Wednesday,

April
24,
2002
Part
II
Environmental
Protection
Agency
40
CFR
Part
63
National
Emission
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants:
Surface
Coating
of
Metal
Furniture;
Proposed
Rule
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00001
Fmt
4717
Sfmt
4717
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20206
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
63
[FRL–
7163–
6]

RIN
2060–
AG55
National
Emission
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants:
Surface
Coating
of
Metal
Furniture
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(EPA).
ACTION:
Proposed
rule.

SUMMARY:
This
action
proposes
national
emission
standards
for
hazardous
air
pollutants
(NESHAP)
for
metal
furniture
surface
coating
operations
located
at
major
sources
of
hazardous
air
pollutant
(HAP)
emissions.
These
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
primary
HAP
emitted
by
these
operations
are
xylene,
toluene,
glycol
ethers,
2­
butoxy
ethanol,
ethylbenzene,
and
methyl
ethyl
ketone.
Each
of
the
HAP
can
cause
toxic
effects
such
as
eye,
nose,
throat,
and
skin
irritation,
and
blood
cell,
heart,
liver,
and
kidney
damage.
Implementation
of
the
proposed
standards
would
reduce
nationwide
HAP
emissions
from
major
sources
by
about
70
percent.
DATES:
Comments.
Submit
comments
on
or
before
June
24,
2002.
Public
Hearing.
If
anyone
wishes
to
contact
EPA
to
request
to
speak
at
a
public
hearing,
they
should
do
so
by
May
14,
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,
send
comments
(in
duplicate
if
possible)
to:
Air
and
Radiation
Docket
and
Information
Center
(6102),
Attention
Docket
Number
A–
97–
40,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
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
(6102),
Attention
Docket
Number
A–
97–
40,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
401
M
Street,
SW.,
Room
M–
1500,
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
our
Office
of
Administration
Auditorium
in
Research
Triangle
Park,
North
Carolina.
You
should
contact
Ms.
Janet
Eck,
Coatings
and
Consumer
Products
Group,
Emission
Standards
Division
(C539–
03),
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
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–
97–
40
contains
supporting
information
used
in
developing
the
proposed
standards.
The
docket
is
located
at
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
401
M
Street,
SW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
in
Room
M–
1500,
Waterside
Mall
(ground
floor),
and
may
be
inspected
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
5:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Dr.
Mohamed
Serageldin,
Coatings
and
Consumer
Products
Group,
Emission
Standards
Division
(C539–
03),
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27711;
telephone
number
(919)
541–
2379;
facsimile
number
(919)
541–
5689;
electronic
mail
(e­
mail)
address:
serageldin.
mohamed@
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–
97–
40.
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:
Dr.
Mohamed
Serageldin,
c/
o
OAQPS
Document
Control
Officer
(C404–
02),
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27711.
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.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
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
these
proposed
emission
standards.
Docket.
The
docket
is
an
organized
and
complete
file
of
all
the
information
considered
by
the
EPA
in
the
development
of
this
rulemaking.
The
docket
is
a
dynamic
file
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
obtained
by
mail
from
the
Air
and
Radiation
Docket
and
Information
Center
by
calling
(202)
260–
7548.
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
is
also
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
proposed
source
category
definition
includes
facilities
that
apply
coatings
to
metal
furniture
or
components
of
metal
furniture.
Metal
furniture
means
furniture
or
components
of
furniture
that
are
constructed
either
entirely
or
partially
from
metal.
Metal
furniture
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00002
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20207
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
includes,
but
is
not
limited
to,
components
of
the
following
types
of
products
as
well
as
the
products
themselves:
household,
office,
institutional,
laboratory,
hospital,
public
building,
restaurant,
barber
and
beauty
shop,
and
dental
furniture;
office
and
store
fixtures;
partitions;
shelving;
lockers;
lamps
and
lighting
fixtures;
and
wastebaskets.
In
general,
facilities
that
coat
metal
furniture
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
regulation
if
they
meet
the
applicability
criteria.
Not
all
facilities
classified
under
the
SIC
and
NAICS
codes
in
table
1
will
be
subject
to
the
proposed
standard
because
some
of
the
classifications
cover
products
outside
the
scope
of
the
proposed
NESHAP
for
metal
furniture.

TABLE
1.—
METAL
FURNITURE
PRODUCT
DESCRIPTIONS
AND
CORRESPONDING
SIC
AND
NAICS
CODES
Product
description
1987
SIC
Code
Equivalent
1997
NAICS
Code(
s)
Equivalent
1997
NAICS
Product
Description
Metal
Household
Furniture
...................................................................
2514
337124
Metal
Household
Furniture
Manufacturing
Office
Furniture,
Except
Wood
.............................................................
2522
337214
Nonwood
Office
Furniture
Manufacturing.
Public
Building
and
Related
Furniture
.................................................
2531
337127
Institutional
Furniture
Manufacturing.
Office
and
Store
Fixtures,
Partitions,
Shelving,
and
Lockers,
Except
Wood.
2542
337215
Showcase,
Partition,
Shelving,
and
Locker
Manufacturing.
Furniture
and
Fixtures,
Not
Classified
Elsewhere
...............................
2599
337127
Institutional
Furniture
Manufacturing.
Hardware,
Not
Classified
Elsewhere
...................................................
3429
332951
Hardware
Manufacturing.
Metal
Stampings,
Not
Classified
Elsewhere
(Except
Kitchen
Utensils,
Pots
and
Pans
for
Cooking,
and
Coins).
3469
332116
Metal
Stamping.

Wire
Springs
.........................................................................................
3495
332612
Wire
Spring
Manufacturing.
Fabricated
Metal
Products,
Not
Classified
Elsewhere
.........................
3499
337215
Showcase,
Partition,
Shelving,
and
Locker
Manufacturing.
Residential
Electric
Lighting
Fixtures
...................................................
3645
335121
Residential
Electric
Lighting
Fixture
Manufacturing
Commercial,
Industrial,
and
Institutional
Electric
Lighting
Fixtures
.....
3646
335122
Commercial,
Industrial,
and
Institutional
Electric
Lighting
Fixture
Manufacturing.
Laboratory
Apparatus
and
Furniture
....................................................
3821
339111
Laboratory
Furniture
Manufacturing.
Dental
Equipment
and
Supplies
...........................................................
3843
339114
Dental
Equipment
Manufacturing.
Manufacturing
Industries,
Not
Classified
Elsewhere
...........................
3999
337127
Institutional
Furniture
Manufacturing.
Reupholster
and
Furniture
Repair
........................................................
7641
81142
Reupholstery
and
Furniture
Repair.
State/
Federal
Governmental
Agencies
................................................
......................
......................
State
correctional
institutions
and
military
installations
that
apply
coatings
to
metal
furniture.

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
would
be
regulated
by
this
proposed
action,
you
should
examine
the
applicability
criteria
in
§
63.4881
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
metal
furniture?
II.
Summary
of
the
Proposed
Rule
A.
What
source
categories
would
be
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
proposed
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
and
other
standards?
F.
What
are
the
proposed
testing
and
initial
compliance
requirements?
G.
What
are
the
proposed
continuous
compliance
provisions?
H.
What
are
the
proposed
notification,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
requirements?
III.
Rationale
for
Selecting
the
Proposed
Standards
A.
How
did
we
select
the
source
category?
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
exisiting
and
new
sources?
E.
How
did
we
select
the
format
of
the
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
nonair
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,
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
certain
area
sources
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00003
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20208
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
of
HAP
and
to
establish
NESHAP
for
the
listed
source
categories
and
subcategories.
The
Surface
Coating
of
Metal
Furniture
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,
considering
controls,
emit
or
have
the
potential
to
emit
equal
to,
or
greater
than,
10
tons
per
year
(tpy)
of
any
one
HAP
or
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
a
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
nonair
quality
health
and
environmental
impacts,
and
energy
requirements.

C.
What
Are
the
Health
Effects
Associated
with
HAP
Emissions
From
the
Surface
Coating
of
Metal
Furniture?
The
major
HAP
emitted
from
the
surface
coating
of
metal
furniture
include
xylene,
toluene,
glycol
ethers,
2­
butoxy
ethanol,
ethylbenzene,
and
methyl
ethyl
ketone.
These
compounds
account
for
about
90
percent
of
the
nationwide
HAP
emissions
from
this
source
category.
Other
HAP
identified
in
emissions
include
methyl
isobutyl
ketone,
hexane,
and
methylene
chloride.
These
pollutants
can
cause
reversible
or
irreversible
toxic
effects
following
sufficient
exposure.
The
potential
toxic
effects
include
eye,
nose,
throat,
and
skin
irritation;
nausea,
vomiting,
headache,
and
dizziness,
and
liver
and
kidney
damage.
The
degree
of
adverse
effects
to
human
health
from
exposure
to
HAP
can
range
from
mild
to
severe.
The
extent
and
degree
to
which
the
human
health
effects
may
be
experienced
are
dependent
upon
(1)
the
ambient
concentration
observed
in
the
area
(as
influenced
by
emission
rates,
meteorological
conditions,
and
terrain);
(2)
the
frequency
and
duration
of
exposures;
(3)
characteristics
of
exposed
individuals
(genetics,
age,
preexisting
health
conditions,
and
lifestyle),
which
vary
significantly
with
the
population;
and
(4)
pollutant­
specific
characteristics
(toxicity,
half­
life
in
the
environment,
bioaccumulation,
and
persistence).

II.
Summary
of
the
Proposed
Rule
A.
What
Source
Categories
Would
Be
Affected
by
This
Proposed
Rule?
The
proposed
rule
would
apply
to
you
if
you
own
or
operate
a
metal
furniture
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
metal
furniture
surface
coating
facility
as
one
that
applies
coatings
to
metal
furniture
or
components
of
metal
furniture.
Metal
furniture
means
furniture
or
components
that
are
constructed
either
entirely
or
partially
from
metal.
You
would
not
be
subject
to
the
proposed
rule
if
your
metal
furniture
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
the
permitting
authority.
You
would
not
be
subject
to
the
proposed
rule
if
you
use
only
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
that
contain
no
organic
HAP.
The
source
category
does
not
include
research
or
laboratory
facilities
or
janitorial,
building,
and
facility
maintenance
operations;
or
coating
application
using
handheld
nonrefillable
aerosol
containers.

B.
What
Is
the
Relationship
to
Other
Rules?
Affected
sources
subject
to
the
proposed
rule
may
also
be
subject
to
other
rules.
The
relationship
between
this
proposed
rule
and
other
rules
is
discussed
below.
We
specifically
request
comments
on
how
monitoring,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
requirements
can
be
consolidated
for
sources
that
are
subject
to
more
than
one
rule.
We
also
request
comments
regarding
instances
where
a
facility
could
be
subject
to
multiple
surface
coating
NESHAP
or
where
the
applicability
of
one
NESHAP
versus
another
is
unclear.
Commenters
should
provide
specific
examples
of
these
instances
and
discuss
any
associated
adverse
effects
that
would
result.
New
Source
Performance
Standards—
40
CFR
Part
60,
Subpart
EE.
The
metal
furniture
new
source
performance
standards
(NSPS)
apply
to
facilities
that
apply
organic
coatings
to
metal
furniture
and
that
began
construction,
reconstruction,
or
modification
after
November
28,
1980.
The
pollutants
regulated
are
volatile
organic
compounds
(VOC).
Emissions
of
VOC
are
limited
to
0.09
kilogram
(kg)
per
liter
of
coating
solids
applied,
and
the
affected
source
is
each
individual
coating
operation.
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
coating
operation.
This
broader
definition
of
affected
source
allows
a
facility's
emissions
to
be
combined
for
compliance
purposes.
Second,
the
proposed
rule
would
regulate
organic
HAP.
While
most
organic
HAP
emitted
from
metal
furniture
surface
coating
operations
are
VOC,
some
VOC
are
not
listed
as
HAP
and,
therefore,
the
NSPS
regulates
a
broader
range
of
pollutants
than
would
the
proposed
NESHAP.
Third,
the
emission
limitations
in
the
proposed
rule
would
be
based
on
the
amount
of
solids
used
at
the
affected
source.
The
NSPS
limitations
are
based
on
the
amount
of
solids
actually
applied
to
the
metal
furniture
which
necessitates
estimates
of
transfer
efficiency
in
the
compliance
calculations.
Because
of
the
differences
between
the
two
rules,
compliance
with
either
rule
cannot
be
deemed
compliance
with
the
other.
A
metal
furniture
surface
coating
facility
that
meets
the
applicability
requirements
of
both
rules
must
comply
with
both.
Overlapping
reporting,
recordkeeping,
and
monitoring
requirements
may
be
resolved
through
the
title
V
permit
process.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00004
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20209
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
National
Emission
Standards
for
Wood
Furniture
Manufacturing
Operations—
40
CFR
Part
63,
Subpart
JJ.
There
may
be
situations
where
a
manufacturer
of
wood
furniture
also
coats
metal
components
of
that
wood
furniture.
The
coating
of
these
metal
components
would
be
subject
to
subpart
JJ,
the
rule
for
wood
furniture
manufacturing.
As
such,
the
proposed
rule
would
not
apply
to
these
facilities.
The
applicability
section
of
the
proposed
rule
clarifies
this
difference
in
applicability.
Future
national
emission
standards
for
the
surface
coating
of
miscellaneous
metal
parts.
Metal
furniture
often
contains
components,
such
as
metal
knobs,
hinges,
and
screws,
that
have
a
wider
use
beyond
metal
furniture.
The
coating
of
such
parts
would
not
be
subject
to
the
proposed
rule
provided
the
coating
takes
place
at
a
facility
that
does
not
apply
coatings
to
other
metal
furniture.
Such
metal
coating
operations
would
be
subject
to
the
future
NESHAP
for
the
surface
coating
of
miscellaneous
metal
parts.
Future
national
emission
standards
for
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products.
Plastic
parts
and
products
may
be
components
(e.
g.,
plastic
handles)
of
metal
furniture.
The
coating
of
such
plastic
parts
would
be
subject
to
the
proposed
rule
if
the
coating
takes
place
at
a
metal
furniture
surface
coating
facility;
otherwise,
the
coating
operation
would
be
subject
to
the
future
NESHAP
for
the
surface
coating
of
plastic
parts
and
products.

C.
What
Are
the
Primary
Sources
of
Emissions
and
What
Are
the
Emissions?

HAP
Emission
Sources.
Emissions
from
coating
application
account
for
more
than
60
percent
of
HAP
emissions
from
the
metal
furniture
surface
coating
process.
Remaining
emissions
are
primarily
from
cleaning.
In
most
cases,
HAP
emissions
from
mixing
and
storage
are
relatively
small.
The
organic
HAP
emissions
associated
with
coatings
(the
term
``
coatings''
includes
protective
and
functional
coatings,
as
well
as
adhesives)
occur
at
several
points.
A
coating
is
most
often
applied
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
applied
to
the
part,
as
well
as
from
the
overspray.
The
coated
part
then
passes
through
an
open
(flash­
off)
area
where
additional
volatiles
evaporate
from
the
coating.
The
coated
part
then
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,
where
solvent
is
applied
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.
Organic
HAP
emissions
can
also
occur
from
displacement
of
organic
vapor­
laden
air
in
containers
used
to
store
HAP
solvents
or
to
mix
coatings
containing
HAP
solvents.
The
displacement
of
organic
HAP
vapor­
laden
air
can
occur
due
to
filling
of
containers,
temperature
or
barometric
pressure
changes,
or
due
to
agitation
during
mixing.
Organic
HAP.
Available
emission
data
collected
during
the
development
of
the
proposed
NESHAP
show
that
the
primary
organic
HAP
emitted
from
the
surface
coating
of
metal
furniture
include
xylene,
toluene,
glycol
ethers,
2­
butoxy
ethanol,
ethylbenzene,
and
methyl
ethyl
ketone.
These
compounds
account
for
over
90
percent
of
this
category's
nationwide
organic
HAP
emissions.
Other
significant
organic
HAP
identified
include
methyl
isobutyl
ketone,
hexane,
and
methylene
chloride.
Inorganic
HAP.
Based
on
information
reported
in
survey
responses
during
the
development
of
the
proposed
NESHAP,
inorganic
HAP,
including
chromium,
lead,
and
manganese
compounds
are
contained
in
two
kinds
of
coatings
used
by
this
source
category.
No
inorganic
HAP
were
reported
in
cleaning
materials.
Nationwide
inorganic
HAP
emissions
are
estimated
to
be
less
than
5
megagrams
per
year
(Mg/
yr).

D.
What
Is
the
Affected
Source?
We
define
an
affected
source
as
a
stationary
source,
group
of
stationary
sources,
or
part
of
a
stationary
source
to
which
a
specific
emission
standard
applies.
This
proposed
rule
defines
the
affected
source
as
the
collection
of
all
operations
associated
with
the
surface
coating
of
metal
furniture
or
components
of
metal
furniture
that
are
performed
at
a
contiguous
area
under
common
control.
These
operations
include
preparation
of
a
coating
for
application
(e.
g.,
mixing
with
thinners);
surface
preparation
of
the
metal
furniture
or
component;
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.
Coatings
include
such
materials
as
adhesives
and
protective
or
decorative
coatings.

E.
What
Are
the
Proposed
Emission
Limits,
Operating
Limits,
and
Other
Standards?

We
are
proposing
standards
that,
if
promulgated,
would
limit
HAP
emissions
from
the
surface
coating
of
metal
furniture.
The
proposed
standards
include
emission
limits
and
operating
limits.
Emission
Limits.
We
are
proposing
to
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
from
each
new
and
reconstructed
affected
source
to
no
more
than
0.094
kilogram
HAP
per
liter
of
coating
solids
used
(kg/
liter)
(0.78
pound
per
gallon
(lb/
gal))
each
calendar
month.
The
proposed
limit
for
each
existing
affected
source
is
0.12
kg
HAP/
liter
used
(1.0
lb/
gal).
You
would
choose
from
several
compliance
options
in
the
proposed
rule
to
achieve
the
emission
limit(
s).
You
could
comply
by
applying
materials
(coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials)
that
meet
the
emission
limit,
either
individually
or
collectively,
during
each
monthly
compliance
period.
You
could
also
use
a
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
to
meet
the
emission
limit,
or
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
monthly
liquid­
liquid
material
balance),
the
proposed
operating
limits
would
apply
to
you.
These
limits
are
site­
specific
parameter
limits
you
determine
during
the
initial
performance
test
of
the
system.
For
capture
systems,
you
would
establish
average
volumetric
flow
rate
limits
for
each
capture
device
(or
enclosure)
in
each
capture
system.
You
would
also
establish
limits
on
average
pressure
drop
across
openings
in
the
capture
system.
For
thermal
and
catalytic
oxidizers,
you
would
monitor
temperature.
For
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
do
not
conduct
a
monthly
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,
you
would
monitor
the
temperature
of
the
outlet
gas
temperature
from
the
condenser.
All
operating
limits
must
reflect
operation
of
the
capture
system
and
control
devices
during
a
performance
test
that
demonstrates
achievement
of
the
emission
limit
during
representative
operating
conditions.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00005
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20210
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
General
Provisions.
The
General
Provisions
(40
CFR
part
63,
subpart
A)
also
would
apply
to
you
as
outlined
in
the
proposed
rule.
The
General
Provisions
codify
certain
procedures
and
criteria
for
all
40
CFR
part
63
NESHAP.
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
you
should
be
aware
of.
However,
unless
specifically
overridden
in
the
proposed
rule,
all
of
the
applicable
General
Provisions
requirements
would
apply
to
you.

