practice
plan,
or
you
did
not
implement
the
plan,
or
you
did
not
keep
the
records
required
by
§
63.4530(
k)(
8),
this
is
a
deviation
from
the
work
practice
standards
that
must
be
reported
as
specified
in
§
§
63.4510(
c)(
6)
and
63.4520(
a)(
7).
(
f)
As
part
of
each
semiannual
compliance
report
required
in
§
63.4520,
you
must
identify
the
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
used
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option.
If
there
were
no
deviations
from
the
emission
limitations,
submit
a
statement
that
you
were
in
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
during
the
reporting
period
because
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
compliance
period
was
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4490,
and
you
achieved
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4492
and
the
work
practice
standards
required
by
§
63.4493
during
each
compliance
period.
(
g)
During
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
of
the
emission
capture
system,
add­
on
control
device,
or
coating
operation
that
may
affect
emission
capture
or
control
device
efficiency,
you
must
operate
in
accordance
with
the
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plan
required
by
§
63.4500(
c).
(
h)
Consistent
with
§
§
63.6(
e)
and
63.7(
e)(
1),
deviations
that
occur
during
a
period
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
of
the
emission
capture
system,
add­
on
control
device,
or
coating
operation
that
may
affect
emission
capture
or
control
device
efficiency
are
not
violations
if
you
demonstrate
to
the
Administrator's
satisfaction
that
you
were
operating
in
accordance
with
the
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plan.
The
Administrator
will
determine
whether
deviations
that
occur
during
a
period
you
identify
as
a
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
are
violations,
according
to
the
provisions
in
§
63.6(
e).
(
i)
[
Reserved]
(
j)
You
must
maintain
records
as
specified
in
§
§
63.4530
and
63.4531.

§
63.4564
What
are
the
general
requirements
for
performance
tests?

(
a)
You
must
conduct
each
performance
test
required
by
§
63.4560
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.7(
e)(
1)
and
under
the
conditions
in
this
section,
unless
you
obtain
a
waiver
of
the
performance
test
according
to
the
provisions
in
§
63.7(
h).
(
1)
Representative
coating
operation
operating
conditions.
You
must
conduct
the
performance
test
under
representative
operating
conditions
for
the
coating
operation.
Operations
during
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
and
during
periods
of
nonoperation
do
not
constitute
representative
conditions.
You
must
record
the
process
information
that
is
necessary
to
document
operating
conditions
during
the
test
and
explain
why
the
conditions
represent
normal
operation.
(
2)
Representative
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
operating
conditions.
You
must
conduct
the
performance
test
when
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
are
operating
at
a
representative
flow
rate,
and
the
add­
on
control
device
is
operating
at
a
representative
inlet
concentration.
You
must
record
information
that
is
necessary
to
document
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
operating
conditions
during
the
test
and
explain
why
the
conditions
represent
normal
operation.
(
b)
You
must
conduct
each
performance
test
of
an
emission
capture
system
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4565.
You
must
conduct
each
performance
test
of
an
add­
on
control
device
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4566.

§
63.4565
How
do
I
determine
the
emission
capture
system
efficiency?

You
must
use
the
procedures
and
test
methods
in
this
section
to
determine
capture
efficiency
as
part
of
the
performance
test
required
by
§
63.4560.
(
a)
Assuming
100
percent
capture
efficiency.
You
may
assume
the
capture
system
efficiency
is
100
percent
if
both
of
the
conditions
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section
are
met:
(
1)
The
capture
system
meets
the
criteria
in
Method
204
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51
for
a
PTE
and
directs
all
the
exhaust
gases
from
the
enclosure
to
an
add­
on
control
device.
(
2)
All
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
are
applied
within
the
capture
system;
coating
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00041
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72316
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
solvent
flash­
off,
curing,
and
drying
occurs
within
the
capture
system;
and
the
removal
or
evaporation
of
cleaning
materials
from
the
surfaces
they
are
applied
to
occurs
within
the
capture
system.
For
example,
this
criterion
is
not
met
if
parts
enter
the
open
shop
environment
when
being
moved
between
a
spray
booth
and
a
curing
oven.
(
b)
Measuring
capture
efficiency.
If
the
capture
system
does
not
meet
both
of
the
criteria
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section,
then
you
must
use
one
of
the
three
protocols
described
in
paragraphs
(
c),
(
d),
and
(
e)
of
this
section
to
measure
capture
efficiency.
The
capture
efficiency
measurements
use
TVH
capture
efficiency
as
a
surrogate
for
organic
HAP
capture
efficiency.
For
the
protocols
in
paragraphs
(
c)
and
(
d)
of
this
section,
the
capture
efficiency
measurement
must
consist
of
three
test
runs.
Each
test
run
must
be
at
least
3
hours
duration
or
the
length
of
a
production
run,
whichever
is
longer,
up
to
8
hours.
For
the
purposes
of
this
test,
a
production
run
means
the
time
required
for
a
single
part
to
go
from
the
beginning
to
the
end
of
the
production,
which
includes
surface
preparation
activities
and
drying
and
curing
time.
(
c)
Liquid­
to­
uncaptured­
gas
protocol
using
a
temporary
total
enclosure
or
building
enclosure.
The
liquid­
touncaptured
gas
protocol
compares
the
mass
of
liquid
TVH
in
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
to
the
mass
of
TVH
emissions
not
captured
by
the
emission
capture
system.
Use
a
temporary
total
enclosure
or
a
building
enclosure
and
the
procedures
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
through
(
6)
of
this
section
to
measure
emission
capture
system
efficiency
using
the
liquid­
touncaptured
gas
protocol.
(
1)
Either
use
a
building
enclosure
or
construct
an
enclosure
around
the
coating
operation
where
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
are
applied,
and
all
areas
where
emissions
from
these
applied
coatings
and
materials
subsequently
occur,
such
as
flash­
off,
curing,
and
drying
areas.
The
areas
of
the
coating
operation
where
capture
devices
collect
emissions
for
routing
to
an
add­
on
control
device,
such
as
the
entrance
and
exit
areas
of
an
oven
or
spray
booth,
must
also
be
inside
the
enclosure.
The
enclosure
must
meet
the
applicable
definition
of
a
temporary
total
enclosure
or
building
enclosure
in
Method
204
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51.
(
2)
Use
Method
204A
or
204F
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51
to
determine
the
mass
fraction
of
TVH
liquid
input
from
each
coating,
thinner
and
other
additive,
and
cleaning
material
used
in
the
coating
operation
during
each
capture
efficiency
test
run.
To
make
the
determination,
substitute
TVH
for
each
occurrence
of
the
term
volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
in
the
methods.
(
3)
Use
Equation
1
of
this
section
to
calculate
the
total
mass
of
TVH
liquid
input
from
all
the
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
during
each
capture
efficiency
test
run:

TVH
TVH
Vol
D
Eq
used
i
i
n
i
i
=
(
)(
)(
)

=
 

1
(
.
1)

Where:

TVHused
=
Mass
of
liquid
TVH
in
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
during
the
capture
efficiency
test
run,
lb.
TVHi
=
mass
fraction
of
TVH
in
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
or
cleaning
material,
i,
that
is
used
in
the
coating
operation
during
the
capture
efficiency
test
run,
lb
TVH
per
lb
material.
Voli
=
total
volume
of
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
or
cleaning
material,
i,
used
in
the
coating
operation
during
the
capture
efficiency
test
run,
gallons.
Di
=
density
of
coating,
thinner
or
other
additive,
or
cleaning
material,
i,
lb
material
per
gallon
material.
n
=
number
of
different
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
during
the
capture
efficiency
test
run.
(
4)
Use
Method
204D
or
E
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51
to
measure
the
total
mass,
lb,
of
TVH
emissions
that
are
not
captured
by
the
emission
capture
system;
they
are
measured
as
they
exit
the
temporary
total
enclosure
or
building
enclosure
during
each
capture
efficiency
test
run.
To
make
the
measurement,
substitute
TVH
for
each
occurrence
of
the
term
VOC
in
the
methods.
(
i)
Use
Method
204D
if
the
enclosure
is
a
temporary
total
enclosure.
(
ii)
Use
Method
204E
if
the
enclosure
is
a
building
enclosure.
During
the
capture
efficiency
measurement,
all
organic
compound
emitting
operations
inside
the
building
enclosure,
other
than
the
coating
operation
for
which
capture
efficiency
is
being
determined,
must
be
shut
down,
but
all
fans
and
blowers
must
be
operating
normally.
(
5)
For
each
capture
efficiency
test
run,
determine
the
percent
capture
efficiency
of
the
emission
capture
system
using
Equation
2
of
this
section:

CE
TVH
TVH
TVH
used
uncaptured
used
=
 
(
)
×
100
(
Eq.
2)

Where:
CE
=
capture
efficiency
of
the
emission
capture
system
vented
to
the
add­
on
control
device,
percent.
TVHused
=
total
mass
of
TVH
liquid
input
used
in
the
coating
operation
during
the
capture
efficiency
test
run,
lb.
TVHuncaptured
=
total
mass
of
TVH
that
is
not
captured
by
the
emission
capture
system
and
that
exits
from
the
temporary
total
enclosure
or
building
enclosure
during
the
capture
efficiency
test
run,
lb.
(
6)
Determine
the
capture
efficiency
of
the
emission
capture
system
as
the
average
of
the
capture
efficiencies
measured
in
the
three
test
runs.
(
d)
Gas­
to­
gas
protocol
using
a
temporary
total
enclosure
or
a
building
enclosure.
The
gas­
to­
gas
protocol
compares
the
mass
of
TVH
emissions
captured
by
the
emission
capture
system
to
the
mass
of
TVH
emissions
not
captured.
Use
a
temporary
total
enclosure
or
a
building
enclosure
and
the
procedures
in
paragraphs
(
d)(
1)
through
(
5)
of
this
section
to
measure
emission
capture
system
efficiency
using
the
gas­
to­
gas
protocol.

