

[Federal Register: October 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 58499-58504]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04oc06-9]                         


[[Page 58499]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0178; FRL-8227-5]
RIN 2060-AM72

 
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: 
Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action promulgates amendments to the national emission 
standards for hazardous air pollutants for miscellaneous coating 
manufacturing. The amendments clarify that coating manufacturing means 
the production of coatings using operations such as mixing and 
blending, not reaction or separation processes used in chemical 
manufacturing. The amendments extend the compliance date for certain 
coating manufacturing equipment that is also part of a chemical 
manufacturing process unit. The amendments also clarify that operations 
by end users that modify a purchased coating prior to application at 
the purchasing facility are exempt. These changes clarify applicability 
of the rule and minimize the compliance burden.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 4, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0178. All documents in the docket are listed on the 
http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business 
information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by 
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not 
placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy 
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either 
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air and Radiation Docket, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0178, EPA/
DC, EPA West Building, Room B-102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone 
number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone 
number for the Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.


    Note: The EPA Docket Center suffered damage due to flooding 
during the last week of June 2006. The Docket Center is continuing 
to operate. However, during the cleanup, there will be temporary 
changes to Docket Center telephone numbers, addresses, and hours of 
operation for people who wish to visit the Public Reading Room to 
view documents. Consult EPA's Federal Register notice at 71 FR 38147 
(July 5, 2006) or the EPA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
 for current information on docket status, locations, and 

telephone numbers.


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Randy McDonald, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division, 
Coatings and Chemicals Group (E143-01), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle 
Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-5402; fax number: (919) 
541-0246; e-mail address: mcdonald.randy@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. The regulated category 
and entities affected by this action include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Examples of
            Category                 NAICS Code*      regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry........................  3255, 3259.......  Manufacturers of
                                                      paints, coatings,
                                                      adhesives, or
                                                      inks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*North American Industry Classification System

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers likely to be interested in the revisions to the rule 
affected by this action. To determine whether your facility, company, 
business, organization, etc., is regulated by this action, you should 
carefully examine all of the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.7985 
of subpart HHHHH (national emission standards for hazardous air 
pollutants (NESHAP) for miscellaneous coating manufacturing), as well 
as in today's amendment to the definitions section. If you have 
questions regarding the applicability of the amendments to a particular 
entity, consult either the air permit authority for the entity or your 
EPA regional representative as listed in 40 CFR 63.13 of subpart A 
(General Provisions).
    World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of the final action will also be available on the 
WWW through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, 
a copy of the final action will be posted on the TTN 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.
    Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act 
(CAA), judicial review of the final amendments is available only by 
filing a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the District of Columbia Circuit by December 4, 2006. Under section 
307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an objection to the final amendments that 
was raised with reasonable specificity during the period for public 
comment may be raised during judicial review. Moreover, under section 
307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements established by the final 
amendments may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal 
proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
    Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that ``[o]nly an 
objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable 
specificity during the period for public comment (including any public 
hearing) may be raised during judicial review.'' This section also 
provides a mechanism for us to convene a proceeding for 
reconsideration, ``[i]f the person raising an objection can demonstrate 
to the EPA that it was impracticable to raise such objection within 
[the period for public comment] or if the grounds for such objection 
arose after the period for public comment (but within the time 
specified for judicial review) and if such objection is of central 
relevance to the outcome of the rule.'' Any person seeking to make such 
a demonstration to us should submit a Petition for Reconsideration to 
the Office of the Administrator, U.S. EPA, Room 3000, Ariel Rios 
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, with a 
copy to both the person(s) listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the Associate General Counsel for the 
Air and Radiation Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 
2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004.
    Organization of this Document. The information presented in this 
preamble is organized as follows:

I. Background
II. Response to Comments
    A. Compliance Date
    B. Affiliated Operations
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments

[[Page 58500]]