F.
What
Are
the
Proposed
Testing
and
Initial
Compliance
Requirements?
Compliance
Dates.
Existing
affected
sources
would
have
to
be
in
compliance
with
the
final
standards
no
later
than
3
years
after
the
effective
date
of
the
subpart.
The
effective
date
is
the
date
on
which
the
final
rule
is
published
in
the
Federal
Register.
New
and
reconstructed
sources
would
have
to
be
in
compliance
upon
startup
of
the
affected
source
or
no
later
than
the
effective
date,
whichever
is
later.
The
proposed
initial
compliance
period
is
1
month
and
begins
on
the
compliance
date
and
ends
on
the
last
day
of
the
first
full
calendar
month
following
the
compliance
date;
except
that
for
new
and
reconstructed
sources
required
to
conduct
performance
tests,
it
ends
on
the
last
day
of
the
first
full
calendar
month
following
the
performance
test.
Being
``
in
compliance''
means
that
the
owner
or
operator
of
the
affected
source
meets
all
the
requirements
of
the
rule
to
achieve
the
proposed
emission
limit(
s)
and
operating
limits
by
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
for
that
period.
If
it
does
not
meet
the
applicable
limit(
s),
then
it
is
out
of
compliance
for
the
entire
initial
compliance
period.
Emission
Limit(
s).
There
are
several
proposed
options
for
complying
with
the
proposed
emission
limit(
s),
and
the
testing
and
initial
compliance
requirements
vary
accordingly.
If
you
demonstrate
compliance
based
on
the
materials
used
in
the
affected
source,
you
would
determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
and
the
volume
of
solids
in
all
materials
used
during
the
initial
compliance
period.
To
determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
and
the
volume
coating
solids,
you
could
either
rely
on
manufacturer's
data
or
on
results
from
the
test
methods
listed
below.
Under
§
63.4941
of
the
proposed
rule,
you
would
be
required
to
determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials.
To
do
this,
you
would
count
HAP
that
are
present
at
1
percent
by
mass
or
more
if
they
are
not
carcinogens
identified
by
the
Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration
(OSHA)
at
29
CFR
1910.1200(
d)(
4),
and
count
HAP
that
are
present
at
0.1
percent
by
mass
or
more
if
they
are
OSHA­
identified
carcinogens.
Coating
and
solvent
manufacturers
are
accustomed
to
providing
a
breakdown
of
material
components
according
to
this
distinction
and
routinely
report
the
values
on
Material
Safety
Data
Sheets
for
the
materials,
as
required
by
OSHA.
We
could
have
selected
some
other
way
to
count
HAP
components
of
materials
but
concluded
that
allowing
this
longstanding
approach
to
be
used
for
compliance
with
the
proposed
NESHAP
would
provide
the
information
needed
for
compliance
assurance
and
would
not
impose
any
additional
burden
on
the
industry.
We
request
comment
on
the
appropriateness
of
this
provision
of
the
proposed
rule.
You
may
use
alternative
test
methods
provided
you
get
EPA
approval
in
accordance
with
the
NESHAP
General
Provisions,
§
63.7(
f).
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.
 
For
organic
HAP
content,
use
Method
311
of
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A;
 
The
proposed
rule
allows
you
to
use
nonaqueous
volatile
matter
as
a
surrogate
for
organic
HAP,
which
would
include
all
organic
HAP
plus
all
other
organic
compounds.
If
you
choose
this
option,
then
use
Method
24
of
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A;
and
 
For
volume
coating
solids,
use
either
manufacturer's
data
or
ASTM
Method
D2697–
86
(1998)
or
ASTM
Method
D6093–
97.
To
demonstrate
initial
compliance
based
on
the
materials
used,
you
would
be
required
to
either
ensure
that
the
organic
HAP
content
of
each
coating
meets
the
emission
limit
and
that
you
use
no
organic
HAP­
containing
thinners
or
cleaning
materials;
or
ensure
that
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
all
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
divided
by
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
meets
the
emission
limit.
For
the
latter
option,
you
would
be
required
to:
 
For
the
initial
compliance
period,
determine
the
quantity
of
each
coating,
thinner,
and
cleaning
material
used
in
the
affected
source.
 
Determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
each
coating,
thinner,
and
cleaning
material.
 
Determine
the
volume
fraction
solids
for
each
coating.
 
Calculate
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
for
materials
and
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
in
the
affected
source
for
the
compliance
period.
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
(TSDF)
regulated
under
40
CFR
part
262,
264,
265,
or
266.
The
proposed
calculation
equation
(Equation
1
in
§
63.4951)
adds
together
all
the
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
and
allows
you
to
subtract
organic
HAP
in
waste
materials
as
indicated
above.
The
calculated
mass
of
organic
HAP
is,
therefore,
not
based
on
actual
measurement
of
emissions
to
the
atmosphere
but
rather
assumes
that
all
organic
HAP
used
(less
those
in
waste
materials
as
appropriate)
are
emitted.
This
means
of
determining
organic
HAP
emissions
for
compliance
is
consistent
with
the
means
by
which
we
calculated
emission
rates
from
industry
data
on
which
the
proposed
emission
limits
are
based.
We
believe
that
Equation
1
is
a
simple
mass­
balance
relationship
which
adequately
quantifies
the
organic
HAP
emissions
without
imposing
an
excessive
burden
on
respondents.
We
request
comment
on
our
approach
for
determining
emissions
and
on
any
alternatives.
 
Calculate
the
ratio
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
for
the
materials
used
to
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used.
 
Record
the
calculations
and
results
and
include
them
in
your
notification
of
compliance
status
(see
section
II.
H
of
this
preamble).
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device,
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
a
monthly
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
you
would:
 
Conduct
an
initial
performance
test
to
determine
the
capture
and
control
efficiencies
of
the
equipment
(described
below)
and
to
establish
operating
limits
to
be
achieved
on
a
continuous
basis
(also
described
below).
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
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00006
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20211
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
reconstructed
sources.
You
would
also
need
to
schedule
it
in
time
to
obtain
the
results
for
use
in
completing
your
compliance
determination
for
the
initial
compliance
period.
 
Determine
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
each
material
and
the
volume
fraction
coating
solids
for
each
coating
used
during
the
initial
compliance
period.
 
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
emissions
from
all
the
controlled
coating
operations
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.
 
Calculate
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
from
uncontrolled
coating
operations.
 
Calculate
the
ratio
of
the
total
mass
of
HAP
emissions
from
both
controlled
and
uncontrolled
coating
operations
to
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
initial
compliance
period.
 
Record
the
calculations
and
results
and
include
them
in
your
Notification
of
Compliance
Status.
The
capture
and
control
efficiency
for
a
capture
and
control
system,
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
monthly
liquid­
liquid
material
balances,
would
be
demonstrated
based
on
emission
capture
and
reduction
efficiency.
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
§
63.4965
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,
then
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.
In
lieu
of
Method
25
or
25A,
you
may
use
Method
18
if
you
know
the
HAP
constituents
in
the
inlet
and
outlet
gas
streams
and
you
quantify
at
least
90
percent
of
the
organic
compounds
in
the
gas
stream.
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
determine
the
overall
control
efficiency
using
a
liquid­
liquid
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
affected
source
during
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
the
compliance
period.
Then
you
would
compare
the
amount
recovered
to
the
amount
used
to
determine
the
overall
control
efficiency,
and
apply
this
efficiency
to
the
organic
HAP
to
solids
ratio
for
the
materials
used.
You
would
record
the
calculations
and
results
and
include
them
in
your
Notification
of
Compliance
Status.
Operating
Limits.
In
accordance
with
section
114(
a)
of
the
CAA,
the
proposed
operating
limits
would
require
the
use
of
continuous
parameter
monitoring
systems
(CPMS)
to
ensure
that
sources
are
in
compliance.
The
monitoring
must
be
capable
of
detecting
deviations
with
sufficient
representativeness,
accuracy,
precision,
reliability,
frequency,
and
timeliness
to
determine
if
compliance
is
continuous
during
a
reporting
period.
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
liquid­
liquid
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
that
demonstrated
compliance
with
the
emission
limit.
If
you
operate
your
capture
system
and
control
device
at
different
sets
of
representative
operating
conditions,
you
must
establish
operating
limits
for
the
parameters
for
each
different
operating
condition.
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
CPMS
meet
the
requirements
in
§
63.4968
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
the
EPA
and
is
not
delegated
to
States.
We
request
comment
on
whether
there
are
alternative
means
of
monitoring
performance
for
add­
on
controls
which
would
be
appropriate.
Commenters
should
address
the
relative
effectiveness
and
cost
of
alternatives.
If
you
use
a
thermal
or
catalytic
oxidizer,
you
would
continuously
monitor
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
during
each
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
combustion
temperature
just
before
the
catalyst
bed
and
the
average
temperature
difference
across
the
catalyst
bed
during
the
performance
test,
and
for
each
3­
hour
period
the
average
combustion
temperature
and
the
average
temperature
difference
would
have
to
be
at
or
above
these
limits.
If
you
use
a
solvent
recovery
system,
and
do
not
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
to
demonstrate
compliance,
then
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
(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,
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
3­
hour
period
the
average
temperature
would
have
to
be
at
or
below
this
limit.
For
each
capture
system,
you
would
establish
operating
limits
for
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
and
pressure
drop
across
an
opening
in
each
enclosure
or
capture
device.
The
operating
limit
would
be
the
average
volumetric
flow
rate
and
average
pressure
drop
across
the
opening
during
the
performance
test,
to
be
met
as
a
minimum.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00007
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20212
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
We
request
comment
on
the
proposed
testing
and
initial
compliance
requirements
discussed
above.

G.
What
Are
the
Proposed
Continuous
Compliance
Provisions?

Emission
Limit(
s)

If
you
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
proposed
emission
limit(
s)
based
on
the
materials
used
in
the
affected
source,
you
would
ensure,
for
each
monthly
compliance
period,
that
the
ratio
of
organic
HAP
to
coating
solids
meets
the
emission
limit.
You
would
follow
the
same
procedures
as
you
would
for
the
initial
compliance
period,
as
described
in
section
II.
F
of
this
preamble.
For
each
coating
operation
on
which
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device,
other
than
solvent
recovery
for
which
you
conduct
a
monthly
liquidliquid
material
balance,
you
would
use
the
continuous
parameter
monitoring
results
for
the
month
in
determining
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,
then
you
would
assume
the
capture
system
and
control
device
is
achieving
the
same
percent
emission
reduction
efficiency
as
it
did
during
the
performance
test.
You
would
then
apply
this
percent
reduction
to
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
materials
used
in
controlled
coating
operations
to
determine
the
monthly
emission
rate
from
those
operations.
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
emission
rate
by
assuming
the
capture
system
and
control
device
were
achieving
zero
emission
reduction
during
the
periods
of
deviation.
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
applied
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.
The
monthly
emission
rate
for
your
affected
source
would
be
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
from
all
controlled
and
uncontrolled
coating
operations
divided
by
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
compliance
period.
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
described
in
section
II.
F
of
this
preamble.
If
the
continuous
monitoring
shows
that
the
capture
system
and
control
device
is
operating
outside
the
range
of
values
established
during
the
performance
test,
then
you
have
deviated
from
the
established
operating
limits.
If
you
operate
a
capture
system
and
control
device
that
allows
emissions
to
bypass
the
control
device,
you
would
have
to
demonstrate
that
HAP
emissions
from
each
emission
point
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:

(1)
Flow
control
position
indicator
to
provide
a
record
of
whether
the
exhaust
stream
is
directed
to
the
control
device;
(2)
Car­
seal
or
lock­
and­
key
valve
closures
to
secure
the
bypass
line
valve
in
the
closed
position
when
the
control
device
is
operating;
(3)
Valve
closure
continuous
monitoring
to
ensure
any
bypass
line
valve
or
damper
is
closed
when
the
control
device
is
operating;
or
(4)
Automatic
shutdown
system
to
stop
the
coating
operation
when
flow
is
diverted
from
the
control
device.
If
the
bypass
monitoring
procedures
indicate
that
emissions
are
not
routed
to
the
control
device,
then
you
have
deviated
from
the
emission
limit.

Operations
During
Startup,
Shutdown,
and
Malfunction.
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
during
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
of
the
capture
system
and
control
device.
Emissions
Reductions
Plan
for
Mixing,
Storage,
and
Waste
Handling.
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device
for
compliance,
you
would
be
required
to
develop
and
operate
according
to
a
plan
for
reducing
emissions
from
mixing
operations,
storage
tanks
or
other
containers,
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
cloth
in
closed
containers
immediately
after
use,
etc.).
If
you
do
not
develop
a
plan
or
you
do
not
implement
the
plan,
this
would
be
a
deviation
from
the
work
practice
standard.
We
request
comment
on
the
proposed
continuous
compliance
requirements
discussed
above.

H.
What
Are
the
Proposed
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
the
proposed
rule.
The
General
Provisions
notification
requirements
include:
(1)
Initial
notifications,
(2)
notification
of
performance
test
if
you
are
complying
using
a
capture
system
and
control
device,
(3)
notification
of
compliance
status,
and
(4)
additional
notifications
required
for
affected
sources
with
continuous
monitoring
systems.
The
General
Provisions
also
require
certain
records
and
periodic
reports.
Initial
Notifications.
If
the
proposed
standards
apply
to
you,
you
would
be
required
to
send
a
notification
to
the
EPA
Regional
Office
in
the
region
where
your
facility
is
located
and
to
your
State
agency
at
least
1
year
before
the
compliance
date
for
existing
sources
and
within
120
days
after
the
date
of
initial
startup
for
new
and
reconstructed
sources,
or
120
days
after
publication
of
the
final
rule,
whichever
is
later.
This
report
notifies
us
and
your
State
agency
that
you
have
an
existing
facility
that
is
subject
to
the
proposed
standard
or
that
you
have
constructed
a
new
facility.
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
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
monthly
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
you
would
be
required
to
conduct
a
performance
test,
as
described
in
section
II.
F
of
this
preamble,
no
later
than
the
compliance
date
for
your
affected
source.
You
would
be
required
to
notify
your
EPA
Regional
Office
(or
the
delegated
State
or
local
agency)
at
least
60
calendar
days
before
the
performance
test
is
scheduled
to
begin,
as
indicated
in
the
General
Provisions
for
the
NESHAP.
Notification
of
Compliance
Status.
Your
compliance
procedures
would
depend
on
which
compliance
option
you
choose.
For
each
compliance
option,
you
would
send
us
a
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00008
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20213
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
within
30
days
after
the
end
of
the
initial
compliance
period
described
in
section
II.
F
of
this
preamble.
In
the
notification,
you
would
certify
whether
the
affected
source
has
complied
with
the
standards,
identify
the
option
you
used
to
demonstrate
initial
compliance,
summarize
the
data
and
calculations
supporting
the
compliance
demonstration,
and
describe
how
you
will
determine
continuous
compliance.
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
would
also
include
the
measured
range
of
each
monitored
parameter
and
the
operating
limits
established
during
the
performance
test,
and
information
showing
whether
the
source
has
achieved
its
operating
limits
during
the
initial
compliance
period.
Recordkeeping
Requirements.
You
would
be
required
to
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
would
be
required
to
be
kept
onsite
the
other
3
years'
records
could
be
kept
off­
site.
Records
pertaining
to
the
design
and
operation
of
the
control
and
monitoring
equipment
would
have
to
be
kept
for
the
life
of
the
equipment.
Depending
on
the
compliance
option
that
you
choose,
you
could
need
to
keep
records
of
the
following:
 
Organic
HAP
content,
volatile
matter
content,
solids
content,
and
quantity
of
the
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
each
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
would
also
need
to
keep
records
of
the
following:
 
The
occurrence
and
duration
of
each
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction
of
the
emission
capture
system
and
control
device;
 
All
maintenance
performed
on
the
capture
system
and
control
device;
 
Actions
taken
during
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
that
are
different
from
the
procedures
specified
in
the
affected
source's
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plan;
 
All
information
necessary
to
demonstrate
conformance
with
the
affected
source's
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plan
when
the
plan
procedures
are
followed;
 
All
information
necessary
to
demonstrate
conformance
with
the
affected
source's
plan
for
minimizing
emissions
from
mixing,
storage,
and
waste
handling
operations;
 
Each
period
during
which
a
CPMS
is
malfunctioning
or
inoperative
(including
out­
of­
control
periods);
 
All
required
measurements
needed
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
standards;
and
 
All
results
of
performance
tests.
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
limit,
operating
limit,
or
work
practice
standard.
Deviations,
as
determined
from
these
records,
would
need
to
be
recorded
and
also
reported,
as
described
in
section
II.
H
of
this
preamble.
A
deviation
is
any
instance
when
any
requirement
or
obligation
established
by
the
proposed
rule
including,
but
not
limited
to,
the
emission
limit(
s),
operating
limits,
and
work
practice
standards,
is
not
met.
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device
to
reduce
HAP
emissions,
you
would
have
to
make
your
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction
plan
available
for
inspection
if
the
Administrator
requests
to
see
it.
It
would
stay
in
your
records
for
the
life
of
the
affected
source
or
until
the
source
is
no
longer
subject
to
the
standards.
If
you
revise
the
plan,
you
would
need
to
keep
the
previous
superceded
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
need
to
document
them
in
the
report
as
follows:
 
Report
each
deviation
from
the
monthly
emission
limit.
 
If
you
are
complying
by
using
a
thermal
oxidizer,
report
all
times
when
a
3­
hour
average
temperature
is
below
the
operating
limit.
 
If
you
are
complying
by
using
a
catalytic
oxidizer,
report
all
times
when
a
3­
hour
average
temperature
difference
across
the
catalyst
bed
is
below
the
operating
limit,
and
when
a
3­
hour
average
combustion
temperature
before
the
catalyst
bed
is
below
the
operating
limit.
 
If
you
are
complying
by
using
oxidizers,
or
solvent
recovery
systems
where
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
are
not
conducted,
report
all
times
when
the
value
of
the
site­
specific
operating
parameter
used
to
monitor
the
capture
system
performance
was
less
than
the
operating
limit
established
for
the
capture
system.
 
If
you
are
complying
by
using
a
carbon
adsorber
for
which
you
do
not
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances,
report
all
times
when
the
steam
or
nitrogen
flow
is
less
than,
and/
or
the
carbon
bed
temperature
is
more
than,
the
operating
limits.
 
If
you
are
complying
by
using
a
condenser,
report
all
times
when
a
3­
hour
average
outlet
temperature
is
higher
than
the
operating
limit.
 
If
your
capture
system
contains
bypass
lines
that
could
divert
emissions
from
the
control
device
to
the
atmosphere,
report
all
times
when
emissions
were
not
routed
to
the
control
device.
 
Report
other
specific
information
on
the
periods
of
time
the
deviations
occurred.
You
would
also
have
to
include
an
explanation
in
each
semiannual
report
if
a
change
occurs
that
might
affect
the
compliance
status
of
the
affected
source
or
you
change
to
another
option
for
meeting
the
emission
limit.
Other
Reports.
You
would
be
required
to
submit
reports
for
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
and
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
the
immediate
reports
required
by
§
63.10(
d)(
5)(
ii).
We
request
comment
on
the
proposed
notification,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
requirements
discussed
above.

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

The
surface
coating
of
metal
furniture
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,
considering
controls,
at
least
10
tons
of
any
one
HAP
or
at
least
25
tons
of
any
combination
of
HAP
annually.
The
proposed
rule
would
control
HAP
emissions
from
both
new
and
existing
major
sources.
Area
sources
are
not
being
regulated
under
this
proposed
rule.
The
surface
coating
of
metal
furniture
as
described
in
the
listing
includes
any
facility
engaged
in
the
surface
coating
and
manufacture
or
repair
of
metal
furniture
parts
or
products
(including,
but
not
limited
to,
chairs,
tables,
cabinets,
and
bookcases).
We
use
the
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00009
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20214
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
metal
furniture
product
lists
contained
in
the
SIC
and
NAICS
code
descriptions
to
describe
the
vast
array
of
metal
furniture
parts
and
products.
We
intend
the
source
category
to
include
facilities
for
which
the
surface
coating
of
metal
furniture
is
either
their
principal
activity
or
is
an
integral
part
of
a
production
process
which
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.
Collocated
surface
coating
operations
comparable
to
the
types
and
sizes
of
the
dedicated
facilities,
in
terms
of
the
coating
process
and
applicable
emission
control
techniques,
are
included
in
the
source
category.
The
source
category
does
not
include
research
or
laboratory
facilities
or
janitorial,
building,
and
facility
maintenance
operations.
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
operation,
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.
The
data
available
to
us
indicate
that
there
are
not
significant
differences
across
the
source
category
in
the
substrates
coated,
the
coating
technologies
used,
the
range
of
HAP
content
in
the
coatings
and
materials
used,
or
the
applicability
of
control
measures
used.
Based
on
this
information,
we
believe
that
subcategories
are
not
warranted
for
the
metal
furniture
surface
coating
source
category.
We
specifically
request
comment
on
this
view
and
ask
that
commenters
provide
data,
information,
and
rationale
to
support
their
position.
B.
How
Did
We
Select
the
Regulated
Pollutants?