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00042
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
EP04DE02.020</
GPH>
EP04DE02.021</
GPH>
72317
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
(
1)
Either
use
a
building
enclosure
or
construct
an
enclosure
around
the
coating
operation
where
coatings,
thinners
and
other
additives,
and
cleaning
materials
are
applied,
and
all
areas
where
emissions
from
these
applied
coatings
and
materials
subsequently
occur,
such
as
flash­
off,
curing,
and
drying
areas.
The
areas
of
the
coating
operation
where
capture
devices
collect
emissions
generated
by
the
coating
operation
for
routing
to
an
add­
on
control
device,
such
as
the
entrance
and
exit
areas
of
an
oven
or
a
spray
booth,
must
also
be
inside
the
enclosure.
The
enclosure
must
meet
the
applicable
definition
of
a
temporary
total
enclosure
or
building
enclosure
in
Method
204
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51.
(
2)
Use
Method
204B
or
204C
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51
to
measure
the
total
mass,
lb,
of
TVH
emissions
captured
by
the
emission
capture
system
during
each
capture
efficiency
test
run
as
measured
at
the
inlet
to
the
add­
on
control
device.
To
make
the
measurement,
substitute
TVH
for
each
occurrence
of
the
term
VOC
in
the
methods.
(
i)
The
sampling
points
for
the
Method
204B
or
204C
measurement
must
be
upstream
from
the
add­
on
control
device
and
must
represent
total
emissions
routed
from
the
capture
system
and
entering
the
add­
on
control
device.
(
ii)
If
multiple
emission
streams
from
the
capture
system
enter
the
add­
on
control
device
without
a
single
common
duct,
then
the
emissions
entering
the
add­
on
control
device
must
be
simultaneously
measured
in
each
duct
and
the
total
emissions
entering
the
add­
on
control
device
must
be
determined.
(
3)
Use
Method
204D
or
204E
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51
to
measure
the
total
mass,
lb,
of
TVH
emissions
that
are
not
captured
by
the
emission
capture
system;
they
are
measured
as
they
exit
the
temporary
total
enclosure
or
building
enclosure
during
each
capture
efficiency
test
run.
To
make
the
measurement,
substitute
TVH
for
each
occurrence
of
the
term
VOC
in
the
methods.
(
i)
Use
Method
204D
if
the
enclosure
is
a
temporary
total
enclosure.
(
ii)
Use
Method
204E
if
the
enclosure
is
a
building
enclosure.
During
the
capture
efficiency
measurement,
all
organic
compound
emitting
operations
inside
the
building
enclosure,
other
than
the
coating
operation
for
which
capture
efficiency
is
being
determined,
must
be
shut
down,
but
all
fans
and
blowers
must
be
operating
normally.
(
4)
For
each
capture
efficiency
test
run,
determine
the
percent
capture
efficiency
of
the
emission
capture
system
using
Equation
3
of
this
section:

CE
TVH
TVH
TVH
captured
captured
uncaptured
=
+
(
)
×
100
(
Eq.
3)

Where:
CE
=
capture
efficiency
of
the
emission
capture
system
vented
to
the
add­
on
control
device,
percent.
TVHcaptured
=
total
mass
of
TVH
captured
by
the
emission
capture
system
as
measured
at
the
inlet
to
the
add­
on
control
device
during
the
emission
capture
efficiency
test
run,
lb.
TVHuncaptured
=
total
mass
of
TVH
that
is
not
captured
by
the
emission
capture
system
and
that
exits
from
the
temporary
total
enclosure
or
building
enclosure
during
the
capture
efficiency
test
run,
lb.
(
5)
Determine
the
capture
efficiency
of
the
emission
capture
system
as
the
average
of
the
capture
efficiencies
measured
in
the
three
test
runs.
(
e)
Alternative
capture
efficiency
protocol.
As
an
alternative
to
the
procedures
specified
in
paragraphs
(
c)
and
(
d)
of
this
section,
you
may
determine
capture
efficiency
using
any
other
capture
efficiency
protocol
and
test
methods
that
satisfy
the
criteria
of
either
the
DQO
or
LCL
approach
as
described
in
appendix
A
to
subpart
KK
of
this
part.

§
63.4566
How
do
I
determine
the
add­
on
control
device
emission
destruction
or
removal
efficiency?
You
must
use
the
procedures
and
test
methods
in
this
section
to
determine
the
add­
on
control
device
emission
destruction
or
removal
efficiency
as
part
of
the
performance
test
required
by
§
63.4560.
You
must
conduct
three
test
runs
as
specified
in
§
63.7(
e)(
3)
and
each
test
run
must
last
at
least
1
hour.
(
a)
For
all
types
of
add­
on
control
devices,
use
the
test
methods
specified
in
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
through
(
5)
of
this
section.
(
1)
Use
Method
1
or
1A
of
appendix
A
to
40
CFR
part
60,
as
appropriate,
to
select
sampling
sites
and
velocity
traverse
points.
(
2)
Use
Method
2,
2A,
2C,
2D,
2F,
or
2G
of
appendix
A
to
40
CFR
part
60,
as
appropriate,
to
measure
gas
volumetric
flow
rate.
(
3)
Use
Method
3,
3A,
or
3B
of
appendix
A
to
40
CFR
part
60,
as
appropriate,
for
gas
analysis
to
determine
dry
molecular
weight.
(
4)
Use
Method
4
of
appendix
A
to
40
CFR
part
60,
to
determine
stack
gas
moisture.
(
5)
Methods
for
determining
gas
volumetric
flow
rate,
dry
molecular
weight,
and
stack
gas
moisture
must
be
performed,
as
applicable,
during
each
test
run.
(
b)
Measure
total
gaseous
organic
mass
emissions
as
carbon
at
the
inlet
and
outlet
of
the
add­
on
control
device
simultaneously,
using
either
Method
25
or
25A
of
appendix
A
to
40
CFR
part
60.
(
1)
Use
Method
25
if
the
add­
on
control
device
is
an
oxidizer
and
you
expect
the
total
gaseous
organic
concentration
as
carbon
to
be
more
than
50
parts
per
million
(
ppm)
at
the
control
device
outlet.
(
2)
Use
Method
25A
if
the
add­
on
control
device
is
an
oxidizer
and
you
expect
the
total
gaseous
organic
concentration
as
carbon
to
be
50
ppm
or
less
at
the
control
device
outlet.
(
3)
Use
Method
25A
if
the
add­
on
control
device
is
not
an
oxidizer.
(
c)
If
two
or
more
add­
on
control
devices
are
used
for
the
same
emission
stream,
then
you
must
measure
emissions
at
the
outlet
to
the
atmosphere
of
each
device.
For
example,
if
one
add­
on
control
device
is
a
concentrator
with
an
outlet
to
the
atmosphere
for
the
high­
volume,
dilute
stream
that
has
been
treated
by
the
concentrator,
and
a
second
add­
on
control
device
is
an
oxidizer
with
an
outlet
to
the
atmosphere
for
the
lowvolume
concentrated
stream
that
is
treated
with
the
oxidizer,
you
must
measure
emissions
at
the
outlet
of
the
oxidizer
and
the
high
volume
dilute
stream
outlet
of
the
concentrator.
(
d)
For
each
test
run,
determine
the
total
gaseous
organic
emissions
mass
flow
rates
for
the
inlet
and
the
outlet
of
the
add­
on
control
device,
using
Equation
1
of
this
section.
If
there
is
more
than
one
inlet
or
outlet
to
the
addon
control
device,
you
must
calculate
the
total
gaseous
organic
mass
flow
rate
using
Equation
1
of
this
section
for
each
inlet
and
each
outlet
and
then
total
all
of
the
inlet
emissions
and
total
all
of
the
outlet
emissions:
Mf
=
Qsd
Cc
(
12)
(
0.0416)
(
10
¥
6)
(
Eq.
1)

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
21:
41
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00043
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
EP04DE02.022</
GPH>
72318
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
Where:
Mf
=
total
gaseous
organic
emissions
mass
flow
rate,
kg/
per
hour
(
h).
Cc
=
concentration
of
organic
compounds
as
carbon
in
the
vent
gas,
as
determined
by
Method
25
or
Method
25A,
parts
per
million
by
volume
(
ppmv),
dry
basis.
Qsd
=
volumetric
flow
rate
of
gases
entering
or
exiting
the
add­
on
control
device,
as
determined
by
Method
2,
2A,
2C,
2D,
2F,
or
2G,
dry
standard
cubic
meters/
hour
(
dscm/
h).
0.0416
=
conversion
factor
for
molar
volume,
kg­
moles
per
cubic
meter
(
mol/
m3)
(@
293
Kelvin
(
K)
and
760
millimeters
of
mercury
(
mmHg)).

(
e)
For
each
test
run,
determine
the
add­
on
control
device
organic
emissions
destruction
or
removal
efficiency,
using
Equation
2
of
this
section:

DRE=
M
M
M
(
Eq.
2)
fi
fo
fi
­
·
100
Where:
DRE
=
organic
emissions
destruction
or
removal
efficiency
of
the
add­
on
control
device,
percent.
Mfi
=
total
gaseous
organic
emissions
mass
flow
rate
at
the
inlet(
s)
to
the
add­
on
control
device,
using
Equation
1
of
this
section,
kg/
h.
Mfo
=
total
gaseous
organic
emissions
mass
flow
rate
at
the
outlet(
s)
of
the
add­
on
control
device,
using
Equation
1
of
this
section,
kg/
h.
(
f)
Determine
the
emission
destruction
or
removal
efficiency
of
the
add­
on
control
device
as
the
average
of
the
efficiencies
determined
in
the
three
test
runs
and
calculated
in
Equation
2
of
this
section.

§
63.4567
How
do
I
establish
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
operating
limits
during
the
performance
test?