    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Congressional Review Act

I. Background

    On December 11, 2003, we promulgated NESHAP for miscellaneous 
coating manufacturing as subpart HHHHH of 40 CFR part 63 (68 FR 69164). 
Subpart HHHHH applies to the facilitywide collection of equipment used 
to manufacture coatings. On May 17, 2006 (71 FR 28639), we proposed 
amendments to the: (1) Definition of the term ``coating,'' (2) 
compliance date for shared equipment that is part of a process unit 
group (PUG) developed under the miscellaneous organic chemical 
manufacturing NESHAP (MON) (40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF), and (3) 
exemptions for operations by end users that are related to the 
application of a pre-manufactured coating.
    All equipment that is used to manufacture coatings is subject to 40 
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH. Because the definition of coating at 40 CFR 
63.8105 in subpart HHHHH does not specify that coatings are produced 
only by blending, mixing, diluting, and related formulation operations 
without chemical synthesis or separation, some products of synthetic 
organic chemical manufacturing could be considered coatings. This 
overly broad definition of ``coating'' expands the applicability of 40 
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH to equipment intended to by covered by 40 
CFR part 63, subpart FFFF. The proposed amendments to the definition of 
coating clarify that products of reaction and separation, such as 
polymers, resins, and synthetic organic chemicals are not coatings and 
are not covered by the final rule. In addition, the proposed amendments 
to the definition of coating clarify that 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH 
also does not apply to the production of formulation components by 
chemical synthesis or separation activity if those components are not 
stored prior to formulation. We proposed these revisions so that the 
applicability of the final rule accurately and appropriately reflects 
the coating manufacturing industry and the basis for the maximum 
achievable control technology (MACT) floor.
    The recent extension of the compliance date for 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart FFFF (see 71 FR 10439, March 1, 2006) raises a timing issue 
with respect to 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF and 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart HHHHH overlap. The extension for the compliance date for 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart FFFF results in the compliance date for 40 CFR part 
63, subpart HHHHH occurring before the MON compliance date, thus 
creating a problem for plants with equipment subject to both subparts 
FFFF and HHHHH of 40 CFR part 63 who opt to develop a PUG. Because we 
have extended the compliance date for 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF, a 
source that primarily manufactures organic chemicals, but also produces 
a coating product in the same equipment, would not be able to comply 
with subparts FFFF and HHHHH of 40 CFR part 63 as EPA intended during 
the period between the compliance date for 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
HHHHH (December 11, 2006) and 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF (May 10, 
2008). Due to the significant amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
FFFF, it is unlikely that sources will be able to comply with the 
revised 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF by the compliance date for 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart HHHHH. Alternatively, if the source was planning to 
comply with subpart HHHHH by referencing 40 CFR 63.2535(l)(3)(i), it is 
also unlikely the source would have enough time to design and install 
interim controls for the coating operations so as to comply with 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart HHHHH between December 11, 2006 and May 10, 2008. 
Thus, relying on the presumption that equipment should be regulated 
according to the standard that effectively applies for a majority of 
products produced, we proposed amending the final rule to reference 40 
CFR part 63, subpart FFFF requirements for a PUG which produces 
primarily 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF products. The proposed 
amendments also clarify that if the source so chooses, equipment that 
is part of a PUG in which a MON product is the primary product must 
comply with the MON by the MON compliance date, not 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart HHHHH by the subpart HHHHH compliance date.
    In section IV.A of the preamble to the final rule, we stated ``the 
final rule does not apply to activities conducted by end users of 
coating products in preparation for application'' (68 FR 69164, 
December 11, 2003). Although the final rule exempts ``affiliated 
operations'' at sources that are subject to surface coating rules, it 
does not specifically exempt operations at sources that are not subject 
to another subpart of 40 CFR part 63. Therefore, we proposed adding an 
exemption in 40 CFR 63.7985(d)(5) for operations by end users who 
modify a purchased coating prior to application at the same facility. 
This exemption applies only if the purchased product is already a 
coating that an end user could apply as purchased, and the modified 
coating must be applied at the same facility where the modification is 
conducted.
    Two trade associations and three coatings manufacturing companies 
provided comments on the proposed amendments to the rule. In general, 
the commenters supported the proposed changes. One commenter also 
requested changes to the compliance date and the exemption for 
affiliated operations at sources that are subject to surface coating 
MACT rules. After consideration of the comments, we are promulgating 
the amendments as proposed.

