

[Federal Register: January 9, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 6)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 1737-1768]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09ja08-12]                         


[[Page 1737]]

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

Part III





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Part 63



 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Paint 
Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations at Area Sources; 
Final Rule


[[Page 1738]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0526; FRL-8508-6]
RIN 2060-AN21

 
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Paint 
Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations at Area Sources

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action promulgates national emission standards for 
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for area sources engaged in paint 
stripping, surface coating of motor vehicles and mobile equipment, and 
miscellaneous surface coating operations. EPA has listed ``Paint 
Stripping,'' ``Plastic Parts and Products (Surface Coating),'' and 
``Autobody Refinishing Paint Shops'' as area sources of hazardous air 
pollutants (HAP) that contribute to the risk to public health in urban 
areas under the Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy. This final rule 
includes emissions standards that reflect the generally available 
control technology or management practices in each of these area source 
categories. ``Plastic Parts and Products (Surface Coating)'' has been 
renamed ``Miscellaneous Surface Coating,'' and ``Autobody Refinishing 
Paint Shops'' has been renamed ``Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment 
Surface Coating'' to more accurately reflect the scope of these source 
categories.

DATES: This final rule is effective on January 9, 2008. The 
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this rule 
is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of January 9, 
2008.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0526. All documents in the docket are 
listed in the Federal Docket Management System index at http://www.regulations.gov.
 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 EPA Docket Center, 

Public Reading Room, EPA West, Room 3334, 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 Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information concerning 
the paint stripping standards, contact Mr. Warren Johnson, Office of 
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs 
Division, Natural Resources and Commerce Group (E143-03), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711, telephone (919) 541-5124, or e-mail at Johnson.warren@epa.gov. 
For technical information concerning the surface coating standards, 
contact Ms. Kim Teal, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 
Sector Policies and Programs Division, Natural Resources and Commerce 
Group (E143-03), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research 
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone (919) 541-5580, or e-
mail at teal.kim@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Outline

    The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:

I. General Information
    A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
    B. Where Can I Get a Copy of This Document?
    C. Judicial Review
II. Background Information for Final Area Source Standards
III. Summary of Final Rule
    A. Applicability
    B. Compliance Dates
    C. Requirements for Paint Stripping Operations
    D. Surface Coating Requirements
    E. Notifications, Recordkeeping, and Reporting
IV. Summary of Changes Since Proposal
    A. Applicability
    B. Compliance Dates
    C. Requirements for Paint Stripping Operations
    D. Requirements for Surface Coating Operations
    E. Notifications, Recordkeeping, and Reporting
V. Summary of Comments and Responses
    A. Applicability
    B. Compliance date
    C. Requirements for Paint Stripping Operations
    D. Authority to Regulate Miscellaneous Surface Coating 
Operations
    E. Basis of Surface Coating Standards
    F. Training Requirements
    G. Spray Gun Requirements
    H. Spray Booths
    I. Spray Booth Filters
    J. Spray Gun Washers
    K. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Compliance
    L. Cost and Economic Impacts
VI. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts
    A. What are the air impacts?
    B. What are the cost impacts?
    C. What are the economic impacts?
    D. What are the non-air health, environmental, and energy 
impacts?
VII. 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
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Categories and entities potentially affected by the rule are paint 
stripping operations using methylene chloride (MeCl)-containing paint 
strippers, motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating 
operations, and miscellaneous surface coating operations located at 
area sources. An area source is defined in the Clean Air Act (CAA) 
section 112(a) as any stationary source of HAP that is not a major 
source, and a major source is defined as 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, considering controls, 
in the aggregate, 10 tons per year (tpy) or more of any single HAP or 
25 tpy or more of any combination of HAP.
    For the purposes of this rule, paint stripping operations are those 
that perform paint stripping using MeCl for the removal of dried paint 
(including, but not limited to, paint, enamel, varnish, shellac, and 
lacquer) from wood, metal, plastic, and other substrates at area 
sources as either:
    (1) an independent activity where paint stripping is the principal 
activity at the source, or
    (2) an activity incidental to the principal activity (e.g., surface 
coating, inspection, maintenance, etc.) at the source.

[[Page 1739]]

    For co-located operations, EPA considers paint stripping activities 
that use one ton or less to be incidental to the principal activity and 
those using more than one ton to be performing paint stripping as a 
principal activity.
    Motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating operations 
involve the spray application of coatings at area sources to 
automobiles, light trucks, heavy duty trucks, buses, construction 
equipment, self-propelled vehicles and equipment that may be drawn and/
or driven on a roadway.
    Miscellaneous surface coating operations are those that involve the 
spray application of coatings that contain compounds of chromium (Cr), 
lead (Pb), manganese (Mn), nickel (Ni), or cadmium (Cd), herein after 
referred to as target HAP, to miscellaneous parts and/or products made 
of metal or plastic, or combinations of metal and plastic.
    In general, the facilities and entities potentially affected by 
some or all of the rule are covered under the North American Industrial 
Classification System (NAICS) codes listed in the following table. 
However, facilities classified under other NAICS codes may be subject 
to the standards if they meet the applicability criteria.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Examples of
           Category                   NAICS        potentially regulated
                                                          entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aerospace Equipment...........  336413, 336414,    Aircraft engines,
                                 336415, 54171.     aircraft parts,
                                                    aerospace ground
                                                    equipment.
Automobiles and Automobile      336111, 336211,    Engine parts, vehicle
 Parts.                          336312, 33632,     parts and
                                 33633, 33634,      accessories, brakes,
                                 33637, 336399,     axles, etc. Motor
                                 441110, 441120,    vehicle body
                                 811121.            manufacturing and
                                                    automobile assembly
                                                    plants. New and used
                                                    car dealers.
                                                    Automotive body,
                                                    paint, and interior
                                                    repair and
                                                    maintenance.
Chemical Manufacturing and      325110, 325120,    Petrochemicals,
 Product Preparation.            325131, 325188,    Industrial Gases,
                                 325192, 325193,    Inorganic Dyes and
                                 325199, 325998.    Pigments, Basic
                                                    Inorganic and
                                                    Organic Chemicals,
                                                    Cyclic Crude and
                                                    Intermediates, Ethyl
                                                    Alcohol,
                                                    Miscellaneous
                                                    Chemical Production
                                                    and Preparation.
Extruded Aluminum.............  331316, 331524,    Extruded aluminum,
                                 332321, 332323.    architectural
                                                    components, coils,
                                                    rod, and tubes.
Government....................  Not Applicable...  Government entities,
                                                    besides Department
                                                    of Defense, that
                                                    maintain vehicles,
                                                    such as school
                                                    buses, police and
                                                    emergency vehicles,
                                                    transit buses, or
                                                    highway maintenance
                                                    vehicles.
Heavy Equipment...............  33312, 333611....  Tractors, earth
                                                    moving machinery.
Job Shops.....................  332722, 332813,    Manufacturing
                                 332991, 334119,    industries not
                                 336413, 339999.    elsewhere classified
                                                    (e.g., bezels,
                                                    consoles, panels,
                                                    lenses).
Large Trucks and Buses........  33612, 336211....  Large trucks and
                                                    buses.
Metal Buildings...............  332311...........  Prefabricated metal
                                                    buildings, carports,
                                                    docks, dwellings,
                                                    greenhouses, panels
                                                    for buildings.
Metal Containers..............  33242, 81131,      Drums, kegs, pails,
                                 322214, 331513.    shipping containers.
Metal Pipe and Foundry........  331111, 331513,    Plate, tube, rods,
                                 33121, 331221,     nails, etc.
                                 331511.
Rail Transportation...........  33651, 336611,     Brakes, engines,
                                 482111.            freight cars,
                                                    locomotives.
Recreational Vehicles and       321991, 3369,      Mobile Homes.
 Other Transportation            331316, 336991,    Motorcycles, motor
 Equipment.                      336211, 336112,    homes, semi
                                 336212, 336213,    trailers, truck
                                 336214, 336399,    trailers.
                                 336999, 33635,     Miscellaneous
                                 56121, 8111,       transportation
                                 56211.             related equipment
                                                    and parts. Travel
                                                    trailer and camper
                                                    manufacturing.
Rubber-to-Metal Products......  326291, 326299...  Engine mounts,
                                                    rubberized tank
                                                    tread, harmonic
                                                    balancers.
Structural Steel..............  332311, 332312...  Joists, railway
                                                    bridge sections,
                                                    highway bridge
                                                    sections.
Waste Treatment, Disposal, and  562211, 562212,    Hazardous Waste
 Materials Recovery.             562213, 562219,    Treatment and
                                 562920.            Disposal, Solid
                                                    Waste Landfill,
                                                    Solid Waste
                                                    Combustors and
                                                    Incinerators, Other
                                                    Nonhazardous Waste
                                                    Treatment and
                                                    Disposal, Materials
                                                    Recovery.
Other Industrial and            211112...........  Natural Gas Liquid
 Commercial.                                        Extraction.
                                311942...........  Spices and Extracts.
                                331311...........  Alumina Refining.
                                337214, 811420...  Office furniture,
                                                    except wood.
                                                    Reupholstery and
                                                    Furniture Repair.
                                325211...........  Plastics Material
                                                    Synthetic Resins,
                                                    and Nonvulcanizable
                                                    Elastomers.
                                325510...........  Paint and Coating
                                                    Manufacturing.
                                32614, 32615.....  Plastic foam products
                                                    (e.g., pool floats,
                                                    wrestling mats, life
                                                    jackets).
                                326199...........  Plastic products not
                                                    elsewhere classified
                                                    (e.g., name plates,
                                                    coin holders,
                                                    storage boxes,
                                                    license plate
                                                    housings, cosmetic
                                                    caps, cup holders).
                                333313...........  Office machines.
                                33422............  Radio and television
                                                    broadcasting and
                                                    communications
                                                    equipment (e.g.,
                                                    cellular
                                                    telephones).
                                339111, 339112...  Medical equipment and
                                                    supplies.
                                33992............  Sporting and athletic
                                                    goods.
                                33995............  Signs and advertising
                                                    specialties.
                                336612...........  Boat building.
                                713930...........  Marinas, including
                                                    boat repair yards.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by the 
rule. Many types of entities that perform stripping and/or coating that 
are not listed in this table would be potentially affected by the rule. 
Additionally, some entities that are classified under the NAICS codes 
in the table may not be subject if they are not performing the 
operations described in the applicability criteria in Sec. Sec.  
63.11169 and 63.11170 of the rule. To determine whether your facility, 
company, business, organization, etc., is subject to this action, you 
should examine the applicability criteria in Sec. Sec.  63.11169 and 
63.11170 of the rule. If you have any

[[Page 1740]]

questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular 
entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

B. Where can I get a copy of this document?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
this final action will also be available on the Worldwide Web (WWW) 
through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). A copy of this final 
action will be posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly 
proposed or promulgated rules at the following address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/.
 The TTN provides information and technology 

exchange in various areas of air pollution control.

C. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial review of this final 
rule is available only by filing a petition for review in the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by March 10, 
2008. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an objection to the 
rule that was raised with reasonable specificity during the period for 
public comment can be raised during judicial review. Moreover, under 
section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements established by this 
final rule may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal 
proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.

II. Background Information for Final Area Source Standards

    Section 112(k)(3)(B) of the CAA requires EPA to identify at least 
30 HAP, which, as the result of emissions of area sources, pose the 
greatest threat to public health in urban areas. Consistent with this 
provision, EPA identified the 30 HAP that pose the greatest potential 
health threat in urban areas in 1999. These HAP are referred to as the 
``Urban HAP'' as part of the Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy. See 
64 FR 38715, July 19, 1999. Section 112(c)(3) requires EPA to list 
sufficient categories or subcategories of area sources to ensure that 
area sources representing 90 percent of the emissions of the 30 Urban 
HAP are subject to regulation. EPA listed the source categories that 
account for 90 percent of the Urban HAP emissions in the Integrated 
Urban Air Toxics Strategy.\1\ Sierra Club sued EPA, alleging a failure 
to complete standards for the area source categories listed pursuant to 
CAA sections 112(c)(3) and (k)(3)(B) within the time frame specified by 
the statute. See Sierra Club v. Johnson, No. 01-1537, (D.D.C.). On 
March 31, 2006, the court issued an order requiring EPA to promulgate 
standards under CAA section 112(d) for those area source categories 
listed pursuant to CAA section 112(c)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Since its publication in the Integrated Urban Air Toxics 
Strategy in 1999, EPA has revised the area source category list 
several times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Among other things, the order as amended on October 15, 2007, 
requires that, by December 15, 2007, EPA complete standards for nine 
area source categories. On September 17, 2007, EPA proposed NESHAP for 
Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations at Area 
Sources. The proposal covered the following three listed area source 
categories that were selected to meet the December 15, 2007, deadline: 
(1) Paint Stripping, (2) Plastic Parts and Products (Surface Coating), 
and (3) Autobody Refinishing Paint Shops. See 72 FR 52958. This final 
NESHAP completes the required regulatory action for three area source 
categories.
    Under CAA section 112(d)(5), the Administrator may, in lieu of 
standards requiring maximum achievable control technology (MACT) under 
section 112(d)(2), elect to promulgate standards or requirements for 
area sources ``which provide for the use of generally available control 
technologies (GACT) or management practices by such sources to reduce 
emissions of hazardous air pollutants.'' As explained in the proposed 
NESHAP, EPA is setting standards for these area source categories 
pursuant to section 112(d)(5). See 72 FR 52958, September 17, 2007.

III. Summary of Final Rule

A. Applicability

    We have revised the rule since proposal to clarify the sources to 
which it applies. In order to clarify the applicability of the final 
rule and the standards that apply, Sec. Sec.  63.11169 and 63.11170 of 
the final rule distinguish among the three separate area source 
categories: paint stripping, motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface 
coating, and miscellaneous surface coating. The rule contains separate 
provisions describing the requirements for each category.
    The final subpart does not apply to any of the following activities 
listed in Sec.  63.11169:
    (1) Surface coating or paint stripping performed on site at 
installations owned or operated by the Armed Forces of the United 
States (including the Coast Guard and the National Guard of any State), 
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, or the National 
Nuclear Security Administration.
    (2) Surface coating or paint stripping of military munitions, as 
defined in Sec.  63.11180, manufactured by or for the Armed Forces of 
the United States (including the Coast Guard and the National Guard of 
any State) or equipment directly and exclusively used for the purposes 
of transporting military munitions.
    (3) Surface coating or paint stripping performed by individuals on 
their personal vehicles, possessions, or property, either as a hobby or 
for maintenance of their personal vehicles, possessions, or property. 
This subpart also does not apply when these operations are performed by 
individuals for others without compensation. An individual who spray 
applies surface coating of more than two motor vehicles or pieces of 
mobile equipment per year is subject to the requirements in this 
subpart that pertain to motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface 
coating regardless of whether compensation is received.
    (4) Surface coating or paint stripping that meets the definition of 
``research and laboratory activities'' in Sec.  63.11180 of the final 
rule.
    (5) Surface coating or paint stripping that meets the definition of 
``quality control activities'' in Sec.  63.11180 of the final rule.
    (6) Surface coating or paint stripping that is specifically covered 
by another area source NESHAP.
    Section 63.11170 specifies the operations that are subject to the 
final standards. For paint stripping, the final rule applies to you if 
you use chemical strippers that contain MeCl to remove dried paint 
(including, but not limited to, paint, enamel, varnish, shellac, and 
lacquer) from wood, metal, plastic, and other substrates.
    The final rule also applies to you if you spray apply coatings to 
motor vehicles or mobile equipment for the purposes of finishing or 
refinishing, and clarifies that the standards apply to all sources 
performing these operations using spray-applied coatings, including 
mobile refinishing operations, except those operations that meet the 
definition of facility maintenance in Sec.  63.11180. Finally, the rule 
applies if you spray apply coatings that contain the target HAP to 
plastic or metal parts and products (other than motor vehicles and 
mobile equipment), except those operations that meet the definition of 
facility maintenance or that are surface coating of a space vehicle. If 
you perform miscellaneous surface coating operations, but do not use 
any coatings

[[Page 1741]]

that contain the target HAP, the rule does not apply.
    The final rule applies to all motor vehicle and mobile equipment 
surface coating operations. However, if you are the owner or operator 
of a motor vehicle or mobile equipment surface coating operation, you 
may petition the Administrator for an exemption from this subpart if 
you can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Administrator, that you 
spray apply no coatings that contain the target HAP. Petitions must 
include a description of the coatings that you spray apply and your 
certification that you do not spray apply any coatings containing the 
target HAP. If circumstances change such that you intend to spray apply 
coatings containing the target HAP, you must submit the initial 
notification required by 63.11175 and comply with the requirements of 
this subpart.
    Coatings are considered to contain the target HAP if they contain 
any individual target HAP that is an Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration (OSHA)-defined carcinogen as specified in 29 CFR 
1910.1200(d)(4) at a concentration greater than 0.1 percent by mass or 
greater than 1.0 percent by mass for any other individual target HAP. 
For the purpose of determining whether materials you use contain the 
target HAP (that is, compounds of chromium (Cr), lead (Pb), manganese 
(Mn), nickel (Ni), or cadmium (Cd)), you may rely on formulation data 
provided by the manufacturer or supplier, such as the material safety 
data sheet (MSDS), as long as it represents each target HAP compound in 
the material that is present at 0.1 percent by mass or more for OSHA-
defined carcinogens and at 1.0 percent by mass or more for other target 
HAP compounds.
    The final rule also includes in Sec.  63.11180 definitions of 
``administrator,'' ``coating,'' ``facility maintenance,'' ``quality 
control activities,'' ``research and laboratory activities,'' ``space 
vehicle,'' and ``spray application of coatings'' related to these 
applicability provisions.
    ``Administrator'' means the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency or the State or local agency that is granted 
delegation for implementation of this subpart.
    ``Coating'' is defined as a material spray-applied to a substrate 
for decorative, protective, or functional purposes. As specified in the 
definition in the final rule, ``coating'' does not include the 
following materials:
    (1) Decorative, protective, or functional materials that consist 
only of protective oils for metal, acids, bases, or any combination of 
these substances.
    (2) Paper film or plastic film that may be pre-coated with an 
adhesive by the film manufacturer.
    (3) Adhesives, sealants, maskants, or caulking materials.
    (4) Temporary protective coatings, lubricants, or surface 
preparation materials.
    (5) In-mold coatings that are spray-applied in the manufacture of 
reinforced plastic composite parts.
    ``Facility maintenance'' is defined to include architectural 
surface coating activities on stationary structures and process 
equipment. It is also defined to include the surface coating of mobile 
equipment in the field, such as farming or mining equipment, or mobile 
equipment coated at a site where it is used, such as a fork truck 
coated at a manufacturing facility. The definition of facility 
maintenance specifically excludes surface coating of motor vehicles, 
mobile equipment, or items that routinely leave and return to the 
facility, such as delivery trucks, rental equipment, or containers used 
to transport or deliver products to customers, such as compressed gas 
canisters. The surface coating of these items (e.g., courier vehicles 
or compressed gas canisters) that routinely leave and return to the 
facility will be subject to the standards.
    ``Quality control activities'' has been defined to mean surface 
coating or paint stripping activities that meet all of the following 
criteria:
    (1) The activities, associated with a surface coating or paint 
stripping operation, to detect and correct defects in the final product 
through selection of limited samples from the operation, and comparison 
of the samples against specific performance criteria.
    (2) The activities do not include the production of an intermediate 
or final product for sale or exchange for commercial profit; for 
example, parts that are surface coated or stripped are not sold.
    (3) The activities are not a normal part of the miscellaneous 
surface coating or paint stripping operation, e.g., they do not include 
color matching activities performed on motor vehicles as part of 
collision repair activities.
    (4) The activities do not involve surface coating or stripping of 
the tools, equipment, machinery, and structures that comprise the 
infrastructure of the affected facility and that are necessary for the 
facility to function in its intended capacity, e.g., the activities are 
not facility maintenance.
    ``Research and laboratory activities'' has been defined to mean 
surface coating or paint stripping activities whose primary purpose is 
to conduct research and development into new processes and products, 
that are performed under the close supervision of technically trained 
personnel and do not include the manufacture of intermediate or final 
products for commercial sale in commerce. Such activities are 
ordinarily conducted in a dedicated area of a facility (such as a 
dedicated room or paint booth), or in a separate facility. Research and 
laboratory activities include, but are not limited to the following:
    (1) Activities conducted to develop more efficient production 
processes, including alternative paint stripping or surface coating 
materials or application methods, or methods for preventing or reducing 
adverse environmental impacts.
    (2) Activities conducted at a laboratory to analyze air, soil, 
water, waste, or product samples for contaminants or environmental 
impact or to develop revised production processes to limit 
environmental effects.
    ``Space Vehicle'' has been defined to mean vehicles designed to 
travel beyond the limit of the earth's atmosphere, such as satellites, 
space stations, and the Space Shuttle System (including orbiter, 
external tanks, and solid rocket boosters).
    ``Spray-applied coating operations'' has been defined to mean 
coatings that are applied using a hand-held device that creates an 
atomized mist of coating and deposits the coating on a substrate. As 
specified in the definition in the final rule, the following materials 
or activities are not considered spray-applied coatings:
    (1) Coatings applied from a hand-held device with a paint cup 
capacity that is equal to or less than 3.0 fluid ounces (89 cubic 
centimeters (cc)).
    (2) Surface coating application using powder coating, hand-held, 
non-refillable aerosol containers, or non-atomizing application 
technology, including, but not limited to, paint brushes, rollers, hand 
wiping, flow coating, dip coating, electrodeposition coating, web 
coating, coil coating, touch-up markers, or marking pens.
    (3) Thermal spray operations (also known as metallizing, flame 
spray, plasma arc spray, and electric arc spray, among other names) in 
which solid metallic or non-metallic material is heated to a molten or 
semi-molten state and propelled to the work piece or substrate by 
compressed air or other gas, where a bond is produced upon impact.