During
the
performance
test
required
by
§
63.4560
and
described
in
§
§
63.4564,
63.4565,
and
63.4566,
you
must
establish
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4492
according
to
this
section,
unless
you
have
received
approval
for
alternative
monitoring
and
operating
limits
under
§
63.8(
f)
as
specified
in
§
63.4492.
(
a)
Thermal
oxidizers.
If
your
add­
on
control
device
is
a
thermal
oxidizer,
establish
the
operating
limits
according
to
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
During
the
performance
test,
you
must
monitor
and
record
the
combustion
temperature
at
least
once
every
15
minutes
during
each
of
the
three
test
runs.
You
must
monitor
the
temperature
in
the
firebox
of
the
thermal
oxidizer
or
immediately
downstream
of
the
firebox
before
any
substantial
heat
exchange
occurs.
(
2)
Use
the
data
collected
during
the
performance
test
to
calculate
and
record
the
average
combustion
temperature
maintained
during
the
performance
test.
This
average
combustion
temperature
is
the
minimum
operating
limit
for
your
thermal
oxidizer.
(
b)
Catalytic
oxidizers.
If
your
add­
on
control
device
is
a
catalytic
oxidizer,
establish
the
operating
limits
according
to
either
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
and
(
2)
or
paragraphs
(
b)(
3)
and
(
4)
of
this
section.
(
1)
During
the
performance
test,
you
must
monitor
and
record
the
temperature
just
before
the
catalyst
bed
and
the
temperature
difference
across
the
catalyst
bed
at
least
once
every
15
minutes
during
each
of
the
three
test
runs.
(
2)
Use
the
data
collected
during
the
performance
test
to
calculate
and
record
the
average
temperature
just
before
the
catalyst
bed
and
the
average
temperature
difference
across
the
catalyst
bed
maintained
during
the
performance
test.
These
are
the
minimum
operating
limits
for
your
catalytic
oxidizer.
(
3)
As
an
alternative
to
monitoring
the
temperature
difference
across
the
catalyst
bed,
you
may
monitor
the
temperature
at
the
inlet
to
the
catalyst
bed
and
implement
a
site­
specific
inspection
and
maintenance
plan
for
your
catalytic
oxidizer
as
specified
in
paragraph
(
b)(
4)
of
this
section.
During
the
performance
test,
you
must
monitor
and
record
the
temperature
just
before
the
catalyst
bed
at
least
once
every
15
minutes
during
each
of
the
three
test
runs.
Use
the
data
collected
during
the
performance
test
to
calculate
and
record
the
average
temperature
just
before
the
catalyst
bed
during
the
performance
test.
This
is
the
minimum
operating
limit
for
your
catalytic
oxidizer.
(
4)
You
must
develop
and
implement
an
inspection
and
maintenance
plan
for
your
catalytic
oxidizer(
s)
for
which
you
elect
to
monitor
according
to
paragraph
(
b)(
3)
of
this
section.
The
plan
must
address,
at
a
minimum,
the
elements
specified
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
4)(
i)
through
(
iii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Annual
sampling
and
analysis
of
the
catalyst
activity
(
i.
e,
conversion
efficiency)
following
the
manufacturer's
or
catalyst
supplier's
recommended
procedures.
(
ii)
Monthly
inspection
of
the
oxidizer
system,
including
the
burner
assembly
and
fuel
supply
lines
for
problems
and,
as
necessary,
adjust
the
equipment
to
assure
proper
air­
to­
fuel
mixtures.
(
iii)
Annual
internal
and
monthly
external
visual
inspection
of
the
catalyst
bed
to
check
for
channeling,
abrasion,
and
settling.
If
problems
are
found,
you
must
take
corrective
action
consistent
with
the
manufacturer's
recommendations
and
conduct
a
new
performance
test
to
determine
destruction
efficiency
according
to
§
63.4566.
(
c)
Carbon
adsorbers.
If
your
add­
on
control
device
is
a
carbon
adsorber,
establish
the
operating
limits
according
to
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
You
must
monitor
and
record
the
total
regeneration
desorbing
gas
(
e.
g.,
steam
or
nitrogen)
mass
flow
for
each
regeneration
cycle,
and
the
carbon
bed
temperature
after
each
carbon
bed
regeneration
and
cooling
cycle
for
the
regeneration
cycle
either
immediately
preceding
or
immediately
following
the
performance
test.
(
2)
The
operating
limits
for
your
carbon
adsorber
are
the
minimum
total
desorbing
gas
mass
flow
recorded
during
the
regeneration
cycle
and
the
maximum
carbon
bed
temperature
recorded
after
the
cooling
cycle.
(
d)
Condensers.
If
your
add­
on
control
device
is
a
condenser,
establish
the
operating
limits
according
to
paragraphs
(
d)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
During
the
performance
test,
you
must
monitor
and
record
the
condenser
outlet
(
product
side)
gas
temperature
at
least
once
every
15
minutes
during
each
of
the
three
test
runs.
(
2)
Use
the
data
collected
during
the
performance
test
to
calculate
and
record
the
average
condenser
outlet
(
product
side)
gas
temperature
maintained
during
the
performance
test.
This
average
condenser
outlet
gas
temperature
is
the
maximum
operating
limit
for
your
condenser.
(
e)
Concentrator.
If
your
add­
on
control
device
includes
a
concentrator,
you
must
establish
operating
limits
for
the
concentrator
according
to
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
58
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00044
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
e:\
pickup\
EP04DE02.024</
GPH>
72319
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
paragraphs
(
e)(
1)
through
(
4)
of
this
section.
(
1)
During
the
performance
test,
you
must
monitor
and
record
the
desorption
concentrate
stream
gas
temperature
at
least
once
every
15
minutes
during
each
of
the
three
runs
of
the
performance
test.
(
2)
Use
the
data
collected
during
the
performance
test
to
calculate
and
record
the
average
temperature.
This
is
the
minimum
operating
limit
for
the
desorption
concentrate
gas
stream
temperature.
(
3)
During
the
performance
test,
you
must
monitor
and
record
the
pressure
drop
of
the
dilute
stream
across
the
concentrator
at
least
once
every
15
minutes
during
each
of
the
three
runs
of
the
performance
test.
(
4)
Use
the
data
collected
during
the
performance
test
to
calculate
and
record
the
average
pressure
drop.
This
is
the
maximum
operating
limit
for
the
dilute
stream
across
the
concentrator.
(
f)
Emission
capture
system.
For
each
capture
device
that
is
not
part
of
a
PTE
that
meets
the
criteria
of
§
63.4565(
a),
establish
an
operating
limit
for
either
the
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure,
as
specified
in
paragraphs
(
f)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
The
operating
limit
for
a
PTE
is
specified
in
Table
1
of
this
subpart.
(
1)
During
the
capture
efficiency
determination
required
by
§
63.4560
and
described
in
§
§
63.4564
and
63.4565,
you
must
monitor
and
record
either
the
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
or
the
duct
static
pressure
for
each
separate
capture
device
in
your
emission
capture
system
at
least
once
every
15
minutes
during
each
of
the
three
test
runs
at
a
point
in
the
duct
between
the
capture
device
and
the
add­
on
control
device
inlet.
(
2)
Calculate
and
record
the
average
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure
for
the
three
test
runs
for
each
capture
device.
This
average
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure
is
the
minimum
operating
limit
for
that
specific
capture
device.

§
63.4568
What
are
the
requirements
for
continuous
parameter
monitoring
system
installation,
operation,
and
maintenance?