Organic
HAP.
Available
emission
data
collected
during
the
development
of
the
proposed
NESHAP
show
that
the
primary
organic
HAP
emitted
from
the
surface
coating
of
metal
furniture
include
xylene,
toluene,
glycol
ethers,
2­
butoxy
ethanol,
ethylbenzene,
and
methyl
ethyl
ketone.
These
compounds
account
for
about
90
percent
of
this
category's
nationwide
organic
HAP
emissions.
However,
many
other
organic
HAP
are
used,
or
can
be
used,
in
metal
furniture
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials.
Therefore,
the
proposed
rule
would
regulate
emissions
of
all
organic
HAP.
Inorganic
HAP.
Based
on
information
reported
in
response
to
surveys
during
the
development
of
the
proposed
NESHAP,
most
of
the
coatings
used
in
this
source
category
do
not
contain
inorganic
HAP.
Approximately
680
coatings
were
reported
in
the
survey
responses
from
the
metal
furniture
industry,
and
only
2
coatings
are
reported
as
containing
inorganic
HAP
such
as
chromium,
lead,
or
manganese
compounds.
These
2
coatings
represent
less
than
0.5
percent
of
the
total
volume
of
coatings
reported
in
the
survey
responses.
The
facilities
in
this
source
category
using
coatings
with
inorganic
HAP
employ
either
a
waterwash
system
or
dry
particulate
filters
that
reduce
inorganic
HAP
emissions
from
the
spray
booth
exhaust.
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
distinguish
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
60.2)
and
provide
that
new
source
MACT
applies
when
construction
or
reconstruction
of
an
affected
source
occurs
(40
CFR
60.5).
The
collection
of
equipment
and
activities
evaluated
in
determining
MACT
(including
the
MACT
floor)
is
used
in
defining
the
affected
source.
When
an
emission
standard
is
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
plantwide
emission
standard
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.
Selection
of
the
Affected
Source.
The
affected
source
for
these
proposed
standards
is
broadly
defined
to
include
all
operations
associated
with
the
coating
and
cleaning
of
metal
furniture
and
cleaning
of
equipment.
These
operations
include
storage
and
mixing
of
coatings
and
other
materials;
surface
preparation
of
the
metal
furniture
prior
to
coating
application;
coating
application
and
flash­
off,
drying
and
curing
of
applied
coatings;
cleaning
operations;
and
waste
handling
operations.
In
selecting
the
affected
source,
we
considered,
for
each
operation,
the
extent
to
which
HAP­
containing
materials
are
used
and
the
level
of
HAP
that
are
emitted.
Cleaning
and
coating
application,
flash­
off,
and
curing/
drying
operations
account
for
the
majority
of
HAP
emissions
at
metal
furniture
surface
coating
operations,
and
most
of
the
industry's
emission
reduction
efforts
have
been
focused
on
these
areas.
Thus,
we
included
these
operations
in
the
affected
source.
We
were
not
able
to
obtain
data
to
adequately
quantify
HAP
emissions
from
storage,
mixing,
and
waste
handling.
However,
solvents
that
are
added
to
coatings
as
thinners,
and
other
HAP­
containing
additives
to
coatings,
may
be
emitted
during
mixing
and
storage.
The
level
of
emissions
would
depend
on
the
type
of
mixing
equipment,
the
type
of
storage
container,
and
the
work
practices
adopted
at
the
facility.
Emissions
from
waste
handling
operations
depend
on
the
type
of
system
used
to
collect
and
transport
organic
HAP­
containing
waste
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
in
the
facility.
For
example,
solvent­
laden
rags
that
are
used
to
clean
spray
booths
or
tanks
could
be
a
source
of
HAP
emissions.
The
method
used
to
isolate
and
store
such
rags
would
affect
the
level
of
emissions
to
ambient
air.
Mixing,
storage,
and
waste
handling
operations
are
included
in
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
total
usage
of
HAPVerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00010
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20215
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
containing
materials,
each
facility
can
select
among
available
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
to
comply
with
the
proposed
limits.
Additional
information
on
the
metal
furniture
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
sections
below
present
the
rationale
for
determining
the
MACT
floor,
regulatory
alternatives
beyond
the
floor,
and
selection
of
the
proposed
standards
for
existing
and
new
affected
sources.
How
did
we
determine
the
MACT
floor
technology?
After
we
identify
the
specific
source
categories
or
subcategories
of
sources
to
regulate
under
section
112,
we
must
develop
emission
standards
for
each
category
or
subcategory.
Section
112
establishes
a
minimum
baseline
or
``
floor''
for
standards.
For
new
sources
in
a
category
or
subcategory,
the
standards
cannot
be
less
stringent
than
the
emission
control
that
is
achieved
in
practice
by
the
bestcontrolled
similar
source
(section
112(
d)(
3)).
The
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
best­
performing
12
percent
of
existing
sources
(or
the
best­
performing
5
sources
for
categories
or
subcategories
with
fewer
than
30
sources).
Within
the
metal
furniture
industry,
organic
HAP
emission
control
for
cleaning
and
surface
coating
operations
is
accomplished
primarily
through
the
use
of
lower­
HAP
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials.
Add­
on
capture
and
control
systems
for
organic
HAP
are
rarely
used
by
the
industry.
While
lower
organic
HAP
materials
are
broadly
used
throughout
the
industry,
each
particular
coating
technology
is
not
used
at
every
facility.
Rather,
facilities
use
various
combinations
of
low­
HAP
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials.
Thus,
the
most
reasonable
approach
to
establishing
a
MACT
floor
appeared
to
be
evaluation
of
a
facility's
organic
HAP
emissions
from
all
coating­
related
operations.
To
account
for
differences
in
production
levels
from
one
facility
to
another,
we
normalized
the
organic
HAP
emissions
by
the
volume
of
coating
solids
used.
We
believe
coating
solids
usage
is
an
appropriate
indicator
of
overall
production
level.
We
used
information
obtained
from
industry
survey
responses
to
estimate
the
sourcewide
organic
HAP
emissions.
We
calculated
total
organic
HAP
emissions
by
assuming
that
100
percent
of
the
volatile
components
in
all
coatings
(including
adhesives),
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
(including
surface
preparation
materials)
are
emitted.
The
survey
response
information
was
also
used
to
determine
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used.
We
included
protective
and
functional
coatings,
as
well
as
adhesives,
in
this
total.
Using
the
sourcewide
organic
HAP
emissions
and
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used.
We
calculated
the
normalized
organic
HAP
emission
rate
in
units
of
kilograms
organic
HAP
per
liter
of
coating
solids
used.
The
facilities
were
then
ranked
from
the
lowest
emission
rate
to
the
highest.
We
based
this
analysis
on
a
total
of
49
facilities
reporting
over
9
million
liters
usage
of
approximately
680
coatings
and
adhesives,
as
well
as
730,000
liters
of
cleaning
materials.
A
detailed
description
of
the
determination
of
the
MACT
floor
is
provided
in
a
memo
(the
MACT
floor
memo)
in
the
docket
for
the
proposed
rule.
The
description
includes
all
the
assumptions
and
it
documents
the
methodology
that
was
used.
(See
ADDRESSES
section
of
this
preamble
for
information
on
the
docket).
We
specifically
request
comment
on
the
methodology
used
to
determine
the
MACT
floor,
as
summarized
below.
The
MACT
floor
for
existing
sources
was
determined
by
the
arithmetic
mean
of
the
HAP
emission
rates
of
the
top
12
percent
of
49
facilities,
which
were
the
top
6
facilities.
This
mean
value
was
0.12
kg
organic
HAP/
liter
of
coating
solids
used
(1.0
lb/
gal)
and
represents
the
existing
source
MACT
floor
for
organic
HAP.
The
survey
data
showed
no
appreciable
differences
between
the
floor
facilities
and
the
remaining
facilities
in
the
database
in
the
substrates
coated,
the
coating
technologies
used,
or
the
applicability
of
control
measures
across
the
various
operations.
Using
the
list
of
facilities
ranked
by
emission
rates,
we
observed
that
the
best
controlled
source
emitted
0.094
kg
organic
HAP/
liter
of
coating
solids
used
(0.78
lb/
gal).
Before
establishing
this
level
of
emissions
as
the
new
source
MACT
floor,
we
evaluated
the
metal
furniture
surface
coating
operations
at
this
source
to
determine
if
the
coating
technology
(in
terms
of
the
coating
type
and
application
method)
used
was
transferable
throughout
the
industry.
We
also
determined
whether
the
product
type
produced
at
this
source
affected
the
emissions
such
that
the
source
may
not
be
similar
to
all
other
sources
in
the
category.
For
example,
a
source
that
coats
only
interior
parts
could
have
significantly
different
requirements
and
coating
choices
than
a
source
that
had
the
visual
and
quality
requirements
associated
with
coating
parts
for
the
exterior
of
the
product.
We
also
determined
that
the
emission
limit
represented
by
the
lowest­
emitting
source
could
be
achieved
through
the
use
of
add­
on
control
devices
for
those
facilities
electing
to
use
higher
organic
HAP
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials.
The
best­
controlled
source
produces
products
(metal
storage
cabinets,
lockers,
and
racks)
that
are
not
unusual
for
the
industry.
The
source
spray
applies
solvent­
based
coatings,
and
all
cleaning
materials
used
for
surface
preparation
prior
to
coating
are
free
of
organic
HAP.
Coating
application
equipment
is
cleaned
with
solvents
containing
organic
HAP.
Thus,
the
source
is
employing
technologies
that
are
already
in
widespread
use
throughout
the
metal
furniture
coating
industry.
We
believe
that
this
source
is
similar
to
other
sources
in
the
category
and
represents
the
best­
controlled
source
in
our
database.
We
recognize
that
some
sources
may
have
limited
choices
in
the
coatings
available
for
their
particular
application.
As
a
result,
lower­
HAP
coatings
may
not
be
available
to
meet
the
needs
of
every
source.
However,
if
the
source
is
also
using
cleaning
materials
that
contain
organic
HAP,
then
it
may
be
able
to
meet
the
emission
limit
by
reformulating
these
cleaning
materials.
A
source
also
would
have
the
option
of
using
capture
systems
and
control
devices
to
reduce
emissions
although
we
believe
choice
of
this
option
is
not
likely
for
most
sources.
How
did
we
consider
beyond­
the­
floor
technology?
After
the
floors
have
been
determined
for
new
and
existing
sources
in
a
source
category
or
subcategory,
we
must
set
emission
standards
that
are
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
emission
reduction,
cost,
nonair
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.
We
identified
three
regulatory
alternatives
more
stringent
than
the
MACT
floor
level
of
control
for
organic
HAP.
These
alternatives
were
(1)

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00011
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20216
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
conversion
to
powder
coatings;
(2)
conversion
to
liquid
coatings
that
have
a
very
low,
or
no,
organic
HAP
content;
and
(3)
use
of
add­
on
capture
systems
and
control
devices.
Information
indicates
that
several
metal
furniture
surface
coating
facilities
have
converted
to
using
only
powder
coatings.
Such
facilities
typically
produce
a
single
type
of
product
(such
as
warehouse
shelving
units),
do
not
require
unusual
finishes,
and
use
a
small
number
of
colors.
Many
metal
furniture
surface
coating
facilities,
however,
manufacture
more
than
one
product
and
often
use
a
wide
array
of
colors.
Many
also
achieve
finish
types
that
cannot
be
duplicated
with
powder
coatings.
Powder
coating
may
not
produce
the
varied
surface
finishes
and
colors
available
from
liquid
coatings.
Although
powder
coatings
may
be
somewhat
more
durable
than
conventional
liquid
coatings,
specialty
finishes
such
as
antique
and
crackle,
as
well
as
the
palette
of
designer
colors
offered
by
some
manufacturers,
may
not
be
adequately
duplicated
by
powder
coatings.
Consequently,
while
powder
coating
is
a
proven
technology
that
can
be
used
in
many
situations,
we
do
not
believe
it
is
appropriate
to
require
the
use
of
powder
coatings
for
all
segments
of
the
metal
furniture
industry
and
have
not
included
them
in
our
proposal
as
a
beyond­
the­
floor
option.
Lower
organic
HAP
liquid
coatings
fall
into
two
primary
categories.
The
most
common
are
coatings
formulated
with
solvents
that
are
not
organic
HAP
(but
may
be
VOC).
The
second
category
are
those
coatings
that
result
from
alternate
technologies
such
as
Ultraviolet
(UV)­
curable
coatings
and
autophoretic
coatings.
The
UV­
curable
coatings
may
or
may
not
include
organic
solvents,
which
may
contain
HAP
or
VOC,
to
keep
the
pigment
and
other
components
of
the
coating
in
solution
until
curing.
Autophoretic
coatings
use
no
organic
HAP
and
only
small
amounts
of
VOC,
but
they
may
contain
inorganic
HAP.
These
coatings
are
applied
using
a
dip
application
method
where
a
chemical
reaction
deposits
the
coating
on
the
surface
of
the
part.
These
lower
organic
HAP
coatings
are
currently
in
production
use
but
their
applicability
is
limited
for
this
industry.
The
selection
of
lower
organic
HAP
coatings
is
limited
and
is
not
extensive
enough
to
broadly
meet
the
needs
of
all
segments
of
the
metal
furniture
industry.
Given
the
limited
applicability
of
UV­
curable
and
autophoretic
coating
technologies,
we
do
not
believe
it
is
feasible
to
require
the
use
of
these
coating
technologies
and
have
not
included
them
in
our
proposal
as
a
beyond­
the­
floor
option
for
organic
HAP.
It
is
technically
feasible
to
achieve
organic
HAP
emission
rates
lower
than
the
MACT
floor
levels
through
the
use
of
emission
capture
systems
and
control
devices.
For
example,
the
use
of
a
permanent
total
enclosure
and
an
oxidizer
could
further
reduce
organic
HAP
emissions
from
typical
sources
by
about
4.2
Mg
(4.6
tons)
to
31
Mg
(34
tons)
per
year.
However,
the
cost
of
such
a
system
could
be
approximately
$1
million.
We
believe
that
the
additional
emission
reduction
would
not
justify
the
additional
cost.
Therefore,
we
have
not
included
the
use
of
emission
capture
and
control
systems
in
our
proposal
as
a
beyond­
the­
floor
option.
How
did
we
select
the
standards?
For
existing
sources,
we
based
the
standards
on
the
existing
source
MACT
floor.
As
described
earlier,
we
believe
that
beyond­
the­
floor
options
are
not
technically
or
economically
feasible
for
all
existing
sources.
For
the
same
reasons,
we
are
basing
the
proposed
standards
for
new
sources
on
the
new
source
MACT
floor.
Without
having
information
on
the
benefits
that
would
be
achieved
by
further
reducing
emissions
beyond
the
floor,
we
believe
that
the
additional
emission
reductions
that
could
be
achieved
do
not
warrant
the
costs
that
each
source
could
incur.
Therefore,
we
would
not
require
beyond­
the­
floor
levels
of
emission
reductions
in
this
proposed
rule.
After
implementation
of
a
final
MACT
rule
for
this
category,
we
will
evaluate
the
health
and
environmental
risks
that
may
be
posed
as
a
result
of
exposure
to
emissions
from
the
metal
furniture
surface
coating
source
category,
as
required
by
section
112(
f)
of
the
CAA.
At
that
time,
we
will
evaluate
whether
additional
controls
are
warranted
in
light
of
the
available
risk
information.
We
specifically
request
comment
on
our
proposal
not
to
base
the
CAA
section
112(
d)
standards
on
a
beyond­
the­
floor
option.
A
beyond­
thefloor
option
could
apply
to
all
segments
of
the
metal
furniture
surface
coating
source
category
or
to
only
certain
segments.
Comments
supporting
our
proposed
decision
not
to
go
beyond
the
floor
as
well
as
comments
opposing
the
decision
should
include
data,
information,
and
rationale
supporting
the
position
of
the
commenter.
We
note
here
that
our
assumption,
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
waste
organic
HAPcontaining
materials
to
a
facility
for
treatment
or
disposal.
We
made
this
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,
believe
that
this
practice
is
not
common
within
the
metal
furniture
industry.
We
recognize,
however,
that
some
metal
furniture
facilities
may
conduct
such
activities
and
should
be
allowed
to
account
for
such
activities
in
determining
their
emissions.
Thus,
the
proposed
regulation
would
allow
you
to
reduce
the
affected
sourcewide
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
Standards?
Numerical
emission
standards
are
required
by
section
112
of
the
CAA
unless
we
determine
that
it
is
not
feasible
to
prescribe
or
enforce
an
emission
standard,
in
which
case
a
design,
equipment,
work
practice,
or
operational
standard
can
be
set
(section
112(
h)
of
the
CAA).
The
formats
considered
for
the
proposed
standards
and
the
considerations
in
selection
of
the
format
are
discussed
below.
We
selected
as
the
format
of
the
proposed
standards
for
organic
HAP,
mass
of
organic
HAP
per
volume
of
coating
solids
used.
The
performancebased
nature
of
this
proposed
format
would
allow
metal
furniture
coating
operation
owners
and
operators
flexibility
in
choosing
any
combination
of
means
(including
coating
reformulation,
use
of
lower­
HAP
or
nonHAP
materials,
solvent
elimination,
work
practices,
and
add­
on
control
devices)
to
comply
with
the
emission
limit
that
is
workable
for
their
particular
situations.
We
selected
volume
of
coating
solids
as
a
component
of
the
proposed
standards
to
normalize
the
rate
of
organic
HAP
emissions
across
all
sizes
and
types
of
facilities.
We
could
not
normalize
by
surface
area
due
to
lack
of
information.
We
selected
the
volume
of
coating
solids
used
because
it
is
directly
related
to
the
surface
area
coated
(i.
e.,
the
average
dry
film
thickness
of
coatings
on
most
metal
furniture
products
is
generally
consistent)
and,
therefore,
provides
an
equitable
basis
for
all
coatings,
regardless
of
differences
in
coating
densities.
A
format
based
on
the
mass
or
weight
of
coating
solids
(instead
of
volume)
could
result
in
inequitable
standards
for
higher­
density
pigmented
coatings,
such
as
basecoats
or
enamels,

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00012
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20217
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
compared
to
coatings
with
lower
densities
per
unit
volume.
Other
choices
for
the
format
of
the
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
coatings
and
cleaning
materials.
As
it
is
not
our
intent
to
limit
a
facility's
production
under
these
proposed
standards,
we
have
not
proposed
a
usage
limit.
We
also
chose
not
to
propose
a
never­
to­
be­
exceeded
limit
because
the
availability
of
all
the
different
kinds
of
coatings
required
by
the
metal
furniture
industry
at
or
below
such
a
limit
does
not
appear
to
be
sufficient
to
meet
the
needs
of
all
segments
of
the
industry.