[[Page 1742]]

B. Compliance Dates

    New sources must comply with the requirements of the final rule 
upon startup of operations, but no earlier than the effective date of 
this notice. Existing sources must comply no later than three years 
from the effective date of this notice.

C. Requirements for Paint Stripping Operations

    All owners and operators of regulated sources conducting paint 
stripping and using MeCl-containing paint stripper must implement 
management practices that reduce emissions of MeCl by minimizing 
evaporative losses of MeCl. The MeCl management practices involve only 
using a MeCl-containing paint stripper when an alternative on site 
stripping method or material is incapable of accomplishing the work as 
determined by the operator. Alternative methods to reduce MeCl usage 
may include:
    (1) Non- or low-MeCl-containing chemical strippers;
    (2) Mechanical stripping;
    (3) Blasting (including dry or wet media); or
    (4) Thermal and cryogenic decomposition.
    The management practices required also include optimizing stripper 
application conditions, reducing exposure of stripper to the air, and 
practicing proper storage and disposal of materials containing MeCl. 
Owners and operators must also maintain records of annual usage of 
strippers containing MeCl.
    In addition to the management practices, sources that use more than 
one ton of MeCl per year need to develop and implement a MeCl 
minimization plan. This must be a written plan including criteria to 
evaluate the necessity of MeCl in the stripping operations and whether 
alternatives are feasible. It must also describe the management 
techniques that will be used to minimize MeCl emissions when MeCl is 
needed in the paint stripping operation.
    The MeCl minimization plan evaluation criteria involves only using 
a MeCl-containing paint stripper when an alternative on site stripping 
method or material is incapable of accomplishing the work as determined 
by the operator. Alternative methods to reduce MeCl usage may include:
    (1) Non- or low-MeCl-containing chemical strippers;
    (2) Mechanical stripping;
    (3) Blasting (including dry or wet media); or
    (4) Thermal and cryogenic decomposition.
    The management practices required to be contained in the plan 
include optimizing stripper application conditions, reducing exposure 
of stripper to the air, and practicing proper storage and disposal of 
materials containing MeCl. Sources are required to notify either EPA or 
the delegated State permit authority that they have developed a MeCl 
minimization plan, keep a written copy of the plan on site and post a 
placard or sign outlining the evaluation criteria and management 
techniques in each area where MeCl-containing paint stripping 
operations occur. They are also required to review the plan annually 
and update it based on the experiences of the previous year or the 
availability of new methods of stripping and to keep a record of the 
review and changes made to the plan on file.

D. Requirements for Surface Coating Operations

    All motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating operations 
and those miscellaneous surface coating operations that spray apply 
coatings containing the target HAP must apply the coatings with a high 
volume, low pressure (HVLP) spray gun, electrostatic spray gun, airless 
spray gun, air-assisted airless spray gun, or a gun demonstrated to be 
equal in transfer efficiency to an HVLP spray gun. All spray-applied 
coatings must be applied in a prep station or spray booth. For motor 
vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating, prep stations and spray 
booths that are large enough to hold a complete vehicle must have four 
complete side walls or curtains and a complete roof. For motor vehicle 
and mobile equipment subassemblies and for miscellaneous surface 
coating, coatings must be spray applied in a booth with a full roof and 
at least three walls or side curtains. Openings are allowed in the 
sidewalls and roof of booths used for miscellaneous surface coating to 
allow for parts conveyors, if needed. The exhaust from the prep station 
or spray booth must be fitted with filters demonstrated to achieve at 
least 98 percent filter efficiency of paint overspray.
    Additionally, surface coating sources subject to the standards are 
required to comply with management practices by demonstrating that:
    (1) All painters that spray apply coatings have completed training 
in techniques to minimize paint overspray, and
    (2) That no spray gun cleaning is performed by spraying solvent 
through the gun creating an atomized mist (i.e., spray guns are cleaned 
in an enclosed spray gun cleaner or by cleaning the disassembled gun 
parts by hand).
    Initial painter training will be valid for a period of five years, 
and refresher training must be repeated at least once every five years. 
Painters that completed training in the last five years before the 
compliance date will be able to use that training to satisfy this 
requirement. To comply with the painter training requirements, all 
spray painters at new sources must complete training no later than 180 
days after hiring or 180 days from the date of this notice, whichever 
is later. All spray painters at existing sources must complete training 
no later than three years from the date of this notice or no later than 
180 days after hiring, whichever is later.
    The initial and refresher training must address the following 
topics to reduce coating overspray and emissions:
    (1) Spray gun equipment selection, set up, and operation, including 
measuring coating viscosity, selecting the proper fluid tip or nozzle, 
and achieving the proper spray pattern, air pressure and volume, and 
fluid delivery rate.
    (2) Spray technique for different types of coatings to improve 
transfer efficiency and minimize coating usage and overspray, including 
maintaining the correct spray gun distance and angle to the part, using 
proper banding and overlap, and reducing lead and lag spraying at the 
beginning and end of each stroke.
    (3) Routine spray booth and filter maintenance, including filter 
selection and installation.
    (4) Environmental compliance with the requirements of this subpart.

E. Notifications, Recordkeeping, and Reporting

    All sources must submit an initial notification to the EPA or to 
their State or local air pollution control agency, if the EPA has 
delegated authority for implementing this rule to that agency, with a 
copy sent to EPA, unless the EPA regional office has waived the dual 
reporting requirements. New sources need to submit the initial 
notification no later than 180 days after initial startup, or no later 
than 180 days after the date of this notice, whichever is later. 
Existing sources need to submit the initial notification no later than 
one year before their compliance date. For new sources, the initial 
notification will also serve as a notification on whether the source is 
in compliance. For existing sources, the initial notification must 
indicate whether the source is already in compliance or that it will be 
brought into compliance by the existing source compliance date.

[[Page 1743]]

    Additionally, all existing sources that did not state in their 
initial notification that they were already in compliance with the 
management practices and equipment requirements prescribed in the final 
rule must also submit a notification of compliance status. The 
notification of compliance status must be submitted no later than 60 
days after the compliance date for existing sources. The notification 
of compliance status must certify that the source is in compliance with 
the applicable requirements for the activities being performed.
    The initial notification must include the following information:
    (1) The name, address, phone number and e-mail address (if 
available) of the owner and operator.
    (2) The address (physical location) of the affected source. If the 
source is a motor vehicle or mobile equipment surface coating operation 
that repairs vehicles at the customer's location, rather than at a 
fixed collision repair shop, the notification should state this and 
indicate the physical location where records are kept to demonstrate 
compliance.
    (3) A statement that the source is subject to this standard, 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart HHHHHH.
    (4) A brief description of the type of operation, including which 
types of activities are performed at the source (miscellaneous surface 
coating, motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating, or paint 
stripping). For surface coating operations, identify the number of 
spray booths and the number of painters usually employed at the 
operation. For paint stripping, identify the method(s) of paint 
stripping employed (e.g., chemical, mechanical) and the substrates 
stripped (e.g., wood, plastic, metal).
    (5) Each paint stripping operation must indicate whether they plan 
to annually use more than one ton of MeCl after the compliance date.
    Sources are only required to submit an annual report to the EPA or 
to their State or local air pollution control agency if any information 
in the initial notification, notification of compliance status report, 
or in a previous annual report has changed in the previous calendar 
year. If an annual report is needed, it must be submitted no later than 
60 days after the yearly anniversary of the compliance date.
    All sources must keep records sufficient to demonstrate that they 
are in compliance at all times. These include the following:
    (1) Records that each spray painter has completed the training, 
with the date of the initial training and the most recent refresher 
training.
    (2) Documentation of the filter efficiency of any spray booth 
exhaust filter material, such as data from the filter manufacturer.
    (3) Documentation from the spray gun manufacturer that each spray 
gun that does not meet the definition of an HVLP spray gun, 
electrostatic spray gun, airless spray gun, or air-assisted airless 
spray gun has been demonstrated to achieve a transfer efficiency equal 
to one of the other allowed types of spray gun.
    (4) Copies of any notifications or reports that were submitted.
    (5) Records of paint strippers containing MeCl used for paint 
stripping operations, including the MeCl content of the paint stripper 
used, and annual usage.
    (6) If you are a paint stripping source that annually uses more 
than one ton of MeCl, a record of your current MeCl minimization plan, 
and records of your annual review of, and updates to, your MeCl 
minimization plan.
    (7) Records of any deviation from the requirements in the final 
rule, including the date and time period of the deviation, and a 
description of the nature of the deviation and the actions taken to 
correct the deviation.
    (8) Records of any assessments of source compliance performed in 
support of the initial notification, notification of compliance status, 
or annual notification of changes report.
    Under the final rule, owners and operators will not be required to 
obtain a Title V operating permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 71, provided 
they are not required to obtain a permit for another reason, even 
though the source is an area source.

IV. Summary of Changes Since Proposal

A. Applicability

    We have revised the rule since proposal to clarify the scope of the 
source category to which it applies, and to clearly identify the 
sources subject to the requirements of the rule. These revisions make 
clear that the affected source category is not as broad as could have 
been interpreted based on the language of the proposed rule. These 
changes were made in both the applicability sections (Sec. Sec.  
63.11169 to 63.11171) and to the definitions in Sec.  63.11180 that 
describe particular operations that are subject to the standards.
    We have revised Sec.  63.11169 to specify that compounds of 
chromium (Cr), lead (Pb), manganese (Mn), nickel (Ni), and cadmium (Cd) 
are the HAP for which the surface coating standards for miscellaneous 
surface coating operations category was listed and which the standards 
are designed to control. In subsequent sections of the rule, certain 
provisions apply only to surface coating operations that are sources of 
these target HAP.
    We have revised Sec.  63.11170 to separate and more clearly explain 
how the rule applies to paint stripping, motor vehicle and mobile 
equipment surface coating, and miscellaneous surface coating. In 
particular, motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating has been 
separated from the larger category of miscellaneous surface coating and 
is treated separately in the rest of the rule. In the proposed rule, 
all surface coating was included under a single set of requirements 
that made no distinction between motor vehicle and mobile equipment 
surface coating and all other miscellaneous surface coating.
    The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has been added 
to the list of installations to which this subpart does not apply. This 
list is found in Sec.  63.11169. Surface coating and paint stripping at 
NNSA installations would be regulated by the military surface coating 
NESHAP that is under development.
    Section 63.11169 has also been revised to specify that these 
standards do not apply to paint stripping and surface coating performed 
by individuals as part of a hobby, or for maintenance of their personal 
vehicles, possessions, and property, or when they perform these 
activities for others without compensation.
    For motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating, all sources 
and individuals that spray finish more than two motor vehicles or 
pieces of mobile equipment per year are subject to the requirements in 
the final rule that pertain to motor vehicle and mobile equipment 
surface coating regardless of whether compensation is received. 
However, we have included a provision in the final rule that allows an 
owner or operator of a motor vehicle or mobile equipment surface 
coating operation to petition the Administrator for an exemption from 
this subpart if the owner or operator can demonstrate that they spray 
apply no coatings that contain the target HAP. Petitions must include a 
description of the coatings that they spray apply and certification 
that they do not spray apply any coatings containing the target HAP. If 
circumstances change such that the owner or operator intends to spray 
apply coatings containing the target HAP, the owner or operator must 
submit

[[Page 1744]]

the initial notification required by 63.11175 and comply with the 
requirements of this subpart. While the proposed rule would have 
required all motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating 
operations to comply with the requirements of the rule, because the 
category was listed for the target HAP, it is appropriate to allow 
operations that do not use products containing the target HAP to 
request that the rule not apply to them based on an adequate 
demonstration that they do not use such products. EPA's understanding, 
based on site visits and communications with the industry, is that many 
shops, especially smaller ones, purchase coatings ``over the counter'' 
on a retail basis and usually do not receive composition data, such as 
a material safety data sheet (MSDS), with these coatings. In addition, 
when a specific color is needed for refinishing a vehicle, it is 
usually custom-mixed from any number of about 50 different toners, 
either by the painter at the shop, or by the coating retailer. 
Therefore, it will likely be very difficult to determine whether any 
particular coating being sprayed contains the target HAP, unless the 
HAP composition of all coatings within the shop is known. For this 
reason, and because we received comments from industry supporting the 
proposed requirements, we expect that few, if any, petitions will be 
received. We hope to encourage reformulation where possible through 
this provision.
    The applicability language in Sec.  63.11169 in the final rule has 
been revised to exclude paint stripping and surface coating that meets 
the definition of research and laboratory activities, and quality 
control activities, as defined in Sec.  63.11180.
    The applicability language in Sec.  63.11170 for motor vehicle and 
mobile equipment surface coating operations has been revised to clarify 
that the standards apply to all sources that spray apply these 
coatings, including mobile refinishing operations, except when they 
qualify as facility maintenance, as defined in Sec.  63.11180.
    The applicability language for miscellaneous surface coating 
operations has been revised to clarify the scope of the source category 
subject to regulation. First, the standards apply to the spray 
application of only coatings that contain the target HAP at 
miscellaneous surface coating operations. Second, language has been 
added to clarify that the standards apply only to plastic and metal 
substrates. Third, the rule has been revised to also exclude 
miscellaneous surface coating that meets the definition of ``facility 
maintenance.'' Finally, surface coating on space vehicles has been 
specifically excluded so as to parallel the applicability of subpart 
GG, the major source NESHAP for Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework 
Facilities.
    The applicability of the final rule has been further clarified by 
revising or adding definitions to Sec.  63.11180 that better explain 
the operations that are covered. The definition of ``coating'' was 
revised to clarify that the following are not coatings subject to this 
rule:
    (a) Adhesives, sealants, maskants, or caulking materials.
    (b) Temporary protective coatings, lubricants, or surface 
preparation materials.
    (c) In-mold coatings that are spray-applied in the manufacture of 
reinforced plastic composite parts.
    New definitions were added for ``facility maintenance'', ``quality 
control activities'', ``research and laboratory activities'', and 
``spray-applied coating.'' These definitions were fully described in 
section III.A of this preamble.

B. Compliance Dates

    The compliance date for existing sources has been extended from two 
years to three years after the effective date of today's final rule 
notice.

C. Requirements for Paint Stripping Operations

    The format of the MeCl minimization plan threshold for the paint 
stripping portion of the rule has been revised from total stripper 
volume usage to MeCl mass usage for several reasons. First, EPA 
believes it is more appropriate to address the emissions directly, when 
possible, in lieu of using a surrogate that may or may not accomplish 
the goal. Additionally, a mass usage format may serve as an incentive 
for sources to evaluate the appropriate MeCl content of their chemical 
strippers and also provide the sources with greater flexibility. The 
rule sets the MeCl minimization plan threshold at one ton per year of 
MeCl contained in paint strippers.

D. Requirements for Surface Coating Operations

    The rule has been revised to create separate categories for motor 
vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating and for miscellaneous 
surface coating. For motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface 
coating, the requirements for painter training, high efficiency spray 
guns (e.g., HVLP or equivalent), spray booths with filters, and gun 
washing still apply to all sources as described in the applicability 
section of the rule.
    For miscellaneous surface coating operations, the rule has been 
revised so that it applies only to those surface coating operations 
that spray apply coatings that contain the target HAP; other surface 
coating operations do not need to comply with those requirements. 
Miscellaneous surface coating operations that spray apply coatings that 
contain the target HAP must meet the same requirements as motor vehicle 
and mobile equipment surface coating operations.
    The spray painter training requirements have been revised so that 
training is not required on those topics that do not have a direct 
effect on emissions reductions. More detail has been added on the 
topics that impact emissions reductions (e.g., transfer efficiency) and 
for which training is required. The training requirements have also 
been revised to allow an owner or operator to certify that their 
employees have completed training to facilitate the use of in-house 
training programs. Spray painters will also have 180 days to complete 
training after hiring or transferring to a surface coating job, instead 
of 60 days.
    The requirements for spray guns have been revised to allow the use 
of airless or air-assisted airless spray guns without having to 
demonstrate that they are equivalent to HVLP spray guns in transfer 
efficiency.
    The requirements for spray booth filters have been revised so that 
all spray booth exhaust filters must achieve 98 percent paint overspray 
filter efficiency (also referred to as ``arrestance''), and details 
have been added on the method that must be used to measure that 
efficiency. The final rule also clarifies that compliance with the 
filter efficiency standard can be demonstrated through data provided by 
the filter manufacturer.
    The booth requirements have been revised to allow for openings in 
side walls and roofs for part conveyors. They have also been revised to 
allow for booths that are operated at up to 0.05 inches water gauge 
positive pressure, if they have sealed doors and other openings and use 
a pressure balancing system.
    The rule language related to spray gun washing has been revised to 
clarify that atomized spraying of gun cleaning solvent is prohibited, 
and allowable means of washing spray guns include hand cleaning 
disassembled spray guns, manually flushing solvent through the gun 
(without atomizing it) and capturing the spent solvent, and using an 
enclosed gun washer, but an enclosed gun washer is not required.

[[Page 1745]]

E. Notifications, Recordkeeping, and Reporting

    The notification and reporting requirements of the rule have been 
simplified and reduced. All sources will still need to submit an 
initial notification, but in that initial notification, sources will be 
asked to state whether they are already in compliance with the 
requirements of the rule or whether they plan to be in compliance by 
the compliance date. For new sources, the initial notification will 
also serve as the notification of compliance status since they would 
otherwise be due by the same date. If existing sources are already in 
compliance by the time they submit the initial notification and certify 
that they are in compliance in their initial notification, they do not 
need to submit a separate notification of compliance status. The need 
for regular annual compliance reports has also been removed. Sources 
will need to submit an annual compliance report only if there is a 
change in any of the information contained in the initial notification, 
the notification of compliance status (if one was needed), or in a 
previous annual compliance report (if one was needed).
    The rule has been revised to remove the requirement for paint 
stripping sources to submit MeCl minimization plans to permitting 
authorities. Facilities will be required to submit either an initial 
notification or a notification of compliance status that says they have 
prepared and implemented the plan. Instead of submitting the plan, 
sources are only required to keep the plan on site. The facility has to 
review and update their plan annually and keep records of the review 
and changes made on site rather than submitting an annual compliance 
report to EPA or a State permitting authority.
    For paint stripping, motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface 
coating operations, and miscellaneous surface coating operations, the 
rule has been revised so that these sources will only have to keep the 
records needed to demonstrate compliance instead of submitting annual 
compliance reports.