(
a)
General.
You
must
install,
operate,
and
maintain
each
CPMS
specified
in
paragraphs
(
c),
(
e),
(
f),
and
(
g)
of
this
section
according
to
paragraphs
(
a)(
1)
through
(
6)
of
this
section.
You
must
install,
operate,
and
maintain
each
CPMS
specified
in
paragraphs
(
b)
and
(
d)
of
this
section
according
to
paragraphs
(
a)(
3)
through
(
5)
of
this
section.
(
1)
The
CPMS
must
complete
a
minimum
of
one
cycle
of
operation
for
each
successive
15­
minute
period.
You
must
have
a
minimum
of
four
equally
spaced
successive
cycles
of
CPMS
operation
in
1
hour.
(
2)
You
must
determine
the
average
of
all
recorded
readings
for
each
successive
3­
hour
period
of
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
operation.
(
3)
You
must
record
the
results
of
each
inspection,
calibration,
and
validation
check
of
the
CPMS.
(
4)
You
must
maintain
the
CPMS
at
all
times
and
have
available
necessary
parts
for
routine
repairs
of
the
monitoring
equipment.
(
5)
You
must
operate
the
CPMS
and
collect
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
parameter
data
at
all
times
that
a
controlled
coating
operation
is
operating,
except
during
monitoring
malfunctions,
associated
repairs,
and
required
quality
assurance
or
control
activities
(
including,
if
applicable,
calibration
checks
and
required
zero
and
span
adjustments).
(
6)
You
must
not
use
emission
capture
system
or
add­
on
control
device
parameter
data
recorded
during
monitoring
malfunctions,
associated
repairs,
out­
of­
control
periods,
or
required
quality
assurance
or
control
activities
when
calculating
data
averages.
You
must
use
all
the
data
collected
during
all
other
periods
in
calculating
the
data
averages
for
determining
compliance
with
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
operating
limits.
(
7)
A
monitoring
malfunction
is
any
sudden,
infrequent,
not
reasonably
preventable
failure
of
the
CPMS
to
provide
valid
data.
Monitoring
failures
that
are
caused
in
part
by
poor
maintenance
or
careless
operation
are
not
malfunctions.
Any
period
for
which
the
monitoring
system
is
out­
of­
control
and
data
are
not
available
for
required
calculations
is
a
deviation
from
the
monitoring
requirements.
(
b)
Capture
system
bypass
line.
You
must
meet
the
requirements
of
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section
for
each
emission
capture
system
that
contains
bypass
lines
that
could
divert
emissions
away
from
the
add­
on
control
device
to
the
atmosphere.
(
1)
You
must
monitor
or
secure
the
valve
or
closure
mechanism
controlling
the
bypass
line
in
a
nondiverting
position
in
such
a
way
that
the
valve
or
closure
mechanism
cannot
be
opened
without
creating
a
record
that
the
valve
was
opened.
The
method
used
to
monitor
or
secure
the
valve
or
closure
mechanism
must
meet
one
of
the
requirements
specified
in
paragraphs
(
b)(
1)(
i)
through
(
iv)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Flow
control
position
indicator.
Install,
calibrate,
maintain,
and
operate
according
to
the
manufacturer's
specifications
a
flow
control
position
indicator
that
takes
a
reading
at
least
once
every
15
minutes
and
provides
a
record
indicating
whether
the
emissions
are
directed
to
the
add­
on
control
device
or
diverted
from
the
add­
on
control
device.
The
time
of
occurrence
and
flow
control
position
must
be
recorded,
as
well
as
every
time
the
flow
direction
is
changed.
The
flow
control
position
indicator
must
be
installed
at
the
entrance
to
any
bypass
line
that
could
divert
the
emissions
away
from
the
addon
control
device
to
the
atmosphere.
(
ii)
Car­
seal
or
lock­
and­
key
valve
closures.
Secure
any
bypass
line
valve
in
the
closed
position
with
a
car­
seal
or
a
lock­
and­
key
type
configuration.
You
must
visually
inspect
the
seal
or
closure
mechanism
at
least
once
every
month
to
ensure
that
the
valve
is
maintained
in
the
closed
position,
and
the
emissions
are
not
diverted
away
from
the
add­
on
control
device
to
the
atmosphere.
(
iii)
Valve
closure
monitoring.
Ensure
that
any
bypass
line
valve
is
in
the
closed
(
nondiverting)
position
through
monitoring
of
valve
position
at
least
once
every
15
minutes.
You
must
inspect
the
monitoring
system
at
least
once
every
month
to
verify
that
the
monitor
will
indicate
valve
position.
(
iv)
Automatic
shutdown
system.
Use
an
automatic
shutdown
system
in
which
the
coating
operation
is
stopped
when
flow
is
diverted
by
the
bypass
line
away
from
the
add­
on
control
device
to
the
atmosphere
when
the
coating
operation
is
running.
You
must
inspect
the
automatic
shutdown
system
at
least
once
every
month
to
verify
that
it
will
detect
diversions
of
flow
and
shut
down
the
coating
operation.
(
2)
If
any
bypass
line
is
opened,
you
must
include
a
description
of
why
the
bypass
line
was
opened
and
the
length
of
time
it
remained
open
in
the
semiannual
compliance
reports
required
in
§
63.4520.
(
c)
Thermal
oxidizers
and
catalytic
oxidizers.
If
you
are
using
a
thermal
oxidizer
or
catalytic
oxidizer
as
an
addon
control
device
(
including
those
used
with
concentrators
or
with
carbon
adsorbers
to
treat
desorbed
concentrate
streams),
you
must
comply
with
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
through
(
3)
of
this
section:
(
1)
For
a
thermal
oxidizer,
install
a
gas
temperature
monitor
in
the
firebox
of
the
thermal
oxidizer
or
in
the
duct
immediately
downstream
of
the
firebox
before
any
substantial
heat
exchange
occurs.
(
2)
For
a
catalytic
oxidizer,
install
gas
temperature
monitors
both
upstream
and
downstream
of
the
catalyst
bed.
The
temperature
monitors
must
be
in
the
gas
stream
immediately
before
and
after
the
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00045
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72320
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
catalyst
bed
to
measure
the
temperature
difference
across
the
bed.
(
3)
For
all
thermal
oxidizers
and
catalytic
oxidizers,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
c)(
3)(
i)
through
(
vii)
of
this
section
for
each
gas
temperature
monitoring
device.
(
i)
Locate
the
temperature
sensor
in
a
position
that
provides
a
representative
temperature.
(
ii)
Use
a
temperature
sensor
with
a
measurement
sensitivity
of
4
degrees
Fahrenheit
or
0.75
percent
of
the
temperature
value,
whichever
is
larger.
(
iii)
Shield
the
temperature
sensor
system
from
electromagnetic
interference
and
chemical
contaminants.
(
iv)
If
a
gas
temperature
chart
recorder
is
used,
it
must
have
a
measurement
sensitivity
in
the
minor
division
of
at
least
20
degrees
Fahrenheit.
(
v)
Perform
an
electronic
calibration
at
least
semiannually
according
to
the
procedures
in
the
manufacturer's
owners
manual.
Following
the
electronic
calibration,
you
must
conduct
a
temperature
sensor
validation
check
in
which
a
second
or
redundant
temperature
sensor
placed
nearby
the
process
temperature
sensor
must
yield
a
reading
within
30
degrees
Fahrenheit
of
the
process
temperature
sensor
reading.
(
vi)
Conduct
calibration
and
validation
checks
any
time
the
sensor
exceeds
the
manufacturer's
specified
maximum
operating
temperature
range
or
install
a
new
temperature
sensor.
(
vii)
At
least
monthly,
inspect
components
for
integrity
and
electrical
connections
for
continuity,
oxidation,
and
galvanic
corrosion.
(
d)
Carbon
adsorbers.
If
you
are
using
a
carbon
adsorber
as
an
add­
on
control
device,
you
must
monitor
the
total
regeneration
desorbing
gas
(
e.
g.,
steam
or
nitrogen)
mass
flow
for
each
regeneration
cycle,
the
carbon
bed
temperature
after
each
regeneration
and
cooling
cycle,
and
comply
with
paragraphs
(
a)(
3)
through
(
5)
and
(
d)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
The
regeneration
desorbing
gas
mass
flow
monitor
must
be
an
integrating
device
having
a
measurement
sensitivity
of
plus
or
minus
10
percent
capable
of
recording
the
total
regeneration
desorbing
gas
mass
flow
for
each
regeneration
cycle.
(
2)
The
carbon
bed
temperature
monitor
must
have
a
measurement
sensitivity
of
1
percent
of
the
temperature
recorded
or
1
degree
Fahrenheit,
whichever
is
greater,
and
must
be
capable
of
recording
the
temperature
within
15
minutes
of
completing
any
carbon
bed
cooling
cycle.
(
e)
Condensers.
If
you
are
using
a
condenser,
you
must
monitor
the
condenser
outlet
(
product
side)
gas
temperature
and
comply
with
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
e)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
The
gas
temperature
monitor
must
have
a
measurement
sensitivity
of
1
percent
of
the
temperature
recorded
or
1
degree
Fahrenheit,
whichever
is
greater.
(
2)
The
temperature
monitor
must
provide
a
gas
temperature
record
at
least
once
every
15
minutes.
(
f)
Concentrator.
If
you
are
using
a
concentrator,
such
as
a
zeolite
wheel
or
rotary
carbon
bed
concentrator,
you
must
comply
with
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
f)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
You
must
install
a
temperature
monitor
in
the
desorption
gas
stream.
The
temperature
monitor
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
c)(
3)
of
this
section.
(
2)
You
must
install
a
device
to
monitor
pressure
drop
across
the
zeolite
wheel
or
rotary
carbon
bed.
The
pressure
monitoring
device
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
f)(
2)(
i)
through
(
vii)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Locate
the
pressure
sensor(
s)
in
or
as
close
to
a
position
that
provides
a
representative
measurement
of
the
pressure.
(
ii)
Minimize
or
eliminate
pulsating
pressure,
vibration,
and
internal
and
external
corrosion.
(
iii)
Use
a
gauge
with
a
minimum
tolerance
of
0.5
inch
of
water
or
a
transducer
with
a
minimum
tolerance
of
1
percent
of
the
pressure
range.
(
iv)
Check
the
pressure
tap
daily.
(
v)
Using
a
manometer,
check
gauge
calibration
quarterly
and
transducer
calibration
monthly.
(
vi)
Conduct
calibration
checks
anytime
the
sensor
exceeds
the
manufacturer's
specified
maximum
operating
pressure
range
or
install
a
new
pressure
sensor.
(
vii)
At
least
monthly,
inspect
all
components
for
integrity,
all
electrical
connections
for
continuity,
and
all
mechanical
connections
for
leakage.
(
g)
Emission
capture
systems.
The
capture
system
monitoring
system
must
comply
with
the
applicable
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
g)(
1)
and
(
2)
of
this
section.
(
1)
For
each
flow
measurement
device,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
g)(
1)(
i)
through
(
iv)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Locate
a
flow
sensor
in
a
position
that
provides
a
representative
flow
measurement
in
the
duct
from
each
capture
device
in
the
emission
capture
system
to
the
add­
on
control
device.
(
ii)
Reduce
swirling
flow
or
abnormal
velocity
distributions
due
to
upstream
and
downstream
disturbances.
(
iii)
Conduct
a
flow
sensor
calibration
check
at
least
semiannually.
(
iv)
At
least
monthly,
inspect
components
for
integrity,
electrical
connections
for
continuity,
and
mechanical
connections
for
leakage.
(
2)
For
each
pressure
drop
measurement
device,
you
must
comply
with
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(
a)
and
(
g)(
2)(
i)
through
(
vi)
of
this
section.
(
i)
Locate
the
pressure
sensor(
s)
in
or
as
close
to
a
position
that
provides
a
representative
measurement
of
the
pressure
drop
across
each
opening
you
are
monitoring.
(
ii)
Minimize
or
eliminate
pulsating
pressure,
vibration,
and
internal
and
external
corrosion.
(
iii)
Check
pressure
tap
pluggage
daily.
(
iv)
Using
an
inclined
manometer
with
a
measurement
sensitivity
of
0.0002
inch
water,
check
gauge
calibration
quarterly
and
transducer
calibration
monthly.
(
v)
Conduct
calibration
checks
any
time
the
sensor
exceeds
the
manufacturer's
specified
maximum
operating
pressure
range
or
install
a
new
pressure
sensor.
(
vi)
At
least
monthly,
inspect
components
for
integrity,
electrical
connections
for
continuity,
and
mechanical
connections
for
leakage.