F.
How
Did
We
Select
the
Testing
and
Initial
Compliance
Requirements?

The
proposed
standards
would
allow
you
to
choose
among
several
methods
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
proposed
standards
for
organic
HAP:
(1)
Coatings
with
low
or
no
organic
HAP;
(2)
an
overall
organic
HAP
emission
rate
from
all
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
that
is
less
than
the
applicable
emission
limit;
or
(3)
capture
systems
and
control
devices.
Coatings
with
Low
or
No
Organic
HAP.
You
would
be
required
to
document
the
organic
HAP
content
of
all
coatings
and
show
that
each
is
less
than
the
applicable
emission
limit.
You
would
also
have
to
show
that
each
thinner
and
each
cleaning
material
used
contains
no
organic
HAP.
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.
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
the
coatings
industry,
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.
The
proposed
requirements
for
determining
volume
coating
solids
would
allow
you
to
choose
between
using
manufacturer's
data
or
measuring
the
volume
with
either
ASTM
Method
D2697–
86
(1998)
or
ASTM
Method
D6093–
97.
Overall
Organic
HAP
Emission
Rate.
To
demonstrate
compliance
using
this
option,
you
would
calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
your
affected
source,
based
on
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
all
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaners
and
the
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
compliance
period,
and
demonstrate
that
it
does
not
exceed
the
applicable
emission
limit.
You
would
document
these
values
using
the
methods
discussed
previously.
Capture
Systems
and
Control
Devices.
If
you
use
a
capture
system
and
control
device,
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
device
for
which
you
conduct
a
monthly
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
you
would
be
required
to
conduct
an
initial
performance
test
of
the
system
to
determine
its
overall
control
efficiency.
For
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
you
would
determine
the
quantity
of
volatile
matter
applied
in
the
affected
source
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
in
the
affected
source
to
derive
the
monthly
HAP
emission
rate
in
kg
HAP/
liter
of
coating
solids
used.
If
you
conduct
a
performance
test,
you
would
also
determine
parameter
operating
limits
during
the
test.
The
test
methods
that
the
proposed
standards
would
require
for
the
performance
test
(described
in
section
II.
F
of
this
preamble)
have
been
required
under
many
standards
of
performance
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
ensure
continuous
compliance
with
the
proposed
organic
HAP
emission
limit(
s)
and/
or
operating
limits,
the
proposed
standards
would
require
continuous
parameter
monitoring
of
capture
systems
and
control
devices
and
recordkeeping.
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
limit(
s)
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.
The
values
of
these
parameters
that
correspond
to
compliance
with
the
proposed
emission
limit(
s)
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
consecutive
3­
hour
average
values
for
most
monitored
parameters
for
the
affected
source.
We
selected
this
averaging
period
to
ensure
the
control
system
is
continuously
operating
at
conditions
that
are
the
same
or
better
than
those
recorded
during
a
performance
test
demonstrating
compliance
with
the
emission
limit(
s).
To
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
monthly
emission
limit(
s),
you
would
also
need
records
of
the
quantity
of
coatings
and
other
materials
used
and
the
data
and
calculations
supporting
your
determination
of
their
HAP
content.
If
you
conduct
monthly
liquid­
liquid
material
balances,
you
would
need
records
of
the
quantity
of
volatile
matter
used
in
the
affected
source
and
the
quantity
recovered
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
each
month.

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
RRRR.
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.

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
who
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
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00013
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20218
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
records
management
systems
required
for
enforcement
purposes.
Sources
that
choose
to
use
emission
capture
and
control
systems
may
need
this
time
to
purchase
and
install
them
and
to
obtain
a
permit
for
the
use
of
add­
on
controls.
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
Model
plants
were
developed
to
aid
in
the
estimation
of
the
impacts
the
MACT
floor
level
of
control
would
have
on
the
metal
furniture
industry.
Three
model
plants
distinguished
by
size,
as
measured
by
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used,
were
developed.
Impacts
were
then
developed
for
each
model
plant,
and
these
individual
impacts
were
scaled
to
nationwide
levels
based
on
the
number
of
facilities
corresponding
to
each
model
plant
size.
We
used
the
model
plant
approach
because
we
did
not
have
adequate
data
to
determine
impacts
for
each
actual
facility.
A
variety
of
compliance
methods
are
available
to
the
industry
to
meet
the
proposed
emission
limit(
s).
We
analyzed
the
information
obtained
from
the
industry
survey
responses,
industry
site
visits,
trade
groups,
and
industry
representatives
to
determine
which
compliance
methods
would
most
likely
be
used
by
existing
and
new
sources.
We
expect
that
the
most
widely­
used
method
would
be
low­
HAP
content
liquid
coatings
(coatings
with
HAP
contents
at
or
below
the
emission
limits)
and
lower­
HAP
cleaning
materials.
Powder
coatings
and
add­
on
capture
and
control
systems
would
likely
be
used
to
a
lesser
extent.
Various
combinations
of
these
methods
may
be
used.
For
the
purpose
of
assessing
impacts,
we
assumed
that
all
existing
sources
would
convert
to
lower­
HAP
content
liquid
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials.
We
assumed
that
new
sources
would
also
use
lower­
HAP
materials.
We
first
estimated
the
impacts
of
the
proposed
emission
limits
on
the
three
model
plants.
To
scale
up
the
model
plant
impacts
to
nationwide
levels,
we
multiplied
the
individual
model
plant
impacts
by
the
estimated
number
of
major
sources
in
the
United
States
corresponding
to
each
model
plant
size.
We
used
United
States
Census
Bureau
data
as
the
basis
for
this
estimate,
which
was
a
total
of
655
facilities.
For
more
information
on
how
impacts
were
estimated,
see
Chapters
7
and
8
of
the
background
information
document,
EPA–
453/
R–
01–
010.

A.
What
Are
the
Air
Impacts?

For
existing
major
sources,
we
estimated
that
compliance
with
the
proposed
emission
limits
would
result
in
a
reduction
of
nationwide
organic
HAP
emissions
of
13,900
Mg/
yr
(15,274
tpy).
This
represents
a
reduction
of
approximately
70
percent
from
the
baseline
organic
HAP
emissions
of
20,300
Mg/
yr
(22,308
tpy).
The
estimated
baseline
organic
HAP
emissions
for
new
sources
(20
over
the
first
5
years
after
promulgation
of
the
final
rule)
would
be
approximately
635
Mg
(698
tons)
in
the
fifth
year.
Emissions
from
new
sources
would
be
reduced
by
approximately
465
Mg
(511
tons)
in
the
fifth
year
as
a
result
of
the
proposed
standards
(73
percent
reduction).

B.
What
Are
the
Cost
Impacts?

An
affected
source
may
incur
three
types
of
costs
to
comply
with
the
proposed
standards:
capital,
direct,
and
indirect.
Capital
costs
represent
the
onetime
purchase
of
equipment.
We
have
included
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
as
direct
costs
incurred
on
a
continuing
basis
for
materials
consumed
in
the
manufacturing
process.
The
cost
of
utilities,
where
applicable,
is
also
included
in
the
direct
costs.
Indirect
costs
typically
include
overhead,
taxes,
insurance,
and
administrative
costs,
as
well
as
capital
recovery
costs.
Existing
sources.
To
comply
with
the
proposed
emission
limits,
we
estimated
that
existing
facilities
would
likely
use
reformulated
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials.
No
capital
costs
have
been
attributed
to
these
compliance
methods.
We
estimated
full
costs
for
517
facilities.
Approximately
60
facilities
would
have
only
recordkeeping
and
reporting
costs
because
these
facilities
would
already
be
in
compliance
with
the
proposed
standards
(based
on
survey
responses).
Facilities
that
would
achieve
area
source
status
before
the
compliance
date
of
the
final
standards
will
only
incur
costs
of
reading
the
rule.
In
addition
to
the
direct
costs,
all
affected
sources
would
incur
some
recordkeeping
and
reporting
costs.
We
estimated
no
incremental
costs
associated
with
the
use
of
lower­
HAP
coatings
and
thinners.
Only
the
incremental
cost
of
organic
HAP­
free
cleaning
materials
over
organic
HAP
cleaning
materials
was
counted.
The
average
annual
cost
for
each
facility
incurring
full
costs
is
approximately
$26,574.
This
value
includes
monitoring,
recordkeeping,
and
reporting
costs.
We
estimated
total
nationwide
annual
costs
in
the
fifth
year
to
comply
with
the
proposed
emission
limits
to
be
$14.8
million
for
existing
sources.
These
costs
include
$4.66
million
direct
costs
associated
with
material
usage
and
$10.1
million
for
recordkeeping
and
reporting.
New
Sources.
We
estimated
the
number
of
new
major
sources
based
on
information
from
industry
trade
groups.
Starting
with
the
anticipated
annual
sales
growth
for
the
industry,
excluding
price
increases
and
inflation,
we
determined
the
amount
of
coating
capacity
that
would
be
needed
to
meet
the
predicted
increase
in
demand.
Based
on
information
provided
by
industry
representatives,
we
assumed
that
75
percent
of
this
coating
capacity
could
be
absorbed
by
excess
capacity
at
existing
facilities.
The
remaining
25
percent
increase
in
capacity
was
estimated
to
be
met
by
the
construction
of
four
new
facilities
per
year
for
the
first
5
years
after
promulgation
of
the
final
standards.
Based
on
available
information,
we
determined
which
compliance
methods
will
most
likely
be
used
by
new
sources
and,
therefore,
which
compliance
methods
to
use
to
estimate
the
cost
impacts.
We
determined
that
new
sources
would
choose
reformulated
lower
organic
HAP
content
materials
to
meet
the
new
source
emission
limit.
For
the
20
new
facilities
anticipated
over
the
5­
year
period
after
promulgation
of
the
final
standards,
annual
costs
in
the
fifth
year
are
estimated
to
be
$0.6
million.
We
estimated
no
incremental
costs
associated
with
use
of
lower­
HAP
coatings
and
thinners.
Only
the
incremental
cost
of
organic
HAP­
free
cleaning
materials
over
organic
HAP
cleaning
materials
was
counted.
There
are
no
anticipated
capital
costs.

C.
What
Are
the
Economic
Impacts?
We
performed
an
economic
impact
analysis
(EIA)
to
provide
an
estimate
of
the
facility
and
market
impacts
of
the
proposed
standards
as
well
as
its
social
costs.
In
general,
we
expect
the
economic
impacts
of
the
proposed
standards
to
be
minimal,
with
price
increases
and
production
decreases
of
less
than
0.1
percent.
Given
the
negligible
market
impacts
of
this
proposed
rule,
the
social
costs
are
expected
to
be
roughly
the
same
as
the
estimated
engineering
compliance
costs
of
$14.8
million
for
existing
sources.
For
affected
facilities,
the
distribution
of
costs
is
slanted
toward
the
lower
impact
levels
with
many
facilities
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00014
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20219
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
incurring
only
those
related
to
recordkeeping
and
reporting.
The
EIA
indicates
that
these
regulatory
costs
are
expected
to
represent
only
0.1
percent
of
the
value
of
product
shipments,
which
should
not
cause
producers
to
cease
or
alter
their
current
operations.
Hence,
no
firms
or
facilities
are
expected
to
become
at
risk
of
closure
because
of
the
proposed
standards.
International
trade
impacts
would
only
occur
for
the
metal
household
furniture
segment
of
the
industry,
but
the
small
price
increase
(i.
e.,
0.04
percent)
on
this
segment
indicates
negligible
impacts,
if
any.
Based
on
the
projected
characteristics
and
costs
for
new
sources,
EPA
does
not
expect
any
differential
impacts
on
these
sources.
For
more
information,
refer
to
the
``
Economic
Impact
Analysis
of
the
Proposed
NESHAP:
Surface
Coating
of
Metal
Furniture''
(Docket
No.
A–
97–
40).

D.
What
are
the
Nonair
Health,
Environmental,
and
Energy
Impacts?

Based
on
information
from
the
industry
survey
responses,
there
was
no
indication
that
the
use
of
low
organic
HAP
content
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
would
result
in
any
increase
or
decrease
in
nonair
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.
Also,
we
estimate
that
there
would
be
no
significant
change
in
the
amount
of
materials
used
or
the
amount
of
waste
produced
and
there
would
be
no
additional
energy
requirements
for
affected
sources.

V.
Administrative
Requirements
A.
Executive
Order
12866,
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review
Under
Executive
Order
12866
(58
FR
51735,
October
4,
1993),
the
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
the
action
to
OMB
for
review.
Changes
made
in
response
to
OMB
suggestions
or
recommendations
will
be
documented
in
the
docket
(see
ADDRESSES
section
of
this
preamble).

B.
Executive
Order
13132,
Federalism
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
``
Federalism''
(64
FR
43255,
August
10,
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
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.
''
``
Policies
that
have
tribal
implications''
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
one
or
more
Indian
tribes,
on
the
relationship
between
the
Federal
government
and
the
Indian
tribes,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
between
the
Federal
government
and
Indian
tribes.
''
This
proposed
rule
does
not
have
tribal
implications.
It
will
not
have
substantial
direct
effects
on
tribal
governments,
on
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
metal
furniture
surface
coating
facilities.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13175
does
not
apply
to
this
rule.

D.
Executive
Order
13045,
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks
Executive
Order
13045
(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,
the
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
is
based
on
technology
performance
and
not
on
health
or
safety
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00015
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20220
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
risks.
No
children's
risk
analysis
was
performed
because
no
alternative
technologies
exist
that
would
provide
greater
stringency
at
a
reasonable
cost.
Furthermore,
this
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
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,
the
EPA
generally
must
prepare
a
written
statement,
including
a
costbenefit
analysis,
for
proposed
and
final
rules
with
``
Federal
mandates''
that
may
result
in
expenditures
by
State,
local,
and
tribal
governments,
in
the
aggregate,
or
by
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
the
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
the
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
the
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
rule
for
any
year
has
been
estimated
to
be
less
than
$15.4
million.
Thus,
today's
proposed
rule
is
not
subject
to
the
requirements
of
sections
202
and
205
of
the
UMRA.
In
addition,
the
EPA
has
determined
that
this
proposed
rule
contains
no
regulatory
requirements
that
might
significantly
or
uniquely
affect
small
governments.
This
rule
contains
requirements
that
may
apply
to
State
governments'
correctional
institutions
that
manufacture
or
repair
metal
furniture.
However,
these
requirements
do
not
uniquely
or
significantly
affect
those
institutions.
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
the
purposes
of
assessing
the
impacts
of
today's
proposed
standards
on
small
entities,
small
entity
is
defined
as:
(1)
A
small
business
ranging
from
100–
1,000
employees
or
less
than
$5
million
in
annual
sales
(see
Table
2);
(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
which
is
independently
owned
and
operated
and
is
not
dominant
in
its
field.

TABLE
2.—
SMALL
BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
(SBA)
SMALL
BUSINESS
SIZE
STANDARDS
FOR
COMPANIES
OWNING
FACILITIES
IN
THE
METAL
FURNITURE
SOURCE
CATEGORY
BY
NAICS
CODES
a,
b
1997
NAICS
code
Product
description
SBA
size
standard
(employees)

421610
.................................
Electrical
Apparatus
and
Equipment,
Wiring
Supplies,
and
Construction
Material
Wholesalers.
100
337124
.................................
Metal
Household
Furniture
Manufacturing
...................................................................
500
337214
.................................
Nonwood
Office
Furniture
Manufacturing
....................................................................
500
336360
.................................
Motor
Vehicle
Fabric
Accessories
and
Seat
Manufacturing
........................................
500
337127
.................................
Institutional
Furniture
Manufacturing
............................................................................
500
337215
.................................
Showcase,
Partition,
Shelving,
and
Locker
Manufacturing
.........................................
500
332951
.................................
Hardware
Manufacturing
..............................................................................................
500
332116
.................................
Metal
Stamping
............................................................................................................
500
332612
.................................
Wire
Spring
Manufacturing
..........................................................................................
500
337215
.................................
Showcase,
Partition,
Shelving,
and
Locker
Manufacturing
.........................................
500
335121
.................................
Residential
Electric
Lighting
Fixture
Manufacturing
.....................................................
500
335122
.................................
Commercial,
Industrial,
and
Institutional
Electric
Lighting
Fixture
Manufacturing
.......
500
339111
.................................
Laboratory
Apparatus
and
Furniture
Manufacturing
....................................................
500
339114
.................................
Dental
Equipment
and
Supplies
Manufacturing
..........................................................
500
337211
.................................
Wood
Office
Furniture
Manufacturing
..........................................................................
500
337212
.................................
Custom
Architectural
Woodwork
and
Millwork
Manufacturing
....................................
500
332312
.................................
Fabricated
Structural
Metal
Manufacturing
(pt)
...........................................................
500
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00016
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20221
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
TABLE
2.—
SMALL
BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION
(SBA)
SMALL
BUSINESS
SIZE
STANDARDS
FOR
COMPANIES
OWNING
FACILITIES
IN
THE
METAL
FURNITURE
SOURCE
CATEGORY
BY
NAICS
CODES
a,
b
—Continued
1997
NAICS
code
Product
description
SBA
size
standard
(employees)

336391
.................................
Motor
Vehicle
Air­
Conditioning
Manufacturing
............................................................
750
811420
.................................
Reupholstery
and
Furniture
Repair
..............................................................................
$5
million
(sales)

a
The
Agency
assumed
a
small
business
size
definition
of
1,000
employees
for
those
companies
included
in
the
SBREFA
analysis
without
available
information
on
SIC
or
NAICS
code.
b
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
(CFR).
Small
Business
Size
Standards­
Part
121.
13­
CFR–
121.
January
2001.
As
obtained
from
<http://
www.
sba.
gov/
regulations/
part121.
pdf>.

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.
In
accordance
with
the
RFA
and
SBREFA,
the
EPA
conducted
an
assessment
of
the
proposed
standards
on
small
businesses
within
the
metal
furniture
coating
industry.
Based
on
Small
Business
Administration
size
definitions
and
reported
sales
and
employment
data,
EPA's
survey
identified
10
of
the
24
companies
owning
metal
furniture
facilities
as
small
businesses.
Although
small
businesses
represent
almost
42
percent
of
the
companies
within
the
source
category,
they
are
expected
to
incur
12
percent
of
the
total
industry
compliance
costs.
Under
the
proposed
standards,
the
average
annual
compliance
cost
share
of
sales
for
small
businesses
is
0.18
percent,
with
two
of
the
ten
small
businesses
not
expected
to
incur
any
additional
costs
because
they
are
permitted
as
synthetic
minor
HAP
emission
sources.
In
addition,
small
businesses
in
this
industry
typically
have
5
percent
profit
margins.
For
more
information,
consult
the
docket
for
this
project.
Although
this
proposed
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities,
EPA
has
nonetheless
worked
aggressively
to
minimize
the
impact
of
this
proposed
rule
on
small
entities,
consistent
with
our
obligations
under
the
CAA.
We
solicited
input
from
small
entities
during
the
data­
gathering
phase
of
the
proposed
rulemaking.
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
(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
meet
the
emission
limits
by
providing
formulation
data
supplied
by
the
manufacturer.
We
continue
to
be
interested
in
the
potential
impacts
of
the
proposed
rule
on
small
entities
and
welcome
comments
on
issues
related
to
such
impacts.