V. Summary of Comments and Responses

A. Applicability

    Comment: Several commenters argued that the miscellaneous surface 
coating rule should apply only to surface coating facilities that emit 
the target HAP, and that target HAP should be defined as the HAP for 
which the miscellaneous surface coating source category was listed. 
These are specifically compounds of Cr, Pb, Mn, Ni, and Cd.
    Response: The EPA agrees with the commenters and recognizes that 
many miscellaneous surface coating operations exist that do not spray 
apply coatings containing the target HAP. Therefore, the applicability 
sections have been revised so that the final rule will apply to only 
miscellaneous surface coating sources that spray apply coatings 
containing the target HAP. If your miscellaneous surface coating 
operations do not spray apply any coatings containing the target HAP, 
then you are not subject to this rule and do not need to comply with 
the requirements for operator training, spray guns, or spray booths. 
This change in the language of the applicability provision accurately 
reflects the sources for which the miscellaneous surface coating source 
category was listed, because sources that do not spray apply coatings 
containing the target HAP will have no target HAP emissions and were 
therefore not part of the inventory on which the source category 
listing was based. It will also create an incentive for all 
miscellaneous surface coating sources to review the coatings they are 
spray applying and find substitutes for those that contain the target 
HAP or to switch to non-spray methods to apply those coatings. Although 
some contract coaters and ``job shops'' may use a large number of 
different coatings, most miscellaneous surface coating operations use 
only a small number of coatings and the composition data for these can 
be reviewed to identify whether these coatings contain the target HAP.
    However, based on the overwhelming support of the commenters for 
the applicability criteria and scope of the motor vehicle and mobile 
equipment source category, we are not narrowing the applicability to 
only the target HAP for the motor vehicle and mobile equipment source 
category. The EPA's understanding, based on site visits and 
communications with the industry, is that these requirements are 
consistent with current good environmental and worker protection 
practices. (See other comment responses for additional clarifications 
on applicability that exclude coating of personal property and 
vehicles, facility maintenance coating, etc.) The final rule applies to 
all motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating operations. 
However, if you are the owner or operator of a motor vehicle or mobile 
equipment surface coating operation, you may petition the Administrator 
for an exemption from this subpart if you can demonstrate, to the 
satisfaction of the Administrator, that you spray apply no coatings 
that contain the target HAP. Petitions must include a description of 
the coatings that you spray apply and your certification that you do 
not spray apply any coatings containing the target HAP. If 
circumstances change such that you intend to spray apply coatings 
containing the target HAP, you must submit the initial notification 
required by 63.11175 and comply with the requirements of this subpart.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the rule should be revised to 
add the NNSA to the list of installations to which this subpart does 
not apply. The commenter noted that EPA is planning that surface 
coating and paint stripping at NNSA installations would be addressed by 
the military surface coating NESHAP that is under development.
    Response: The EPA agrees and has added NNSA installations to the 
list of installations to which this subpart does not apply. These 
installations will be addressed by the military surface coating NESHAP 
that is under development.
    Comment: Several comments noted that the applicability of the 
proposed rule, as written, could be interpreted to apply to all paint 
stripping and surface coating operations, and included no exemptions 
for automobile hobbyists or homeowners stripping and painting their own 
property or vehicles. Nearly all commenters felt that paint stripping 
and surface coating by hobbyists and homeowners should be exempt from 
the rule. Several commenters suggested that EPA establish a de minimis 
usage threshold, based on either major source surface coating rules or 
state volatile organic compounds (VOC) rules, to exclude noncommercial 
paint stripping or surface coating operations. The commenters noted 
that hobbyist and homeowner activities are difficult to locate because 
they are located in residential areas and are intermittent. However, 
one commenter suggested that the rule should have no exemptions and any 
individual painting vehicles should be subject to the proposed 
equipment and training requirements.
    Response: EPA re-examined the scope of the source categories that 
we listed based on the 1990 national emissions inventory. The analyses 
that were the basis for the source category listing for paint 
stripping, miscellaneous surface coating, and motor vehicle and mobile 
equipment surface coating focused on commercial operations, along with 
some government and institutional operations, such as municipal garages 
that service fleet vehicles. Homeowners

[[Page 1746]]

and hobbyists were not part of these analyses and were not intended to 
be part of the listed source categories.
    Therefore, the final rule has been revised to clarify that it does 
not cover paint stripping and surface coating performed by individuals 
on their personal vehicles, possessions, or property, either as a hobby 
or for maintenance. This subpart also does not apply when these 
operations are performed by individuals for others without 
compensation, which is akin to the hobbyist and homeowner activities 
not considered in the baseline inventory that formed the basis for the 
listing of the source categories at issue here.
    However, for motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating 
operations, an individual surface coating more than two vehicles per 
year will be covered by the rule. This limit on the number of vehicles 
coated per year was included so that commercial automobile surface 
coating shops could not avoid compliance by claiming to be a hobby 
shop. The limit was based on information collected from automobile 
hobbyists during the rule development. The hobbyists that provided 
information to the EPA suggested that a legitimate hobbyist would 
complete no more than two automobile restorations or customizations per 
year.
    The EPA is not including a volumetric coating usage threshold in 
the final rule for either motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface 
coating operations, or for miscellaneous surface coating operations, as 
suggested by some commenters, because the threshold is not supported by 
the baseline inventory on which we based our listing decision. CAA 
section 112(c)(3) requires that EPA list sufficient categories and 
subcategories to ensure that area sources representing 90 percent of 
the emissions of the 30 listed urban HAP are subject to regulation. The 
CAA contains no exemption from the statutory requirement to regulate 
sources accounting for 90 percent of the emissions of an urban HAP. The 
inventory does not indicate that in listing the categories at issue 
here EPA included only those sources that use coatings above a certain 
threshold amount. Moreover, the commenter's reliance on the use of 
thresholds in certain major source HAP rules and State VOC rules is 
misplaced. EPA listed the area source categories at issue in this rule 
because the categories accounted for a certain percentage of the 
emissions necessary to meet the 90 percent requirement for the target 
urban HAP; therefore, regulation of the categories as listed is 
necessary for EPA to attain the 90 percent reduction of those HAP and 
comply with the requirements of section 112(c)(3) and 112(k). The rules 
on which the commenters rely were not issued under these provisions.
    Comment: Three commenters suggested EPA exempt from the proposed 
rule operations that use less than 150 gallons per year of paint 
stripper that contains MeCl. A commenter justified the exemption as 
allowing minor paint stripping operations to continue, and let the 
regulating authorities focus on the more significant operations and 
facilities.
    Response: EPA is required by the CAA to regulate emissions from 
area sources, which are, by definition, small sources. Based on 
baseline emission estimates updated with additional information 
provided by commenters, we estimate that 150 gallons of MeCl equates to 
approximately one ton of MeCl emissions per year from each of these 
small sources. This represents around five percent of the total area 
source MeCl emissions considered in the original section 112(k) 
inventory. While we appreciate the opinions of the commenters to focus 
on the more significant emitters, we cannot justify ignoring this level 
of MeCl emissions.
    We have minimized the requirements and burden on these low level 
users by not requiring them to develop MeCl minimization plans. We do 
not feel that asking them to consider alternatives to using MeCl-based 
strippers is overly burdensome. The reporting requirements for these 
low level users are also minimal. They must submit an initial 
notification letter and keep MeCl-based stripper purchase or use 
records, which we believe would be maintained for tax purposes already. 
We do not believe that receiving one letter per facility would be 
overly burdensome for permitting agencies. In conclusion, we feel that 
our approach has adequately balanced the requirements of the CAA 
without unduly burdening small businesses in this source category or 
permitting agencies.
    Comment: One commenter noted that while basing the threshold level 
that triggers development of a written MeCl minimization plan on the 
total quantity of stripper used may simplify compliance, it does not 
consider the MeCl content of the stripper formulation, and thus may 
create a disincentive for facilities to explore formulations with lower 
MeCl content. They stated that, although the MeCl-based products 
commonly used in paint stripping operations contain 75 to 90 percent 
MeCl, products containing 40 to 50 percent of the solvent are also 
available. However, they pointed out that facilities may need to use 
more stripper to compensate for the lower MeCl content, resulting in 
the need for higher volumes. The commenter indicated that they did not 
believe that specifying a use threshold based on the MeCl content was 
appropriate. They indicated that a higher gallon-per-year limit would 
allow many paint stripping firms to explore the applicability of lower 
MeCl-content formulations to their operations. The commenter stated 
that discussions with member companies that formulate MeCl-based 
strippers for commercial operations indicated that a threshold of 500 
to 600 gallons also would better distinguish between operations that 
perform paint stripping as a regular part of their business and those 
that conduct stripping on an as-needed (incidental) basis.
    Another commenter said that to be cost effective, shops buy MeCl 
based strippers in 55 gallon drums, which makes the 150 gallon per year 
minimum unrealistic. They suggested that a 220 gallon per year 
threshold would be a more realistic number and would reflect a factor 
of cost-effective bulk purchases.
    Response: As discussed in the proposal preamble (72 FR 52966), a 
subcategory of paint strippers was created to distinguish those sources 
that were assumed to have alternative on site paint stripping 
technologies available. The threshold level to define this subcategory 
was proposed as a volume of MeCl-based stripper used (150 gallons per 
year). Given the large number of small businesses that will be impacted 
by this rule, we thought that this volume-based threshold would lessen 
the burden when compared with a threshold based on the mass of MeCl in 
the stripper.
    However, we do recognize the relevant points made by the commenter. 
If owners and operators performing paint stripping cannot find non-MeCl 
alternatives, we certainly want to encourage them to consider strippers 
with lower MeCl contents. We understand that basing this threshold on 
volume may provide a disincentive to the use of these low-MeCl content 
strippers.
    Like the commenter, we do not believe that specifying a use 
threshold based on the MeCl content is appropriate. However, we believe 
that simply raising the volume-based threshold would remove all 
incentive to use lower MeCl content strippers, rather than encourage 
their usage. Increasing the volume-based threshold from the proposed 
150 gallons per year to the suggested 500 to 600 gallons per year would 
increase the emissions of

[[Page 1747]]

facilities required to develop a written MeCl minimization plan three 
or four-fold, assuming that they utilize a stripper with the same MeCl 
content. Further, sources using these levels of MeCl strippers could 
emit as much as three to four tons of MeCl if using high-MeCl content 
strippers. We do not believe it is unreasonable to require sources with 
the potential to emit MeCl at these levels to develop a formal plan for 
reducing these emissions and evaluating the feasibility of alternative 
paint stripping technology.
    We considered including both a volume-based and mass-based 
threshold in the final rule. However, the complexity of such provisions 
defeated the purpose of using a simple volume-based threshold in the 
first place. Therefore, in the final rule, the threshold that defines 
the subcategory of paint strippers that is required to develop a 
written MeCl minimization plan is on a mass basis. Specifically, the 
final rule requires paint strippers that use more than one ton per year 
of MeCl in paint strippers to develop a written MeCl minimization plant 
to implement the management practices in the rule.
    As noted in the proposal preamble, a major criterion in the 
selection of the proposed 150 gallons per year threshold was our model 
plant impacts analysis. The 150 gallons per year level was selected for 
the model plant representing stripping operations that use between 100 
and 250 gallons of MeCl paint strippers. Facilities represented by this 
model plant would be using around one ton of MeCl per year for their 
paint stripping operations, depending on the density of the stripper 
and the percent of MeCl in the stripper (assuming the higher range of 
MeCl contents confirmed by the commenter). Therefore, as described 
elsewhere in the record for this rulemaking, any level selected within 
this range would still be consistent with our proposed threshold.
    In addition to being consistent with our proposed intention, the 
one ton MeCl per year threshold is also relatively compatible with the 
requested volume-based levels requested by the commenter, assuming that 
lower-content MeCl strippers are used. For example, between 450 and 500 
gallons of paint stripper containing 40 percent MeCl could be used and 
still remain below the one ton per year MeCl threshold.
    Finally, while we appreciate the practicality of a threshold based 
on the purchase of 55-gallon drums, as discussed above, we have 
concluded that any volume-based threshold is not ideal. If owners and 
operators of paint stripping operators wish to remain below the 
threshold and avoid the requirement to develop a written MeCl 
minimization plan, we would suggest that they calculate the number of 
55-gallon drums of stripper that they can utilize and still remain 
below the one ton level and plan accordingly.
    Comment: Two commenters felt the number of affected paint stripping 
sources used to assess impacts in the proposed rule was too low. A 
commenter extrapolated information from California, Canada, and other 
sources to develop an estimate of sources affected by the proposed rule 
and commented that EPA's estimate of 3,000 sources was an 
underestimate. Using two methods to extrapolate from estimates of 
furniture stripping operations using MeCl-based strippers in 
California, one based on population and the other based on business 
statistics, they estimated that nationally, approximately 4,000 sources 
were involved in furniture stripping with MeCl-based strippers. 
Factoring in autobody shops use of MeCl-based strippers, the number of 
facilities affected is two to three times EPA's estimate of 3,000 
firms. Additionally, a significantly larger number of firms would 
exceed the proposed 150 gallon threshold. As a result, the total cost 
of EPA's proposal would be significantly higher than estimated.
    Response: Developing an estimate of the number of affected sources 
was a difficult portion of the analyses conducted, to arrive at the 
proposed rule and to estimate its impacts. Unlike source categories 
with large facilities, emission inventories were not as useful in 
arriving at an estimate of facility numbers. Further, this source 
category does not have an industrial trade organization to turn to for 
further information about the source category.
    We appreciate the additional information on number of affected 
facilities provided by the commenters and considered the impacts of 
revising the population in the final rule. However, since little 
documentation was provided in support of the population estimate we 
have decided not to revise the estimate of sources. Finally, a change 
in the population totals affects the impacts proportionally and since 
we received no adverse comments on the assumptions and basis for our 
proposed impacts, which indicated a cost savings, we have decided not 
to revise the impacts and just rely on those at proposal as a worst-
case analysis.
    Comment: Several commenters asked for clarification on whether the 
rule applies to mobile automobile refinishers that perform spot repairs 
and other refinishing, such as fender and bumper repairs, at the 
customer's location, rather than in a conventional collision repair 
shop. Several other commenters also asked for clarification on whether 
motor vehicle refinishing coating operations (primarily refinishing of 
car bumpers and fenders) using ``miniature'' spray guns would be 
subject to the same standards as other motor vehicle refinishing 
operations. The commenters felt that surface coating with these 
miniature spray guns should be subject to the proposed standards, but 
felt that the final rule should clarify this applicability relative to 
operations done with air brushes. One commenter asked the EPA to 
increase the size of the spray cup allowed on air brushes that would be 
exempt from the standards.
    Response: The proposed and final rule is intended to cover mobile 
motor vehicle refinishing operations that bring the coating equipment 
and supplies to the repaired vehicle, as well as those in which the 
vehicle is brought to a conventional collision repair shop. In the 
final rule, these mobile refinishers are subject to the rule 
requirements for training, spray equipment, and the use of a spray 
booth or other ventilated and filtered enclosure if they spray apply 
coatings from a spray gun with a cup size greater than 3.0 fluid ounces 
(89 cc). If they use a cup size equal to or smaller than 3.0 fluid 
ounces, they do not need to comply with the requirements for training, 
spray guns, and ventilated and filtered enclosures.
    The proposed rule would not have applied to spray-applied coatings 
using an airbrush or spray gun with a cup size of 1.0 fluid ounce (30 
cc) or less, and this was intended, in part, to address mobile repair 
and refinishing operations that performed repairs of small stone chips 
and scratches, and graphic artists and others using these small spray 
guns to paint motor vehicles, signs, or other items that are 
potentially subject to the rule. These touch up and repair operations, 
and graphic arts painting on vehicles, were not part of the original 
inventory that focused on collision repair shops and other types of 
motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating, so the source 
category does not include surface coating with small airbrushes, and 
such operations are not subject to this rule.
    However, during the development of this rule, the EPA learned that 
more motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating that was 
formerly done by collision repair shops (and as such, was reflected in 
the source category listing) is now being done by mobile operators. 
Since this practice is becoming more common, the EPA has

[[Page 1748]]

decided that this source of emissions should be regulated on the same 
basis as motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating that takes 
place at a fixed location. Even so, the EPA felt it was not necessary 
to regulate in this rule small touch up and spot repair operations done 
with an airbrush, because these operations were not reflected in the 
original inventory and source category listing.
    Since the EPA could identify no single characteristic or group of 
characteristics to clearly differentiate a larger spray gun from an 
``air brush'' we have decided to define applicability based on the cup 
size of the spray equipment. In the final rule, all motor vehicle and 
mobile equipment spray coating operations and miscellaneous surface 
coating operations with a cup size greater than 3.0 ounces (89 cc) 
would be subject to the applicable standards for painter training and 
equipment. Surface coating operations with a smaller cup size would not 
be subject to the standards for spray-applied surface coating 
operations since these are typically just touch up and repair surface 
coating.
    This size (3.0 ounces or 89 cc) was selected based on a review of 
vendor literature for miniature spray guns and air brushes, and 
discussions with collision repair shop owners that commented on the 
proposed rule. This cup size is less than the minimum practical amount 
of coating that could be used to refinish a bumper or fender. 
Therefore, it helps distinguish those sources that are doing small 
scratch and spot repairs from those that are doing work that is more 
typically done at a collision repair shop.
    Comment: Many commenters stated that the proposed requirements for 
miscellaneous surface coating operations, as written, could be 
interpreted to potentially apply to all surface coating operations 
beyond those associated with the manufacture of plastic and metal parts 
and products. Examples cited by the commenters included the spray 
application of adhesives that do not include any of the target HAP, the 
spray application of coatings in the manufacture of leather shoes, and 
the spray application of coatings in the restoration of wood furniture.
    Several commenters also asked that the rule should specifically 
exclude surface coating operations that do not involve the use of 
spray-applied liquid coatings, since these operations have little 
potential for the target HAP emissions.
    Other commenters noted that the proposed rule could also be 
interpreted to apply to the surface coating of buildings and other 
stationary structures, such as bridges, water towers, and stationary 
equipment at manufacturing and processing facilities. The commenters 
recommended that the rule include an exemption for facility maintenance 
surface coating, and for research and development activities, as is 
found in the major source surface coating rules. Other commenters added 
that quality control activities should also be exempt since these are 
often of the same scale as research and development activities and are 
conducted at coating manufacturing facilities that do not produce 
surface coated parts for sale.
    Some commenters noted that it may be impractical to perform surface 
coating of large pieces of mobile equipment, such as some types of 
mining and farm equipment, in a spray booth or similar enclosure. The 
commenters suggested an exemption for these types of equipment that are 
generally coated in the field since it is not practical to move them to 
a dedicated facility for surface coating.
    Response: The EPA agrees with the commenters that the rule was 
intended to only apply to surface coating on plastic and metal 
substrates and language has been added to clarify that the standards do 
not apply to other substrates, such as wood, leather, fabric, rubber, 
masonry, ceramics, concrete, or stone. Spray coating of these other 
substrates was not considered in the inventory on which the surface 
coating source category listing was based.
    The rule has also been revised to specifically exclude surface 
coating that meets the definitions of ``facility maintenance'', 
``research and laboratory activities'', and ``quality control 
activities'' in Sec.  63.11180. Paint stripping and surface coating 
associated with these research and laboratory activities and quality 
control activities will not be subject to the standards as long as the 
items that are the subject of the surface coating or paint stripping 
are not products for commerce or for a function outside the facility, 
and do not leave the facility. For example, surface coating of test 
coupons in the manufacture of a coating to verify the final color of 
the coating is a quality control activity that is exempt from the rule 
because the test coupons are not products for commerce and are not 
intended to leave the facility. However, surface coating that is done 
to correct a defect or repair damage on a product that was detected as 
part of a final quality control check before the product leaves the 
factory is potentially subject to the rule.
    ``Facility maintenance'' is defined to include architectural 
surface coating activities on stationary structures and process 
equipment. It is also defined to include the surface coating of mobile 
equipment in the field, such as farming or mining equipment, or mobile 
equipment coated at a site where it is used, such as a fork truck 
coated at a manufacturing facility. The surface coating of stationary 
structures in the field was not intended to be part of the 
miscellaneous surface coating source category and was not included in 
EPA's analysis in the development of the proposed rule. Similarly, the 
surface coating of process equipment including, for example, farming 
and mining equipment that is coated in the field, was also not intended 
to be part of the source category and was not included in EPA's 
analyses.
    The definition of facility maintenance specifically excludes 
surface coating of motor vehicles, mobile equipment, or other items 
that routinely leave and return to the facility, such as delivery 
trucks, rental equipment, or containers used to transport or deliver 
products to customers. The paint stripping and surface coating of these 
latter items that routinely leave and return to the facility are 
subject to the standards for surface coating operations. Facility 
maintenance is limited to the paint stripping and surface coating of 
the infrastructure or process equipment of the facility. Items that 
routinely leave and return to a facility are not considered part of the 
facility's infrastructure or process equipment.
    The final rule includes definitions of ``coating'' and ``spray-
applied coating operations'' that include lists of materials and 
activities that are not subject to the final standards for either motor 
vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating, or for miscellaneous 
surface coating operations.
    The definition of ``coating'' excludes the following materials 
because they either do not contain the target HAP, they are not spray-
applied,or, if they are spray-applied, they are applied in larger 
particles that settle near the source and are not emitted and are not 
sources of the target HAP for which the surface coating categories were 
listed:
     Decorative, protective, or functional materials that 
consist only of protective oils for metal, acids, bases, or any 
combination of these substances.
     Paper film or plastic film that may be pre-coated with an 
adhesive by the film manufacturer.
     Adhesives, sealants, maskants, or caulking materials.