Other
Requirements
and
Information
§
63.4580
Who
implements
and
enforces
this
subpart?
(
a)
This
subpart
can
be
implemented
and
enforced
by
us,
the
U.
S.
EPA,
or
a
delegated
authority
such
as
your
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency.
If
the
Administrator
has
delegated
authority
to
your
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency,
then
that
agency
(
as
well
as
the
EPA)
has
the
authority
to
implement
and
enforce
this
subpart.
You
should
contact
your
EPA
Regional
Office
to
find
out
if
implementation
and
enforcement
of
this
subpart
is
delegated
to
your
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency.
(
b)
In
delegating
implementation
and
enforcement
authority
of
this
subpart
to
a
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency
under
subpart
E
of
this
part,
the
authorities
contained
in
paragraph
(
c)
of
this
section
are
retained
by
the
Administrator
and
are
not
transferred
to
the
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency.
(
c)
The
authorities
that
will
not
be
delegated
to
State,
local,
or
tribal
agencies
are
listed
in
paragraphs
(
c)(
1)
through
(
4)
of
this
section:
(
1)
Approval
of
alternatives
to
the
work
practice
standards
in
§
63.4493
under
§
63.6(
g).

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00046
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72321
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
(
2)
Approval
of
major
alternatives
to
test
methods
under
§
63.7(
e)(
2)(
ii)
and
(
f)
and
as
defined
in
§
63.90.
(
3)
Approval
of
major
alternatives
to
monitoring
under
§
63.8(
f)
and
as
defined
in
§
63.90.
(
4)
Approval
of
major
alternatives
to
recordkeeping
and
reporting
under
§
63.10(
f)
and
as
defined
in
§
63.90.

§
63.4581
What
definitions
apply
to
this
subpart?

Terms
used
in
this
subpart
are
defined
in
the
Clean
Air
Act,
in
40
CFR
63.2,
the
General
Provisions
of
this
part,
and
in
this
section
as
follows:
Additive
means
a
material
that
is
added
to
a
coating
after
purchase
from
a
supplier
(
e.
g.,
catalysts,
activators,
accelerators).
Add­
on
control
means
an
air
pollution
control
device,
such
as
a
thermal
oxidizer
or
carbon
adsorber,
that
reduces
pollution
in
an
air
stream
by
destruction
or
removal
before
discharge
to
the
atmosphere.
Adhesive,
adhesive
coating
means
any
chemical
substance
that
is
applied
for
the
purpose
of
bonding
two
surfaces
together.
Assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
means
any
coating
operation
in
which
coating
is
applied
to
the
surface
of
some
plastic
component
or
plastic
surface
of
a
fully
assembled
motor
vehicle
or
trailer
intended
for
on­
road
use,
including,
but
not
limited
to,
plastic
components
or
surfaces
on:
automobiles
and
light
trucks
that
have
been
repaired
after
a
collision
or
otherwise
repainted,
fleet
delivery
trucks,
and
motor
homes
and
other
recreational
vehicles
(
including
camping
trailers
and
fifth
wheels).
Assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
does
not
include
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
prior
to
their
attachment
to
an
on­
road
vehicle
on
an
original
equipment
manufacturer's
(
OEM)
assembly
line.
Assembled
onroad
vehicle
coating
also
does
not
include
the
use
of
adhesives,
sealants,
and
caulks
used
in
assembling
on­
road
vehicles.
Capture
device
means
a
hood,
enclosure,
room,
floor
sweep,
or
other
means
of
containing
or
collecting
emissions
and
directing
those
emissions
into
an
add­
on
air
pollution
control
device.
Capture
efficiency
or
capture
system
efficiency
means
the
portion
(
expressed
as
a
percentage)
of
the
pollutants
from
an
emission
source
that
is
delivered
to
an
add­
on
control
device.
Capture
system
means
one
or
more
capture
devices
intended
to
collect
emissions
generated
by
a
coating
operation
in
the
use
of
coatings
or
cleaning
materials,
both
at
the
point
of
application
and
at
subsequent
points
where
emissions
from
the
coatings
and
cleaning
materials
occur,
such
as
flashoff,
drying,
or
curing.
As
used
in
this
subpart,
multiple
capture
devices
that
collect
emissions
generated
by
a
coating
operation
are
considered
a
single
capture
system.
Cleaning
material
means
a
solvent
used
to
remove
contaminants
and
other
materials,
such
as
dirt,
grease,
oil,
and
dried
or
wet
coating
(
e.
g.,
depainting),
from
a
substrate
before
or
after
coating
application
or
from
equipment
associated
with
a
coating
operation,
such
as
spray
booths,
spray
guns,
racks,
tanks,
and
hangers.
Thus,
it
includes
any
cleaning
material
used
on
substrates
or
equipment
or
both.
Coating
means
a
material
applied
to
a
substrate
for
decorative,
protective,
or
functional
purposes.
Such
materials
include,
but
are
not
limited
to,
paints,
sealants,
liquid
plastic
coatings,
caulks,
inks,
adhesives,
and
maskants.
Decorative,
protective,
or
functional
materials
that
consist
only
of
protective
oils
for
metal,
acids,
bases,
or
any
combination
of
these
substances
are
not
considered
coatings
for
the
purposes
of
this
subpart.
Coating
operation
means
equipment
used
to
apply
cleaning
materials
to
a
substrate
to
prepare
it
for
coating
application
(
surface
preparation)
or
to
remove
dried
coating;
to
apply
coating
to
a
substrate
(
coating
application)
and
to
dry
or
cure
the
coating
after
application;
or
to
clean
coating
operation
equipment
(
equipment
cleaning).
A
single
coating
operation
may
include
any
combination
of
these
types
of
equipment,
but
always
includes
at
least
the
point
at
which
a
coating
or
cleaning
material
is
applied
and
all
subsequent
points
in
the
affected
source
where
organic
HAP
emissions
from
that
coating
or
cleaning
material
occur.
There
may
be
multiple
coating
operations
in
an
affected
source.
Coating
application
with
handheld,
nonrefillable
aerosol
containers,
touchup
markers,
or
marking
pens
is
not
a
coating
operation
for
the
purposes
of
this
subpart.
Coatings
solids
means
the
nonvolatile
portion
of
the
coating
that
makes
up
the
dry
film.
Continuous
parameter
monitoring
system
(
CPMS)
means
the
total
equipment
that
may
be
required
to
meet
the
data
acquisition
and
availability
requirements
of
this
subpart,
used
to
sample,
condition
(
if
applicable),
analyze,
and
provide
a
record
of
coating
operation,
or
capture
system,
or
add­
on
control
device
parameters.
Controlled
coating
operation
means
a
coating
operation
from
which
some
or
all
of
the
organic
HAP
emissions
are
routed
through
an
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device.
Deviation
means
any
instance
in
which
an
affected
source
subject
to
this
subpart,
or
an
owner
or
operator
of
such
a
source:
(
1)
Fails
to
meet
any
requirement
or
obligation
established
by
this
subpart
including,
but
not
limited
to,
any
emission
limit
or
operating
limit,
or
work
practice
standard;
(
2)
Fails
to
meet
any
term
or
condition
that
is
adopted
to
implement
an
applicable
requirement
in
this
subpart
and
that
is
included
in
the
operating
permit
for
any
affected
source
required
to
obtain
such
a
permit;
or
(
3)
Fails
to
meet
any
emission
limit,
or
operating
limit,
or
work
practice
standard
in
this
subpart
during
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction,
regardless
of
whether
or
not
such
failure
is
permitted
by
this
subpart.
Emission
limitation
means
an
emission
limit,
operating
limit,
or
work
practice
standard.
Enclosure
means
a
structure
that
surrounds
a
source
of
emissions
and
captures
and
directs
the
emissions
to
an
add­
on
control
device.
Exempt
compound
means
a
specific
compound
that
is
not
considered
a
VOC
due
to
negligible
photochemical
reactivity.
The
exempt
compounds
are
listed
in
40
CFR
51.100(
s).
Facility
maintenance
means
the
routine
repair
or
renovation
(
including
the
surface
coating)
of
the
tools,
equipment,
machinery,
and
structures
that
comprise
the
infrastructure
of
the
affected
facility
and
that
are
necessary
for
the
facility
to
function
in
its
intended
capacity.
General­
use
coating
means
any
coating
operation
that
is
not
a
headlamp,
TPO,
or
assembled
on­
road
vehicle
coating
operation.
Headlamp
coating
means
any
coating
operation
in
which
coating
is
applied
to
the
surface
of
some
component
of
the
body
of
an
automotive
headlamp,
including
the
application
of
reflective
argent
coatings
and
clear
topcoats.
Headlamp
coating
does
not
include
any
coating
operation
performed
on
an
assembled
on­
road
vehicle.
Hobby
shop
means
any
surface
coating
operation,
located
at
an
affected
source,
that
is
used
exclusively
for
personal,
noncommercial
purposes
by
the
affected
source's
employees
or
assigned
personnel.
Liquid
plastic
coating
means
a
coating
made
from
fine,
particle­
size
polyvinyl
chloride
(
PVC)
in
solution
(
also
referred
to
as
plastisol).
Manufacturer's
formulation
data
means
data
on
a
material
(
such
as
a
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00047
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72322
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
coating)
that
are
supplied
by
the
material
manufacturer
based
on
knowledge
of
the
ingredients
used
to
manufacture
that
material,
rather
than
based
on
testing
of
the
material
with
the
test
methods
specified
in
§
63.4541.
Manufacturer's
formulation
data
may
include,
but
are
not
limited
to,
information
on
density,
organic
HAP
content,
volatile
organic
matter
content,
and
coating
solids
content.
Mass
fraction
of
coating
solids
means
the
ratio
of
the
mass
of
solids
(
also
known
as
the
mass
of
nonvolatiles)
to
the
mass
of
a
coating
in
which
it
is
contained;
lb
of
coating
solids
per
lb
of
coating.
Mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
means
the
ratio
of
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
to
the
mass
of
a
material
in
which
it
is
contained,
expressed
as
lb
of
organic
HAP
per
lb
of
material.
Month
means
a
calendar
month
or
a
pre­
specified
period
of
28
days
to
35
days
to
allow
for
flexibility
in
recordkeeping
when
data
are
based
on
a
business
accounting
period.
Organic
HAP
content
means
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
per
mass
of
coating
solids
for
a
coating
calculated
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4541.
The
organic
HAP
content
is
determined
for
the
coating
in
the
condition
it
is
in
when
received
from
its
manufacturer
or
supplier
and
does
not
account
for
any
alteration
after
receipt.
Permanent
total
enclosure
(
PTE)
means
a
permanently
installed
enclosure
that
meets
the
criteria
of
Method
204
of
appendix
M,
40
CFR
part
51
for
a
PTE
and
that
directs
all
the
exhaust
gases
from
the
enclosure
to
an
add­
on
control
device.
Personal
Watercraft
means
a
vessel
(
boat)
which
uses
an
inboard
motor
powering
a
water
jet
pump
as
its
primary
source
of
motive
power
and
which
is
designed
to
be
operated
by
a
person
or
persons
sitting,
standing,
or
kneeling
on
the
vessel,
rather
than
in
the
conventional
manner
of
sitting
or
standing
inside
the
vessel.
Plastic
part
and
product
means
any
piece
or
combination
of
pieces
of
which
at
least
one
has
been
formed
from
one
or
more
resins.
Such
pieces
may
be
solid,
porous,
flexible
or
rigid.
Protective
oil
means
an
organic
material
that
is
applied
to
metal
for
the
purpose
of
providing
lubrication
or
protection
from
corrosion
without
forming
a
solid
film.
This
definition
of
protective
oil
includes,
but
is
not
limited
to,
lubricating
oils,
evaporative
oils
(
including
those
that
evaporate
completely),
and
extrusion
oils.
Research
or
laboratory
facility
means
a
facility
whose
primary
purpose
is
for
research
and
development
of
new
processes
and
products,
that
is
conducted
under
the
close
supervision
of
technically
trained
personnel,
and
is
not
engaged
in
the
manufacture
of
final
or
intermediate
products
for
commercial
purposes,
except
in
a
de
minimis
manner.
Responsible
official
means
responsible
official
as
defined
in
40
CFR
70.2.
Startup,
initial
means
the
first
time
equipment
is
brought
online
in
a
facility.
Surface
preparation
means
use
of
a
cleaning
material
on
a
portion
of
or
all
of
a
substrate.
This
includes
use
of
a
cleaning
material
to
remove
dried
coating,
which
is
sometimes
called
``
depainting.''
Temporary
total
enclosure
means
an
enclosure
constructed
for
the
purpose
of
measuring
the
capture
efficiency
of
pollutants
emitted
from
a
given
source
as
defined
in
Method
204
of
appendix
M,
40
CFR
part
51.
Thermoplastic
olefin
(
TPO)
coating
means
any
coating
operation
in
which
the
coatings
are
components
of
a
system
of
coatings
applied
to
a
TPO
substrate,
including
adhesion
promoters,
primers,
color
coatings,
clear
coatings
and
topcoats.
Thermoplastic
olefin
coating
does
not
include
the
coating
of
TPO
substrates
on
assembled
on­
road
vehicles.
Thinner
means
an
organic
solvent
that
is
added
to
a
coating
after
the
coating
is
received
from
the
supplier.
Total
volatile
hydrocarbon
(
TVH)
means
the
total
amount
of
nonaqueous
volatile
organic
matter
determined
according
to
Methods
204
and
204A
through
204F
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51
and
substituting
the
term
TVH
each
place
in
the
methods
where
the
term
VOC
is
used.
The
TVH
includes
both
VOC
and
non­
VOC.
Uncontrolled
coating
operation
means
a
coating
operation
from
which
none
of
the
organic
HAP
emissions
are
routed
through
an
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device.
Volatile
organic
compound
(
VOC)
means
any
compound
defined
as
VOC
in
40
CFR
51.100(
s).
Wastewater
means
water
that
is
generated
in
a
coating
operation
and
is
collected,
stored,
or
treated
prior
to
being
discarded
or
discharged.
If
you
are
required
to
comply
with
operating
limits
by
§
63.4491(
c),
you
must
comply
with
the
applicable
operating
limits
in
the
following
table:

TABLE
1.
 
TO
SUBPART
PPPP
OF
PART
63
 
OPERATING
LIMITS
IF
USING
THE
EMISSION
RATE
WITH
ADD­
ON
CONTROLS
OPTION
For
the
following
device
you
must
meet
the
following
operating
limit
.
.
.
and
you
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
operating
limit
by
.
.
.

1.
thermal
oxidizer
...............
a.
the
average
combustion
temperature
in
any
3­
hour
period
must
not
fall
below
the
combustion
temperature
limit
established
according
to
§
63.4567(
a).
i.
collecting
the
combustion
temperature
data
according
to
§
63.4568(
c);
ii.
reducing
the
data
to
3­
hour
block
averages;
and
iii.
maintaining
the
3­
hour
average
combustion
temperature
at
or
above
the
temperature
limit.
2.
catalytic
oxidizer
..............
a.
the
average
temperature
measured
just
before
the
catalyst
bed
in
any
3­
hour
period
must
not
fall
below
the
limit
established
according
to
§
63.4567(
b);
and
either.
i.
collecting
the
temperature
data
according
to
§
63.4568(
c);
ii.
reducing
the
data
to
3­
hour
block
averages;
and
iii.
maintaining
the
3­
hour
average
temperature
before
the
catalyst
bed
at
or
above
the
temperature
limit.
b.
ensure
that
the
average
temperature
difference
across
the
catalyst
bed
in
any
3­
hour
period
does
not
fall
below
the
temperature
difference
limit
established
according
to
§
63.4567(
b)(
2);
or
i.
collecting
the
temperature
data
according
to
§
63.4568(
c),
reducing
the
data
to
3­
hour
block
averages
and
maintaining
the
3­
hour
average
temperature
difference
at
or
above
the
temperature
difference
limit;
or
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
21:
41
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00048
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72323
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
TABLE
1.
 
TO
SUBPART
PPPP
OF
PART
63
 
OPERATING
LIMITS
IF
USING
THE
EMISSION
RATE
WITH
ADD­
ON
CONTROLS
OPTION
 
Continued
For
the
following
device
you
must
meet
the
following
operating
limit
.
.
.
and
you
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
operating
limit
by
.
.
.

c.
develop
and
implement
an
inspection
and
maintenance
plan
according
to
§
63.4567(
b)(
4).
i.
maintaining
an
up­
to­
date
inspection
and
maintenance
plan,
records
of
annual
catalyst
activity
checks,
records
of
monthly
inspections
of
the
oxidizer
system,
and
records
of
the
annual
internal
inspections
of
the
catalyst
bed.
If
a
problem
is
discovered
during
a
monthly
or
annual
inspection
required
by
§
63.4567(
b)(
4),
you
must
take
corrective
action
as
soon
as
practicable
consistent
with
the
manufacturer's
recommendations.
3.
carbon
adsorber
...............
a.
the
total
regeneration
desorbing
gas
(
e.
g.,
steam
or
nitrogen)
mass
flow
for
each
carbon
bed
regeneration
cycle
must
not
fall
below
the
total
regeneration
desorbing
gas
mass
flow
limit
established
according
to
§
63.4567(
c).
i.
measuring
the
total
regeneration
desorbing
gas
(
e.
g.,
steam
or
nitrogen)
mass
flow
for
each
regeneration
cycle
according
to
§
63.4568(
d);
and
ii.
maintaining
the
total
regeneration
desorbing
gas
mass
flow
at
or
above
the
mass
flow
limit.
b.
the
temperature
of
the
carbon
bed,
after
completing
each
regeneration
and
any
cooling
cycle,
must
not
exceed
the
carbon
bed
temperature
limit
established
according
to
§
63.4567(
c).
i.
measuring
the
temperature
of
the
carbon
bed
after
completing
each
regeneration
and
any
cooling
cycle
according
to
§
63.4568(
d);
and
ii.
operating
the
carbon
beds
such
that
each
carbon
bed
is
not
returned
to
service
until
completing
each
regeneration
and
any
cooling
cycle
until
the
recorded
temperature
of
the
carbon
bed
is
at
or
below
the
temperature
limit.
4.
condenser
........................
a.
the
average
condenser
outlet
(
product
side)
gas
temperature
in
any
3­
hour
period
must
not
exceed
the
temperature
limit
established
according
to
§
63.4567(
d).
i.
collecting
the
condenser
outlet
(
product
side)
gas
temperature
according
to
§
63.4568(
e);
ii.
reducing
the
data
to
3­
hour
block
averages;
and
iii.
maintaining
the
3­
hour
average
gas
temperature
at
the
outlet
at
or
below
the
temperature
limit.
5.
concentrators,
including
zeolite
wheels
and
rotary
carbon
adsorbers.
a.
the
average
gas
temperature
of
the
desorption
concentrate
stream
in
any
3­
hour
period
must
not
fall
below
the
limit
established
according
to
§
63.4567(
e).
i.
collecting
the
temperature
data
according
to
63.4568(
f);
ii.
reducing
the
data
to
3­
hour
block
averages
and
iii.
maintaining
the
3­
hour
average
temperature
at
or
above
the
temperature
limit.
b.
the
average
pressure
drop
of
the
dilute
stream
across
the
concentrator
in
any
3­
hour
period
must
not
fall
below
the
limit
established
according
to
§
63.4567(
e).
i.
collecting
the
pressure
drop
data
according
to
63.4568(
f);
and
ii.
reducing
the
pressure
drop
data
to
3­
hour
block
averages;
and
iii.
maintaining
the
3­
hour
average
pressure
drop
at
or
above
the
pressure
drop
limit.
6.
emission
capture
system
that
is
a
PTE
according
to
§
63.4565(
a).
a.
the
direction
of
the
air
flow
at
all
times
must
be
into
the
enclosure;
and
either
b.
the
average
facial
velocity
of
air
through
all
natural
draft
openings
in
the
enclosure
must
be
at
least
200
feet
per
minute;
or.
c.
the
pressure
drop
across
the
enclosure
must
be
at
least
0.007
inch
H2O,
as
established
in
Method
204
of
appendix
M
to
40
CFR
part
51.
i.
collecting
the
direction
of
air
flow,
and
either
the
facial
velocity
of
air
through
all
natural
draft
openings
according
to
§
63.4568(
g)(
1)
or
the
pressure
drop
across
the
enclosure
according
to
§
63.4568(
g)(
2);
and
ii.
maintaining
the
facial
velocity
of
air
flow
through
all
natural
draft
or
the
pressure
drop
openings
at
or
above
the
facial
velocity
limit
or
pressure
drop
limit,
and
maintaining
the
direction
of
air
flow
into
the
enclosure
at
all
times.
7.
emission
capture
system
that
is
not
a
PTE
according
to
§
63.4565(
a).
a.
the
average
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure
in
each
duct
between
a
capture
device
and
add­
on
control
device
inlet
in
any
3­
hour
period
must
not
fall
below
the
average
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure
limit
established
for
that
capture
device
according
to
§
63.4567(
f).
i.
collecting
the
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure
for
each
capture
device
according
to
§
63.4568(
g);
ii.
reducing
the
data
to
3­
hour
block
averages;
and
iii.
maintaining
the
3­
hour
average
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure
for
each
capture
device
at
or
above
the
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure
limit.