H.
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
The
information
collection
requirements
in
the
proposed
standards
have
been
submitted
for
approval
to
the
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.
1952.01)
and
a
copy
may
be
obtained
from
Sandy
Farmer
by
mail
at
the
Collection
Strategies
Division
(2822),
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20460,
by
email
at
farmer.
sandy@
epa.
gov,
or
by
calling
(202)
260–
2740.
A
copy
may
also
be
downloaded
off
the
internet
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
icr.
The
information
requirements
are
not
effective
until
OMB
approves
them.
The
information
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
owners
and
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
the
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
cleaning
materials
data
and
calculations
used
to
determine
compliance.
This
information
includes
the
volume
used
during
each
monthly
compliance
period,
mass
fraction
organic
HAP,
density,
and,
for
coatings
only,
volume
fraction
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
sourcewide
emissions
for
each
monthly
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
fifth
year
after
the
effective
date
of
the
promulgated
rule
is
estimated
to
be
approximately
165,000
labor
hours
at
a
cost
of
approximately
$11
million
for
new
and
existing
sources.
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.
Under
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act,
44
U.
S.
C.
3501,
et
seq.,
the
EPA
must
consider
the
paperwork
burden
imposed
by
any
information
collection
request
in
a
proposed
or
final
rule.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00017
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20222
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
Comments
are
requested
on
the
Agency'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.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(2822);
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460;
or
by
courier,
send
comments
on
the
ICR
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division;
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(2822);
401
M
Street,
SW.,
Room
925H,
West
Tower;
Washington,
DC;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20503,
marked
``
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
''
Include
the
ICR
number
in
any
correspondence.
Since
OMB
is
required
to
make
a
decision
concerning
the
ICR
between
30
and
60
days
after
April
24,
2002,
a
comment
to
OMB
is
best
assured
of
having
its
full
effect
if
OMB
receives
it
by
May
24,
2002.
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
all
Federal
agencies
to
use
voluntary
consensus
standards
(VCS)
in
their
regulatory
and
procurement
activities
unless
to
do
so
would
be
inconsistent
with
applicable
law
or
otherwise
impractical.
The
VCS
are
technical
standards
(e.
g.,
material
specifications,
test
methods,
sampling
procedures,
business
practices,
etc.)
that
are
developed
or
adopted
by
one
or
more
VCS
bodies.
The
NTTAA
directs
EPA
to
provide
Congress,
through
annual
reports
to
OMB,
with
explanations
when
EPA
does
not
use
available
and
applicable
VCS.
Consistent
with
the
NTTAA,
EPA
conducted
searches
to
identify
VCS
for
use
in
emissions
monitoring.
The
search
for
emissions
monitoring
procedures
identified
20
VCS
that
appeared
to
have
possible
use
in
lieu
of
EPA
standard
reference
methods.
However,
after
reviewing
the
available
standards,
EPA
determined
that
ten
of
the
candidate
consensus
standards
(ASTM
D3154–
00,
ASTM
D3271–
87,
ASTM
D3464–
96,
ASTM
D3796–
90,
ASTM
D3960–
98,
ASTM
D6053–
96,
ASTM
E337–
84,
ISO
9096:
1992,
PTC
19–
10–
1981,
and
EN
1093–
4:
1996)
identified
for
measuring
emissions
of
the
HAP
or
surrogates
subject
to
the
proposed
emission
standards
would
not
be
practical
due
to
lack
of
equivalency,
documentation,
and
validation
data
(Docket
A–
97–
47).
Seven
of
the
remaining
candidate
consensus
standards
(BSR/
ASME
MFC
13m,
ASTM
Z6871Z,
ISO/
DIS
14164,
ISO
PWI
17895,
ISO/
DIS
11890–
1,
ISO/
DIS
11890–
2,
and
PREN
12619)
are
under
development.
The
EPA
plans
to
follow,
review,
and
consider
adopting
these
standards
after
their
development
is
completed.
The
ASTM
2369–
98
is
practical
for
EPA
use
as
an
acceptable
alternative
in
measuring
the
volatile
matter
content
of
surface
coatings.
This
VCS
uses
the
same
techniques,
equipment,
and
procedures
as
Method
24.
The
EPA
will
incorporate
by
reference
ASTM
D2369–
98
into
40
CFR
63.14
in
the
near
future.
The
ASTM
D2697–
86
(1998)
and
ASTM
D6093–
97
are
acceptable
procedures
for
use
in
determining
the
volume
fraction
of
solids
for
a
variety
of
coatings.
The
EPA
will
incorporate
by
reference
ASTM
D2697–
86
(1998)
and
ASTM
D6093–
97
into
40
CFR
63.14
in
the
near
future.
Six
consensus
standards:
ASTM
D1475–
98,
ASTM
D2369–
98,
ASTM
D3792–
99,
ASTM
D4017–
96a,
ASTM
D4457–
85(
Reapproved
91),
and
ASTM
D5403–
93
are
already
incorporated
by
reference
in
EPA
Method
24;
and
five
consensus
standards:
ASTM
D1979–
97,
ASTM
D3432–
89,
ASTM
D4747–
87,
ASTM
D4827–
93,
and
ASTM
PS
9–
94
are
incorporated
by
reference
in
EPA
Method
311.
The
EPA
takes
comment
on
proposed
compliance
demonstration
requirements
in
the
proposed
standards
and
specifically
invites
the
public
to
identify
potentially­
applicable
VCS.
Commentors
should
also
explain
why
the
proposed
standards
should
adopt
these
VCS
in
lieu
of
EPA's
methods.
Emission
test
methods
and
performance
specifications
submitted
for
evaluation
should
be
accompanied
with
a
basis
for
the
recommendation,
including
method
validation
data
and
the
procedure
used
to
validate
the
candidate
method
(if
method
other
than
Method
301,
40
CFR
part
63,
appendix
A,
was
used).
Sections
63.4964
through
63.4966
of
the
proposed
standards
list
EPA
testing
methods
and
performance
standards
included.
Most
of
the
standards
have
been
used
by
States
and
industry
for
more
than
10
years.
Nevertheless,
any
State
or
source
may
apply
to
EPA
for
permission
to
use
alternative
methods
in
place
of
any
of
the
EPA
testing
methods
or
performance
standards
listed.
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:
March
19,
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:

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
RRRR
to
read
as
follows:

Subpart
RRRR—
National
Emission
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants:
Surface
Coating
of
Metal
Furniture
Sec.

What
This
Subpart
Covers
63.4880
What
is
the
purpose
of
this
subpart?
63.4881
Am
I
subject
to
this
subpart?
63.4882
What
parts
of
my
plant
does
this
subpart
cover?
63.4883
When
do
I
have
to
comply
with
this
subpart?

Emission
Limitations
63.4890
What
emission
limits
must
I
meet?
63.4891
What
are
my
options
for
meeting
the
emission
limits?
63.4892
What
operating
limits
must
I
meet?
63.4893
What
work
practice
standards
must
I
meet?

General
Compliance
Requirements
63.4900
What
are
my
general
requirements
for
complying
with
this
subpart?
63.4901
What
parts
of
the
General
Provisions
apply
to
me?

Notifications,
Reports,
and
Records
63.4910
What
notifications
must
I
submit?
63.4920
What
reports
must
I
submit?
63.4930
What
records
must
I
keep?
63.4931
In
what
form
and
for
how
long
must
I
keep
my
records?

Compliance
Requirements
for
the
Compliant
Material
Option
63.4940
By
what
date
must
I
conduct
the
initial
compliance
demonstration?
63.4941
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?
63.4942
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00018
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20223
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
Compliance
Requirements
for
the
Emission
Rate
Without
Add­
On
Controls
Option
63.4950
By
what
date
must
I
conduct
the
initial
compliance
demonstration?
63.4951
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?
63.4952
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?

Compliance
Requirements
for
the
Emission
Rate
With
Add­
On
Controls
Option
63.4960
By
what
date
must
I
conduct
performance
tests
and
other
initial
compliance
demonstrations?
63.4961
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance?
63.4962
How
do
I
determine
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
a
controlled
coating
operation
not
using
a
liquidliquid
material
balance
if
I
operate
it
under
different
sets
of
representative
operating
conditions?
63.4963
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?
63.4964
What
are
the
general
requirements
for
performance
tests?
63.4965
How
do
I
determine
the
emission
capture
system
efficiency?
63.4966
How
do
I
determine
the
add­
on
control
device
emission
destruction
or
removal
efficiency?
63.4967
How
do
I
establish
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
operating
limits
during
the
performance
test?
63.4968
What
are
the
requirements
for
continuous
parameter
monitoring
system
(CPMS)
installation,
operation,
and
maintenance?

Other
Requirements
and
Information
63.4980
Who
implements
and
enforces
this
subpart?
63.4981
What
definitions
apply
to
this
subpart?

Tables
to
Subpart
RRRR
of
Part
63
Table
1
to
Subpart
RRRR
of
Part
63.
Operating
Limits
if
Using
the
Emission
Rate
with
Add­
on
Controls
Option
Table
2
to
Subpart
RRRR
of
Part
63.
Applicability
of
General
Provisions
to
Subpart
RRRR
Table
3
to
Subpart
RRRR
of
Part
63.
Default
Organic
HAP
Mass
Fraction
for
Solvents
and
Solvent
Blends
Table
4
to
Subpart
RRRR
of
Part
63.
Default
Organic
HAP
Mass
Fraction
for
Petroleum
Solvent
Groups
What
This
Subpart
Covers
§
63.4880
What
is
the
purpose
of
this
subpart?

This
subpart
establishes
national
emission
standards
for
hazardous
air
pollutants
(NESHAP)
for
metal
furniture
surface
coating
facilities.
This
subpart
also
establishes
requirements
to
demonstrate
initial
and
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations.
§
63.4881
Am
I
subject
to
this
subpart?
(a)
Except
as
provided
in
paragraph
(c)
of
this
section,
the
source
category
to
which
this
subpart
applies
is
surface
coating
of
metal
furniture.
(1)
Surface
coating
is
the
application
of
coatings
to
a
substrate
using,
for
example,
spray
guns
or
dip
tanks.
(2)
Metal
furniture
means
furniture
or
components
of
furniture
constructed
either
entirely
or
partially
from
metal.
Metal
furniture
includes,
but
is
not
limited
to,
components
of
the
following
types
of
products
as
well
as
the
products
themselves:
household,
office,
institutional,
laboratory,
hospital,
public
building,
restaurant,
barber
and
beauty
shop,
and
dental
furniture;
office
and
store
fixtures;
partitions;
shelving;
lockers;
lamps
and
lighting
fixtures;
and
wastebaskets.
(b)
You
are
subject
to
this
subpart
if
you
own
or
operate
a
new,
reconstructed,
or
existing
affected
source,
as
defined
in
§
63.4882,
in
the
source
category
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
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
any
of
the
criteria
of
paragraphs
(c)(
1)
through
(5)
of
this
section.
(1)
Surface
coating
conducted
at
a
source
that
uses
only
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
that
contain
no
organic
HAP.
(2)
Surface
coating
of
metal
components
of
wood
furniture
conducted
in
an
operation
that
is
subject
to
the
wood
furniture
manufacturing
NESHAP
in
subpart
JJ
of
this
part.
(3)
Surface
coating
that
occurs
at
research
or
laboratory
facilities
or
that
is
part
of
janitorial,
building,
and
facility
maintenance
operations.
(4)
Surface
coating
of
only
small
items
such
as
knobs,
hinges,
or
screws
that
have
a
wider
use
beyond
metal
furniture
are
not
subject
to
this
subpart
unless
the
surface
coating
occurs
at
a
metal
furniture
source.
(5)
Surface
coating
of
metal
furniture
conducted
for
the
purpose
of
repairing
or
maintaining
metal
furniture
used
by
a
facility
and
not
for
commerce
is
not
subject
to
this
subpart,
unless
organic
HAP
emissions
from
the
surface
coating
itself
are
as
high
as
the
rates
specified
in
paragraph
(b)
of
this
section.

§
63.4882
What
parts
of
my
plant
does
this
subpart
cover?
(a)
This
subpart
applies
to
each
new,
reconstructed,
and
existing
affected
source.
(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
metal
furniture:
(1)
All
coating
operations
as
defined
in
§
63.4981;
(2)
All
storage
containers
and
mixing
vessels
in
which
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
are
stored
or
mixed;
(3)
All
manual
and
automated
equipment
and
containers
used
for
conveying
coatings,
thinners,
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
affected
source
if
you
commenced
its
construction
after
April
24,
2002,
and
the
construction
is
of
a
completely
new
metal
furniture
surface
coating
facility
where
previously
no
metal
furniture
surface
coating
facility
had
existed.
(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.

§
63.4883
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
§§
63.4940,
63.4950,
and
63.4960.
(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.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00019
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20224
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
(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
compliance
date
is
the
date
of
initial
startup
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
§
63.4910
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
§
63.4890
What
emission
limits
must
I
meet?
(a)
For
a
new
or
reconstructed
affected
source,
you
must
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
the
atmosphere
to
no
more
than
0.094
kilogram
(kg)
organic
HAP
per
liter
(0.78
pound
per
gallon
(lb/
gal))
of
coating
solids
used
during
each
compliance
period,
determined
according
to
the
procedures
in
§
63.4941,
§
63.4951,
or
§
63.4961.
(b)
For
an
existing
affected
source,
you
must
limit
organic
HAP
emissions
to
the
atmosphere
to
no
more
than
0.12
kg
organic
HAP
per
liter
(1.0
lb/
gal)
of
coating
solids
used
during
each
compliance
period,
determined
according
to
the
procedures
in
§
63.4941,
§
63.4951,
or
§
63.4961.

§
63.4891
What
are
my
options
for
meeting
the
emission
limits?
You
must
include
all
coatings,
thinners,
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
§
63.4890.
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
§
63.4930(
c),
and
you
must
report
it
in
the
next
semiannual
compliance
report
required
in
§
63.4920.
(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
§
63.4890
and
that
each
thinner
and
each
cleaning
material
used
contains
no
organic
HAP.
You
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
§§
63.4940,
63.4941,
and
63.4942
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
emission
limit
using
this
option.
(b)
Emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option.
Demonstrate
that,
based
on
the
coatings,
thinners,
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
§
63.4890,
calculated
as
a
monthly
emission
rate.
You
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
§§
63.4950,
63.4951,
and
63.4952
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
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation(
s),
and
the
emission
capture
and
add­
on
control
efficiencies
achieved,
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
coating
operation(
s)
is
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890,
calculated
as
a
monthly
emission
rate.
If
you
use
this
compliance
option,
you
must
also
demonstrate
that
all
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices
for
the
coating
operation(
s)
meet
the
operating
limits
required
in
§
63.4892,
except
for
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4961(
j);
and
that
you
meet
the
work
practice
standards
required
in
§
63.4893.
You
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
§§
63.4960
through
63.4968
to
demonstrate
compliance
with
the
emission
limits,
operating
limits,
and
work
practice
standards
using
this
option.
§
63.4892
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
§
63.4961(
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
procedures
in
§
63.4967.
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
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).

§
63.4893
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
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,
cleaning
materials,
and
waste
materials
must
be
stored
in
closed
containers.
(2)
Spills
of
organic­
HAP­
containing
coatings,
thinners,
cleaning
materials,
and
waste
materials
must
be
minimized.
(3)
Organic­
HAP­
containing
coatings,
thinners,
cleaning
materials,
and
waste
materials
must
be
conveyed
from
one
location
to
another
in
closed
containers
or
pipes.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00020
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20225
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
(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
§
63.4900
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
§
63.4891(
a)
and
(b),
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890
at
all
times.
(2)
Any
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
use
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option,
as
specified
in
§
63.4891(
c),
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890
at
all
times
except
during
periods
of
startup,
shutdown,
and
malfunction.
Each
controlled
coating
operation
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
operating
limits
for
emission
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices
required
by
§
63.4892
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
§
63.4961(
j).
Each
controlled
coating
operation
must
be
in
compliance
with
the
work
practice
standards
in
§
63.4893
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
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
specified
for
your
affected
source
in
§
63.4883
and
the
date
when
the
initial
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
performance
tests
have
been
completed,
as
specified
in
§
63.4960.
This
requirement
does
not
apply
to
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance
according
to
§
63.4961(
j).
(d)
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
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.

§
63.4901
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
§
63.4910
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
§§
63.4940,
63.4950,
or
63.4960
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
§§
63.4940,
63.4950,
or
63.4960
that
applies
to
your
affected
source.
(4)
Identification
of
the
compliance
option
or
options
specified
in
§
63.4891
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
of
and
statement
of
the
cause
of
the
deviation.
(ii)
If
you
failed
to
meet
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890,
include
all
the
calculations
you
used
to
determine
the
kg
organic
HAP
emitted
per
liter
of
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
results
of
testing
conducted
according
to
§
63.4941(
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,
and
for
one
cleaning
material.
(ii)
Volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
one
coating.
(iii)
Density
for
one
coating,
one
thinner,
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
§
63.4951.
(8)
The
calculation
of
kg
organic
HAP
emitted
per
liter
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
(Hc)
for
one
coating,
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4941.
(ii)
For
the
emission
rate
without
addon
controls
option,
provide
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
during
the
initial
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00021
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20226
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
compliance
period
(He);
the
calculation
of
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
initial
compliance
period
(Vst);
and
the
calculation
of
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
initial
compliance
period
(Havg),
using
Equations
1,
2,
and
3,
respectively,
of
§
63.4951.
(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
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
initial
compliance
period
(He),
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1C
of
§
63.4951;
the
calculation
of
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
initial
compliance
period
(Vst),
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.4951;
the
calculation
of
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
during
the
initial
compliance
period
by
emission
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices,
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1D
of
§
63.4961
for
HC,
and
Equations
2
and
3
of
§
63.4961
for
HCSR,
as
applicable;
and
the
calculation
of
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
(HHAP)
for
the
initial
compliance
period,
using
either
Equation
4
of
§
63.4961
or
Equation
1
of
§
63.4962,
as
applicable.
(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.
The
requirements
in
paragraphs
(c)(
9)(
i)
through
(iii)
of
this
section
do
not
apply
to
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4961(
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
§
63.4893.

§
63.4920
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.
(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
§§
63.4940,
63.4950,
or
63.4960
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
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
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
shall
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.
(iv)
Identification
of
the
compliance
option
or
options
specified
in
§
63.4891
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
(§
63.4891(
b)
or
(c)),
the
calculation
results
for
each
monthly
organic
HAP
emission
rate
during
the
6­
month
reporting
period.
(4)
No
deviations.
If
there
were
no
deviations
from
the
emission
limitations
in
§§
63.4890,
63.4892,
and
63.4893
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
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00022
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20227
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
deviation
from
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890,
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
emission
limit,
and
of
each
thinner
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
(HC,
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4941)
for
each
coating
identified
in
paragraph
(a)(
5)(
i)
of
this
section.
You
do
not
need
to
submit
background
data
supporting
this
calculation,
for
example,
information
provided
by
coating
suppliers
or
manufacturers,
or
test
reports.
(iii)
The
determination
of
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
for
each
coating,
thinner,
and
cleaning
material
identified
in
paragraph
(a)(
5)(
i)
of
this
section.
You
do
not
need
to
submit
background
data
supporting
this
calculation,
for
example,
information
provided
by
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
§
63.4890,
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
organic
HAP
emission
rate
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890.
(ii)
The
calculations
used
to
determine
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
compliance
period
in
which
the
deviation
occurred.
You
must
submit
the
calculations
for
Equations
1,
1A
through
1C,
2,
and
3
in
§
63.4951;
and
if
applicable,
the
calculation
used
to
determine
Rw
according
to
§
63.4951(
e)(
4).
You
do
not
need
to
submit
background
data
supporting
these
calculations,
for
example,
information
provided
by
materials
suppliers
or
manufacturers,
or
test
reports.
(iii)
A
statement
of
the
cause
of
each
deviation.
(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
organic
HAP
emission
rate
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890.
(ii)
The
calculations
used
to
determine
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
compliance
period
in
which
a
deviation
occurred.
You
must
provide
the
calculation
of
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
for
the
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
compliance
period
(He),
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1C
of
§
63.4951
and,
if
applicable,
the
calculation
used
to
determine
Rw
according
to
§
63.4951(
e)(
4);
the
calculation
of
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
compliance
period
(Vst),
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.4951;
the
calculation
of
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
during
the
compliance
period
by
emission
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices,
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1D
of
§
63.4961
for
HC,
and
Equations
2
and
3
of
§
63.4961
for
HCSR,
as
applicable;
and
the
calculation
of
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
compliance
period
(HHAP),
using
either
Equation
4
of
§
63.4961
or
Equation
1
of
§
63.4962,
as
applicable.
You
do
not
need
to
submit
the
background
data
supporting
these
calculations,
for
example
information
provided
by
materials
suppliers
or
manufacturers,
or
test
reports.
(iii)
The
date
and
time
that
each
malfunction
started
and
stopped.
(iv)
A
brief
description
of
the
CPMS.
(v)
The
date
of
the
latest
CPMS
certification
or
audit.
(vi)
The
date
and
time
that
each
CPMS
was
inoperative,
except
for
zero
(low­
level)
and
high­
level
checks.
(vii)
The
date,
time,
and
duration
that
each
CPMS
was
out­
of­
control,
including
the
information
in
§
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.
(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
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00023
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20228
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
§
63.10(
d)(
5)(
ii).
The
letter
must
contain
the
information
specified
in
§
63.10(
d)(
5)(
ii).