[[Page 1749]]

     Temporary protective coatings, lubricants, or surface 
preparation materials.
    The definition of ``coating'' also excludes in-mold coatings, 
typically gel coatings, that are spray-applied in the manufacture of 
reinforced plastic composite parts. Gel coats are part of the 
fabrication process for reinforced plastic composites, and were 
considered in separate processes when the EPA developed the inventory 
which served as the basis for the source category listing.
    The definition of ``spray-applied coating operations'' excludes 
several operations that were not considered part of the inventory that 
was the basis for the source category listing. These excluded 
operations are not subject to the rule. As described earlier in this 
section, coatings applied from a spray gun or air brush with a paint 
cup capacity that is equal to or less than 3.0 fluid ounces (89 cc) are 
not included because they are primarily used for touch up and repair 
operations.
    Surface coating application using powder coating, hand-held, non-
refillable aerosol containers, or non-atomizing application technology, 
including, for example, paint brushes, rollers, hand wiping, flow 
coating, dip coating, electrodeposition coating, web coating, coil 
coating, touch-up markers, and marking pens are not included because 
they do not atomize coating, so they are not sources of the target HAP 
emissions from the spray application of coating.
    The definition of spray-applied surface coating operation does not 
include thermal spray operations (also known as metallizing, flame 
spray, plasma arc spray, and electric arc spray, among other names). In 
these operations, solid metallic or non-metallic material is heated to 
a molten or semi-molten state and propelled to the work piece or 
substrate by compressed air or other gas, where a bond is produced upon 
impact. These are inorganic coatings (conductive metals) that were not 
considered part of the source category. In addition, although they are 
metals (usually zinc or aluminum), they do not contain the target HAP 
of concern for which the miscellaneous surface coating category was 
listed. In addition, the metal particles created are larger than those 
created in spraying liquid organic coatings and are less likely to be 
emitted.
    Comment: One commenter asked that the applicability be revised to 
specifically exclude surface coating operations on space vehicles so as 
to parallel the applicability of subpart GG, the major source NESHAP 
for Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities.
    Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter and has revised Sec.  
63.11170 to specifically exclude surface coating on space vehicles from 
the standards for miscellaneous surface coating in the final rule. 
However, paint stripping operations on space vehicles using MeCl would 
still be subject to the standards in the final rule. Paint stripping on 
space vehicles is regulated at major sources by subpart GG.

B. Compliance Date

    Comment: Several State agency commenters requested existing sources 
be given three years to comply rather than two years. They contend that 
more time is needed for State and local agencies to identify all 
subject sources and perform the needed outreach activities, and for the 
sources to have time to get all of their painters trained and to 
purchase and install any needed equipment. Sources may be difficult to 
identify and unfamiliarity with the rules is likely to be widespread 
because the sources are small businesses, with frequent employee 
turnover and changes in ownership. Commenters added that most other air 
toxics regulations allow existing sources three years to comply and 
this rule should be consistent to allow time for outreach.
    Response: EPA has revised the proposed rule to allow existing 
sources three years to comply. EPA agrees that the State agencies and 
other commenters have provided sufficient justification that three 
years is needed. There is a lack of readily available information to 
identify all of the area sources that are subject to the rule. Many of 
the area sources covered by the rule are small and have not previously 
been subject to air pollution control rules. Therefore, implementing 
agencies will need time to widely publicize these rules, develop 
outreach materials, and perform outreach though a variety of channels 
in order to inform sources that they are subject to the rule. In 
addition, many small sources are likely to require assistance in 
determining applicability, identifying the necessary steps to achieve 
compliance including, but not limited to locating and registering for 
painter training. Section 112 of the CAA allows up to three years for 
existing sources to comply, and given the characteristics of the source 
category, three years is a reasonable compliance time for this rule.

C. Requirements for Paint Stripping Operations

    Comment: Two commenters provided positive feedback on the proposal 
of Generally Available Management Practices as GACT, agreeing that 
development of a MeCl minimization plan is a good idea. They added that 
the plan would make sources more aware of the impacts of certain 
practices and require them to develop alternate ways to perform paint 
stripping operations without the use of MeCl. Another supported the 
EPA's focus on management practices to reduce emissions of MeCl from 
paint stripping operations rather than on what they termed 
inappropriate technology requirements or alternative stripping 
techniques.
    Response: Like the commenters, we believed that it was most 
appropriate to place the decisions on the feasibility of alternatives 
to MeCl strippers at the feet of those who know their business best. 
Therefore, the final rule retains the proposed requirements that owners 
and operators institute management practices to reduce MeCl emissions 
from paint stripping.
    Comment: There were several comments received that discussed the 
need for MeCl for stripping and expressed doubt at the plausibility of 
alternative technologies. A commenter remarked that in many cases, 
products containing MeCl are the only effective means of removing 
certain finishes, such as polyurethanes and most paints, for commercial 
operations. Another stated that, in their department's experience, most 
chemical paint stripping operations were dedicated to stripping paint 
from wooden furniture. They noted that the proposed management practice 
of recoating without stripping or substituting alternative stripping 
technologies was not a possibility for painted wood. Owners of a small 
business dedicated to restoring furniture, commented that for furniture 
restoration shops to reduce their MeCl use, there would have to be 
better alternative chemical strippers available. MeCl strippers are not 
flammable, but the current alternative chemical strippers are highly 
flammable and explosive. In addition, the current alternative chemical 
strippers cost two to three times those containing MeCl, and take two 
to five hours to work versus 15 to 20 minutes for those containing 
MeCl. Another commenter supported the EPA's proposal to allow the 
facility to determine whether a MeCl-based product was appropriate for 
the particular paint stripping task. They provided a comment that 
quotes from the preamble to the proposed rule that the evaluation 
criteria in the management plan would involve ``only using MeCl-
containing paint stripper when an alternative on site stripper

[[Page 1750]]

method or material is incapable of accomplishing the work as determined 
by the operator.''
    Response: The rule does not limit or ban the use of MeCl-based 
paint strippers. The rule also does not say when a facility can use or 
cannot use MeCl-based paint strippers. Instead, the rule encourages 
operations to think of ideas specific to their operation where 
alternative stripping technologies can be employed. The facility has 
the obligation to determine whether and when it can most effectively 
substitute alternative technologies for MeCl-containing stripper. In 
some cases a facility may find that MeCl strippers may currently be the 
only feasible choice; however, in other cases these strippers may 
currently be used as a matter of routine and suitable alternatives can 
be used instead.
    The basis of the rule is to consider, and when possible, to use 
alternative stripping techniques. There are situations where 
alternative stripping methods can be employed successfully. Examples of 
alternative techniques for wood include sanding off the top layers of 
paint and using a smaller amount of MeCl-containing stripper to remove 
the remaining paint. Another would be to sand the flat surfaces and use 
the MeCl-containing stripper to remove the paint from only certain 
areas such as carvings or joinings.

D. Authority To Regulate Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations

    Comment: A commenter argued that plastic parts and product surface 
coating should not be listed as an area source of the specific heavy 
metals in urban areas. The commenter stated that the major source rule 
for plastic parts surface coating (40 CFR Part 63 subpart PPPP) did not 
regulate heavy metal emissions and did not require the use of spray 
booths. The commenter also stated that heavy metals were not mentioned 
in the proposed or final major source rule. The commenter also 
contended that the listing of plastic parts and products was not 
consistent with EPA's stated policy for listing sources of HAP (64 FR 
38720, July 19, 1999) and heavy metal HAP (64 FR 38722). The commenter 
further stated that the analysis in the preamble to the proposed area 
source rule indicates that plastic part surface coating sources account 
for only about 700 pounds a year, or between 0.15 percent and 0.33 
percent of total area source heavy metal emissions. The commenter 
requested EPA to change the listing decision and remove plastic parts 
coating operations from the rule.
    Response: The listing and regulation of plastic parts and products 
(surface coating) for the targeted metal HAP is consistent with CAA 
requirements. Sections 112(c) and 112(k) of the CAA instruct EPA to 
identify and list area source categories accounting for at least 90 
percent of the emissions of the 30 listed HAP (referred to as ``urban 
HAP'') (64 FR 38706, July 19, 1999). One of the listed area source 
categories is plastic parts and products (surface coatings). The 
commenter provides no information indicating that this listing was 
inappropriate.
    In the 1999 final urban air toxics strategy notice, we listed 16 
area source categories including paint stripping. Each of these 
categories accounted for at least 15 percent of at least one of the 30 
urban HAP. See 64 FR at 38720. But, as indicated in that notice, the 
initial list of area source categories did not account for 90 percent 
of several of the HAP, including six metal HAP (64 FR 38722, July 19, 
1999). That notice announced EPA's intent to study additional area 
source categories and complete the list of area source categories by 
2003.
    In June 2002, we listed several additional area source categories 
including autobody refinishing (67 FR 43122, June 26, 2002). That 
listing, however, still did not meet the requirement to list area 
sources representing 90 percent of the area source emissions of each of 
the 30 HAP. In the urban air toxics strategy, EPA indicated we would be 
adding additional area source categories as necessary to meet the 90 
percent requirement.
    Consequently, in November 2002, we listed 23 additional area source 
categories including plastic parts and products (surface coating) (67 
FR 70428, November 22, 2002). Each of these listed categories 
contributes some percentage of emissions of one or more of the 30 urban 
HAP. The plastic parts and products (surface coating) area source 
category was listed for cadmium, chromium, lead compounds, manganese, 
and nickel compounds. In order to meet the 90 percent requirement for 
each of the 30 urban HAP, we had to list many categories that 
individually contributed only a small percent of the target HAP.
    This history and the CAA requirements for area sources explain why 
the metal urban HAP are the target of the surface coating portion of 
this area source rule. We are required during rule development to 
regulate emissions of the target urban HAP from surface coating area 
sources. Under section 112(d) area source regulations may be based on 
GACT rather than MACT, which is required for major sources. In this 
rule we have established emissions standards that represent GACT for 
the source categories. The commenter has provided no information 
questioning the GACT determination in the proposed rule.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the rule should not regulate 
surface coating on metal parts and products as part of the 
miscellaneous surface coating source category because it was not listed 
as an area source category. The commenter noted that the category 
included in the final notice for the list of source categories in 
November 2002\2\ was ``plastic parts and products (surface coating).'' 
The commenter also noted that the description of this source category 
in supporting documents for that listing includes industrial 
classification codes only for plastic parts and products. However, the 
commenter notes that the standard industrial classification code for 
miscellaneous metal surface coating (SIC 3479) was included in the 
source category description for ``autobody refinishing paint shops.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 67 FR 70427 (November 22, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: The EPA's decision to list plastic parts and product 
(surface coating) as an area source category was based on analysis of 
emissions data from over 20 different SIC codes that represent 
manufacturers of parts and products that contain both metal and plastic 
substrates. These included, for example, architectural metal work; 
games, toys, and childrens' vehicles; motor homes; motor vehicle parts 
and accessories; motor cycles, bicycles, and parts; musical 
instruments; transportation equipment not elsewhere classified; and 
truck and bus bodies. These analyses were documented in ``1990 
EMISSIONS INVENTORY OF FORTY POTENTIAL Sec.  112(k) POLLUTANTS, 
SUPPORTING DATA FOR EPA'S Sec.  112(k) REGULATORY STRATEGY, Final 
Report'' (May 21, 1999). A copy of the relevant portions of this 
document has been included in the docket for this final rulemaking.
    Since the analysis of the inventory included a broad sampling of 
both metal and plastic surface coating that were identified as sources 
of the target HAP, the EPA is regulating both metal and plastic surface 
coating operations in the final rule. To more accurately reflect the 
scope of the regulated operation, we refer to them in the final rule as 
``miscellaneous surface coating operations'' and describe them more 
completely in the applicability section of the final rule.

[[Page 1751]]

E. Basis of Surface Coating Standards

    Comment: Some commenters believed that the requirements for spray 
booths and painter training, particularly applied to very small 
miscellaneous surface coating operations and those that apply coatings 
to large parts or subassemblies, are beyond GACT. Some commenters 
suggested that EPA should collect additional information on the types 
of spray equipment and practices being used, coatings being employed, 
and product rates at small sources. They claim that the requirements 
for spraying automotive coatings do not necessarily carry over well to 
the miscellaneous surface coating operations. Other commenters 
supported the proposed standards as GACT.
    Response: The EPA disagrees that spray booths and painter training 
are beyond GACT for sources using coatings containing the target HAP. 
The analyses performed in support of the proposed rule demonstrate that 
painter training and filtered spray booths are both commonly employed 
by miscellaneous surface coating sources of all sizes.
    However, the EPA has revised the proposed rule such that painter 
training and spray booths are only required for miscellaneous surface 
coating operations that spray apply coatings that contain the target 
HAP. Miscellaneous surface coating operations that do not use coatings 
that contain the target HAP will not be subject to these requirements. 
However, all motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating 
operations would still be subject to the requirements of the final 
rule.

F. Training Requirements

    Comment: Several commenters felt that the training standards could 
be interpreted to apply to all painters, and those standards should 
only apply to spray coating operations. Painters in non-spray coating 
operations should not be required to complete training. Other 
commenters noted that training would not benefit the operators of 
automated or robotic surface coating operations, and these operations 
should be exempt from the training requirements.
    Response: The rule has been clarified, as suggested by several 
commenters, to clearly apply only to painters that spray apply coatings 
using hand-held devices. Painters using brushes and rollers, and other 
non-spray application methods, are not subject to the training 
requirements. In addition, all automated and robotic surface coating 
operations are not required to meet these requirements since these 
operations are not considered part of the intended source category. 
Automated operations are typically performed in a booth, are part of a 
production line operation with similar, if not identical, parts, and 
often result in high transfer efficiency.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that painting is an art form not 
possessed by everyone and a test and certification should not be used 
to dictate who works as a painter. Another painter asked whether the 
rule would include a grandfather clause that would exempt experienced 
painters based on their length of time in the business or years 
experience painting. One commenter suggested that retraining every five 
years is not needed because of the daily experience of painting.
    Response: The EPA agrees that spray painting is a skill that is not 
easily mastered, and that shop owners will avoid hiring and keeping 
poorly performing spray painters. However, information collected by EPA 
in development of the proposed rule has shown that even experienced 
spray painters can improve their transfer efficiency and reduce 
emissions and paint consumption through appropriate training. 
Therefore, the final rule retains the training requirement for all 
spray painters at motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating 
operations, and for all spray painters that use coatings containing the 
target HAP at miscellaneous surface coating facilities.
    The final rule will allow painters who have completed formal 
training in the past five years to use that training to demonstrate 
compliance. Refresher training is retained in the final rule since it 
is important to ensure that painter techniques do not revert back to 
those that were used before training, and also so painters can be 
brought up to date on current technologies.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the rule should allow 180 
days after hiring for new painters to be trained, instead of 60 days, 
as well as for new painters at existing facilities.
    Response: The EPA agrees and the rule has been revised to allow 180 
days after hiring, or after completing a transfer within a facility to 
a painting job, for new painters to complete the prescribed training.
    Comment: Several commenters were concerned about the availability 
of training and the suitability of training for the particular type of 
surface coating that they perform, or the type of workforce they have. 
Some commenters noted that their painters may not speak English, or be 
able to perform well in a typical classroom setting or in a testing 
environment. In these cases, a formal certification may be difficult 
for their painters to achieve. One commenter noted that inmates 
participating in prison industries could not be sent to outside 
training. Other commenters were concerned that training should not be 
limited to any one type of program or it could create a limited market 
of providers and costs may not be affordable for small shops. They 
suggested that the rule language should be more specific about the 
criteria that would indicate a training program meets the minimum 
requirements.
    Response: The EPA agrees that training should not be limited to any 
one provider or a small number of providers, and should be available 
and affordable for all sizes and types of shops. The final rule 
includes additional detail on the training requirements so that 
alternative training programs can be developed that meet the minimum 
requirements and meet the particular needs of different types of shops. 
For example, the EPA recognizes that some larger employers may wish to 
develop in-house training programs that are focused on the materials, 
products, and procedures used at a particular facility.
    The final rule does not specify that any one training provider or 
program must be used. The final rule allows flexibility for the best 
training environment and certification process that an owner or 
operator can identify for their particular work site that meets the 
requirements in the final rule. The training requirements have been 
revised to allow for in-house training programs and for successful 
completion of a training program to be certified by the owner of the 
facility.
    Comment: Several commenters suggested that if the EPA is expecting 
industry to provide certification or training programs, the rule should 
make provisions for a certifying agency or program certification 
procedures. One commenter asked whether training programs would need to 
meet a set of standards, and whether a manufacturer, trade school, or 
consultant would be required to submit curriculum to EPA for prior 
approval. Another commenter recommended that training programs used to 
meet this regulation should be validated or certified by an independent 
clearinghouse. The commenter suggested that EPA should delegate this 
responsibility to a proven program that has a history of developing and 
providing paint technician training, since the EPA does not have the 
necessary painting experience to do this.
    Response: The EPA does not believe that it is necessary to 
establish or designate a body to certify or approve training programs 
to comply with the requirements in the final rule. The final

[[Page 1752]]

rule includes sufficient detail on the training requirements so that 
training programs can be developed that meet the minimum requirements. 
The EPA feels that painters and the shops that employ them are the most 
appropriate judge of different training programs, due primarily to the 
economic benefit they can realize through good training. Since the shop 
owner or the painter will need to absorb the initial cost of training 
(even though it should represent a coating cost savings in the long 
run), it will be up to painters and shops to identify and evaluate 
training programs that best meet the requirements of the final rule and 
which seem to be the best investment of their time and resources. To 
the extent that additional guidance on the training requirements in the 
final rule is needed, the EPA will work with all affected parties to 
develop that guidance.

G. Spray Gun Requirements

    Comment: Several commenters state that a number of spray coating 
applications cannot be accomplished using HVLP, electrostatic guns, or 
equivalent techniques. Two commenters stated that EPA determined during 
the development of the NESHAP for Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework 
Facilities (40 CFR 63, subpart GG) and other major NESHAP rules that 
high solids coatings cannot be applied using HVLP, or equivalent 
methods.
    Response: The final rule includes the same exemptions from the HVLP 
requirements for aerospace manufacturing and rework facilities as 
subpart GG. The rule was revised to exempt any situation that normally 
requires the use of an airbrush or an extension on the spray gun to 
properly reach limited access spaces; the application of coatings that 
contain fillers that adversely affect atomization with HVLP spray guns, 
and the application of coatings that normally have a dried film 
thickness of less than 0.0013 centimeter (0.0005 in.). The technical 
basis for these allowances for aerospace surface coating operations was 
established in the development of subpart GG. Since there is no 
technical difference between these aerospace surface coating operations 
at area and major sources (aside from the relative size of these 
operations), the EPA is including the same allowance in the final rule 
as found in subpart GG.
    Comment: Several commenters requested that airless and air-assisted 
airless spray guns should be considered equally efficient and 
equivalent to HVLP, and requested that EPA treat airless spray 
equivalent to HVLP for the purpose of this rule. One commenter stated 
that airless spray operations are very common for most miscellaneous 
parts surface coating operations and should be considered as a viable 
and authorized option.
    Another commenter provided an example of a structural steel 
facility that uses a high viscosity, high solids coating as being an 
operation that could not employ HVLP spray guns. The commenter stated 
that such operations generally use airless spray guns to apply high-
viscosity, high solids primers.
    Another commenter stated that while HVLP spray guns and gravity fed 
supply lines are well suited for the automotive refinishing industry, 
pressure fed application equipment is best suited and typically used in 
other miscellaneous sectors. Other sectors use coatings that have 
characteristics much different from automotive coatings. Quite often, 
these coatings are higher in viscosity because of higher solids 
content, compared to automotive coatings.
    Response: The final rule requires that miscellaneous surface 
coating operations are only required to employ HVLP, or equivalent, 
spray guns if they are spraying coatings that contain the target HAP. 
Motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating operations must use 
HVLP or equivalent spray guns for all surface coating. The rule was 
also revised to allow airless and air-assisted airless spray guns as 
alternatives to HVLP. Airless and air-assisted airless spray guns are 
used in some applications instead of HVLP spray guns because they are 
more suited to spraying higher solids coating, such as in the 
fabrication of large structural steel components, and in applying 
coatings to ships and other marine items. In these cases, HVLP spray 
guns are not feasible because of the viscosity of the coating, and 
airless and air assisted airless spray guns are the most efficient 
means to spray apply these coatings.