II. Response to Comments

A. Compliance Date

    Comment: One commenter supported the amendment to clarify the 
definition of ``coating'' but also expressed concern that this change 
could have unanticipated impacts that would make it difficult to 
achieve compliance by December 11, 2006. According to the commenter, 
the change is a major modification of the rule because it could affect 
applicability determinations for some facilities. For example, the 
commenter suggested the possibility that some facilities currently 
thinking they are subject to the MON may realize that they have to 
comply with the Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing NESHAP. To ensure 
that facilities have time to review the amendments and make appropriate 
changes to their compliance plans, the commenter requested that the 
compliance date for all existing sources under 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
HHHHH be extended to May 10, 2008.
    Response: As noted in the preamble to the proposed amendments, 
concerns with the definition of ``coating'' in the final rule were that 
it was too expansive. It included all materials that are intended to be 
applied to a substrate, regardless of the production process. The 
amended definition narrows the scope of the definition, which may 
reduce the number of operations that are subject to the MON. Any 
operations that are excluded from the amended Miscellaneous Coating 
Manufacturing NESHAP will be subject to the MON. Facilities with such 
operations will have until May 10, 2008, to comply with the 
Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing NESHAP. We are unaware of 
any materials that are coatings under the amended definition

[[Page 58501]]

that would not have been coatings under the definition in the final 
rule. Thus, we have determined that there is no need to extend the 
compliance date for existing sources that are subject to the 
Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing NESHAP, except for operations that 
are part of a PUG under the MON as discussed in section I of this 
preamble.

B. Affiliated Operations

    Comment: One commenter supports our position, as stated in the 
preamble to the proposed amendments, that 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH 
does not apply to activities conducted by end users of coating products 
in preparation for application. According to the commenter, these 
activities cannot be regulated under 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH 
because they are not coating manufacturing operations and were not part 
of the MACT analysis for 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH. For the rule to 
be consistent with this position, the commenter believes 40 CFR 
63.7985(d)(2) should exempt ``affiliated operations'' at all surface 
coating facilities, not just those at sources that are subject to the 
surface coating rules in subparts GG, KK, JJJJ, MMMM, and SSSS of 40 
CFR part 63. The commenter suggested listing each surface coating 
category in 40 CFR 63.7985(d)(2).
    Response: We decided not to adopt the changes suggested by the 
commenter. Listing all surface coating categories in 40 CFR 
63.7985(d)(2) is unnecessary and impractical. There are three 
categories of end users to consider: Sources that are subject to 40 CFR 
part 63 surface coating rules that do not include ``affiliated 
operations'' in the affected source, sources that are subject to 40 CFR 
part 63 surface coating rules that do include ``affiliated operations'' 
in the affected source, and sources that are not subject to a 40 CFR 
part 63 surface coating rule. Operations at end user facilities in two 
categories are exempted by existing provisions in the rule, and 
operations at end user facilities in the third category are exempted by 
the proposed amendments.
    First, as the commenter noted, explicit exemptions for affiliated 
operations, as defined in 40 CFR 63.7985(d)(2), apply to affiliated 
operations that are located at affected sources under subparts GG, KK, 
JJJJ, MMMM, and SSSS of 40 CFR part 63. All of these rules lack 
requirements for affiliated operations, but affiliated operations were 
considered during development of the rules. Therefore, an exemption was 
needed in the Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing NESHAP to avoid a 
conflict between the decisions made in the development of the five 
surface coating rules and the applicability of 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
HHHHH.
    Facilities in the second group of end users are also subject to 
surface coating rules, but the affiliated operations at these 
facilities are part of the affected sources under the applicable 
surface coating rule. These affiliated operations are exempt from 40 
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH by 40 CFR 63.7985(a)(4), which specifies 
that operations are miscellaneous coating manufacturing operations and 
subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH only if they are not part of 
an affected source under another subpart of 40 CFR part 63. Therefore, 
exempting these source categories by listing them in 40 CFR 
63.7985(d)(2) would be redundant.
    The third group of end users includes all facilities that are not 
part of a source category that is subject to a surface coating NESHAP. 
Listing all of these surface coating categories in 40 CFR 63.7985(d)(2) 
would be impractical because there is no way of knowing all possible 
categories. Therefore, the proposed exemption in new paragraph (d)(5) 
of 40 CFR 63.7985 provides a general exemption for all facilities in 
this group. This new provision exempts operations that modify a 
purchased coating prior to application at the purchasing facility. 
Therefore, we have decided to promulgate this proposed amendment 
without changes.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is 
therefore not subject to review under the Executive Order.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The final rule amendments impose no new information collection 
requirements on the industry. The final rule amendments clarify 
applicability of the final rule and extend the compliance date for 
owners and operators of certain coating manufacturing equipment. These 
changes have the potential to result in minor reductions in the 
information collection burden. Therefore, the Information Collection 
Request (ICR) has not been revised.
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved 
the information collection requirements contained in the existing 
regulations (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH) under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and has assigned OMB 
control number 2060-0535 (EPA ICR number 2115.01). A copy of the OMB 
approved ICR may be obtained from Susan Auby, by mail at the Office of 
Environmental Information, Collection Strategies Division; U.S. EPA 
(2822T); 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail 
at auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 566-1672. A copy may also be 
downloaded off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. Include the ICR 