§
63.4930
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,
and
cleaning
material
and
the
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating.
If
you
conducted
testing
to
determine
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP,
density,
or
volume
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
at
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
(H
c),
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4941.
(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
cleaning
materials
used
during
each
compliance
period
(He),
using
Equations
1,
1A
through
1C,
and
2
of
§
63.4951
and,
if
applicable,
the
calculation
used
to
determine
Rw
according
to
§
63.4951(
e)(
4);
the
calculation
of
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
each
compliance
period
(Vst),
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.4951;
and
the
calculation
of
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
compliance
period
(Havg),
using
Equation
3
of
§
63.4951.
(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
cleaning
materials
used
during
each
compliance
period
(He),
using
Equations
1
and
1A
through
1C
of
§
63.4951
and,
if
applicable,
the
calculation
used
to
determine
Rw
according
to
§
63.4951(
e)(
4);
(ii)
The
calculation
of
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
each
compliance
period
(Vst),
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.4951;
(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
§
63.4961
for
HC,
and
Equations
2
and
3
of
§
63.4961
for
HCSR,
as
applicable;
(iv)
The
calculation
of
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
compliance
period
(HHAP),
using
either
Equation
4
of
§
63.4961
or
Equation
1
of
§
63.4962,
as
applicable.
(d)
A
record
of
the
name
and
volume
of
each
coating,
thinner,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
each
compliance
period.
(e)
A
record
of
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
for
each
coating,
thinner,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
each
compliance
period.
(f)
A
record
of
the
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating
used
during
each
compliance
period.
(g)
A
record
of
the
density
for
each
coating
used
during
each
compliance
period;
and,
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
thinner
and
cleaning
material
used
during
each
compliance
period.
(h)
If
you
use
an
allowance
in
Equation
1
of
§
63.4951
for
organic
HAP
contained
in
waste
materials
sent
to
or
designated
for
shipment
to
a
treatment,
storage,
and
disposal
facility
(TSDF)
according
to
§
63.4951(
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
§
63.4951,
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
§
63.4951.
(3)
The
methodology
used
in
accordance
with
§
63.4951(
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
(9)
of
this
section.
(1)
For
each
deviation,
a
record
of
whether
the
deviation
occurred
during
a
period
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction.
(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)
If
you
operate
under
multiple
operating
conditions
that
affect
emission
capture
system
efficiency
or
add­
on
control
device
organic
HAP
destruction
or
removal
efficiency,
and
you
are
using
different
emission
capture
system
efficiency
or
add­
on
control
device
organic
HAP
destruction
or
removal
efficiency
factors
for
each
condition,
then
you
must
keep
records
of
the
data
you
used
to
calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
compliance
period,
as
described
by
Equation
1
in
§
63.4962.
(5)
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
§
63.4965(
a).
(6)
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
§§
63.4964
and
63.4965(
b)
through
(e),
including
the
records
specified
in
paragraphs
(k)(
6)(
i)
through
(iii)
of
this
section
that
apply
to
you.
(i)
Records
for
a
liquid­
to­
uncapturedgas
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
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00024
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20229
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
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
§
63.4965(
e),
if
applicable.
(7)
The
records
specified
in
paragraphs
(k)(
7)(
i)
and
(ii)
of
this
section
for
each
add­
on
control
device
organic
HAP
destruction
or
removal
efficiency
determination
as
specified
in
§
63.4966.
(i)
Records
of
each
add­
on
control
device
performance
test
conducted
according
to
§§
63.4964
and
63.4966.
(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.
(8)
Records
of
the
data
and
calculations
you
used
to
establish
the
emission
capture
and
add­
on
control
device
operating
limits
as
specified
in
§
63.4967
and
to
document
compliance
with
the
operating
limits
as
specified
in
Table
1
of
this
subpart.
(9)
A
record
of
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4893
and
documentation
that
you
are
implementing
the
plan
on
a
continuous
basis.

§
63.4931
In
what
form
and
for
how
long
must
I
keep
my
records?
(a)
Your
records
must
be
in
a
form
suitable
and
readily
available
for
expeditious
review,
according
to
§
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
§
63.4940
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
§
63.4941.
The
initial
compliance
period
begins
on
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4883
and
ends
on
the
last
day
of
the
first
full
month
following
the
compliance
date.
The
initial
compliance
demonstration
includes
the
calculations
according
to
§
63.4941
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
§
63.4890
and
you
used
no
thinners
or
cleaning
materials
that
contained
organic
HAP.

§
63.4941
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
§
63.4890
and
must
use
no
thinner
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
§§
63.4892
and
63.4893,
respectively.
To
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
using
the
compliant
material
option,
you
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
this
section
for
the
coating
operation
or
group
of
coating
operations
using
this
option.
Use
the
procedures
in
this
section
on
each
coating,
thinner,
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
cleaning
materials
that
are
reclaimed
and
reused
onsite
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,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
the
compliance
period
by
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
(for
example,
0.3791).
(ii)
Calculate
the
total
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
the
test
material
by
adding
up
the
individual
organic
HAP
mass
fractions
and
truncating
the
result
to
three
places
after
the
decimal
point
(for
example,
0.763).
(2)
Method
24
(appendix
A
to
40
CFR
part
60).
For
coatings,
you
may
use
Method
24
to
determine
the
mass
fraction
of
non­
aqueous
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
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00025
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20230
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
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
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating.
You
must
determine
the
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
(liters
of
coating
solids
per
liter
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)
and
(2)
of
this
section.
If
test
results
obtained
according
to
paragraph
(b)(
1)
of
this
section
do
not
agree
with
the
information
obtained
under
paragraph
(b)(
2)
of
this
section,
the
test
results
will
take
precedence.
(1)
ASTM
Method
D2697–
86(
1998)
or
D6093–
97.
You
may
use
ASTM
Method
D2697–
86(
1998)
or
D6093–
97
to
determine
the
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating.
Divide
the
nonvolatile
volume
percent
obtained
with
the
methods
by
100
to
calculate
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids.
(2)
Information
from
the
supplier
or
manufacturer
of
the
material.
You
may
obtain
the
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating
from
the
supplier
or
manufacturer.
(c)
Determine
the
density
of
each
coating.
Determine
the
density
of
each
coating
used
during
the
compliance
period
from
test
results
using
ASTM
Method
D1475–
98
or
information
from
the
supplier
or
manufacturer
of
the
material.
If
there
is
disagreement
between
ASTM
Method
D1475–
98
test
results
and
the
supplier's
or
manufacturer's
information,
the
test
results
will
take
precedence.
(d)
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
content
of
each
coating.
Calculate
HC,
the
organic
HAP
content,
kg
organic
HAP
per
liter
coating
solids,
of
each
coating
used
during
the
compliance
period,
using
Equation
1
of
this
section:

H
D
W
V
c
c
c
s
=
(
)
(
)
(
)
Eq.
1
Where:
HC
=
organic
HAP
content
of
the
coating,
kg
organic
HAP
per
liter
coating
solids.
DC
=
density
of
coating,
kg
coating
per
liter
coating,
determined
according
to
paragraph
(c)
of
this
section.
WC
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coating,
kg
organic
HAP
per
kg
coating,
determined
according
to
paragraph
(a)
of
this
section.
VS
=
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids,
liter
coating
solids
per
liter
coating,
determined
according
to
paragraph
(b)
of
this
section.

(e)
Compliance
demonstration.
The
calculated
organic
HAP
content,
HC,
for
each
coating
used
during
the
initial
compliance
period
must
be
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890;
and
each
thinner
and
cleaning
material
used
during
the
initial
compliance
period
must
contain
no
organic
HAP,
determined
according
to
paragraph
(a)
of
this
section.
You
must
keep
all
records
required
by
§§
63.4930
and
63.4931.
As
part
of
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
required
in
§
63.4910,
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
§
63.4890,
and
you
used
no
thinners
or
cleaning
materials
that
contained
organic
HAP.
§
63.4942
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,
HC,
determined
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4941,
exceeds
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890,
and
use
no
thinner
or
cleaning
material
that
contains
organic
HAP,
determined
according
to
§
63.4941(
a).
Each
month
following
the
initial
compliance
period
described
in
§
63.4940
is
a
compliance
period.
(b)
If
you
choose
to
comply
with
the
emission
limitations
by
using
the
compliant
material
option,
the
use
of
any
coating,
thinner,
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
§§
63.4910(
c)(
6)
and
63.4920(
a)(
5).
(c)
As
part
of
each
semiannual
compliance
report
required
by
§
63.4920,
you
must
identify
the
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
used
the
compliant
material
option.
If
there
were
no
deviations
from
the
emission
limitations
in
§
63.4890,
submit
a
statement
that
the
coating
operation(
s)
was
(were)
in
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
during
the
reporting
period
because
you
used
no
coating
for
which
the
organic
HAP
content
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890
and
you
used
no
thinner
or
cleaning
material
that
contained
organic
HAP.
(d)
You
must
maintain
records
as
specified
in
§§
63.4930
and
63.4931.

Compliance
Requirements
for
the
Emission
Rate
Without
Add­
On
Controls
Option
§
63.4950
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
§
63.4951.
The
initial
compliance
period
begins
on
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4883
and
ends
on
the
last
day
of
the
first
full
month
following
the
compliance
date.
The
initial
compliance
demonstration
includes
the
calculations
showing
that
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
initial
compliance
period
was
equal
to
or
less
than
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890.

§
63.4951
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
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00026
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20231
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
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
§
63.4890,
but
is
not
required
to
meet
the
operating
limits
or
work
practice
standards
in
§§
63.4892
and
63.4893,
respectively.
You
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
this
section
to
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890
for
the
coating
operation(
s).
When
calculating
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
according
to
this
section,
do
not
include
any
coatings,
thinners,
or
cleaning
materials
used
on
coating
operations
for
which
you
use
the
compliant
material
option
or
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option.
You
do
not
need
to
include
organic
HAP
in
coatings,
thinners,
or
cleaning
materials
that
are
reclaimed
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,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
the
compliance
period
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4941(
a).
(b)
Determine
the
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating.
Determine
the
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating
used
during
the
compliance
period
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4941(
b).
(c)
Determine
the
density
of
each
material.
Determine
the
density
of
each
coating,
thinner,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
the
compliance
period
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4941(
c)
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
such
other
information
sources,
the
test
results
will
take
precedence.
(d)
Determine
the
volume
of
each
material
used.
Determine
the
volume
(liters)
of
each
coating,
thinner,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
the
compliance
period
by
measurement
or
usage
records.
(e)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions.
The
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions,
He,
is
the
combined
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
all
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
compliance
period
minus
the
organic
HAP
in
certain
waste
materials.
Calculate
He
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
compliance
period,
kg.
A
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
during
the
compliance
period,
kg,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1A
of
this
section.
B
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
used
during
the
compliance
period,
kg,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1B
of
this
section.
C
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
compliance
period,
kg,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1C
of
this
section.
Rw
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
waste
materials
sent
or
designated
for
shipment
to
a
hazardous
waste
TSDF
for
treatment
or
disposal
during
the
compliance
period,
kg,
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
A,
the
kg
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
during
the
compliance
period
using
Equation
1A
of
this
section:

A
Vol
D
W
c
i
c
i
c
i
m
=
(
)
(
)
(
)
(
)
i=
 
,,,
Eq.
1A
1
Where:
A
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
during
the
compliance
period,
kg.
Volc,
i
=
total
volume
of
coating,
i,
used
during
the
compliance
period,
liters.
Dc,
i
=
density
of
coating,
i,
kg
coating
per
liter
coating.
Wc,
i
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
coating,
i,
kg
organic
HAP
per
kg
coating.
m
=
number
of
different
coatings
used
during
the
compliance
period.

(2)
Calculate
B,
the
kg
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
used
during
the
compliance
period
using
Equation
1B
of
this
section:

B
Vol
D
W
t
j
t
j
t
j
m
=
(
)
(
)
(
)
(
)
j=
 
,,,
Eq.
1B
1
Where:
B
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
used
during
the
compliance
period,
kg.
Volt,
j
=
total
volume
of
thinner,
j,
used
during
the
compliance
period,
liters.
Dt,
j
=
density
of
thinner,
j,
kg
per
liter.
Wt,
j
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
thinner,
j,
kg
organic
HAP
per
kg
thinner.
n
=
number
of
different
thinners
used
during
the
compliance
period.

(3)
Calculate
C,
the
kg
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
compliance
period
using
Equation
1C
of
this
section:

C
Vol
D
W
s
k
s
k
s
k
p
=
(
)
(
)
(
)
(
)
k=
 
,,,
Eq.
1C
1
Where:

C
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
compliance
period,
kg.
Vols,
k
=
total
volume
of
cleaning
material,
k,
used
during
the
compliance
period,
liters.
Ds,
k
=
density
of
cleaning
material,
k,
kg
per
liter.
Ws,
k
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
cleaning
material,
k,
kg
organic
HAP
per
kg
material.
p
=
number
of
different
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
compliance
period.
(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
(Rw)
in
the
calculation
of
He
(Equation
1
of
this
section),
then
you
must
determine
Rw
according
to
paragraphs
(e)(
4)(
i)
through
(iv)
of
this
section.
(i)
You
may
include
in
the
determination
of
Rw
only
waste
materials
that
are
generated
by
coating
operations
for
which
you
use
Equation
1
of
this
section
and
that
will
be
treated
or
disposed
of
by
a
facility
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
in
Rw
the
organic
HAP
contained
in
wastewater.
(ii)
You
must
determine
either
the
amount
of
the
waste
materials
sent
to
a
TSDF
during
the
compliance
period
or
the
amount
collected
and
stored
during
the
compliance
period
and
designated
for
future
transport
to
a
TSDF.
Do
not
include
in
your
determination
of
Rw
any
waste
materials
sent
to
a
TSDF
during
a
compliance
period
if
you
have
already
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00027
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20232
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
included
them
in
the
amount
collected
and
stored
during
that
or
a
previous
compliance
period.
(iii)
Determine
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
the
waste
materials
specified
in
paragraph
(e)(
4)(
ii)
of
this
section.
(iv)
You
may
use
any
reasonable
methodology
to
determine
the
amount
of
waste
materials
and
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
they
contain,
and
you
must
document
your
methodology
as
required
in
§
63.4930(
h).
To
the
extent
that
waste
manifests
include
this
information,
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
volume
of
coating
solids
used.
Determine
Vst,
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used,
liters,
which
is
the
combined
volume
of
coating
solids
for
all
the
coatings
used
during
the
compliance
period,
using
Equation
2
of
this
section:

V
Vol
V
st
i
s
i
m
=
(
)
(
)
(
)
i=
 
c,,
Eq.
2
1
Where:
Vst
=
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
compliance
period,
liters.
Volc,
i
=
total
volume
of
coating,
i,
used
during
the
compliance
period,
liters.
Vs,
i
=
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
coating,
i,
liter
solids
per
liter
coating,
determined
according
to
§
63.4941(
b).
m
=
number
of
coatings
used
during
the
compliance
period.

(g)
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate.
Calculate
Havg,
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
compliance
period,
kg
organic
HAP
per
liter
coating
solids
used,
using
Equation
3
of
this
section:

H
H
V
avg
e
st
=
(
)
Eq.
3
Where:
Havg
=
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
compliance
period,
kg
organic
HAP
per
liter
coating
solids.
He
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
from
all
materials
used
during
the
compliance
period,
kg,
as
calculated
by
Equation
1
of
this
section.
Vst
=
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
compliance
period,
liters,
as
calculated
by
Equation
2
of
this
section.

(h)
Compliance
demonstration.
The
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
initial
compliance
period,
Havg,
must
be
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890.
You
must
keep
all
records
as
required
by
§§
63.4930
and
63.4931.
As
part
of
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
required
by
§
63.4910,
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
§
63.4890,
determined
according
to
this
section.

§
63.4952
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
§
63.4951(
a)
through
(g),
must
be
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890.
Each
month
following
the
initial
compliance
period
described
in
§
63.4950
is
a
compliance
period.
(b)
If
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
any
compliance
period
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890,
this
is
a
deviation
from
the
emission
limitations
for
that
compliance
period
and
must
be
reported
as
specified
in
§§
63.4910(
c)(
6)
and
63.4920(
a)(
6).
(c)
As
part
of
each
semiannual
compliance
report
required
by
§
63.4920,
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
§
63.4890.
(d)
You
must
maintain
records
as
specified
in
§§
63.4930
and
63.4931.

Compliance
Requirements
for
the
Emission
Rate
With
Add­
On
Controls
Option
§
63.4960
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,
on
control
devices,
and
CPMS
must
be
installed
and
operating
no
later
than
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4883.
Except
for
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
conduct
liquid
liquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4961(
j),
you
must
conduct
a
performance
test
of
each
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
according
to
§§
63.4964,
63.4965,
and
63.4966,
and
establish
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4892,
no
later
than
180
days
after
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4883.
For
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4961(
j),
you
must
initiate
the
first
material
balance
no
later
than
180
days
after
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4883.
(2)
You
must
develop
and
begin
implementing
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4893
no
later
than
the
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4883.
(3)
You
must
complete
the
initial
compliance
demonstration
for
the
initial
compliance
period
according
to
the
requirements
of
§
63.4961.
The
initial
compliance
period
begins
on
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4883
and
ends
on
the
last
day
of
the
first
full
month
following
the
compliance
date.
The
initial
compliance
demonstration
includes
the
results
of
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
performance
tests
conducted
according
to
§§
63.4964,
63.4965,
and
63.4966;
results
of
liquid
liquid
material
balances
conducted
according
to
§
63.4961(
j);
calculations
showing
whether
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
initial
compliance
period
was
equal
to
or
less
than
the
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890(
a);
the
operating
limits
established
during
the
performance
tests
and
the
results
of
the
continuous
parameter
monitoring
required
by
§
63.4968;
and
documentation
of
whether
you
developed
and
implemented
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4893.
(4)
You
do
not
need
to
comply
with
the
operating
limits
for
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
required
by
§
63.4892
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
addspecified
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.
(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,
add
on
control
devices,
and
CPMS
must
be
installed
and
operating
no
later
than
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00028
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20233
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
§
63.4883.
Except
for
solvent
recovery
systems
for
which
you
conduct
liquidliquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4961(
j),
you
must
conduct
a
performance
test
of
each
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
according
to
the
procedures
in
§§
63.4964,
63.4965,
and
63.4966,
and
establish
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4892,
no
later
than
the
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4883.
For
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
according
to
§
63.4961(
j),
you
must
initiate
the
first
material
balance
no
later
than
the
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4883.
(2)
You
must
develop
and
begin
implementing
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4893
no
later
than
the
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4883.
(3)
You
must
complete
the
initial
compliance
demonstration
for
the
initial
compliance
period
according
to
the
requirements
of
§
63.4961.
The
initial
compliance
period
begins
on
the
applicable
compliance
date
specified
in
§
63.4883
and
ends
on
the
last
day
of
the
first
full
month
following
the
compliance
date.
The
initial
compliance
demonstration
includes
the
results
of
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
performance
tests
conducted
according
to
§§
63.4964,
63.4965,
and
63.4966;
results
of
liquidliquid
material
balances
conducted
according
to
§
63.4961(
j);
calculations
showing
whether
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
initial
compliance
period
was
equal
to
or
less
than
the
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890(
b);
the
operating
limits
established
during
the
performance
tests
and
the
results
of
the
continuous
parameter
monitoring
required
by
§
63.4968;
and
documentation
of
whether
you
developed
and
implemented
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4893.