H. Spray Booths

    Comment: Several commenters stated that requiring spray booths is 
not practical, realistic, or economically feasible for some facilities 
performing coating on work pieces that are too large to fit in a booth 
such as large structural metal work pieces, fixed equipment, structural 
steel, and large mobile equipment.
    Several commenters also stated that requiring spray booths for 
these types of operations would make the rule more stringent than the 
MACT rules for the corresponding industries. One commenter provides an 
offshore drilling rig as an example of mobile equipment that is too 
large for a spray booth. Two commenters requested that the rule include 
an exemption for the surface coating of oversized parts.
    Response: The proposed rule was revised so that it does not apply 
to miscellaneous surface coating operations that do not spray apply 
coatings that contain the target HAP. The proposed rule was also 
revised to clarify that it does not apply to facility maintenance of 
fixed equipment and architectural surface coating of stationary 
structures.
    The final rule has not been revised to specifically exempt the 
surface coating of large objects from the spray booth requirement. 
However, the surface coating of large objects would not be subject to 
the requirements of the final rule if the coatings that are spray 
applied do not contain the target HAP, the surface coating operation of 
the object met the definition of facility maintenance, or the surface 
coating was done using non-spray application methods. The EPA believes 
that the surface coating situations described by the commenters 
involving large objects all fall into at least one of these categories. 
Therefore, they would not be subject to the requirement to use a spray 
booth and an exemption for large objects is not specifically required 
by the information provided by the commenters.
    Comment: Three commenters expressed concern regarding the language 
requiring negative pressure paint booths. The reason for this concern 
is that for critical finishes, such as automotive surface coating, 
negative pressure may cause airborne dust and dirt to be drawn into the 
booth and mar the finish. As a result, downdraft paint booths used for 
automotive surface coating are usually ventilated at slight positive 
pressure so that contaminants are kept out of the booth, although door 
seals and filtration systems are still used to protect air quality. One 
commenter suggested that in applications that require a dust/dirt free 
finish, and where the spray booth is totally sealed and the booth 
control system utilizes an automatic pressure balance system, spray 
booths should be allowed to operate at up to, but not more than, 0.05 
inches water gauge positive pressure.
    Response: The final rule was revised to allow for downdraft spray 
booths that are balanced at slight positive air pressure and 
incorporates the recommended language. The EPA observed several spray 
booths of this configuration during site visits in the development of 
this rule and agrees that with appropriate door seals and filtration 
systems these booths are as

[[Page 1753]]

protective of the environment as booths operated at negative pressure.
    Comment: Several commenters stated that the EPA has understated the 
impacts of the proposed requirement to use a spray booth for all spray 
finishing operations. The commenters noted that EPA did not assign any 
costs to the requirement to use a spray booth because the EPA had 
assumed that spray booths would already be required in order to comply 
with OSHA standards for spray finishing operations under 29 CFR 
1910.94(c). The commenters argued that OSHA standards require a spray 
booth only if certain exposure conditions are met, and these exposure 
conditions can be avoided with, for example, the use of waterborne 
coatings or outdoor spraying operations. Other examples of spray 
coating operations that can be conducted outside of a filtered spray 
booth in compliance with OSHA include automotive undercoating, areas of 
low coating use with adequate ventilation, powder coating, waterborne 
products, and touch-up and repair coating.
    Response: The EPA acknowledges that there are situations in which 
OSHA does not require surface coating to be performed in a filtered 
spray booth. That being noted, the rule was revised to clarify that the 
scope of the source category does not include miscellaneous surface 
coating operations if the coating being used does not contain the 
target HAP, facility maintenance surface coating and other 
architectural surface coating of stationary structures, powder coating 
and the spray application of coatings from a spray gun with a cup size 
equal to or less than 3.0 fluid ounces (89 cc). Given the clarified 
scope of the surface coating operations that are subject to the spray 
booth requirements in the final rule, the EPA believes that there is a 
substantial overlap between the operations that would be performed in a 
spray booth to comply with OSHA standards for spray finishing 
operations and those that would be required to do so by this rule. 
Therefore, the EPA does not believe that we have substantially 
underestimated the cost of the final rule.
    Comment: Two commenters pointed out that EPA did not address 
enclosing automated or robotic spray systems in a spray booth. One 
commenter stated that the costs for doing so could be very high and 
requested that EPA exempt all fixed point automatic spray installations 
from this rule.
    Another commenter stated that the proposed rule did not include 
language that addressed spray booth configurations with openings for 
conveyor lines that carry parts through a booth. The commenter 
suggested that the openings for conveyors would be equal to no more 
than the area of the open face of a three-sided spray booth.
    Response: The rule was revised to clarify that automated or robotic 
spray operations were not considered within the scope of the source 
category, as the source categories for surface coating were intended to 
cover coating that is spray applied using hand-held devices.
    The EPA acknowledges that miscellaneous surface coating operations 
may be spray applying coatings that contain the target HAP using 
conveyor line configurations, and the rule was revised to account for 
openings needed on side walls and roofs of spray booths to accommodate 
the conveyor lines.
    Comment: One commenter noted that spot repairs on automobiles can 
be performed using commercially available portable extraction systems. 
One such system consists of a ring that is placed around the area to be 
repaired. The ring is hollow and is attached to a ventilation system so 
that air and overspray are drawn into the ring placed around the area 
being repaired. The commenter asked whether this would be an acceptable 
alternative to a spray booth for small spot repairs.
    Response: The EPA reviewed the product information cited by the 
commenter and agrees that portable or mobile enclosures and extraction 
systems such as the one cited by the commenter are reasonable 
alternatives to a full size paint booth for small repairs. The paint 
booth requirements in the final rule have been revised to allow for the 
use of portable enclosures and extraction systems that can be used to 
enclose only the area being refinished in a spot repair. The enclosure 
would still need to be ventilated so that air is drawn into and paint 
overspray is captured by the enclosure, and it would also need to meet 
the same requirements for spray booth filters as full size spray 
booths.

I. Spray Booth Filters

    Comment: Several commenters stated that requiring facilities to 
demonstrate compliance by testing for filter efficiency places an undue 
burden on any facility attempting to use a more efficient filter. 
Vendor guarantees or specifications should be sufficient for 
compliance.
    Response: It was the intent of EPA that filter specifications or 
filter performance data provided by the filter manufacturer would 
suffice for the purpose of compliance in the proposed rule. The final 
rule clarifies that records of manufacturer specifications or vendor 
supplied or published data are sufficient for demonstrating compliance 
with the filter efficiency requirement. Operators are not expected to 
have to perform the test since it is usually done by the filter 
vendors.
    Comment: One commenter stated that waterwash filters were not 
discussed in the proposed rule. The commenter requested that EPA assess 
the acceptability of water wash booths as a control technology for 
overspray.
    Response: The final rule was revised to state that waterwash spray 
booths will be acceptable for the purposes of complying with the rule 
as long as they are used and maintained according to manufacturer 
specifications and consistent with good air pollution control 
practices. Although many waterwash spray booths have been replaced or 
retrofitted with dry filters, there are some applications where 
waterwash spray booths are still the most practical technology to 
control paint overspray. Since EPA believes that properly operated and 
maintained waterwash spray booths are nearly as efficient as required 
by this rule for dry filters and it would not be cost-effective to 
require retrofitting with dry filters, considering the potential 
limited increase in capture efficiency, the final rule provides for the 
use of waterwash spray booths, but requires that they be operated and 
maintained according to the manufacturer's specifications.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the paint overspray filter 
criteria are inconsistent. The commenter requests that if 98 percent 
overspray filter efficiency is the criteria, then it should be required 
for all paint overspray filters. The commenter speculated that by 
stating in the regulation that any fiberglass or polyester filter is 
acceptable, the practice of using cheap, low efficiency furnace filters 
could grow. The commenter suggested that specifying a minimum filter 
efficiency of any medium would be more effective at reducing 
particulate emissions.
    Response: The final rule was revised so all spray booth dry 
filters, regardless of media, are required to meet the 98 percent 
efficiency standard. The rule was also revised to clarify that records 
of manufacturer's specifications or filter performance data are 
sufficient for demonstrating compliance with this performance level.

J. Spray Gun Washers

    Comment: One commenter stated that the need for enclosed spray gun 
washers may be over emphasized since the intent of the rule is to 
prohibit the atomization of solvent through the gun into the air. 
Although the proposed rule

[[Page 1754]]

indicates that spray equipment may be dismantled and cleaned in lieu of 
a gun washer system, this alternative seems overshadowed by the gun 
wash option and may be lost in the rule interpretation. Other 
commenters reported that some commercially available enclosed gun 
washers were less efficient and more difficult to use and maintain than 
simply disassembling a spray gun and cleaning it by hand in a container 
of solvent.
    Two commenters stated that the rule should allow for equipment to 
be cleaned by spraying a non-HAP containing solvent through the 
applicator outside of an enclosed gun washer.
    Response: The final rule was revised to clarify that if washing a 
gun, an affected facility is prohibited from spraying cleaning solvent 
through the gun in a way that creates an atomized mist that is not 
captured. The intent of this requirement is to prevent the emission of 
the target HAP that is in the paint residue that remains in the spray 
gun. The EPA agrees that an enclosed gun washer is not needed to meet 
this objective. To comply, you may, for example, clean a disassembled 
gun by hand in a bucket or vat, flush solvent through the gun without 
atomizing it and capturing the solvent in an enclosed container, or use 
an enclosed manual or automatic gun washer. The final rule does not 
require the use of an enclosed gun washer, but identifies an enclosed 
gun washer as one compliance option in addition to the other options 
suggested by the commenters.

K. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Compliance

    Comment: A commenter felt that it would be more suitable for 
sources to keep the MeCl minimization plan for paint stripping 
operations on site rather than submitting it to the State and EPA. They 
stated that States and EPA would not have the time or resources 
necessary to review the plans, and that they were unsure what kind of 
review/approval process should be used. Another commenter stated that 
since the proposed standard imposes management practices rather than 
emissions limits, it is not clear what aspect of their compliance 
activity sources would need to report. They suggest that beyond the 
initial report, the only reporting that should be necessary would be a 
change in status relative to the threshold level for developing a MeCl 
minimization plan.
    Response: The development and implementation of the MeCl 
minimization plan is designed to reduce MeCl usage and emissions at the 
facility level. In the proposed rule, the requirement to submit the 
MeCl minimization plan was included to ensure that there would be 
oversight of facilities' plans. However, EPA understands the 
commenter's point that the value of submitting them to the State or EPA 
would likely not offset the burden of time and resources for submittal 
and review. As a result, the final rule was revised so that it does not 
require facilities to submit their plans to State or local agencies, or 
the EPA. The final rule requires them to keep their plans on site and 
to include a statement in their initial notification or notification of 
compliance that they have developed their plans and met the 
requirements associated with the MeCl minimization plan. The final rule 
also includes a requirement for facilities to review their plans 
annually and to make changes as appropriate based on their experiences 
in the previous year. Documentation of this review will also replace 
the proposed rule requirement to submit annual compliance reports to 
the permitting authority. While the final rule does not require 
submission of the MeCl minimization plan, facilities that are required 
to develop plans must still submit an initial notification and a 
notification of compliance, and meet annual MeCl minimization plan 
review, revision, and recordkeeping requirements.
    Comment: One commenter indicated the annual reporting time and 
costs appeared to be underestimated unless simple materials are 
developed to help streamline the efforts of small businesses to 
complete this reporting. The commenter predicted that small businesses 
would spend closer to 15 hours or more to develop something on their 
own and to compile all the information alone would probably take six to 
eight hours. If a small business owner tries to minimize his or her 
time spent on the report, they would have to hire a consultant at $100 
per hour or more. The consultant may take just six hours to complete 
the work, but that total cost would be $600 instead of $219, according 
to the commenter. Other commenters also indicated that the reporting 
burden had been underestimated.
    Some commenters questioned whether EPA had considered the cost to 
EPA, State, and local implementing agencies to perform outreach and 
assist sources to comply, receive initial notifications, conduct field 
inspections, and process annual certifications.
    Some commenters also said that initial notifications, compliance 
status notifications, and annual compliance reports would place an 
undue burden on facilities and State agencies. One commenter suggested 
allowing sources to maintain records of compliance on site and make 
them available upon request for local, State, or Federal inspection 
without submission of annual reports. Another suggested the following 
for autobody refinishing shops: Combine the initial notification with 
the notification of compliance status, eliminate the annual reports, 
keep file copies of training certifications for currently employed 
painters, eliminate some other records including records of deviations, 
and possibly the requirement to keep records for five years.
    Response: The EPA has revised the rule to reduce the notification 
and reporting burden to sources and the burden to State and local 
agencies receiving the notifications and reports, while still retaining 
information needed to implement and enforce the rule. In particular, 
the final rule does not require facilities to submit annual compliance 
reports. Therefore, after the one-time initial notification and 
notification of compliance status (if needed), there will be no regular 
annual reporting burden to sources, and the implementing agencies will 
not need to review and track thousands of annual compliance reports. 
Sources will only need to submit a report if there is a change in the 
information contained in the initial notification, notification of 
compliance status, or a previous annual notification of changes report. 
This is a reasonable approach that reduces the burden on regulated 
sources, but provides EPA and delegated States with necessary 
compliance information. If there are no changes in a given year, the 
report would be identical to what was previously submitted, either in 
an earlier annual report, in the initial notification, or in the 
notification of compliance status. Therefore, EPA believes it is 
appropriate to require a report only if the relevant information has 
changed.
    Sources will still be required to submit an initial notification 
that they are subject to the rule. The notification contains a very 
brief description of the operation that is subject to the rule; 
however, the type of information that should be included is minimal, 
clearly explained in the rule, and should be readily available to the 
owners and operators of motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface 
coating shops, or miscellaneous surface coating operations.
    The initial notification is needed so that implementing agencies 
will have a list of sources that are subject to the rule and will know 
with which part of the

[[Page 1755]]

rules each source must comply (e.g., surface coating or paint 
stripping). This is necessary so that implementing agencies can target 
outreach, inspection, and enforcement efforts.
    In addition, sources will continue to be required to keep the 
proposed records to demonstrate compliance. These records are limited 
to painter certification records, documentation of spray booth filter 
efficiencies (which are expected to be supplied by the manufacturer), 
documentation from spray gun manufacturers (only if the source is using 
a spray gun other than the types listed in the rule), records of usage 
of paint strippers containing MeCl, and records of deviations from the 
rule requirements. The content of the required records is clearly 
explained in the rule, and the records can be kept in whatever format 
is easiest for the shop (hard copies or electronic). These records are 
the minimum level of information needed for an inspector to determine 
if a source is complying with the rules.
    The EPA has not reduced the amount of time that records must be 
retained. The records that must be retained are minimal and reducing 
the time they are kept from five years to two years would not affect 
the burden of storing these minimal records. In addition, the longer 
record period is the minimum needed to verify compliance with the 
training requirements since refresher training is needed every five 
years. The longer record period is also needed to ensure that paint 
stripping sources that have to complete a MeCl minimization plan are 
consistently reviewing and updating the plan on an annual basis.

L. Cost and Economic Impacts

    Comment: Several commenters said that the number of area sources 
that perform miscellaneous surface coating is much larger than EPA 
estimated. These estimates were based on the number of miscellaneous 
surface coating sources known to regulatory agencies in different 
States. The commenters estimated that the total number of sources 
subject to the rule could be about 200,000 nationwide, and many of 
these could be small businesses. Another commenter believed that EPA 
has not met the criteria needed to certify that there will not be a 
``significant impact on a substantial number of small entities'' 
(SISNOSE) as needed under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) and has 
underestimated the cost and economic impacts because the rule would 
require many sources to install spray booths and obtain operator 
training.
    Response: The EPA agrees that the number of sources that could have 
been affected by the proposed rule, if interpreted to apply to all 
miscellaneous surface coating operations, was higher than estimated at 
proposal. However, the EPA has revised the final rule to clarify the 
intended sources to which it would apply, and to reduce the actual 
number of affected sources subject to the rule. Miscellaneous surface 
coating facilities that do not spray apply coatings that contain the 
target HAP will not be subject to the final rule.
    The EPA believes that these changes in the final rule will more 
accurately reflect the number of sources that are potentially subject 
to the rule, and for which the proposed economic impacts were based, 
since only a fraction of miscellaneous surface coating sources use 
coatings that contain the target HAP. Based on the datasets available 
to EPA for the miscellaneous surface coating source category and 
additional information submitted by several commenters, EPA estimates 
that less than 10 percent of the total population of sources are spray 
applying coatings that contain the target HAP. In addition, many 
miscellaneous surface coating sources that are currently using coatings 
that contain the target HAP may be able to avoid being subject to the 
rule by either switching to coatings that do not contain the target 
HAP, or switching to non-spray application technology. Based on these 
changes, the EPA believes that the rule will not have an adverse impact 
on those facilities.

VI. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts

    The EPA estimates that about 39,000 establishments performing paint 
stripping, motor vehicle and mobile equipment, or miscellaneous surface 
coating operations would be subject to the final rule. We estimate that 
about 3,000 of these establishments are paint stripping facilities and 
36,000 establishments are surface coating operations. The majority of 
these surface coating establishments (about 35,000) are involved in 
motor vehicle and mobile equipment refinishing, and employ about 
263,000 people, of which about one-third are painters.

A. What are the air impacts?

Paint Stripping Operations
    The baseline MeCl emissions from paint stripping operations are 
estimated to be 3,800 tpy. Around 500 tpy is estimated to be emitted 
from the approximately 2,000 facilities that annually use paint 
stripper containing one ton of MeCl or less. The remaining 3,300 tpy is 
estimated to be emitted by the approximately 1,000 paint strippers that 
annually use paint strippers containing more than one ton of MeCl and 
who would be required to develop a MeCl minimization plan.
Miscellaneous Coating Operations
    The baseline emissions from the surface coating operations are 
estimated to be about 38,000 tpy of HAP, including 12.4 tpy of 
inorganic HAP (e.g. Pb and Cr-VI compounds). In addition to the HAP, 
baseline emissions of criteria pollutants are estimated to be 3,100 tpy 
of particulate matter (PM) from paint overspray and 120,400 tpy of 
volatile organic compounds (VOC) from coating and solvent evaporation.
    Implementation of the final standards would achieve a reduction of 
6,900 tpy of HAP from surface coating operations, including about 11.4 
tpy of inorganic HAP. In addition to the HAP, we estimate PM reductions 
of about 2,900 tpy and VOC reductions of about 20,900 tpy. These 
reductions would occur as a result of reduced use of HAP-containing 
solvents and coatings, increased use of filtered spray booths to 
capture overspray, increased spray painter training, and use of HVLP or 
equivalent guns to improve transfer efficiency and to reduce coating 
overspray and paint consumption. Additional detail on these 
calculations are included in the public docket for this rulemaking.

