[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 37 (Tuesday, February 25, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10828-10871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00303]



[[Page 10827]]

Vol. 85

Tuesday,

No. 37

February 25, 2020

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





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





40 CFR Part 63





National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Surface 
Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil Residual Risk 
and Technology Reviews; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 85 , No. 37 / Tuesday, February 25, 2020 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 10828]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0684, EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0685; FRL-10003-81-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT51


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Surface 
Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil Residual Risk 
and Technology Reviews

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final 
action on the residual risk and technology reviews (RTRs) conducted for 
the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
source categories regulated under national emission standards for 
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP). The EPA is also taking final action 
on amendments for the two source categories to address emissions during 
periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM); electronic 
reporting of performance test results and compliance reports; the 
addition of EPA Method 18 and updates to several measurement methods; 
and the addition of requirements for periodic performance testing. 
Additionally, several miscellaneous technical amendments are being made 
to improve the clarity of the rule requirements. We are making no 
revisions to the numerical emission limits for the two source 
categories based on the residual risk and technology reviews.

DATES: This final rule is effective on February 25, 2020. The 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of certain publications listed in the 
rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of February 
25, 2020.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established dockets for this action under Docket 
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0684 for 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 
part 63, subpart KKKK, Surface Coating of Metal Cans, and Docket ID No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0685 for 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSS, Surface Coating 
of Metal Coil. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov/ website. Although listed, some information is not 
publicly available, e.g., confidential business information (CBI) 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 https://www.regulations.gov/, or in hard copy at the EPA Docket 
Center, WJC West Building, Room Number 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, 
Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room hours of operation are 8:30 
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST), Monday through Friday. 
The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and 
the telephone number for the EPA Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this final action, 
contact Ms. Paula Hirtz, Minerals and Manufacturing Group, Sector 
Policies and Programs Division (D243-04), Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research 
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-2618; 
fax number: (919) 541-4991; and email address: hirtz.paula@epa.gov. For 
specific information regarding the risk modeling methodology, contact 
Mr. Chris Sarsony, Health and Environmental Impacts Division (C539-02), 
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; 
telephone number: (919) 541-4843; fax number: (919) 541-0840; and email 
address: sarsony.chris@epa.gov. For information about the applicability 
of these NESHAP to a particular entity, contact Mr. John Cox, Office of 
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, WJC South Building (Mail Code 2227A), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-1395; and email 
address: cox.john@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Preamble acronyms and abbreviations. We use multiple acronyms and 
terms in this preamble. While this list may not be exhaustive, to ease 
the reading of this preamble and for reference purposes, the EPA 
defines the following terms and acronyms here:

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
BPA bisphenol A
BPA-NI not intentionally containing BPA
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI Confidential Business Information
CDX Central Data Exchange
CEDRI Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface
CEMS continuous emissions monitoring systems
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DGME diethylene glycol monobutyl ether
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ERT Electronic Reporting Tool
HAP hazardous air pollutant(s)
HCl hydrochloric acid
HF hydrogen fluoride
HI hazard index
HQ hazard quotient
HQREL hazard quotient recommended exposure limit
IBR incorporation by reference
ICR Information Collection Request
kg kilogram
km kilometer
MACT maximum achievable control technology
MIR maximum individual risk
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NESHAP national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
NSPS new source performance standard
NSR New Source Review
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PB-HAP hazardous air pollutants known to be persistent and bio-
accumulative in the environment
PDF portable document format
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
PTE permanent total enclosure
REL reference exposure level
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RTR residual risk and technology review
SSM startup, shutdown, and malfunction
TOSHI target organ-specific hazard index
tpy tons per year
[mu]g/m3 micrograms per cubic meter
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
VCS voluntary consensus standards

    Background information. On June 4, 2019, the EPA proposed revisions 
to the Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP and the Surface Coating of 
Metal Coil NESHAP based on our RTRs. In this action, we are finalizing 
decisions and revisions to the rules. In this preamble, we summarize 
some of the more significant comments we timely received regarding the 
proposed rule and provide our responses. A summary of all the public 
comments on the proposed rules and the EPA's responses to those 
comments is available in the ``Summary of Public Comments and Responses 
for the Risk and Technology Reviews for the Surface Coating of Metal 
Cans and the Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP,'' in Docket ID Nos. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0684 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0685. A ``track changes'' 
version of the regulatory language that incorporates the changes in 
this action is available in the docket for each rule.
    Organization of this document. The information in this preamble is 
organized as follows:


[[Page 10829]]


I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?
    C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration
II. Background
    A. What is the statutory authority for this action?
    B. What are the source categories and how does the NESHAP 
regulate HAP emissions from the source categories?
    C. What changes did we propose for the source categories in our 
June 4, 2019, RTR proposal?
III. What is included in these final rules?
    A. What are the final rule amendments based on the risk reviews 
for the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal 
Coil source categories?
    B. What are the final rule amendments based on the technology 
reviews for the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of 
Metal Coil source categories?
    C. What are the final rule amendments addressing emissions 
during periods of SSM?
    D. What other changes have been made to the NESHAP?
    E. What are the effective and compliance dates of the revisions 
to the standards?
    F. What are the requirements for submission of performance test 
data to the EPA?
IV. What is the rationale for our final decisions and amendments for 
the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
source categories?
    A. Residual Risk Reviews
    B. Technology Reviews
    C. Electronic Reporting Provisions
    D. SSM Provisions
    E. Ongoing Compliance Demonstrations
V. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts and 
Additional Analyses Conducted
    A. What are the affected sources?
    B. What are the air quality impacts?
    C. What are the cost impacts?
    D. What are the economic impacts?
    E. What are the benefits?
    F. What analysis of environmental justice did we conduct?
    G. What analysis of children's environmental health did we 
conduct?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs
    C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 
1 CFR Part 51
    K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Regulated entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated 
by this action are shown in Table 1 of this preamble.