§
63.4961
How
do
I
demonstrate
initial
compliance?
(a)
When
add­
on
controls
are
used.
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
limit
in
§
63.4890,
and
each
controlled
coating
operation
must
meet
the
operating
limits
and
work
practice
standards
required
in
§§
63.4892
and
63.4893,
respectively.
You
must
meet
all
the
requirements
of
this
section
to
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations.
When
calculating
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
according
to
this
section,
do
not
include
any
coatings,
thinners,
or
cleaning
materials
used
on
coating
operations
for
which
you
use
the
compliant
material
option
or
the
emission
rate
without
add­
on
controls
option.
(b)
Compliance
with
operating
limits.
Except
as
provided
in
§
63.4960(
a)(
4),
you
must
establish
and
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
during
the
initial
compliance
period
with
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4892,
using
the
procedures
specified
in
§§
63.4967
and
63.4968.
(c)
Compliance
with
work
practice
requirements.
You
must
develop,
implement,
and
document
your
implementation
of
the
work
practice
plan
required
by
§
63.4893
during
the
initial
compliance
period,
as
specified
in
§
63.4930.
(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
§
63.4890.
(e)
Determine
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP,
density,
volume
used,
and
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids.
Follow
the
procedures
specified
in
§
63.4951(
a)
through
(d)
to
determine
the
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP,
density,
and
volume
of
each
coating,
thinner,
and
cleaning
material
used
during
the
compliance
period;
and
the
volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
for
each
coating
used
during
the
compliance
period.
(f)
Calculate
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
before
add­
on
controls.
Using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4951,
calculate
the
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
before
add­
on
controls
from
all
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
compliance
period,
He.
(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
the
compliance
period.
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
controlled
coating
operations
not
using
liquidliquid
material
balance,
HC.
For
each
controlled
coating
operation
using
an
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
other
than
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances,
calculate
HC,
using
Equation
1
of
this
section.
The
calculation
of
HC
applies
the
emission
capture
system
efficiency
and
add­
on
control
device
efficiency
to
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
the
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
that
are
used
in
the
coating
operation
served
by
the
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
during
the
compliance
period.
For
any
period
of
time
a
deviation
specified
in
§
63.4963(
c)
or
(d)
occurs
in
the
controlled
coating
operation,
including
a
deviation
during
a
period
of
startup,
shutdown,
or
malfunction,
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
ABC
CE
DRE
H
Eq
c
I
I
I
unc
=
+
+
(
)
×
 
 
 
+
(
)
100
100
.
1
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00029
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20234
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
Where:
HC
=
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
compliance
period,
kg.
AI
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
compliance
period,
excluding
coatings
used
during
deviations,
kg,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1A
of
this
section.
BI
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
compliance
period,
excluding
thinners
used
during
deviations,
kg,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1B
of
this
section.
CI
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
compliance
period,
excluding
cleaning
materials
used
during
deviations,
kg,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1C
of
this
section.
CE
=
capture
efficiency
of
the
emission
capture
system
vented
to
the
add­
on
control
device,
percent.
Use
the
test
methods
and
procedures
specified
in
§§
63.4964
and
63.4965
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
§§
63.4964
and
63.4966
to
measure
and
record
the
organic
HAP
destruction
or
removal
efficiency.
Hunc
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
all
deviations
specified
in
§
63.4963(
c)
and
(d)
that
occurred
during
the
compliance
period
in
the
controlled
coating
operation,
kg,
as
calculated
in
Equation
1D
of
this
section.

(1)
Calculate
AI,
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation,
kg,
using
Equation
1A
of
this
section.
Do
not
include
in
the
calculation
of
AI
the
coatings
used
during
any
deviation
specified
in
§
63.4963(
c)
or
(d)
that
occurred
during
the
month.
Include
such
coatings
in
the
calculation
of
Hunc
in
Equation
1D
of
this
section.

A
Vol
D
W
I
cicici
m
=
(
)
(
)
(
)
(
)
i=
 
,,,
Eq.
1A
1
Where:
AI
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
compliance
period,
excluding
coatings
used
during
deviations,
kg.
Volc,
i
=
total
volume
of
coating,
i,
used
during
the
compliance
period
except
during
deviations,
liters.
Dc,
i
=
density
of
coating,
i,
kg
per
liter.
Wc,
i
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
coating,
i,
kg
per
kg.
m
=
number
of
different
coatings
used.

(2)
Calculate
BI,
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation,
kg,
using
Equation
1B
of
this
section.
Do
not
include
in
the
calculation
of
BI
the
thinners
used
during
any
deviation
specified
in
§
63.4963(
c)
or
(d)
that
occurred
during
the
month.
Include
such
coatings
in
the
calculation
of
Hunc
in
Equation
1D
of
this
section.

B
Vol
D
W
I
tjtjtj
n
=
(
)
(
)
(
)
(
)
j=
 
,,,
Eq.
1B
1
Where:
BI
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
compliance
period,
excluding
thinners
used
during
deviations,
kg.
Volt,
j
=
total
volume
of
thinner,
j,
used
during
the
compliance
period
except
during
deviations,
liters.
Dt,
j
=
density
of
thinner,
j,
kg
per
liter.
Wt,
j
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
thinner,
j,
kg
per
kg.
n
=
number
of
different
thinners
used.

(3)
Calculate
CI,
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation,
kg,
using
Equation
1C
of
this
section.
Do
not
include
in
the
calculation
of
CI
the
cleaning
materials
used
during
any
deviation
specified
in
§
63.4963(
c)
or
(d)
that
occurred
during
the
compliance
period.
Include
such
cleaning
materials
in
the
calculation
of
Hunc
in
Equation
1D
of
this
section.

C
Vol
D
W
I
sksksk
p
=
(
)
(
)
(
)
(
)
k=
 
,,,
Eq.
1C
1
Where:
CI
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
the
compliance
period,
excluding
cleaning
materials
used
during
deviations,
kg.
Vols,
k
=
total
volume
of
cleaning
material,
k,
used
during
the
compliance
period
except
during
deviations,
liters.
Ds,
k
=
density
of
cleaning
material,
k,
kg
per
liter.
Ws,
k
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
cleaning
material,
k,
kg
per
kg.
p
=
number
of
different
cleaning
materials
used.

(4)
Calculate
Hunc,
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
deviations
specified
in
§
63.4963(
c)
and
(d),
using
Equation
1D
of
this
section:

H
Vol
D
W
unc
h
h
h
q
=
(
)
(
)
(
)
(
)
h=
 
Eq.
1D
1
Where:
Hunc
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
all
deviations
specified
in
§
63.4963(
c)
and
(d)
that
occurred
during
the
compliance
period
in
the
controlled
coating
operation,
kg.
Volh
=
total
volume
of
coating,
thinner,
or
cleaning
material,
h,
used
in
the
controlled
coating
operation
during
deviations,
liters.
Dh
=
density
of
coating,
thinner,
or
cleaning
material,
h,
kg
per
liter.
Wh
=
mass
fraction
of
organic
HAP
in
coating,
thinner,
or
cleaning
material,
h,
kg
organic
HAP
per
kg
coating.
q
=
number
of
different
coatings,
thinning
solvents,
or
cleaning
materials.
(i)
[Reserved]
(j)
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
controlled
coating
operations
using
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
HCSR.
For
each
controlled
coating
operation
using
a
solvent
recovery
system
for
which
you
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances,

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00030
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20235
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
calculate
HCSR
by
applying
the
volatile
organic
matter
collection
and
recovery
efficiency
to
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
the
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
that
are
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period.
Perform
a
liquidliquid
material
balance
for
each
compliance
period
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
compliance
period.
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,
M
VR,
of
volatile
organic
matter
recovered
for
the
compliance
period,
kg,
based
on
measurement
with
the
device
required
in
paragraph
(j)(
1)
of
this
section.
(3)
Determine
the
mass
fraction,
CV,
of
volatile
organic
matter
for
each
coating,
thinner,
and
cleaning
material
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period,
kg
volatile
organic
matter
per
kg
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,
and
cleaning
material
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period,
kg
per
liter,
according
to
§
63.4951(
c).
(5)
Measure
the
volume
of
each
coating,
thinner,
and
cleaning
material
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period,
liters.
(6)
Calculate
the
solvent
recovery
system's
volatile
organic
matter
collection
and
recovery
efficiency,
RV,
using
Equation
2
of
this
section:

R
M
Vol
D
WV
Vol
D
WV
Vol
D
WV
v
VR
i
i
ci
jj
tj
kk
sk
p
n
m
=
+
+
(
)

k=
j=
i=
 
 
 
100
1
1
1
,,,
Eq.
2
Where:
RV
=
volatile
organic
matter
collection
and
recovery
efficiency
of
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period,
percent.
MVR
=
mass
of
volatile
organic
matter
recovered
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period,
kg.
Voli
=
volume
of
coating,
i,
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period,
liters.
Di
=
density
of
coating,
i,
kg
per
liter.
WVc,
i
=
mass
fraction
of
volatile
organic
matter
for
coating,
i,
kg
volatile
organic
matter
per
kg
coating.
Volj
=
volume
of
thinner,
j,
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period,
liters.
Dj
=
density
of
thinner,
j,
kg
per
liter.
WVt,
j
=
mass
fraction
of
volatile
organic
matter
for
thinner,
j,
kg
volatile
organic
matter
per
kg
thinner.
Volk
=
volume
of
cleaning
material,
k,
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period,
liters.
Dk
=
density
of
cleaning
material,
k,
kg
per
liter.
WVs,
k
=
mass
fraction
of
volatile
organic
matter
for
cleaning
material,
k,
kg
volatile
organic
matter
per
kg
cleaning
material.
m
=
number
of
different
coatings
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period.
n
=
number
of
different
thinners
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period.
p
=
number
of
different
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period.

(7)
Calculate
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period,
HCSR,
using
Equation
3
of
this
section:

H
ABC
R
CSR
I
I
I
V
=
+
+
(
)
 
 
 
 
(
)
100 
Eq.
3
Where:
HCSR
=
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system
during
the
compliance
period,
kg.
AI
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
coatings
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system,
kg,
calculated
using
Equation
1A
of
this
section.
BI
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
thinners
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system,
kg,
calculated
using
Equation
1B
of
this
section.
CI
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
in
the
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
controlled
by
the
solvent
recovery
system,
kg,
calculated
using
Equation
1C
of
this
section.
RV
=
volatile
organic
matter
collection
and
recovery
efficiency
of
the
solvent
recovery
system,
percent,
from
Equation
2
of
this
section.

(k)
Calculate
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used.
Determine
Vst,
the
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used,
liters,
which
is
the
combined
volume
of
coating
solids
for
all
the
coatings
used
during
the
compliance
period,
using
Equation
2
of
§
63.4951.

(l)
Calculate
the
organic
HAP
emissions
rate.
Determine
HHAP,
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
to
the
atmosphere,
kg
organic
HAP
per
liter
coating
solids
used
during
the
compliance
period,
using
either
Equation
4
of
this
section
or
Equation
1
of
§
63.4962.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00031
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20236
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
H
H
HH
V
HAP
e
Ci
q
CSR
j
r
st
=
 
(
)
 
(
)
(
)
i=
j=
 
 
,,
1
1
Eq.
4
Where:
HHAP
=
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
compliance
period,
kg.
He
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
before
add­
on
controls
from
all
the
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
compliance
period,
kg,
determined
according
to
paragraph
(f)
of
this
section.
HC,
i
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
controlled
coating
operation,
i,
not
using
liquid­
liquid
material
balances,
during
the
compliance
kg,
from
Equation
1
of
this
section.
HCSR,
j
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction
for
controlled
coating
operation,
j,
using
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance,
during
the
compliance
period,
kg,
from
Equation
3
of
this
section.
Vst
=
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
compliance
period,
liters,
from
Equation
2
of
§
63.4951.
q
=
number
of
controlled
coating
operations
except
those
controlled
with
a
solvent
recovery
system.
r
=
number
of
coating
operations
controlled
with
a
solvent
recovery
system.

(m)
Compliance
demonstration.
To
demonstrate
initial
compliance
with
the
emission
limit,
HHAP,
calculated
using
either
Equation
4
of
this
section
or
Equation
1
of
§
63.4962,
must
be
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890.
You
must
keep
all
records
as
required
by
§§
63.4930
and
63.4931.
As
part
of
the
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
required
by
§
63.4910,
you
must
identify
the
coating
operation(
s)
for
which
you
used
the
emission
rate
with
add­
on
controls
option
and
submit
a
statement
that
the
coating
operation(
s)
was
(were)
in
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations
during
the
initial
compliance
period
because
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
was
less
than
or
equal
to
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890,
and
you
achieved
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4892
and
the
work
practice
standards
required
by
§
63.4893.

§
63.4962
How
do
I
determine
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
a
controlled
coating
operation
not
using
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance
if
I
operate
it
under
different
sets
of
representative
operating
conditions?

(a)
This
section
applies
only
to
controlled
coating
operations
for
which
you
do
not
conduct
liquid­
liquid
material
balances
to
demonstrate
compliance.
If
you
operate
such
a
controlled
coating
operation,
its
emission
capture
system,
or
its
add­
on
control
device
at
multiple
sets
of
representative
operating
conditions
that
result
in
different
capture
system
or
add­
on
control
device
efficiencies
during
a
compliance
period,
you
must
determine
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
according
to
either
paragraph
(b)
or
(c)
of
this
section.
The
cases
described
in
paragraphs
(a)(
1)
and
(2)
of
this
section
are
examples
of
such
operating
conditions.
(1)
You
use
a
single
add­
on
control
device
to
reduce
emissions
from
two
or
more
coating
operations
and
the
number
of
coating
operations
vented
to
the
add
on
control
device
is
variable
during
the
compliance
period.
This
case
also
includes
situations
where
you
have
more
than
one
capture
device
on
the
same
coating
operation
and
the
number
of
capture
devices
vented
to
the
add­
on
control
device
is
changed
during
the
compliance
period.
(2)
The
coatings
or
cleaning
materials
you
apply
or
the
products
to
which
you
apply
them
differ
during
the
compliance
period,
and
the
differences
in
resulting
emissions
are
such
that
the
emission
capture
efficiency
or
add­
on
control
device
efficiency
changes.
This
case
includes
a
change
in
the
shape
or
size
of
the
product
coated
such
that
there
is
a
change
in
capture
efficiency
of
the
capture
system.
This
case
also
includes
a
change
in
the
materials
that
results
in
an
inlet
concentration
to
the
add­
on
control
device
that
is
sufficiently
lower
such
that
the
percent
reduction
the
addperiod
on
control
device
can
achieve
changes,
or
a
change
in
the
volatility
of
the
organic
HAP
in
the
materials
used
such
that
a
lower
proportion
of
the
HAP
is
captured
by
the
capture
system
and
a
higher
amount
is
not
captured
by
the
capture
system.
(b)
If
you
conduct
performance
tests
under
the
representative
operating
conditions
that
are
expected
to
result
in
the
lowest
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
efficiencies,
as
allowed
under
§
63.4964(
b)(
2),
then
determine
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
according
to
the
procedures
and
equations
in
§
63.4961.
You
do
not
need
to
follow
paragraph
(c)
of
this
section.
(c)
If
you
conduct
performance
tests
under
multiple
sets
of
representative
operating
conditions
to
establish
different
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
efficiencies
for
each
set
of
operating
conditions,
as
allowed
under
§
63.4964(
b)(
1),
then
determine
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
according
to
paragraphs
(c)(
1)
and
(2)
of
this
section.
(1)
You
must
use
Equation
1
of
this
section
for
determining
HHAP,
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate,
kg
organic
HAP
emitted
per
liter
coating
solids
used:

H
H
HHH
H
V
HAP
e
q
c
i
c
i
C
r
CSR
st
n
j
=
 
+
+
(
)
 
(
)
(
)
i=
j=
 
 
1
1
1
2
,,
,i
...
Eq.
1
Where:
HHAP
=
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
the
compliance
period,
kg
organic
HAP
per
liter
coating
solids.
He
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emissions
before
add­
on
controls
from
all
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
used
during
the
compliance
period,
kg,
determined
according
to
§
63.4961(
f).
HC,
i1,
HC,
i2,HC,
in
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction,
kg,
for
controlled
coating
operation,
i,
while
operating
under
each
operating
condition,
n,
during
the
compliance
period,
from
Equation
1
of
§
63.4961.
HCSR,
j
=
total
mass
of
organic
HAP
emission
reduction,
kg,
for
controlled
coating
operation,
j,
using
a
liquid­
liquid
material
balance
during
the
compliance
period,
from
Equation
3
of
§
63.4961.
Vst
=
total
volume
of
coating
solids
used
during
the
compliance
period,
liters,
from
Equation
2
of
§
63.4951.
n
=
number
of
different
operating
conditions
that
affect
emission
capture
system
efficiency
or
add­
on
control
device
organic
HAP
destruction
or
removal
efficiency
under
which
the
coating
operation
operated
during
the
compliance
period.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
19:
41
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00032
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm11
PsN:
24APP2
20237
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
q
=
number
of
controlled
coating
operations
not
controlled
by
a
solvent
recovery
system.
r
=
number
of
coating
operations
controlled
by
a
solvent
recovery
system.

(2)
To
determine
the
HC,
in
in
Equation
1
of
this
section,
follow
the
steps
in
paragraphs
(c)(
2)(
i)
through
(iii)
of
this
section.
(i)
Use
Equation
1
of
§
63.4961
to
calculate
the
HC
for
each
operating
condition,
n,
of
each
controlled
coating
operation,
i.
(ii)
For
the
factors
AI,
BI,
and
CI
in
Equation
1
of
§
63.4961,
use
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
contained
in
the
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
used
in
each
controlled
coating
operation,
i,
while
operating
under
each
operating
condition,
n.
(iii)
In
Equation
1
of
§
63.4961,
use
the
emission
capture
system
efficiency
and
addon
control
device
organic
HAP
destruction
or
removal
efficiency
that
apply
under
each
operating
condition,
n.
These
efficiencies
for
each
operating
condition
are
determined
from
the
performance
test
required
by
§
63.4960
and
as
specified
in
§
63.4964(
b).

§
63.4963
How
do
I
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
emission
limitations?
(a)
To
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890,
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
each
compliance
period,
determined
according
to
the
procedures
in
§
63.4961
(and
in
§
63.4962,
if
applicable),
must
be
equal
to
or
less
than
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890.
Each
month
following
the
initial
compliance
period
described
in
§
63.4960
is
a
compliance
period.
(b)
If
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
for
any
compliance
period
exceeded
the
applicable
emission
limit
in
§
63.4890,
this
is
a
deviation
from
the
emission
limitation
for
that
compliance
period
and
must
be
reported
as
specified
in
§§
63.4910(
c)(
6)
and
63.4920(
a)(
7).
(c)
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
each
operating
limit
required
by
§
63.4892
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
§§
63.4910(
b)(
6)
and
63.4920(
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
§§
63.4961
and
63.4962,
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
§
63.4961.
(d)
You
must
meet
the
requirements
for
bypass
lines
in
§
63.4968(
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
§§
63.4910(
c)(
6)
and
63.4920(
a)(
7).
For
the
purposes
of
completing
the
compliance
calculations
in
§§
63.4961
and
63.4962,
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
§
63.4961.
(e)
You
must
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
with
the
work
practice
standards
in
§
63.4893.
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
§
63.4930(
k)(
9),
this
is
a
deviation
from
the
work
practice
standards
that
must
be
reported
as
specified
in
§§
63.4910(
c)(
6)
and
63.4920(
a)(
7).
(f)
As
part
of
each
semiannual
compliance
report
required
in
§
63.4920,
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
§
63.4890,
and
you
achieved
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4892
and
the
work
practice
standards
required
by
§
63.4893
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
§
63.4900(
d).
(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
§§
63.4930
and
63.4931.

§
63.4964
What
are
the
general
requirements
for
performance
tests?