B. What are the cost impacts?

Paint Stripping Operations
    We estimate that the final standards for paint stripping operations 
will result in an initial cost of around $1,500,000 and a net savings 
in annual costs. This includes an estimated initial cost of $490,000 
and annual costs of $80,000 for the nearly 2,000 paint strippers who 
annually use paint stripper containing one ton of MeCl or less. Initial 
costs for the approximately 1,000 paint strippers who annually use 
paint strippers containing more than one ton of MeCl, who would be 
required to develop MeCl minimization plans, are estimated to be just 
over $1 million. The annual costs for those plants are estimated to be 
a net savings of $910,000.
    For the nearly 2,000 paint strippers who annually use paint 
strippers containing one ton of MeCl or less, switching to alternative 
non-MeCl paint stripping methods comprise most of the costs.
    The costs for the approximately 1,000 paint strippers who are 
required to develop MeCl minimization plans are attributable to the 
development and implementation of the MeCl

[[Page 1756]]

minimization plan. Annual costs will include an estimated $400,000 for 
the development and implementation of the MeCl minimization plan and an 
estimated $450,000 associated with switching paint stripping 
technologies. Annual savings resulting from the implementation of the 
MeCl minimization plan include an estimated $420,000 from the 
elimination of unnecessary stripping operations and $1,320,000 in 
management practice savings from the reduced use of MeCl-containing 
strippers. Additional detail on these calculations are included in the 
public docket for this rulemaking.
Miscellaneous Coating Operations
    We estimate that the final standards for surface coating operations 
will have no net annual cost to surface coating operations. The initial 
cost of complying with the final standards would be off-set and 
recovered over time by cost savings as a result of more efficient use 
of labor and materials by surface coating operations. The initial costs 
for surface coating operations are for purchasing improved spray booth 
filters, HVLP or equivalent spray guns, and painter training, if needed 
to comply with the final standards.
    Spray finishing operations are already required by OSHA standards 
to perform spray painting in a spray booth or similar enclosure. 
However, the final standards specify that certain types of filters have 
to be used on the spray booth exhaust to minimize HAP emissions, and 
these filters are not addressed by OSHA standards. Some surface coating 
sources may need to replace their current filters for ones with higher 
paint overspray capture efficiency, but the higher efficiency filters 
are readily available and will not result in an additional cost.
    The estimated cost for training is $1,000 per painter, which covers 
tuition cost and labor cost for 16 hours of training time. Based on the 
United States census data collected to estimate new sources for this 
source category the number of refinishing shops in the United States 
remain constant (i.e., for every new shop, a shop closes) and it is 
expected that this trend will continue in the future. This reflects on 
the number of new painters that would need training. We assumed that 
training certification would be valid for five years, so about one-
fifth of painters (20 percent) would receive training every year. We 
estimate that about 18,000 painters would be trained per year at an 
annual cost of $18 million per year.
    However, EPA believes that these training costs could be over-
stated for at least two reasons. First, many facilities already send 
their painters to training sponsored by paint companies and trade 
organizations. Paint companies sponsor painter training so that the 
paint company can reduce warranty claims on their paint products. These 
training courses already cover much of the same material required by 
the final rule. Therefore, the rule would not impose new training costs 
on these facilities that already participate in training.
    Second, the estimated training cost could be offset by reduced 
coating costs if the training results in reduced coating consumption. 
Data from the STAR[reg] training programs indicate that painters who 
complete this training can decrease the amount of coating sprayed by 
about 20 percent per job. We estimate that if a typical facility 
reduced their coating consumption and costs by about four percent per 
year, the cost savings would equalize the increased cost of training 
after one year, and there would be no net cost in training. To recover 
the cost of training over five years, a typical facility would need to 
reduce their coating consumption by slightly less than one percent.
    In summary, EPA estimates that the final requirements for surface 
coating operations would not result in any net increase in annual costs 
from the control requirements for surface coating operations. We 
estimated that the annual cost for recordkeeping and reporting for 
surface coating operations would be $7.8 million for about 36,000 
surface coating operations, or an average of about $220 per facility. 
Cost estimates are based on the information available to the 
Administrator and presented in the economic analysis of this rule. 
Additional detail is included in the public docket for this rulemaking.

C. What are the economic impacts?

    The economic impact analysis focuses on changes in market prices 
and output levels. A more detailed discussion of the economic impacts 
is presented in the economic impact analysis memorandum that is 
included in the docket.
    Both the magnitude of control costs needed to comply with the rule 
and the distribution of these costs among affected facilities can have 
a role in determining how the market prices and quantities will change 
in response to the rule. In this case, we have so many facilities that 
model facilities must be used in the cost analysis. The cost analysis 
estimates that there will be no net increase in annual costs from the 
control requirements from the final regulation for surface coating 
operations. The record keeping and reporting costs are estimated to 
range from $76 to $95 per facility per year.
    These costs are too small to have any significant market impact. 
Whether the costs are absorbed by the affected facilities or passed on 
to the purchaser in the form of higher prices, the impacts would be 
quite small.
    The cost analysis estimates that there will be a net cost savings 
from the control requirements, recordkeeping, and reporting from the 
final regulation for paint stripping for all but the smallest model 
plant. The cost for the smallest model plant is estimated to be $11 a 
year.
    Again, these costs are too small to have any significant market 
impact. Whether the costs are absorbed by the affected facilities or 
passed on to the purchaser in the form of higher prices, the impacts 
would be quite small.
    While most of these facilities are small, the very small costs are 
not expected to be even a tenth of a percent of revenues. Thus a 
significant impact is not expected for a substantial number of small 
entities.

D. What are the non-air health, environmental, and energy impacts?

Paint Stripping Operations
    We estimate that there will be a reduction in non-air health and 
environmental impacts resulting from the paint stripping area source 
NESHAP. Reduced usage of MeCl-containing chemical strippers will result 
in reduction in waste water generated from rinsing chemically stripped 
pieces. Additionally, reduced chemical stripping activity will result 
in a reduction in the generation of hazardous wastes composed of rags 
and other chemical stripper applicators and removal equipment.
    EPA expects some increase in the need for energy resulting from 
switching away from MeCl-containing chemical strippers to other paint 
stripping methods. There would be a slight increase in energy usage 
associated with switching to other chemical strippers that do not 
contain MeCl because they often need to be heated above room 
temperature to be most effective. There is also some increase in energy 
usage associated with non-manual mechanical stripping and blasting with 
both dry and wet media.
    The energy usage increase would be somewhat more for thermal 
decomposition or cryogenic paint stripping technologies. Thermal 
decomposition basically uses natural gas heated ovens to bake the paint 
off the substrate. Cryogenic paint stripping methods have increased 
electricity demands associated with the production

[[Page 1757]]

of liquid nitrogen or liquid carbon dioxide.
Surface Coating Operations
    We estimated that about 5,000 surface coating operations, primarily 
motor vehicle refinishing operations, would need to install spray 
booths to comply with the final standards. Spray booths would need 
electricity to run fans and natural gas to heat make-up air to maintain 
facility temperatures in colder weather. We estimate that this would 
lead to an increased electricity consumption of 9.8 million kilowatt 
hours per year and increased natural gas consumption of 724 million 
cubic feet per year. However, spray booths are already required for 
spray finishing operations to comply with OSHA standards, so these 
impacts would not be assigned to these final standards.
    Facilities that install spray booths would also need to dispose of 
used spray booth filters. These are often placed in a sealed drum to 
prevent spontaneous combustion and disposed of as hazardous waste. We 
estimate that 5,000 new spray booths could generate used filters equal 
to about 8,000 drums per year.
    We expect no increase in generation of wastewater or other water 
quality impacts. None of the control measures considered for this rule 
generates a wastewater stream.
    The installation of spray booths and increased worker training in 
the proper use and handling of coating materials should reduce worker 
exposure to harmful chemicals in the workplace. This should have a 
positive benefit on worker health, but this benefit cannot be 
quantified in the scope of this rulemaking.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), 
this action is a ``significant regulatory action.'' Accordingly, EPA 
submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for 
review under EO 12866 and any changes made in response to OMB 
recommendations have been documented in the docket for this action.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this rule have been 
submitted for approval to the OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The information collection requirements are not 
enforceable until OMB approves them.
    The information collection requirements are based on notification, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General 
Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all 
operators subject to national emission standards. These recordkeeping 
and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by CAA section 
114 (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information submitted to EPA pursuant to the 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a claim of 
confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to Agency policies set 
forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
    The standards would require sources to submit an initial 
notification that they are subject to the standards, submit a 
notification of whether or not the source is in compliance (the 
notification of compliance status) and keep records needed to 
demonstrate compliance. These requirements would be the minimum needed 
to ensure that sources were complying with the requirements of the 
rule.
    EPA estimates that about 40,000 existing area sources would be 
subject to the standards. EPA also estimates that about 1,600 new 
facilities would open per year in the three years following 
promulgation of the standards, but that the total number of facilities 
would remain constant as new facilities replace facilities that have 
closed.
    New and existing sources would have no capital costs associated 
with the information collection requirements in the standards.
    The estimated recordkeeping and reporting burden in the third year 
after the effective date of the promulgated rule is estimated to be 
62,877 labor hours at a cost of $2.2 million. This estimate includes, 
depending on the type of source, the cost of keeping records of paint 
stripping solvent consumption, painter training, spray booth filter 
efficiency, and spray gun transfer efficiency. The average hours and 
cost per facility would be 6.4 hours and $219.
    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 in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When this ICR is 
approved by OMB, the Agency will publish a technical amendment to 40 
CFR part 9 in the Federal Register to display the OMB control number 
for the approved information collection requirements contained in this 
final rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For the purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small 
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that meets 
the Small Business Administration size standards for small businesses 
found 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; and (3) a small 
organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this final rule on small 
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The small 
entities directly regulated by this final rule are small businesses, 
small governmental jurisdictions and small non-profits. There will not 
be significant adverse impacts on existing area sources in any of the 
three source categories because the rule creates minimal burden for 
existing sources associated primarily with notification and reporting 
requirements, as the best management or equipment practices are 
designed to recover initial cost. EPA has determined that the cost of 
these requirements (estimated at less than $100 per year per facility) 
would not result in a significant adverse economic

[[Page 1758]]

impact on any facility, large or small (i.e., the cost is less than one 
percent of total revenues, even for small businesses).
    Although this final rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless, has 
tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities. The 
standards represent practices and controls that are common throughout 
the sources engaged in paint stripping and surface coating. The 
standards also require minimal amount of recordkeeping and reporting 
needed to demonstrate and verify compliance. These standards were 
developed in consultation with numerous individual small businesses and 
their representative trade associations.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, established 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 the proposed and final rule with ``Federal mandates'' 
that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 
million or more in any one year. Before promulgating a 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.
    EPA has determined that this 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 one year. This decision is based on discussions with 
State, local, and tribal governments during site visits. Thus, this 
rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the 
UMRA.
    EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory 
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments. Some State, local, or tribal governments have paint 
stripping and/or surface coating operations (e.g., municipal fleet 
vehicle maintenance garages) that may be subject to the requirements of 
this rule. However, EPA does not believe that any of them are operated 
by small government entities. Small government entities are expected to 
contract for vehicle refinishing services when these services are 
needed, rather than doing this work in-house. In addition, total 
expenditures for all entities to comply with the rule are estimated to 
be less than $100 million in any year.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order (EO) 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 EO 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.''
    This 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 EO 13132. The EPA is required by CAA section 112, to 
establish the standards in the rule. The rule primarily affects private 
industry, and does not impose significant economic costs on State or 
local governments. In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and 
consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and 
State and local governments, EPA specifically solicited comment on the 
proposed rule from State and local officials.

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

    Executive Order (EO) 13175, entitled ``Consultation and 
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (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.'' This final rule 
does not have tribal implications, as specified in EO 13175. It will 
not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, or the 
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified in EO 13175. Thus, EO 13175 
does not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order (EO) 13045: ``Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 
applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically 
significant'' as defined under EO 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 Agency 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 EO 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 Order has the potential to 
influence the regulation. This rule is not subject to EO 13045 because 
it is based on technology performance and not on health or safety 
risks.

H. 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

[[Page 1759]]

energy. Some of the affected sources would be expected to install and 
operate spray booths to comply with the rule and these would require 
electricity and natural gas to operate. However the increased use of 
energy by these sources would not have a significant effect on the 
supply, distribution, or use of energy.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    As noted in the proposed rule, section 12(d) of the National 
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (Pub. L. 104-
113, 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. The 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.
    This rulemaking involves technical standards. Therefore the EPA 
conducted searches to identify potential voluntary consensus standards. 
However, we identified no such standards and none were brought to our 
attention in comments. The search and review results are in the docket 
for this rule. Therefore EPA has decided to use the following:
    (1) the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Method 52.1, ``Gravimetric and Dust-
Spot Procedures for Testing Air-Cleaning Devices Used in General 
Ventilation for Removing Particulate Matter, June 4, 1992,'' to measure 
paint booth filter efficiency to measure the capture efficiency of 
paint overspray arrestors with spray-applied coatings
    (2) California South Coast Air Quality Management District's 
(SCAQMD) methods: ``Spray Equipment Transfer Efficiency Test Procedure 
For Equipment User, May 24, 1989'' and ``Guidelines for Demonstrating 
Equivalency with District Approved Transfer Efficient Spray Guns, 
September 26, 2002'' as methods to demonstrate the equivalency of spray 
gun transfer efficiency for spray guns that do not meet the definition 
of HVLP or electrostatic spray.
    Under Sec.  63.7(f) and Sec.  63.8(f) of subpart A of the General 
Provisions, a source may apply to EPA for permission to use alternative 
test methods or alternative monitoring requirements in place of any 
required testing methods, performance specifications, or procedures.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes 
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this final rule will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it increases the 
level of environmental protection for all affected populations without 
having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects on any population, including any minority or low-
income population. The rule establishes national standards for air 
quality that apply equally to all affected sources, whether or not they 
are located in or near minority or low-income populations. Hence there 
are no requirements in this rule that would disproportionately affect 
these populations.

K. 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. The EPA will submit a report containing 
this final rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the 
U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the 
United States prior to publication of the final rule 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). This final rule will be effective on 
January 9, 2008.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous 
substances, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: December 14, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code 
of 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 A--[Amended]

0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraph (d) introductory text 
and adding new paragraphs (d)(7) and (d)(8) and (l)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.14  Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (d) State and Local Requirements. The materials listed below are 
available at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. 
EPA, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC. Additionally, the California South 
Coast Air Quality Management District materials are available at http://www.aqmd.gov/permit/spraytransferefficiency.html
.

* * * * *
    (7) California South Coast Air Quality Management District's 
``Spray Equipment Transfer Efficiency Test Procedure for Equipment 
User, May 24, 1989'', IBR approved for Sec.  63.11173(e)(3).
    (8) California South Coast Air Quality Management District's 
``Guidelines for Demonstrating Equivalency with District Approved 
Transfer Efficient Spray Guns, September 26, 2002'', IBR approved for 
Sec.  63.11173(e)(3).
* * * * *
    (l) The following materials are available for purchase from the 
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning 
Engineers at 1791 Tullie Circle, NE., Atlanta, GA 30329 or by 
electronic mail at orders@ashrae.org:
    (1) American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers Method 52.1, ``Gravimetric and Dust-Spot 
Procedures for Testing Air-Cleaning Devices Used in General Ventilation 
for Removing Particulate Matter, June 4, 1992'', IBR approved for Sec.  
63.11173(e)(2)(i).
* * * * *
0
3. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart HHHHHH consisting of Sec. Sec.  
63.11169 through 63.11180 and table 1 to read as follows:

[[Page 1760]]

Subpart HHHHHH National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants: Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating 
Operations at Area Sources

What This Subpart Covers

Sec.
63.11169 What is the purpose of this subpart?
63.11170 Am I subject to this subpart?
63.11171 How do I know if my source is considered a new source or an 
existing source?

General Compliance Requirements

63.11172 When do I have to comply with this subpart?
63.11173 What are my general requirements for complying with this 
subpart?
63.11174 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?

Notifications, Reports, and Records

63.11175 What notifications must I submit?
63.11176 What reports must I submit?
63.11177 What records must I keep?
63.11178 In what form and for how long must I keep my records?

Other Requirements and Information

63.11179 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
63.11180 What definitions do I need to know?

Table to Subpart HHHHHH of Part 63

Table 1 to Subpart HHHHHH of Part 63--Applicability of General 
Provisions to Subpart HHHHHH of Part 63

Subpart HHHHHH--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants: Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating 
Operations at Area Sources

What This Subpart Covers


Sec.  63.11169  What is the purpose of this subpart?

    Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, this subpart 
establishes national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants 
(HAP) for area sources involved in any of the activities in paragraphs 
(a) through (c) of this section. This subpart also establishes 
requirements to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the 
emission standards contained herein.
    (a) Paint stripping operations that involve the use of chemical 
strippers that contain methylene chloride (MeCl), Chemical Abstract 
Service number 75092, in paint removal processes;
    (b) Autobody refinishing operations that encompass motor vehicle 
and mobile equipment spray-applied surface coating operations;
    (c) Spray application of coatings containing compounds of chromium 
(Cr), lead (Pb), manganese (Mn), nickel (Ni), or cadmium (Cd), 
collectively referred to as the target HAP to any part or product made 
of metal or plastic, or combinations of metal and plastic that are not 
motor vehicles or mobile equipment.
    (d) This subpart does not apply to any of the activities described 
in paragraph (d)(1) through (6) of this section.
    (1) Surface coating or paint stripping performed on site at 
installations owned or operated by the Armed Forces of the United 
States (including the Coast Guard and the National Guard of any such 
State), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, or the 
National Nuclear Security Administration.
    (2) Surface coating or paint stripping of military munitions, as 
defined in Sec.  63.11180, manufactured by or for the Armed Forces of 
the United States (including the Coast Guard and the National Guard of 
any such State) or equipment directly and exclusively used for the 
purposes of transporting military munitions.
    (3) Surface coating or paint stripping performed by individuals on 
their personal vehicles, possessions, or property, either as a hobby or 
for maintenance of their personal vehicles, possessions, or property. 
This subpart also does not apply when these operations are performed by 
individuals for others without compensation. An individual who spray 
applies surface coating to more than two motor vehicles or pieces of 
mobile equipment per year is subject to the requirements in this 
subpart that pertain to motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface 
coating regardless of whether compensation is received.
    (4) Surface coating or paint stripping that meets the definition of 
``research and laboratory activities'' in Sec.  63.11180.
    (5) Surface coating or paint stripping that meets the definition of 
``quality control activities'' in Sec.  63.11180.
    (6) Surface coating or paint stripping activities that are covered 
under another area source NESHAP.


Sec.  63.11170  Am I subject to this subpart?

    (a) You are subject to this subpart if you operate an area source 
of HAP as defined in paragraph (b) of this section, including sources 
that are part of a tribal, local, State, or Federal facility and you 
perform one or more of the activities in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) 
of this section:
    (1) Perform paint stripping using MeCl for the removal of dried 
paint (including, but not limited to, paint, enamel, varnish, shellac, 
and lacquer) from wood, metal, plastic, and other substrates.
    (2) Perform spray application of coatings, as defined in Sec.  
63.11180, to motor vehicles and mobile equipment including operations 
that are located in stationary structures at fixed locations, and 
mobile repair and refinishing operations that travel to the customer's 
location, except spray coating applications that meet the definition of 
facility maintenance in Sec.  63.11180. However, if you are the owner 
or operator of a motor vehicle or mobile equipment surface coating 
operation, you may petition the Administrator for an exemption from 
this subpart if you can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the 
Administrator, that you spray apply no coatings that contain the target 
HAP, as defined in Sec.  63.11180. Petitions must include a description 
of the coatings that you spray apply and your certification that you do 
not spray apply any coatings containing the target HAP. If 
circumstances change such that you intend to spray apply coatings 
containing the target HAP, you must submit the initial notification 
required by 63.11175 and comply with the requirements of this subpart.
    (3) Perform spray application of coatings that contain the target 
HAP, as defined in Sec.  63.11180, to a plastic and/or metal substrate 
on a part or product, except spray coating applications that meet the 
definition of facility maintenance or space vehicle in Sec.  63.11180.
    (b) An area source of HAP is a source of HAP that is not a major 
source of HAP, is not located at a major source, and is not part of a 
major source of HAP emissions. 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 emit any combination of HAP at a rate of 
22.68 Mg (25 tons) or more per year.


Sec.  63.11171  How do I know if my source is considered a new source 
or an existing source?

    (a) This subpart applies to each new and existing affected area 
source engaged in the activities listed in Sec.  63.11170, with the 
exception of those activities listed in Sec.  63.11169(d) of this 
subpart.
    (b) The affected source is the collection of all of the items 
listed in paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) of this section. Not all 
affected sources will have all of the items listed in paragraphs (b)(1) 
through (6) of this section.
    (1) Mixing rooms and equipment;

[[Page 1761]]

    (2) Spray booths, ventilated prep stations, curing ovens, and 
associated equipment;
    (3) Spray guns and associated equipment;
    (4) Spray gun cleaning equipment;
    (5) Equipment used for storage, handling, recovery, or recycling of 
cleaning solvent or waste paint; and
    (6) Equipment used for paint stripping at paint stripping 
facilities using paint strippers containing MeCl.
    (c) An affected source is a new source if it meets the criteria in 
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section.
    (1) You commenced the construction of the source after September 
17, 2007 by installing new paint stripping or surface coating 
equipment. If you purchase and install spray booths, enclosed spray gun 
cleaners, paint stripping equipment to reduce MeCl emissions, or 
purchase new spray guns to comply with this subpart at an existing 
source, these actions would not make your existing source a new source.
    (2) The new paint stripping or surface coating equipment is used at 
a source that was not actively engaged in paint stripping and/or 
miscellaneous surface coating prior to September 17, 2007.
    (d) An affected source is reconstructed if it meets the definition 
of reconstruction in Sec.  63.2.
    (e) An affected source is an existing source if it is not a new 
source or a reconstructed source.