You
must
comply
with
the
applicable
General
Provisions
requirements
according
to
the
following
table:

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
22:
11
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00049
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72324
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
TABLE
2
TO
SUBPART
PPPP
OF
PART
63.
 
APPLICABILITY
OF
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
TO
SUBPART
PPPP
OF
PART
63
Citation
Subject
Applicable
to
subpart
PPPP
Explanation
§
63.1(
a)(
1)
 
(
14)
...............................
General
Applicability
...............................
Yes.
§
63.1(
b)(
1)
 
(
3)
.................................
Initial
Applicability
Determination
............
Yes
...............................
Applicability
to
subpart
PPPP
is
also
specified
in
§
63.4481.
§
63.1(
c)(
1)
.......................................
Applicability
After
Standard
Established
Yes.
§
63.1(
c)(
2)
 
(
3)
.................................
Applicability
of
Permit
Program
for
Area
Sources.
No
.................................
Area
sources
are
not
subject
to
subpart
PPPP.
§
63.1(
c)(
4)
 
(
5)
.................................
Extensions
and
Notifications
...................
Yes.
§
63.1(
e)
...........................................
Applicability
of
Permit
Program
Before
Relevant
Standard
is
Set.
Yes.

§
63.2
................................................
Definitions
...............................................
Yes
...............................
Additional
definitions
are
specified
in
§
63.4581.
§
63.3(
a)
 
(
c)
.....................................
Units
and
Abbreviations
..........................
Yes.
§
63.4(
a)(
1)
 
(
5)
.................................
Prohibited
Activities
.................................
Yes.
§
63.4(
b)
 
(
c)
.....................................
Circumvention/
Severability
......................
Yes.
§
63.5(
a)
...........................................
Construction/
Reconstruction
...................
Yes.
§
63.5(
b)(
1)
 
(
6)
.................................
Requirements
for
Existing,
Newly
Constructed
and
Reconstructed
Sources.
Yes.

§
63.5(
d)
...........................................
Application
for
Approval
of
Construction/
Reconstruction.
Yes.

§
63.5(
e)
...........................................
Approval
of
Construction/
Reconstruction
Yes.
§
63.5(
f)
............................................
Approval
of
Construction/
Reconstruction
Based
on
Prior
State
Review.
Yes.

§
63.6(
a)
...........................................
Compliance
With
Standards
and
Maintenance
Requirements
 
Applicability.
Yes.

§
63.6(
b)(
1)
 
(
7)
.................................
Compliance
Dates
for
New
and
Reconstructed
Sources.
Yes
...............................
§
63.4483
specifies
the
compliance
dates.
§
63.6(
c)(
1)
 
(
5)
.................................
Compliance
Dates
for
Existing
Sources
Yes
...............................
§
63.4483
specifies
the
compliance
dates.
§
63.6(
e)(
1)
 
(
2)
.................................
Operation
and
Maintenance
...................
Yes.
§
63.6(
e)(
3)
.......................................
Startup,
Shutdown,
and
Malfunction
Plan.
Yes
...............................
Only
sources
using
an
add­
on
control
device
to
comply
with
the
standard
must
complete
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plans.
§
63.6(
f)(
1)
........................................
Compliance
Except
During
Startup,
Shutdown,
and
Malfunction.
Yes
...............................
Applies
only
to
sources
using
an
add­
on
control
device
to
comply
with
the
standard.
§
63.6(
f)(
2)
 
(
3)
..................................
Methods
for
Determining
Compliance
....
Yes.
§
63.6(
g)(
1)
 
(
3)
.................................
Use
of
an
Alternative
Standard
..............
Yes.
§
63.6(
h)
...........................................
Compliance
With
Opacity/
Visible
Emission
Standards.
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
does
not
establish
opacity
standards
and
does
not
require
continuous
opacity
monitoring
systems
(
COMS).
§
63.6(
i)(
1)
 
(
16)
................................
Extension
of
Compliance
........................
Yes.
§
63.6(
j)
.............................................
Presidential
Compliance
Exemption
.......
Yes.
§
63.7(
a)(
1)
.......................................
Performance
Test
Requirements
 
Applicability
Yes
...............................
Applies
to
all
affected
sources.
Additional
requirements
for
performance
testing
are
specified
in
§
§
63.4564,
63.4565,
and
63.4566.
§
63.7(
a)(
2)
.......................................
Performance
Test
Requirements
 
Dates
Yes
...............................
Applies
only
to
performance
tests
for
capture
system
and
control
device
efficiency
at
sources
using
these
to
comply
with
the
standard
Section
63.4560
specifies
the
schedule
for
performance
test
requirements
that
are
earlier
than
those
specified
in
§
63.7(
a)(
2).
§
63.7(
a)(
3)
.......................................
Performance
Tests
Required
By
the
Administrator
Yes.

§
63.7(
b)
 
(
e)
.....................................
Performance
Test
Requirements
 
Notification
Quality
Assurance,
Facilities
Necessary
for
Safe
Testing,
Conditions
During
Test.
Yes
...............................
Applies
only
to
performance
tests
for
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
efficiency
at
sources
using
these
to
comply
with
the
standard.
§
63.7(
f)
............................................
Performance
Test
Requirements
 
Use
of
Alternative
Test
Method.
Yes
...............................
Applies
to
all
test
methods
except
those
used
to
determine
capture
system
efficiency.

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00050
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72325
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
TABLE
2
TO
SUBPART
PPPP
OF
PART
63.
 
APPLICABILITY
OF
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
TO
SUBPART
PPPP
OF
PART
63
 
Continued
Citation
Subject
Applicable
to
subpart
PPPP
Explanation
§
63.7(
g)
 
(
h)
.....................................
Performance
Test
Requirements
 
Data
Analysis,
Recordkeeping,
Reporting,
Waiver
of
Test.
Yes
...............................
Applies
only
to
performance
tests
for
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
efficiency
at
sources
using
these
to
comply
with
the
standard.
§
63.8(
a)(
1)
 
(
3)
.................................
Monitoring
Requirements
 
Applicability
Yes
...............................
Applies
only
to
monitoring
of
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
efficiency
at
sources
using
these
to
comply
with
the
standard
Additional
requirements
for
monitoring
are
specified
in
§
63.4568.
§
63.8(
a)(
4)
.......................................
Additional
Monitoring
Requirements
.......
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
does
not
have
monitoring
requirements
for
flares.
§
63.8(
b)
...........................................
Conduct
of
Monitoring
.............................
Yes.
§
63.8(
c)(
1)
 
(
3)
.................................
Continuous
Monitoring
Sysem
(
CMS)
Operation
and
Maintenance.
Yes
...............................
Applies
only
to
monitoring
of
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
efficiency
at
sources
using
these
to
comply
with
the
standard
Additional
requirements
for
CMS
operations
and
maintenance
are
specified
in
§
63.4568.
§
63.8(
c)(
4)
.......................................
CMS
........................................................
No
.................................
§
63.4568
specifies
the
requirements
for
the
operation
of
CMS
for
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices
at
sources
using
these
to
comply.
§
63.8(
c)(
5)
.......................................
COMS
.....................................................
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
does
not
have
opacity
or
visible
emission
standards.
§
63.8(
c)(
6)
.......................................
CMS
Requirements
.................................
No
.................................
§
63.4568
specifies
the
requirements
for
monitoring
systems
for
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices
at
sources
using
these
to
comply.
§
63.8(
c)(
7)
.......................................
CMS
Out­
of­
Control
Periods
...................
Yes.
§
63.8(
c)(
8)
.......................................
CMS
Out­
of­
Control
Periods
and
Reporting
No
.................................
§
63.4520
requires
reporting
of
CMS
out
of
control
periods.
§
63.8(
d)
 
(
e)
.....................................
Quality
Control
Program
and
CMS
Performance
Evaluation.
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
does
not
require
the
use
of
continuous
emissions
monitoring
systems.
§
63.8(
f)(
1)
 
(
5)
..................................
Use
of
an
Alternative
Monitoring
Method
Yes.
§
63.8(
f)(
6)
........................................
Alternative
to
Relative
Accuracy
Test
.....
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
does
not
require
the
use
of
continuous
emissions
monitoring
systems.
§
63.8(
g)(
1)
 
(
5)
.................................
Data
Reduction
.......................................
No
.................................
§
§
63.4567
and
63.4568
specify
monitoring
data
reduction.
§
63.9(
a)
 
(
d)
.....................................
Notification
Requirements
.......................
Yes.
§
63.9(
e)
...........................................
Notification
of
Performance
Test
............
Yes
...............................
Applies
only
to
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
performance
tests
at
sources
using
these
to
comply
with
the
standard.
§
63.9(
f)
............................................
Notification
of
Visible
Emissions/
Opacity
Test.
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
does
not
have
opacity
or
visible
emission
standards.
§
63.9(
g)(
1)
 
(
3)
.................................
Additional
Notifications
When
Using
CMS.
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
does
not
require
the
use
of
continuous
emissions
monitoring
systems.
§
63.9(
h)
...........................................
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
...........
Yes
...............................
§
63.4510
specifies
the
dates
for
submitting
the
notification
of
compliance
status.
§
63.9(
i)
.............................................
Adjustment
of
Submittal
Deadlines
.........
Yes.
§
63.9(
j)
.............................................
Change
in
Previous
Information
.............
Yes.
§
63.10(
a)
.........................................
Recordkeeping/
Reporting
 
Applicability
and
General
Information.
Yes.