(a)
You
must
conduct
each
performance
test
required
by
§
63.4960
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
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)
If
the
coating
operation,
emission
capture
system,
or
add­
on
control
device
will
be
operated
at
different
sets
of
representative
operating
conditions,
you
must
conduct
the
performance
test
according
to
either
paragraph
(b)(
1)
or
(2)
of
this
section:
(1)
Test
at
each
of
the
representative
operating
conditions
and
establish
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
efficiencies
and
operating
limits
for
each
operating
condition.
To
demonstrate
continuous
compliance
following
the
performance
test,
record
the
conditions
under
which
the
process,
emission
capture
system,
and
add­
on
control
device
are
operating
during
each
time
period
of
operation,
and
calculate
the
organic
HAP
emission
rate
as
described
in
§
63.4962.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00033
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20238
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
(2)
Test
at
the
representative
operating
conditions
that
are
expected
to
result
in
the
lowest
emission
capture
system
and
add­
on
control
device
efficiencies
and
establish
efficiencies
and
operating
limits
based
on
this
test.
Use
these
efficiencies
in
the
emission
calculations
in
§
63.4961.
(c)
You
must
conduct
each
performance
test
of
an
emission
capture
system
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4965.
You
must
conduct
each
performance
test
of
an
add­
on
control
device
according
to
the
requirements
in
§
63.4966.
(d)
The
performance
test
to
determine
add­
on
control
device
organic
HAP
destruction
or
removal
efficiency
must
consist
of
three
runs
as
specified
in
§
63.7(
e)(
3)
and
each
run
must
last
at
least
1
hour.

§
63.4965
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
§
63.4960.
(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
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
are
applied
within
the
capture
system;
coating
solvent
flash­
off
and
coating,
curing,
and
drying
occurs
within
the
capture
system;
and
the
removal
of
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
production,
which
includes
surface
preparation
activities
and
drying
or
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,
referred
to
as
TVHused,
to
the
mass
of
TVH
emissions
not
captured
by
the
emission
capture
system,
referred
to
as
TVHuncaptured.
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
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,
kg
TVH
per
kg
material,
of
TVH
liquid
input
from
each
coating,
thinner,
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
TVHused,
the
total
mass
of
TVH
liquid
input
from
all
the
coatings,
thinners,
and
cleaning
materials
used
in
the
coating
operation
during
each
capture
efficiency
test
run:

TVH
TVH
Vol
D
used
i
i
i
n
=
(
)
(
)
(
)
(
)
i=
 
Eq.
1
1
Where:
TVHi
=
mass
fraction
of
TVH
in
coating,
thinner,
or
cleaning
material,
i,
that
is
used
in
the
coating
operation
during
the
capture
efficiency
test
run,
kg
TVH
per
kg
material.
Voli
=
total
volume
of
coating,
thinner,
or
cleaning
material,
i,
used
in
the
coating
operation
during
the
capture
efficiency
test
run,
liters.
Di
=
density
of
coating,
thinner,
or
cleaning
material,
i,
kg
material
per
liter
material.
n
=
number
of
different
coatings,
thinners,
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
TVHuncaptured,
the
total
mass,
kg,
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,
CE,
of
the
emission
capture
system
using
Equation
2
of
this
section:

CE
TVH
TVH
TVH
used
uncaptured
used
=
 
(
)
×
(
)
100
Eq.
2
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00034
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4725
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20239
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
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,
kg.
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,
kg.

(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,
referred
to
as
TVHcaptured,
to
the
mass
of
TVH
emissions
not
captured,
referred
to
as
TVHuncaptured.
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.
(1)
Either
use
a
building
enclosure
or
construct
an
enclosure
around
the
coating
operation
where
coatings,
thinners,
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
TVHcaptured,
the
total
mass,
kg,
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
TVHuncaptured,
the
total
mass,
kg,
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,
CE,
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.
TVHcaptuted
=
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,
kg.
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,
kg.

(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.
§
63.4966
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
§
63.4960.
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,
as
specified
in
paragraphs
(b)(
1)
through
(3)
of
this
section.
You
must
use
the
same
method
for
both
the
inlet
and
outlet
measurements.
(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.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00035
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20240
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
(3)
Use
Method
25A
if
the
add­
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
of
each
device.
For
example,
if
one
add­
on
control
device
is
a
concentrator
with
an
outlet
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
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.

M
QC
Eq
f
sdc
=
(
)
(
)
(
)
(
)
 
12
0
0416
10
6
..
1
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/
m
3
)
(@
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,
DRE,
using
Equation
2
of
this
section:

DRE
M
M
M
Eq
fi
fo
fi
=
 
(
)
.
2
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.

§
63.4967
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
§
63.4960
and
described
in
§§
63.4964,
63.4965,
and
63.4966,
you
must
establish
the
operating
limits
required
by
§
63.4892
according
to
this
section,
unless
you
have
received
approval
for
alternative
monitoring
and
operating
limits
under
§
63.8(
f)
as
specified
in
§
63.4892.
(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,
unless
you
are
determining
operating
limits
for
multiple
operating
conditions
as
specified
in
§
63.4964(
b)(
1)
and
paragraph
(f)
of
this
section.
(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,
unless
you
are
determining
operating
limits
for
multiple
operating
conditions
as
specified
in
§
63.4964(
b)(
1)
and
paragraph
(f)
of
this
section.
(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,
unless
you
are
determining
operating
limits
for
multiple
operating
conditions
as
specified
in
§
63.4964(
b)(
1)
and
paragraph
(f)
of
this
section.
(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
replace
the
catalyst
bed
and
conduct
a
new
performance
test
to
determine
destruction
efficiency
according
to
§
63.4966.
(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.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00036
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20241
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
(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,
unless
you
are
determining
operating
limits
for
multiple
operating
conditions
as
specified
in
§
63.4964(
b)(
1)
and
paragraph
(f)
of
this
section.
(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,
unless
you
are
determining
operating
limits
for
multiple
operating
conditions
as
specified
in
§
63.4964(
b)(
1)
and
paragraph
(f)
of
this
section.
(e)
Emission
capture
system.
For
each
capture
device
that
is
not
part
of
a
PTE
that
meets
the
criteria
of
§
63.4965(
a),
establish
an
operating
limit
for
either
the
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure,
as
specified
in
paragraphs
(e)(
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
§
63.4960
and
described
in
§§
63.4964
and
63.4965,
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,
unless
you
are
determining
operating
limits
for
multiple
operating
conditions
as
specified
in
§
63.4964(
b)(
1)
and
paragraph
(f)
of
this
section.
(f)
Multiple
operating
conditions.
If
you
are
determining
operating
limits
for
multiple
operating
conditions
for
the
emission
capture
system
or
add­
on
control
device
as
specified
in
§
63.4964(
b)(
1),
you
must
conduct
a
performance
test
under
each
operating
condition
and
establish
the
operating
limits
for
the
parameters
under
each
operating
condition
according
to
paragraphs
(f)(
1)
and
(2)
of
this
section.
(1)
You
must
monitor
and
record
the
value
of
the
parameter
that
corresponds
to
the
applicable
operating
limit
during
the
performance
test
under
each
operating
condition.
(2)
The
average
parameter
value
recorded
during
the
performance
test
under
each
condition
is
the
operating
limit
for
that
parameter
when
the
coating
operation
is
operating
under
that
condition.
(g)
Concentrators.
If
your
add­
on
control
device
includes
a
concentrator,
you
must
establish
operating
limits
for
the
concentrator
according
to
paragraphs
(g)(
1)
and
(2)
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.

§
63.4968
What
are
the
requirements
for
continuous
parameter
monitoring
system
(CPMS)
installation,
operation,
and
maintenance?

(a)
General.
You
must
install,
operate,
and
maintain
each
CPMS
specified
in
paragraphs
(c),
(e),
and
(f)
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
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00037
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20242
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
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
(non­
diverting)
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
§
63.4920.
(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
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's
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)
Emission
capture
systems.
The
capture
system
monitoring
system
must
comply
with
the
applicable
requirements
in
paragraphs
(f)(
1)
and
(2)
of
this
section.
(1)
For
each
flow
measurement
device,
you
must
meet
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(a)
and
(f)(
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
all
components
for
integrity,
all
electrical
connections
for
continuity,
and
all
mechanical
connections
for
leakage.
(2)
For
each
pressure
drop
measurement
device,
you
must
comply
with
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(a)
and
(f)(
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
all
components
for
integrity,
all
electrical
connections
for
continuity,
and
all
mechanical
connections
for
leakage.
(g)
Concentrators.
If
you
are
using
a
concentrator,
such
as
a
zeolite
wheel
or
rotary
carbon
bed
concentrator,
you
must
comply
with
the
requirements
in
paragraphs
(g)(
1)
and
(2)
of
this
section.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00038
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20243
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
(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
(g)(
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
any
time
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.

Other
Requirements
and
Information
§
63.4980
Who
implements
and
enforces
this
subpart?
(a)
This
subpart
can
be
implemented
and
enforced
by
us,
the
EPA,
or
a
delegated
authority
such
as
your
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency.
If
the
EPA
Administrator
has
delegated
authority
to
your
State,
local,
or
tribal
agency,
then
that
agency
(as
well
as
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
as
follows:
(1)
Approval
of
alternatives
to
the
work
practice
standards
in
§
63.4893
under
§
63.6(
g).
(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.

§
63.4981
What
definitions
apply
to
this
subpart?

Terms
used
in
this
subpart
are
defined
in
the
CAA,
in
40
CFR
63.2,
the
General
Provisions
of
this
part,
and
in
this
section
as
follows:
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
means
any
chemical
substance
that
is
applied
for
the
purpose
of
bonding
two
surfaces
together.
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
or
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,
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
or
to
remove
dried
coating
(surface
preparation);
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
hand­
held
nonrefillable
aerosol
containers,
touchup
markers,
or
marking
pens
is
not
a
coating
operation
for
the
purposes
of
this
subpart.
Coating
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.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
16:
36
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00039
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm09
PsN:
24APP2
20244
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
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).
Manufacturer's
formulation
data
means
data
on
a
material
(such
as
a
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
§
63.4941(
a)(
1)
through
(3).
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
organic
HAP
means
the
ratio
of
the
mass
of
organic
HAP
to
the
mass
of
a
material
in
which
it
is
contained;
kg
of
organic
HAP
per
kg
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
volume
of
coating
solids
for
a
coating,
calculated
using
Equation
1
of
§
63.4941.
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.
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.
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).
Volume
fraction
of
coating
solids
means
the
ratio
of
the
volume
of
coating
solids
(also
known
as
volume
of
nonvolatiles)
to
the
volume
of
coating;
liters
of
coating
solids
per
liter
of
coating.
Wastewater
means
water
that
is
generated
in
a
coating
operation
and
is
collected,
stored,
or
treated
prior
to
being
discarded
or
discharged.

Tables
to
Subpart
RRRR
of
Part
63
If
you
are
required
to
comply
with
operating
limits
by
§
63.4892,
you
must
comply
with
the
applicable
operating
limits
in
the
following
table:

TABLE
1
TO
SUBPART
RRRR
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
............................
the
average
combustion
temperature
in
any
3­
hour
period
must
not
fall
below
the
combustion
temperature
limit
established
according
to
§
63.4967(
a).
i.
collecting
the
combustion
temperature
data
according
to
§
63.4968(
c);
ii.
reducing
the
data
to
3­
hour
block
averages;
and
iii.
maintaining
the
3­
hour
average
combustion
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
§
63.4967(
b).
i.
collecting
the
temperature
data
according
to
§
63.4968(
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.
either
ensure
that
the
average
temperature
difference
catalyst
bed
in
any
3­
hour
period
does
not
fall
below
the
temperature
difference
limit
established
according
to
§
63.4967(
b)
or
develop
and
implement
an
inspection
and
maintenance
plan
according
to
§
63.4967(
b)(
3)
and
(4).
i.
either
collecting
the
temperature
data
according
to
across
the
§
63.4968(
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
ii.
complying
with
the
inspection
and
maintenance
plan
developed
according
to
§
63.4967(
b)(
3)
and
(4).

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
§
63.4967(
c).
i.
measuring
the
total
regeneration
desorbing
gas
(e.
g.,
steam
or
nitrogen)
mass
flow
for
each
regeneration
cycle
according
to
§
63.4968(
d);
and
ii.
maintaining
the
total
regeneration
desorbing
gas
mass
flow
at
or
above
the
mass
flow
limit.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00040
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20245
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
TABLE
1
TO
SUBPART
RRRR
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
*
*
*

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
§
63.4967(
c).
i.
measuring
the
temperature
of
the
carbon
bed,
after
completing
each
regeneration
and
any
cooling
cycle,
according
to
§
63.4968(
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
.....................................
the
average
condenser
outlet
(product
side)
gas
temperature
in
any
3­
hour
period
must
not
exceed
the
temperature
limit
established
according
to
§
63.4967(
d).
i.
collecting
the
condenser
outlet
(product
side)
gas
temperature
according
to
§
63.4968(
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.
emission
capture
system
that
is
a
PTE
according
to
§
63.4965(
a).
the
direction
of
the
air
flow
at
all
times
must
be
into
the
enclosure;
and
either
the
average
facial
velocity
of
air
through
all
natural
draft
openings
in
the
enclosure
must
be
at
least
200
feet
per
minute;
or
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
§
63.4968(
f)(
1)
or
the
pressure
drop
across
the
enclosure
according
to
§
63.4968(
f)(
2);
and
ii.
maintaining
the
facial
velocity
of
air
flow
through
all
natural
draft
openings
or
the
pressure
drop
at
or
above
the
facial
velocity
limit
or
pressure
drop
limit,
and
maintaining
the
direction
of
air
flow
into
the
enclosure
at
all
times.

6.
emission
capture
system
that
is
a
PTE
according
to
§
63.4965(
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
§
63.4967(
e).
i.
collecting
the
gas
volumetric
flow
rate
or
duct
static
pressure
for
each
not
capture
device
according
to
§
63.4968(
f);
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.

7.
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
§
63.4967(
g).
i.
collecting
the
temperature
data
according
to
63.4968(
g);
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
§
63.4967(
g).
i.
collecting
the
pressure
drop
data
according
to
§
63.4968(
g);
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.

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

TABLE
2
TO
SUBPART
RRRR
OF
PART
63.—
APPLICABILITY
OF
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
TO
SUBPART
RRRR
Citation
Subject
Applicable
to
subpart
RRRR
Explanation
§
63.1(
a)(
1)–(
14)
..........
General
Applicability
.......................................
Yes.
§
63.1(
b)(
1)–(
3)
............
Initial
Applicability
Determination
....................
Yes
.............................
Applicability
to
subpart
RRRR
is
also
specified
in
§
63.4881.
§
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
RRRR.
§
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
§
63.4981.
§
63.3(
a)–(
c)
................
Units
and
Abbreviations
..................................
Yes.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00041
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20246
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
TABLE
2
TO
SUBPART
RRRR
OF
PART
63.—
APPLICABILITY
OF
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
TO
SUBPART
RRRR—
Continued
Citation
Subject
Applicable
to
subpart
RRRR
Explanation
§
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
.............................
Section
63.4883
specifies
the
compliance
dates.
§
63.6(
c)(
1)–(
5)
............
Compliance
Dates
for
Existing
Sources
.........
Yes
.............................
Section
63.4883
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
Malfunction.
Yes
.............................
Applies
only
to
sources
using
an
add­
on
and
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
RRRR
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
§§
63.4964,
63.4965,
and
63.4966.
§
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
63.4960
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.
§
63.7(
g)–(
h)
................
Performance
TestRequirements—
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
§
63.4968.
§
63.8(
a)(
4)
..................
Additional
Monitoring
Requirements
...............
No
...............................
Subpart
RRRR
does
not
have
monitoring
requirements
for
flares.
§
63.8(
b)
.......................
Conduct
of
Monitoring
.....................................
Yes.
§
63.8(
c)(
1)–(
3)
............
Continuous
Monitoring
System
(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
§
63.4968.
§
63.8(
c)(
4)
..................
CMSs
..............................................................
No
...............................
Section
63.4968
specifies
the
requirements
for
the
operation
of
CMS
for
capture
systems
and
add­
on
control
devices
at
sources
using
these
to
comply.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00042
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20247
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
TABLE
2
TO
SUBPART
RRRR
OF
PART
63.—
APPLICABILITY
OF
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
TO
SUBPART
RRRR—
Continued
Citation
Subject
Applicable
to
subpart
RRRR
Explanation
§
63.8(
c)(
5)
..................
COMS
.............................................................
No
...............................
Subpart
RRRR
does
not
have
opacity
or
visible
emission
standards.
§
63.8(
c)(
6)
..................
CMS
Requirements
.........................................
No
...............................
Section
63.4968
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
reporting
...........
No
...............................
Section
63.4920
requires
reporting
of
CMS
out­
of­
control
periods.
§
63.8(
d)–(
e)
................
Quality
Control
Program
and
CMS
Performance
Evaluation.
No
...............................
Subpart
RRRR
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
RRRR
does
not
require
the
use
of
continuous
emissions
monitoring
systems.
§
63.8(
g)(
1)–(
5)
............
Data
Reduction
...............................................
No
...............................
Sections
63.4967
and
63.4968
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
RRRR
does
not
have
opacity
or
visible
emission
standards.
§
63.9(
g)(
1)–(
3)
............
Additional
Notifications
When
Using
CMS
.....
No
...............................
Subpart
RRRR
does
not
require
the
use
of
continuous
emissions
monitoring
systems.
§
63.9(
h)
.......................
Notification
of
Compliance
Status
...................
Yes
.............................
Section
63.4910
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
§§
63.4930
and
63.4931.
§
63.10(
b)(
2)(
i)–(
v)
.......
Recordkeeping
Relevant
Startup,
to
Shutdown
and
Malfunction
Periods
and
CMS.
Yes
.............................
Requirements
for
Startup,
Startup,
Shutdown,
and
Malfunction
records
only
apply
to
addon
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
RRRR
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
§
63.4920(
a)(
7)
§
63.10(
c)(
9)–(
15)
........
.........................................................................
Yes.
§
63.10(
d)(
1)
................
General
Reporting
Requirements
...................
Yes
.............................
Additional
requirements
are
specified
in
§
63.4920.
§
63.10(
d)(
2)
................
Report
of
Performance
Test
Results
..............
Yes
.............................
Additional
requirements
are
specified
in
§
63.4920(
b).
§
63.10(
d)(
3)
................
Reporting
Opacity
or
Visible
Emissions
Observations
No
...............................
Subpart
RRRR
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
with
the
standard.
§
63.10(
e)(
1)–(
2)
..........
Additional
CMS
Reports
.................................
No
...............................
Subpart
RRRR
does
not
require
the
use
of
continuous
emissions
monitoring
systems.
§
63.10(
e)(
3)
................
Excess
Emissions/
CMS
Performance
Reports
No
...............................
Section
63.4920(
b)
specifies
the
contents
of
periodic
compliance
reports.
§
63.10(
e)(
4)
................
COMS
Data
Reports
.......................................
No
...............................
Subpart
RRRR
does
not
specify
requirements
for
opacity
or
COMS.
§
63.10(
f)
......................
Recordkeeping/
Reporting
Waiver
...................
Yes.
§
63.11
.........................
Control
Device
Requirements/
Flares
..............
No
...............................
Subpart
RRRR
does
not
specify
use
of
flares
for
compliance.
§
63.12
.........................
State
Authority
and
Delegations
.....................
Yes.

VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00043
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
20248
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
79
/
Wednesday,
April
24,
2002
/
Proposed
Rules
TABLE
2
TO
SUBPART
RRRR
OF
PART
63.—
APPLICABILITY
OF
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
TO
SUBPART
RRRR—
Continued
Citation
Subject
Applicable
to
subpart
RRRR
Explanation
§
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
RRRR
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.
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%
ethyl
benzene.
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
RRRR
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
e.
g.,
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
e.
g.,
Medium­
flash
Naphtha,
High­
flash
Naphtha,
Aromatic
Naphtha,
Light
Aromatic
Naphtha,
Light
Aromatic
Hydrocarbons,
Aromatic
Hydrocarbons
Light
Aromatic
Solvent.

[FR
Doc.
02–
7224
Filed
4–
23–
02;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560–
50–
P
VerDate
11<
MAY>
2000
18:
07
Apr
23,
2002
Jkt
197001
PO
00000
Frm
00044
Fmt
4701
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
24APP2.
SGM
pfrm01
PsN:
24APP2