General Compliance Requirements


Sec.  63.11172  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) and (b) of this section.
    (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 after September 17, 2007, the compliance date is January 9, 
2008.
    (2) If the initial startup of your new or reconstructed affected 
source occurs after January 9, 2008, the compliance date is the date of 
initial startup of your affected source.
    (b) For an existing affected source, the compliance date is January 
10, 2011.


Sec.  63.11173  What are my general requirements for complying with 
this subpart?

    (a) Each paint stripping operation that is an affected area source 
must implement management practices to minimize the evaporative 
emissions of MeCl. The management practices must address, at a minimum, 
the practices in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section, as 
applicable, for your operations.
    (1) Evaluate each application to ensure there is a need for paint 
stripping (e.g., evaluate whether it is possible to re-coat the piece 
without removing the existing coating).
    (2) Evaluate each application where a paint stripper containing 
MeCl is used to ensure that there is no alternative paint stripping 
technology that can be used.
    (3) Reduce exposure of all paint strippers containing MeCl to the 
air.
    (4) Optimize application conditions when using paint strippers 
containing MeCl to reduce MeCl evaporation (e.g., if the stripper must 
be heated, make sure that the temperature is kept as low as possible to 
reduce evaporation).
    (5) Practice proper storage and disposal of paint strippers 
containing MeCl (e.g., store stripper in closed, air-tight containers).
    (b) Each paint stripping operation that has annual usage of more 
than one ton of MeCl must develop and implement a written MeCl 
minimization plan to minimize the use and emissions of MeCl. The MeCl 
minimization plan must address, at a minimum, the management practices 
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section, as 
applicable, for your operations. Each operation must post a placard or 
sign outlining the MeCl minimization plan in each area where paint 
stripping operations subject to this subpart occur. Paint stripping 
operations with annual usage of more than one ton of MeCl, must comply 
with the management practices in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this 
section, as applicable, but are not required to develop and implement a 
written MeCl minimization plan.
    (c) Each paint stripping operation must maintain copies of annual 
usage of paint strippers containing MeCl on site at all times.
    (d) Each paint stripping operation with annual usage of more than 
one ton of MeCl must maintain a copy of their current MeCl minimization 
plan on site at all times.
    (e) Each motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating 
operation and each miscellaneous surface coating operation must meet 
the requirements in paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(5) of this section.
    (1) All painters must be certified that they have completed 
training in the proper spray application of surface coatings and the 
proper setup and maintenance of spray equipment. The minimum 
requirements for training and certification are described in paragraph 
(f) of this section. The spray application of surface coatings is 
prohibited by persons who are not certified as having completed the 
training described in paragraph (f) of this section. The requirements 
of this paragraph do not apply to the students of an accredited surface 
coating training program who are under the direct supervision of an 
instructor who meets the requirements of this paragraph.
    (2) All spray-applied coatings must be applied in a spray booth, 
preparation station, or mobile enclosure that meets the requirements of 
paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section and either paragraph (e)(2)(ii), 
(e)(2)(iii), or (e)(2)(iv) of this section.
    (i) All spray booths, preparation stations, and mobile enclosures 
must be fitted with a type of filter technology that is demonstrated to 
achieve at least 98-percent capture of paint overspray. The procedure 
used to demonstrate filter efficiency must be consistent with the 
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning 
Engineers (ASHRAE) Method 52.1, ``Gravimetric and Dust-Spot Procedures 
for Testing Air-Cleaning Devices Used in General Ventilation for 
Removing Particulate Matter, June 4, 1992'' (incorporated by reference, 
see Sec.  63.14 of subpart A of this part). The test coating for 
measuring filter efficiency shall be a high solids bake enamel 
delivered at a rate of at least 135 grams per minute from a 
conventional (non-HVLP) air-atomized spray gun operating at 40 pounds 
per square inch (psi) air pressure; the air flow rate across the filter 
shall be 150 feet per minute. Owners and operators may use published 
filter efficiency data provided by filter vendors to demonstrate 
compliance with this requirement and are not required to perform this 
measurement. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply to 
waterwash spray booths that are operated and maintained according to 
the manufacturer's specifications.
    (ii) Spray booths and preparation stations used to refinish 
complete motor vehicles or mobile equipment must be fully enclosed with 
a full roof, and four complete walls or complete side curtains, and 
must be ventilated at negative pressure so that air is drawn into any 
openings in the booth walls or preparation station curtains. However, 
if a spray booth is fully enclosed and has seals on all doors and other 
openings and has an automatic pressure balancing system, it may be 
operated at up to, but

[[Page 1762]]

not more than, 0.05 inches water gauge positive pressure.
    (iii) Spray booths and preparation stations that are used to coat 
miscellaneous parts and products or vehicle subassemblies must have a 
full roof, at least three complete walls or complete side curtains, and 
must be ventilated so that air is drawn into the booth. The walls and 
roof of a booth may have openings, if needed, to allow for conveyors 
and parts to pass through the booth during the coating process.
    (iv) Mobile ventilated enclosures that are used to perform spot 
repairs must enclose and, if necessary, seal against the surface around 
the area being coated such that paint overspray is retained within the 
enclosure and directed to a filter to capture paint overspray.
    (3) All spray-applied coatings must be applied with a high volume, 
low pressure (HVLP) spray gun, electrostatic application, airless spray 
gun, air-assisted airless spray gun, or an equivalent technology that 
is demonstrated by the spray gun manufacturer to achieve transfer 
efficiency comparable to one of the spray gun technologies listed above 
for a comparable operation, and for which written approval has been 
obtained from the Administrator. The procedure used to demonstrate that 
spray gun transfer efficiency is equivalent to that of an HVLP spray 
gun must be equivalent to the California South Coast Air Quality 
Management District's ``Spray Equipment Transfer Efficiency Test 
Procedure for Equipment User, May 24, 1989'' and ``Guidelines for 
Demonstrating Equivalency with District Approved Transfer Efficient 
Spray Guns, September 26, 2002'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  
63.14 of subpart A of this part). The requirements of this paragraph do 
not apply to painting performed by students and instructors at paint 
training centers. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply to 
the surface coating of aerospace vehicles that involves the coating of 
components that normally require the use of an airbrush or an extension 
on the spray gun to properly reach limited access spaces; to the 
application of coatings on aerospace vehicles that contain fillers that 
adversely affect atomization with HVLP spray guns; or to the 
application of coatings on aerospace vehicles that normally have a 
dried film thickness of less than 0.0013 centimeter (0.0005 in.).
    (4) All paint spray gun cleaning must be done so that an atomized 
mist or spray of gun cleaning solvent and paint residue is not created 
outside of a container that collects used gun cleaning solvent. Spray 
gun cleaning may be done with, for example, hand cleaning of parts of 
the disassembled gun in a container of solvent, by flushing solvent 
through the gun without atomizing the solvent and paint residue, or by 
using a fully enclosed spray gun washer. A combination of non-atomizing 
methods may also be used.
    (5) As provided in Sec.  63.6(g), we, the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, may choose to grant you permission to use an 
alternative to the emission standards in this section after you have 
requested approval to do so according to Sec.  63.6(g)(2).
    (f) Each owner or operator of an affected miscellaneous surface 
coating source must ensure and certify that all new and existing 
personnel, including contract personnel, who spray apply surface 
coatings, as defined in Sec.  63.11180, are trained in the proper 
application of surface coatings as required by paragraph (e)(1) of this 
section. The training program must include, at a minimum, the items 
listed in paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(3) of this section.
    (1) A list of all current personnel by name and job description who 
are required to be trained;
    (2) Hands-on and classroom instruction that addresses, at a 
minimum, initial and refresher training in the topics listed in 
paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through (2)(iv) of this section.
    (i) Spray gun equipment selection, set up, and operation, including 
measuring coating viscosity, selecting the proper fluid tip or nozzle, 
and achieving the proper spray pattern, air pressure and volume, and 
fluid delivery rate.
    (ii) Spray technique for different types of coatings to improve 
transfer efficiency and minimize coating usage and overspray, including 
maintaining the correct spray gun distance and angle to the part, using 
proper banding and overlap, and reducing lead and lag spraying at the 
beginning and end of each stroke.
    (iii) Routine spray booth and filter maintenance, including filter 
selection and installation.
    (iv) Environmental compliance with the requirements of this 
subpart.
    (3) A description of the methods to be used at the completion of 
initial or refresher training to demonstrate, document, and provide 
certification of successful completion of the required training. Owners 
and operators who can show by documentation or certification that a 
painter's work experience and/or training has resulted in training 
equivalent to the training required in paragraph (f)(2) of this section 
are not required to provide the initial training required by that 
paragraph to these painters.
    (g) As required by paragraph (e)(1) of this section, all new and 
existing personnel at an affected motor vehicle and mobile equipment or 
miscellaneous surface coating source, including contract personnel, who 
spray apply surface coatings, as defined in Sec.  63.11180, must be 
trained by the dates specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this 
section. Employees who transfer within a company to a position as a 
painter are subject to the same requirements as a new hire.
    (1) If your source is a new source, all personnel must be trained 
and certified no later than 180 days after hiring or no later than July 
7, 2008, whichever is later. Painter training that was completed within 
five years prior to the date training is required, and that meets the 
requirements specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this section satisfies 
this requirement and is valid for a period not to exceed five years 
after the date the training is completed.
    (2) If your source is an existing source, all personnel must be 
trained and certified no later than 180 days after hiring or no later 
than January 10, 2011, whichever is later. Painter training that was 
completed within five years prior to the date training is required, and 
that meets the requirements specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this 
section satisfies this requirement and is valid for a period not to 
exceed five years after the date the training is completed.
    (3) Training and certification will be valid for a period not to 
exceed five years after the date the training is completed, and all 
personnel must receive refresher training that meets the requirements 
of this section and be re-certified every five years.


Sec.  63.11174  What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?

    (a) Table 1 of this subpart shows which parts of the General 
Provisions in subpart A apply to you.
    (b) If you are an owner or operator of an area source subject to 
this subpart, you are exempt from the obligation to obtain a permit 
under 40 CFR part 70 or 71, provided you are not required to obtain a 
permit under 40 CFR 70.3(a) or 71.3(a) for a reason other than your 
status as an area source under this subpart. Notwithstanding the 
previous sentence, you must continue to comply with the provisions of 
this subpart applicable to area sources.

[[Page 1763]]

Notifications, Reports, and Records


Sec.  63.11175  What notifications must I submit?

    (a) Initial Notification. If you are the owner or operator of a 
paint stripping operation using paint strippers containing MeCl and/or 
a surface coating operation subject to this subpart, you must submit 
the initial notification required by Sec.  63.9(b). For a new affected 
source, you must submit the Initial Notification no later than 180 days 
after initial startup or July 7, 2008, whichever is later. For an 
existing affected source, you must submit the initial notification no 
later than January 11, 2010. The initial notification must provide the 
information specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (8) of this section.
    (1) The company name, if applicable.
    (2) The name, title, street address, telephone number, e-mail 
address (if available), and signature of the owner and operator, or 
other certifying company official;
    (3) The street address (physical location) of the affected source 
and the street address where compliance records are maintained, if 
different. If the source is a motor vehicle or mobile equipment surface 
coating operation that repairs vehicles at the customer's location, 
rather than at a fixed location, such as a collision repair shop, the 
notification should state this and indicate the physical location where 
records are kept to demonstrate compliance;
    (4) An identification of the relevant standard (i.e., this subpart, 
40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHH);
    (5) A brief description of the type of operation as specified in 
paragraph (a)(5)(i) or (ii) of this section.
    (i) For all surface coating operations, indicate whether the source 
is a motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating operation or a 
miscellaneous surface coating operation, and include the number of 
spray booths and preparation stations, and the number of painters 
usually employed at the operation.
    (ii) For paint stripping operations, identify the method(s) of 
paint stripping employed (e.g., chemical, mechanical) and the 
substrates stripped (e.g., wood, plastic, metal).
    (6) Each paint stripping operation must indicate whether they plan 
to annually use more than one ton of MeCl after the compliance date.
    (7) A statement of whether the source is already in compliance with 
each of the relevant requirements of this subpart, or whether the 
source will be brought into compliance by the compliance date. For 
paint stripping operations, the relevant requirements that you must 
evaluate in making this determination are specified in Sec.  
63.11173(a) through (d) of this subpart. For surface coating 
operations, the relevant requirements are specified in Sec.  
63.11173(e) through (g) of this subpart.
    (8) If your source is a new source, you must certify in the initial 
notification whether the source is in compliance with each of the 
requirements of this subpart. If your source is an existing source, you 
may certify in the initial notification that the source is already in 
compliance. If you are certifying in the initial notification that the 
source is in compliance with the relevant requirements of this subpart, 
then include also a statement by a responsible official with that 
official's name, title, phone number, e-mail address (if available) and 
signature, certifying the truth, accuracy, and completeness of the 
notification, a statement that the source has complied with all the 
relevant standards of this subpart, and that this initial notification 
also serves as the notification of compliance status.
    (b) Notification of Compliance Status. If you are the owner or 
operator of a new source, you are not required to submit a separate 
notification of compliance status in addition to the initial 
notification specified in paragraph (a) of this subpart provided you 
were able to certify compliance on the date of the initial 
notification, as part of the initial notification, and your compliance 
status has not since changed. If you are the owner or operator of any 
existing source and did not certify in the initial notification that 
your source is already in compliance as specified in paragraph (a) of 
this section, then you must submit a notification of compliance status. 
You must submit a Notification of Compliance Status on or before March 
11, 2011. You are required to submit the information specified in 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section with your Notification of 
Compliance Status:
    (1) Your company's name and the street address (physical location) 
of the affected source and the street address where compliance records 
are maintained, if different.
    (2) The name, title, address, telephone, e-mail address (if 
available) and signature of the owner and operator, or other certifying 
company official, certifying the truth, accuracy, and completeness of 
the notification and a statement of whether the source has complied 
with all the relevant standards and other requirements of this subpart 
or an explanation of any noncompliance and a description of corrective 
actions being taken to achieve compliance. For paint stripping 
operations, the relevant requirements that you must evaluate in making 
this determination are specified in Sec.  63.11173(a) through (d). For 
surface coating operations, the relevant requirements are specified in 
Sec.  63.11173(e) through (g).
    (3) The date of the Notification of Compliance Status.
    (4) If you are the owner or operator of an existing affected paint 
stripping source that annually uses more than one ton of MeCl, you must 
submit a statement certifying that you have developed and are 
implementing a written MeCl minimization plan in accordance with Sec.  
63.11173(b).


Sec.  63.11176  What reports must I submit?

    (a) Annual Notification of Changes Report. If you are the owner or 
operator of a paint stripping, motor vehicle or mobile equipment, or 
miscellaneous surface coating affected source, you are required to 
submit a report in each calendar year in which information previously 
submitted in either the initial notification required by Sec.  
63.11175(a), Notification of Compliance, or a previous annual 
notification of changes report submitted under this paragraph, has 
changed. Deviations from the relevant requirements in Sec.  63.11173(a) 
through (d) or Sec.  63.11173(e) through (g) on the date of the report 
will be deemed to be a change. This includes notification when paint 
stripping affected sources that have not developed and implemented a 
written MeCl minimization plan in accordance with Sec.  63.11173(b) 
used more than one ton of MeCl in the previous calendar year. The 
annual notification of changes report must be submitted prior to March 
1 of each calendar year when reportable changes have occurred and must 
include the information specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (2) of 
this section.
    (1) Your company's name and the street address (physical location) 
of the affected source and the street address where compliance records 
are maintained, if different.
    (2) The name, title, address, telephone, e-mail address (if 
available) and signature of the owner and operator, or other certifying 
company official, certifying the truth, accuracy, and completeness of 
the notification and a statement of whether the source has complied 
with all the relevant standards and other requirements of this subpart 
or an explanation of any noncompliance and a description of corrective 
actions being taken to achieve compliance.
    (b) If you are the owner or operator of a paint stripping affected 
source that has

[[Page 1764]]

not developed and implemented a written MeCl minimization plan in 
accordance with Sec.  63.11173(b) of this subpart, you must submit a 
report for any calendar year in which you use more than one ton of 
MeCl. This report must be submitted no later than March 1 of the 
following calendar year. You must also develop and implement a written 
MeCl minimization plan in accordance with Sec.  63.11173(b) no later 
than December 31. You must then submit a Notification of Compliance 
Status report containing the information specified in Sec.  63.11175(b) 
by March 1 of the following year and comply with the requirements for 
paint stripping operations that annually use more than one ton of MeCl 
in Sec. Sec.  63.11173(d) and 63.11177(f).


Sec.  63.11177  What records must I keep?

    If you are the owner or operator of a surface coating operation, 
you must keep the records specified in paragraphs (a) through (d) and 
(g) of this section. If you are the owner or operator of a paint 
stripping operation, you must keep the records specified in paragraphs 
(e) through (g) of this section, as applicable.
    (a) Certification that each painter has completed the training 
specified in Sec.  63.11173(f) with the date the initial training and 
the most recent refresher training was completed.
    (b) Documentation of the filter efficiency of any spray booth 
exhaust filter material, according to the procedure in Sec.  
63.11173(e)(3)(i).
    (c) Documentation from the spray gun manufacturer that each spray 
gun with a cup capacity equal to or greater than 3.0 fluid ounces (89 
cc) that does not meet the definition of an HVLP spray gun, 
electrostatic application, airless spray gun, or air assisted airless 
spray gun, has been determined by the Administrator to achieve a 
transfer efficiency equivalent to that of an HVLP spray gun, according 
to the procedure in Sec.  63.11173(e)(4).
    (d) Copies of any notification submitted as required by Sec.  
63.11175 and copies of any report submitted as required by Sec.  
63.11176.
    (e) Records of paint strippers containing MeCl used for paint 
stripping operations, including the MeCl content of the paint stripper 
used. Documentation needs to be sufficient to verify annual usage of 
paint strippers containing MeCl (e.g., material safety data sheets or 
other documentation provided by the manufacturer or supplier of the 
paint stripper, purchase receipts, records of paint stripper usage, 
engineering calculations).
    (f) If you are a paint stripping source that annually uses more 
than one ton of MeCl you are required to maintain a record of your 
current MeCl minimization plan on site for the duration of your paint 
stripping operations. You must also keep records of your annual review 
of, and updates to, your MeCl minimization plan.
    (g) Records of any deviation from the requirements in Sec. Sec.  
63.11173, 63.11174, 63.11175, or 63.11176. These records must include 
the date and time period of the deviation, and a description of the 
nature of the deviation and the actions taken to correct the deviation.
    (h) Records of any assessments of source compliance performed in 
support of the initial notification, notification of compliance status, 
or annual notification of changes report.


Sec.  63.11178  In what form and for how long must I keep my records?

    (a) If you are the owner or operator of an affected source, you 
must maintain copies of the records specified in Sec.  63.11177 for a 
period of at least five years after the date of each record. Copies of 
records must be kept on site and in a printed or electronic form that 
is readily accessible for inspection for at least the first two years 
after their date, and may be kept off-site after that two year period.

Other Requirements and Information


Sec.  63.11179  Who implements and enforces this subpart?

    (a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by us, the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), or a delegated authority such as 
your State, local, or tribal agency. If the Administrator has delegated 
authority to your State, local, or tribal agency, then that agency (as 
well as the EPA) has the authority to implement and enforce this 
subpart. You should contact your EPA Regional Office to find out if 
implementation and enforcement of this subpart is delegated to your 
State, local, or tribal agency.
    (b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this 
subpart to a State, local, or tribal agency under subpart E of this 
part, the authorities contained in paragraph (c) of this section are 
retained by the Administrator and are not transferred to the State, 
local, or tribal agency.
    (c) The authority in Sec.  63.11173(e)(5) will not be delegated to 
State, local, or tribal agencies.


Sec.  63.11180  What definitions do I need to know?

    Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air Act, in 40 
CFR 63.2, and in this section as follows:
    Additive means a material that is added to a coating after purchase 
from a supplier (e.g., catalysts, activators, accelerators).
    Administrator means, for the purposes of this rulemaking, the 
Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the State 
or local agency that is granted delegation for implementation of this 
subpart.
    Aerospace vehicle or component means any fabricated part, processed 
part, assembly of parts, or completed unit, with the exception of 
electronic components, of any aircraft including but not limited to 
airplanes, helicopters, missiles, rockets, and space vehicles.
    Airless and air-assisted airless spray mean any paint spray 
technology that relies solely on the fluid pressure of the paint to 
create an atomized paint spray pattern and does not apply any atomizing 
compressed air to the paint before it leaves the paint nozzle. Air-
assisted airless spray uses compressed air to shape and distribute the 
fan of atomized paint, but still uses fluid pressure to create the 
atomized paint.
    Appurtenance means any accessory to a stationary structure coated 
at the site of installation, whether installed or detached, including 
but not limited to: bathroom and kitchen fixtures; cabinets; concrete 
forms; doors; elevators; fences; hand railings; heating equipment, air 
conditioning equipment, and other fixed mechanical equipment or 
stationary tools; lamp posts; partitions; pipes and piping systems; 
rain gutters and downspouts; stairways, fixed ladders, catwalks, and 
fire escapes; and window screens.
    Architectural coating means a coating to be applied to stationary 
structures or their appurtenances at the site of installation, to 
portable buildings at the site of installation, to pavements, or to 
curbs.
    Cleaning material means a solvent used to remove contaminants and 
other materials, such as dirt, grease, or oil, 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, for the purposes of this subpart, a material spray-
applied to a substrate for decorative, protective, or functional 
purposes. For the purposes of this subpart, coating does not include 
the following materials:
    (1) Decorative, protective, or functional materials that consist 
only of protective oils for metal, acids, bases, or any combination of 
these substances.

[[Page 1765]]

    (2) Paper film or plastic film that may be pre-coated with an 
adhesive by the film manufacturer.
    (3) Adhesives, sealants, maskants, or caulking materials.
    (4) Temporary protective coatings, lubricants, or surface 
preparation materials.
    (5) In-mold coatings that are spray-applied in the manufacture of 
reinforced plastic composite parts.
    Compliance date means the date by which you must comply with this 
subpart.
    Deviation means any instance in which an affected source, subject 
to this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source fails to meet 
any requirement or obligation established by this subpart.
    Dry media blasting means abrasive blasting using dry media. Dry 
media blasting relies on impact and abrasion to remove paint from a 
substrate. Typically, a compressed air stream is used to propel the 
media against the coated surface.
    Electrostatic application means any method of coating application 
where an electrostatic attraction is created between the part to be 
coated and the atomized paint particles.
    Equipment cleaning means the use of an organic solvent to remove 
coating residue from the surfaces of paint spray guns and other 
painting related equipment, including, but not limited to stir sticks, 
paint cups, brushes, and spray booths.
    Facility maintenance means, for the purposes of this subpart, 
surface coating performed as part of the routine repair or renovation 
of the tools, equipment, machinery, and structures that comprise the 
infrastructure of the affected facility and that are necessary for the 
facility to function in its intended capacity. Facility maintenance 
also includes surface coating associated with the installation of new 
equipment or structures, and the application of any surface coating as 
part of janitorial activities. Facility maintenance includes the 
application of coatings to stationary structures or their appurtenances 
at the site of installation, to portable buildings at the site of 
installation, to pavements, or to curbs. Facility maintenance also 
includes the refinishing of mobile equipment in the field or at the 
site where they are used in service and at which they are intended to 
remain indefinitely after refinishing. Such mobile equipment includes, 
but is not limited to, farm equipment and mining equipment for which it 
is not practical or feasible to move to a dedicated mobile equipment 
refinishing facility. Such mobile equipment also includes items, such 
as fork trucks, that are used in a manufacturing facility and which are 
refinished in that same facility. Facility maintenance does not include 
surface coating of motor vehicles, mobile equipment, or items that 
routinely leave and return to the facility, such as delivery trucks, 
rental equipment, or containers used to transport, deliver, distribute, 
or dispense commercial products to customers, such as compressed gas 
canisters.
    High-volume, low-pressure (HVLP) spray equipment means spray 
equipment that is permanently labeled as such and used to apply any 
coating by means of a spray gun which is designed and operated between 
0.1 and 10 pounds per square inch gauge (psig) air atomizing pressure 
measured dynamically at the center of the air cap and at the air horns.
    Initial startup means the first time equipment is brought online in 
a paint stripping or surface coating operation, and paint stripping or 
surface coating is first performed.
    Materials that contain HAP or HAP-containing materials mean, for 
the purposes of this subpart, materials that contain 0.1 percent or 
more by mass of any individual HAP that is an OSHA-defined carcinogen 
as specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(d)(4), or 1.0 percent or more by mass 
for any other individual HAP.
    Military munitions means all ammunition products and components 
produced or used by or for the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) or for 
the U.S. Armed Services for national defense and security, including 
military munitions under the control of the Department of Defense, the 
U.S. Coast Guard, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), 
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and National Guard personnel. The term 
military munitions includes: confined gaseous, liquid, and solid 
propellants, explosives, pyrotechnics, chemical and riot control 
agents, smokes, and incendiaries used by DoD components, including bulk 
explosives and chemical warfare agents, chemical munitions, biological 
weapons, rockets, guided and ballistic missiles, bombs, warheads, 
mortar rounds, artillery ammunition, small arms ammunition, grenades, 
mines, torpedoes, depth charges, cluster munitions and dispensers, 
demolition charges, nonnuclear components of nuclear weapons, wholly 
inert ammunition products, and all devices and components of any items 
listed in this definition.
    Miscellaneous parts and/or products means any part or product made 
of metal or plastic, or combinations of metal and plastic. 
Miscellaneous parts and/or products include, but are not limited to, 
metal and plastic components of the following types of products as well 
as the products themselves: motor vehicle parts and accessories for 
automobiles, trucks, recreational vehicles; automobiles and light duty 
trucks at automobile and light duty truck assembly plants; boats; 
sporting and recreational goods; toys; business machines; laboratory 
and medical equipment; and household and other consumer products.
    Miscellaneous surface coating operation means the collection of 
equipment used to apply surface coating to miscellaneous parts and/or 
products made of metal or plastic, including applying cleaning solvents 
to prepare the surface before coating application, mixing coatings 
before application, applying coating to a surface, drying or curing the 
coating after application, and cleaning coating application equipment, 
but not plating. A single surface coating operation may include any 
combination of these types of equipment, but always includes at least 
the point at which a coating material is applied to a given part. A 
surface coating operation includes all other steps (such as surface 
preparation with solvent and equipment cleaning) in the affected source 
where HAP are emitted from the coating of a part. The use of solvent to 
clean parts (for example, to remove grease during a mechanical repair) 
does not constitute a miscellaneous surface coating operation if no 
coatings are applied. A single affected source may have multiple 
surface coating operations. Surface coatings applied to wood, leather, 
rubber, ceramics, stone, masonry, or substrates other than metal and 
plastic are not considered miscellaneous surface coating operations for 
the purposes of this subpart.
    Mobile equipment means any device that may be drawn and/or driven 
on a roadway including, but not limited to, heavy-duty trucks, truck 
trailers, fleet delivery trucks, buses, mobile cranes, bulldozers, 
street cleaners, agriculture equipment, motor homes, and other 
recreational vehicles (including camping trailers and fifth wheels).
    Motor vehicle means any self-propelled vehicle, including, but not 
limited to, automobiles, light duty trucks, golf carts, vans, and 
motorcycles.
    Motor vehicle and mobile equipment surface coating means the spray 
application of coatings to assembled motor vehicles or mobile 
equipment. For the purposes of this subpart, it does not include the 
surface coating of motor vehicle or mobile equipment parts or

[[Page 1766]]

subassemblies at a vehicle assembly plant or parts manufacturing plant.
    Non-HAP solvent means, for the purposes of this subpart, a solvent 
(including thinners and cleaning solvents) that contains less than 0.1 
percent by mass of any individual HAP that is an OSHA-defined 
carcinogen as specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(d)(4) and less than 1.0 
percent by mass for any other individual HAP.
    Paint stripping and/or miscellaneous surface coating source or 
facility means any shop, business, location, or parcel of land where 
paint stripping or miscellaneous surface coating operations are 
conducted.
    Paint stripping means the removal of dried coatings from wood, 
metal, plastic, and other substrates. A single affected source may have 
multiple paint stripping operations.
    Painter means any person who spray applies coating.
    Plastic refers to substrates containing one or more resins and may 
be solid, porous, flexible, or rigid. Plastics include fiber reinforced 
plastic composites.
    Protective oil means 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.
    Quality control activities means surface coating or paint stripping 
activities that meet all of the following criteria:
    (1) The activities associated with a surface coating or paint 
stripping operation are intended to detect and correct defects in the 
final product by selecting a limited number of samples from the 
operation, and comparing the samples against specific performance 
criteria.
    (2) The activities do not include the production of an intermediate 
or final product for sale or exchange for commercial profit; for 
example, parts that are surface coated or stripped are not sold and do 
not leave the facility.
    (3) The activities are not a normal part of the surface coating or 
paint stripping operation; for example, they do not include color 
matching activities performed during a motor vehicle collision repair.
    (4) The activities do not involve surface coating or stripping of 
the tools, equipment, machinery, and structures that comprise the 
infrastructure of the affected facility and that are necessary for the 
facility to function in its intended capacity; that is, the activities 
are not facility maintenance.
    Research and laboratory activities means surface coating or paint 
stripping activities that meet one of the following criteria:
    (1) Conducted at a laboratory to analyze air, soil, water, waste, 
or product samples for contaminants, or environmental impact.
    (2) Activities conducted to test more efficient production 
processes, including alternative paint stripping or surface coating 
materials or application methods, or methods for preventing or reducing 
adverse environmental impacts, provided that the activities do not 
include the production of an intermediate or final product for sale or 
exchange for commercial profit.
    (3) Activities conducted at a research or laboratory facility that 
is operated under the close supervision of technically trained 
personnel, the primary purpose of which is to conduct research and 
development into new processes and products and that is not engaged in 
the manufacture of products for sale or exchange for commercial profit.
    Solvent means a fluid containing organic compounds used to perform 
paint stripping, surface prep, or cleaning of surface coating 
equipment.
    Space Vehicle means vehicles designed to travel beyond the limit of 
the earth's atmosphere, including but not limited to satellites, space 
stations, and the Space Shuttle System (including orbiter, external 
tanks, and solid rocket boosters).
    Spray-applied coating operations means coatings that are applied 
using a hand-held device that creates an atomized mist of coating and 
deposits the coating on a substrate. For the purposes of this subpart, 
spray-applied coatings do not include the following materials or 
activities:
    (1) Coatings applied from a hand-held device with a paint cup 
capacity that is equal to or less than 3.0 fluid ounces (89 cubic 
centimeters).
    (2) Surface coating application using powder coating, hand-held, 
non-refillable aerosol containers, or non-atomizing application 
technology, including, but not limited to, paint brushes, rollers, hand 
wiping, flow coating, dip coating, electrodeposition coating, web 
coating, coil coating, touch-up markers, or marking pens.
    (3) Thermal spray operations (also known as metallizing, flame 
spray, plasma arc spray, and electric arc spray, among other names) in 
which solid metallic or non-metallic material is heated to a molten or 
semi-molten state and propelled to the work piece or substrate by 
compressed air or other gas, where a bond is produced upon impact.
    Surface preparation or Surface prep means use of a cleaning 
material on a portion of or all of a substrate prior to the application 
of a coating.
    Target HAP are compounds of chromium (Cr), lead (Pb), manganese 
(Mn), nickel (Ni), or cadmium (Cd).
    Target HAP containing coating means a spray-applied coating that 
contains any individual target HAP that is an Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration (OSHA)-defined carcinogen as specified in 29 CFR 
1910.1200(d)(4) at a concentration greater than 0.1 percent by mass, or 
greater than 1.0 percent by mass for any other individual target HAP 
compound. For the purpose of determining whether materials you use 
contain the target HAP compounds, you may rely on formulation data 
provided by the manufacturer or supplier, such as the material safety 
data sheet (MSDS), as long as it represents each target HAP compound in 
the material that is present at 0.1 percent by mass or more for OSHA-
defined carcinogens as specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(d)(4) and at 1.0 
percent by mass or more for other target HAP compounds.
    Transfer efficiency means the amount of coating solids adhering to 
the object being coated divided by the total amount of coating solids 
sprayed, expressed as a percentage. Coating solids means the 
nonvolatile portion of the coating that makes up the dry film.
    Truck bed liner coating means any coating, excluding color coats, 
labeled and formulated for application to a truck bed to protect it 
from surface abrasion.

[[Page 1767]]



     Table 1 to Subpart HHHHHH of Part 63.--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart HHHHHH of Part 63
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Applicable to subpart
              Citation                       Subject                    HHHHHH                  Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   63.1(a)(1)-(12).............  General Applicability.  Yes........................
Sec.   63.1(b)(1)-(3)..............  Initial Applicability   Yes........................  Applicability of
                                      Determination.                                       subpart HHHHHH is
                                                                                           also specified in
                                                                                           Sec.   63.11170.
Sec.   63.1(c)(1)..................  Applicability After     Yes........................
                                      Standard Established.
Sec.   63.1(c)(2)..................  Applicability of        Yes........................  (63.11174(b) of
                                      Permit Program for                                   Subpart HHHHHH
                                      Area Sources.                                        exempts area sources
                                                                                           from the obligation
                                                                                           to obtain Title V
                                                                                           operating permits.
Sec.   63.1(c)(5)..................  Notifications.........  Yes........................
Sec.   63.1(e).....................  Applicability of        No.........................  (63.11174(b) of
                                      Permit Program to                                    Subpart HHHHHH
                                      Major Sources Before                                 exempts area sources
                                      Relevant Standard is                                 from the obligation
                                      Set.                                                 to obtain Title V
                                                                                           operating permits.
Sec.   63.2........................  Definitions...........  Yes........................  Additional definitions
                                                                                           are specified in Sec.
                                                                                             63.11180.
Sec.   63.3(a)-(c).................  Units and               Yes........................
                                      Abbreviations.
Sec.   63.4(a)(1)-(5)..............  Prohibited Activities.  Yes........................
Sec.   63.4(b)-(c).................  Circumvention/          Yes........................
                                      Fragmentation.
Sec.   63.5........................  Construction/           No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH applies
                                      Reconstruction of                                    only to area sources.
                                      major sources.
Sec.   63.6(a).....................  Compliance With         Yes........................
                                      Standards and
                                      Maintenance
                                      Requirements--Applica
                                      bility.
Sec.   63.6(b)(1)-(7)..............  Compliance Dates for    Yes........................  Sec.   63.11172
                                      New and Reconstructed                                specifies the
                                      Sources.                                             compliance dates.
Sec.   63.6(c)(1)-(5)..............  Compliance Dates for    Yes........................  Sec.   63.11172
                                      Existing Sources.                                    specifies the
                                                                                           compliance dates.
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)-(2)..............  Operation and           Yes........................
                                      Maintenance.
Sec.   63.6(e)(3)..................  Startup, Shutdown, and  No.........................  No startup, shutdown,
                                      Malfunction Plan.                                    and malfunction plan
                                                                                           is required by
                                                                                           subpart HHHHHH.
Sec.   63.6(f)(1)..................  Compliance Except       Yes........................
                                      During Startup,
                                      Shutdown, and
                                      Malfunction.
Sec.   63.6(f)(2)-(3)..............  Methods for             Yes........................
                                      Determining
                                      Compliance.
Sec.   63.6(g)(1)-(3)..............  Use of an Alternative   Yes........................
                                      Standard.
Sec.   63.6(h).....................  Compliance With         No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      Opacity/Visible                                      not establish opacity
                                      Emission Standards.                                  or visible emission
                                                                                           standards.
Sec.   63.6(i)(1)-(16).............  Extension of            Yes........................
                                      Compliance.
Sec.   63.6(j).....................  Presidential            Yes........................
                                      Compliance Exemption.
Sec.   63.7........................  Performance Testing     No.........................  No performance testing
                                      Requirements.                                        is required by
                                                                                           subpart HHHHHH.
Sec.   63.8........................  Monitoring              No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      Requirements.                                        not require the use
                                                                                           of continuous
                                                                                           monitoring systems.
Sec.   63.9(a)-(d).................  Notification            Yes........................  Sec.   63.11175
                                      Requirements.                                        specifies
                                                                                           notification
                                                                                           requirements.
Sec.   63.9(e).....................  Notification of         No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      Performance Test.                                    not require
                                                                                           performance tests.
Sec.   63.9(f).....................  Notification of         No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      Visible Emissions/                                   not have opacity or
                                      Opacity Test.                                        visible emission
                                                                                           standards.
Sec.   63.9(g).....................  Additional              No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      Notifications When                                   not require the use
                                      Using CMS.                                           of continuous
                                                                                           monitoring systems.
Sec.   63.9(h).....................  Notification of         No.........................  Sec.   63.11175
                                      Compliance Status.                                   specifies the dates
                                                                                           and required content
                                                                                           for submitting the
                                                                                           notification of
                                                                                           compliance status.
Sec.   63.9(i).....................  Adjustment of           Yes........................
                                      Submittal Deadlines.
Sec.   63.9(j).....................  Change in Previous      Yes........................  Sec.   63.11176(a)
                                      Information.                                         specifies the dates
                                                                                           for submitting the
                                                                                           notification of
                                                                                           changes report.
Sec.   63.10(a)....................  Recordkeeping/          Yes........................
                                      Reporting--Applicabil
                                      ity and General
                                      Information.
Sec.   63.10(b)(1).................  General Recordkeeping   Yes........................  Additional
                                      Requirements.                                        requirements are
                                                                                           specified in Sec.
                                                                                           63.11177.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(i)-(xi).........  Recordkeeping Relevant  No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      to Startup, Shutdown,                                not require startup,
                                      and Malfunction                                      shutdown, and
                                      Periods and CMS.                                     malfunction plans, or
                                                                                           CMS.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(xii)............  Waiver of               Yes........................
                                      recordkeeping
                                      requirements.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(xiii)...........  Alternatives to the     No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      relative accuracy                                    not require the use
                                      test.                                                of CEMS.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(xiv)............  Records supporting      Yes........................
                                      notifications.

[[Page 1768]]


Sec.   63.10(b)(3).................  Recordkeeping           Yes........................  ......................
                                      Requirements for
                                      Applicability
                                      Determinations.
Sec.   63.10(c)....................  Additional              No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      Recordkeeping                                        not require the use
                                      Requirements for                                     of CMS.
                                      Sources with CMS.
Sec.   63.10(d)(1).................  General Reporting       Yes........................  Additional
                                      Requirements.                                        requirements are
                                                                                           specified in Sec.
                                                                                           63.11176.
Sec.   63.10(d)(2)-(3).............  Report of Performance   No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      Test Results, and                                    not require
                                      Opacity or Visible                                   performance tests, or
                                      Emissions                                            opacity or visible
                                      Observations.                                        emissions
                                                                                           observations.
Sec.   63.10(d)(4).................  Progress Reports for    Yes........................
                                      Sources With
                                      Compliance Extensions.
Sec.   63.10(d)(5).................  Startup, Shutdown, and  No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      Malfunction Reports.                                 not require startup,
                                                                                           shutdown, and
                                                                                           malfunction reports.
Sec.   63.10(e)....................  Additional Reporting    No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      requirements for                                     not require the use
                                      Sources with CMS.                                    of CMS.
Sec.   63.10(f)....................  Recordkeeping/          Yes........................
                                      Reporting Waiver.
Sec.   63.11.......................  Control Device          No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      Requirements/Flares.                                 not require the use
                                                                                           of flares.
Sec.   63.12.......................  State Authority and     Yes........................
                                      Delegations.
Sec.   63.13.......................  Addresses of State Air  Yes........................
                                      Pollution Control
                                      Agencies and EPA
                                      Regional Offices.
Sec.   63.14.......................  Incorporation by        Yes........................  Test methods for
                                      Reference.                                           measuring paint booth
                                                                                           filter efficiency and
                                                                                           spray gun transfer
                                                                                           efficiency in Sec.
                                                                                           63.11173(e)(2) and
                                                                                           (3) are incorporated
                                                                                           and included in Sec.
                                                                                            63.14.
Sec.   63.15.......................  Availability of         Yes........................
                                      Information/
                                      Confidentiality.
Sec.   63.16(a)....................  Performance Track       Yes........................
                                      Provisions--reduced
                                      reporting.
Sec.   63.16(b)-(c)................  Performance Track       No.........................  Subpart HHHHHH does
                                      Provisions--reduced                                  not establish
                                      reporting.                                           numerical emission
                                                                                           limits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[FR Doc. E7-24718 Filed 1-8-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