or OMB number in any correspondence.
    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.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis in connection with the final rule amendments.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of the final rule amendments 
on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as 
defined by the Small Business Administrations' regulations at 13 CFR 
121.201; (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; or (3) a small organization that is any 
not-for-profit enterprise that is independently owned and operated and 
is not dominant in its field.
    For sources subject to the final rule amendments, the relevant 
NAICS and associated employee sizes are listed below:


[[Page 58502]]


NAICS 32551--Paint and Coatings Manufacturing--500 employees or fewer.
NAICS 32552--Adhesives and Sealants Manufacturing--500 employees or 
fewer.
NAICS 32591--Printing Ink Manufacturing--500 employees or fewer.

    After considering the economic impacts of the final rule amendments 
on small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any 
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the 
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify 
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant 
economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 
and 604. Thus, an agency may conclude that a rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive 
economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule. The 
final rule amendments clarify applicability of the final rule and 
extend the compliance date for owners and operators of certain coating 
manufacturing equipment. These changes have the potential to result in 
minor burden reductions for small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995, Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling 
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
    The EPA has determined that the final rule amendments do 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. Therefore, the final 
rule amendments are not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 
205 of the UMRA. In addition, the final rule amendments contain no 
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments because they contain no requirements that apply to 
such governments or impose obligations upon them. Therefore, the final 
rule amendments are not subject to the requirements of section 203 of 
the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 (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.''
    The final rule amendments do not have federalism implications. They 
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. None of the affected 
facilities are owned or operated by State or local governments. Thus, 
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the final rule amendments.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 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.'' The final rule amendments do not have 
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The final 
rule amendments clarify applicability of the rule and extend the 
compliance date for owners and operators of certain coating 
manufacturing equipment. Therefore, the final rule amendments 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. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 
apply to the final rule amendments.

G. 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, 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.
    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. The final rule amendments 
are not subject to the Executive Order because they are based on 
technology performance and not on health or safety risks.