§
63.10(
b)(
1)
.....................................
General
Recordkeeping
Requirements
..
Yes
...............................
Additional
requirements
are
specified
in
§
§
63.4530
and
63.4531.

VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00051
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72326
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
TABLE
2
TO
SUBPART
PPPP
OF
PART
63.
 
APPLICABILITY
OF
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
TO
SUBPART
PPPP
OF
PART
63
 
Continued
Citation
Subject
Applicable
to
subpart
PPPP
Explanation
§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
i)
 
(
v)
............................
Recordkeeping
Relevant
to
Startup,
Shutdown,
and
Malfunction
Periods
and
CMS.
Yes
...............................
Requirements
for
Startup,
Shutdown
and
Malfunction
records
only
apply
to
add­
on
control
devices
used
to
comply
with
the
standard.
§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
vi)
 
(
xi)
.........................
.................................................................
Yes.
§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
xii)
...............................
Records
...................................................
Yes.
§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
xiii)
...............................
.................................................................
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
does
not
require
the
use
of
continuous
emissions
monitoring
systems.
§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
xiv)
..............................
.................................................................
Yes.
§
63.10(
b)(
3)
.....................................
Recordkeeping
Requirements
for
Applicability
Determinations.
Yes.

§
63.10(
c)(
1)
 
(
6)
...............................
Additional
Recordkeeping
Requirements
for
Sources
with
CMS.
Yes.

§
63.10(
c)(
7)
 
(
8)
...............................
.................................................................
No
.................................
The
same
records
are
required
in
§
63.4520(
a)(
7).
§
63.10(
c)(
9)
 
(
15)
.............................
.................................................................
Yes.
§
63.10(
d)(
1)
.....................................
General
Reporting
Requirements
...........
Yes
...............................
Additional
requirements
are
specified
in
§
63.4520.
§
63.10(
d)(
2)
.....................................
Report
of
Performance
Test
Results
......
Yes
...............................
Additional
requirements
are
specified
in
§
63.4520(
b).
§
63.10(
d)(
3)
.....................................
Reporting
Opacity
or
Visible
Emissions
Observations.
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
or
does
not
require
opacity
or
visible
emissions
observations
§
63.10(
d)(
4)
.....................................
Progress
Reports
for
Sources
With
Compliance
Extensions.
Yes.

§
63.10(
d)(
5)
.....................................
Startup,
Shutdown,
and
Malfunction
Reports
Yes
...............................
Applies
only
to
add­
on
control
devices
at
sources
using
these
to
comply
withthe
standard.
§
63.10(
e)(
1)
 
(
2)
...............................
Additional
CMS
Reports
.........................
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
does
not
require
the
use
of
continuous
emissions
monitoring
systems.
§
63.10(
e)(
3)
.....................................
Excess
Emissinos/
CMS
Performance
Reports.
No
.................................
§
63.4520(
b)
specifies
the
contents
of
periodic
compliance
reports.
§
63.10(
e)(
4)
.....................................
COMS
Data
Reports
...............................
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
does
not
specify
requirements
for
opacity
or
COMS.
§
63.10(
f)
..........................................
Recordkeeping/
Reporting
Waiver
...........
Yes.
§
63.11
..............................................
Control
Device
Requirements/
Flares
......
No
.................................
Subpart
PPPP
does
not
specify
use
of
flares
for
compliance.
§
63.12
..............................................
State
Authority
and
Delegations
.............
Yes.
§
63.13
..............................................
Addresses
...............................................
Yes.
§
63.14
..............................................
Incorporation
by
Reference
....................
Yes.
§
63.15
..............................................
Availability
of
Information/
Confidentiality
Yes.

You
may
use
the
mass
fraction
values
in
the
following
table
for
solvent
blends
for
which
you
do
not
have
test
data
or
manufacturer's
formulation
data.

TABLE
3
TO
SUBPART
PPPP
OF
PART
63.
 
DEFAULT
ORGANIC
HAP
MASS
FRACTION
FOR
SOLVENTS
AND
SOLVENT
BLENDS
Solvent/
solvent
blend
CAS
No.
Average
organic
HAP
mass
fraction
Typical
organic
HAP,
percent
by
mass
1.
Toluene
..............................................................................
108
 
88
 
3
1.0
Toluene
2.
Xylene(
s)
...........................................................................
1330
 
20
 
7
1.0
Xylenes,
ethylbenzene
3.
Hexane
..............................................................................
110
 
54
 
3
0.5
n­
hexane
4.
n­
Hexane
...........................................................................
110
 
54
 
3
1.0
n­
hexane
5.
Ethylbenzene
.....................................................................
100
 
41
 
4
1.0
Ethylbenzene
6.
Aliphatic
140
......................................................................
..............................
0
None
7.
Aromatic
100
.....................................................................
..............................
0.02
1%
xylene,
1%
cumene
8.
Aromatic
150
.....................................................................
..............................
0.09
Naphthalene
9.
Aromatic
naphtha
..............................................................
64742
 
95
 
6
0.02
1%
xylene,
1%
cumene
10.
Aromatic
solvent
..............................................................
64742
 
94
 
5
0.1
Naphthalene
11.
Exempt
mineral
spirits
.....................................................
8032
 
32
 
4
0
None
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
20:
54
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00052
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2
72327
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
233
/
Wednesday,
December
4,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
TABLE
3
TO
SUBPART
PPPP
OF
PART
63.
 
DEFAULT
ORGANIC
HAP
MASS
FRACTION
FOR
SOLVENTS
AND
SOLVENT
BLENDS
 
Continued
Solvent/
solvent
blend
CAS
No.
Average
organic
HAP
mass
fraction
Typical
organic
HAP,
percent
by
mass
12.
Ligroines
(
VM
&
P)
..........................................................
8032
 
32
 
4
0
None
13.
Lactol
spirits
....................................................................
64742
 
89
 
6
0.15
Toluene
14.
Low
aromatic
white
spirit
.................................................
64742
 
82
 
1
0
None
15.
Mineral
spirits
..................................................................
64742
 
88
 
7
0.01
Xylenes
16.
Hydrotreated
naphtha
......................................................
64742
 
48
 
9
0
None
17.
Hydrotreated
light
distillate
..............................................
64742
 
47
 
8
0.001
Toluene
18.
Stoddard
solvent
.............................................................
8052
 
41
 
3
0.01
Xylenes
19.
Super
high­
flash
naphtha
................................................
64742
 
95
 
6
0.05
Xylenes
20.
Varsol
 
solvent
...............................................................
8052
 
49
 
3
0.01
0.5%
xylenes,
0.5%
ethylbenzene
21.
VM
&
P
naphtha
..............................................................
64742
 
89
 
8
0.06
3%
toluene,
3%
xylene
22.
Petroleum
distillate
mixture
.............................................
68477
 
31
 
6
0.08
4%
naphthalene,
4%
biphenyl
You
may
use
the
mass
fraction
values
in
the
following
table
for
solvent
blends
for
which
you
do
not
have
test
data
or
manufacturer's
formulation
data:

TABLE
4
TO
SUBPART
PPPP
OF
PART
63.
 
DEFAULT
ORGANIC
HAP
MASS
FRACTION
FOR
PETROLEUM
SOLVENT
GROUPS
a
Solvent
type
Average
organic
HAP
mass
fraction
Typical
organic
HAP
percent
by
mass
Aliphatic
b
.................................................................................
0.03
1%
Xylene,
1%
Toluene,
and
1%
Ethylbenzene
Aromatic
c
.................................................................................
0.06
4%
Xylene,
1%
Toluene,
and
1%
Ethylbenzene
a
Use
this
table
only
if
the
solvent
blend
does
not
match
any
of
the
solvent
blends
in
Table
3
to
this
subpart
and
you
only
know
whether
the
blend
is
aliphatic
or
aromatic.
b
Mineral
Spirits
135,
Mineral
Spirits
150
EC,
Naphtha,
Mixed
Hydrocarbon,
Aliphatic
Hydrocarbon,
Aliphatic
Naphtha,
Naphthol
Spirits,
Petroleum
Spirits,
Petroleum
Oil,
Petroleum
Naphtha,
Solvent
Naphtha,
Solvent
Blend.
c
Medium­
flash
Naphtha,
High­
flash
Naphtha,
Aromatic
Naphtha,
Light
Aromatic
Naphtha,
Light
Aromatic
Hydrocarbons,
Aromatic
Hydrocarbons
Light
Aromatic
Solvent.

[
FR
Doc.
02
 
29073
Filed
12
 
3
 
02;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
P
VerDate
0ct<
31>
2002
22:
11
Dec
03,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00053
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
04DEP2.
SGM
04DEP2