[[Page 58503]]

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The final rule amendments do not constitute a ``significant energy 
action'' as defined in Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 
2001) because they are not likely to have a significant adverse effect 
on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The final rule 
amendments clarify applicability of the rule and extend the compliance 
date for owners and operators of certain coating manufacturing 
equipment. Further, we have concluded that the final rule amendments 
are not likely to have any adverse energy effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    As noted in the proposed rule, section 12(d) of the National 
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) of 1995, Public Law 
104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use 
voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its regulatory activities unless 
to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical. VCS are technical standards (e.g., materials 
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business 
practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA 
directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the 
Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
    During the rulemaking, the EPA conducted searches to identify VCS 
in addition to EPA test methods referenced by the final rule. The 
search and review results have been documented and placed in the docket 
for the NESHAP (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0178). The final rule 
amendments do not require the use of any additional technical standards 
beyond those cited in the final rule. Therefore, EPA is not considering 
the use of any additional VCS for the final rule amendments.

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller 
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing the 
final rule amendments and other required information to the United 
States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and the 
Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the 
final rule amendments in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take 
effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. 
This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The 
final rule amendments are effective on October 4, 2006.

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: September 28, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of 
the Code of the Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart HHHHH--[Amended]

0
2. Section 63.7985 is amended by revising paragraph (d) introductory 
text and adding paragraph (d)(5) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.7985  Am I subject to the requirements of this subpart?

* * * * *
    (d) The requirements for miscellaneous coating manufacturing 
sources in this subpart do not apply to operations described in 
paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of this section.
* * * * *
    (5) Modifying a purchased coating in preparation for application at 
the purchasing facility.

0
3. Section 63.7995 is amended by adding introductory text to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.7995  When do I have to comply with this subpart?

    Except as specified in Sec.  63.8090, you must comply with this 
subpart according to the requirements of this section.
* * * * *

0
4. Section 63.8090 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.8090  What compliance options do I have if part of my plant is 
subject to both this subpart and another subpart?

* * * * *
    (c) Compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF.
    After the compliance dates specified in Sec.  63.7995, an affected 
source under this subpart HHHHH that includes equipment that is also 
part of an affected source under 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF is deemed 
in compliance with this subpart HHHHH if all of the conditions 
specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this section are met.
    (1) Equipment used for both miscellaneous coating manufacturing 
operations and as part of a miscellaneous organic chemical 
manufacturing process unit (MCPU), as defined in Sec.  63.2435, must be 
part of a process unit group developed in accordance with the 
provisions in Sec.  63.2535(l).
    (2) For the purposes of complying with Sec.  63.2535(l), a 
miscellaneous coating manufacturing ``process unit'' consists of all 
coating manufacturing equipment that is also part of an MCPU in the 
process unit group. All miscellaneous coating manufacturing operations 
that are not part of a process unit group must comply with the 
requirements of this subpart HHHHH.
    (3) The primary product for a process unit group that includes 
miscellaneous coating manufacturing equipment must be organic chemicals 
as described in Sec.  63.2435(b)(1).
    (4) The process unit group must be in compliance with the 
requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF as specified in Sec.  
63.2535(l)(3)(i) no later than the applicable compliance dates 
specified in Sec.  63.2445.
    (5) You must include in the notification of compliance status 
report required in Sec.  63.8070(d) the records as specified in Sec.  
63.2535(l)(1) through (3).
    5. Section 63.8105 is amended by revising the definition of the 
term ``coating'' in paragraph (g) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.8105  What definitions apply to this subpart?

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    Coating means a material such as paint, ink, or adhesive that is 
intended to be applied to a substrate and consists of a mixture of 
resins, pigments, solvents, and/or other additives, where the material 
is produced by a manufacturing operation where materials are blended, 
mixed, diluted, or otherwise formulated. Coating does not include 
materials made in processes where a formulation component is 
synthesized by chemical reaction or separation activity and then 
transferred to another vessel where it is formulated to produce a 
material used as a coating,

[[Page 58504]]

where the synthesized or separated component is not stored prior to 
formulation. Typically, coatings include products described by the 
following North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, 
code 325510, Paint and Coating Manufacturing, code 325520, Adhesive and 
Sealant Manufacturing, and code 325910, Ink Manufacturing.
* * * * *

 [FR Doc. E6-16407 Filed 10-3-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