 Table 1--NESHAP and Industrial Source Categories Affected by This Final
                                 Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    NAICS \1\
      NESHAP source category           code      Regulated entities \2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface Coating of Metal Cans.....     332431  Two-piece Beverage Can
                                                Facilities, Three-piece
                                                Food Can Facilities, Two-
                                                piece Draw and Iron
                                                Facilities, One-piece
                                                Aerosol Can Facilities.
                                       332115
                                       332116
                                       332812
                                       332999
                                       332431  Can Assembly Facilities.
                                       332812  End Manufacturing
                                                Facilities.
Surface Coating of Metal Coil.....     325992  Photographic Film, Paper,
                                                Plate, and Chemical
                                                Manufacturing.
                                       326199  All Other Plastics
                                                Product Manufacturing.
                                       331110  Iron and Steel Mills and
                                                Ferroalloy
                                                Manufacturing.
                                       331221  Rolled Steel Shape
                                                Manufacturing.
                                       331315  Aluminum Sheet, Plate,
                                                and Foil Manufacturing.
                                       331318  Other Aluminum Rolling,
                                                Drawing, and Extruding.
                                       331420  Copper Rolling, Drawing,
                                                Extruding, and Alloying.
                                       332311  Prefabricated Metal
                                                Building and Component
                                                Manufacturing.
                                       332312  Fabricated Structural
                                                Metal Manufacturing.
                                       332322  Sheet Metal Work
                                                Manufacturing.
                                          \3\  Metal Coating, Engraving
                                       332812   (except Jewelry and
                                                Silverware), and Allied
                                                Services to
                                                Manufacturers.
                                       332999  All Other Miscellaneous
                                                Fabricated Metal Product
                                                Manufacturing.
                                       333249  Other Industrial
                                                Machinery Manufacturing.
                                       337920  Blind and Shade
                                                Manufacturing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
\2\ Regulated entities are major source facilities that apply surface
  coatings to these parts or products.
\3\ The majority of coil coating facilities are included in NAICS Code
  332812.

    Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but 
rather to provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be 
affected by the final action for the source categories listed. To 
determine whether your facility is affected, you should examine the 
applicability criteria in the appropriate NESHAP. If you have any 
questions regarding the applicability of any aspect of these NESHAP, 
please contact the appropriate person listed in the preceding FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.

B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?

    In addition to being available in the dockets, an electronic copy 
of this final action will also be available on the internet. Following 
signature by the EPA Administrator, the EPA will post

[[Page 10830]]

copies of this final action at: https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/surface-coating-metal-cans-national-emission-standards-hazardous and https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/surface-coating-metal-coil-national-emission-standards-hazardous. 
Following publication in the Federal Register, the EPA will post the 
Federal Register version and key technical documents at these same 
websites.
    Additional information is available on the RTR website at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/risk-and-technology-review-national-emissions-standards-hazardous. This information 
includes an overview of the RTR program, links to project websites for 
the RTR source categories, and detailed emissions data and other data 
we used as inputs to the risk assessments.

C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration

    Under Clean Air Act (CAA) section 307(b)(1), judicial review of 
this final action is available only by filing a petition for review in 
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 
(the Court) by April 27, 2020. Under CAA section 307(b)(2), the 
requirements established by these final rules may not be challenged 
separately in any civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to 
enforce the requirements.
    Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that only an 
objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable 
specificity during the period for public comment (including any public 
hearing) may be raised during judicial review. This section also 
provides a mechanism for the EPA to reconsider the rule if the person 
raising an objection can demonstrate to the Administrator that it was 
impracticable to raise such objection within the period for public 
comment or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period for 
public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) and 
if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the rule. 
Any person seeking to make such a demonstration should submit a 
Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the Administrator, U.S. 
EPA, Room 3000, WJC South Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, 
Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to both the person(s) listed in the 
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the Associate 
General Counsel for the Air and Radiation Law Office, Office of General 
Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, 
Washington, DC 20460.

II. Background

A. What is the statutory authority for this action?

    Section 112 of the CAA establishes a two-stage regulatory process 
to address emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from stationary 
sources. In the first stage, we must identify categories of sources 
emitting one or more of the HAP listed in CAA section 112(b) and then 
promulgate technology-based NESHAP for those sources. ``Major sources'' 
are those that emit, or have the potential to emit, any single HAP at a 
rate of 10 tons per year (tpy) or more, or 25 tpy or more of any 
combination of HAP. For major sources, these standards are commonly 
referred to as maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards 
and must reflect the maximum degree of emission reductions of HAP 
achievable (after considering cost, energy requirements, and non-air 
quality health and environmental impacts). In developing MACT 
standards, CAA section 112(d)(2) directs the EPA to consider the 
application of measures, processes, methods, systems, or techniques, 
including, but not limited to, those that reduce the volume of or 
eliminate HAP emissions through process changes, substitution of 
materials, or other modifications; enclose systems or processes to 
eliminate emissions; collect, capture, or treat HAP when released from 
a process, stack, storage, or fugitive emissions point; are design, 
equipment, work practice, or operational standards; or any combination 
of the above.
    For these MACT standards, the statute specifies certain minimum 
stringency requirements, which are referred to as MACT floor 
requirements, and which may not be based on cost considerations. See 
CAA section 112(d)(3). For new sources, the MACT floor cannot be less 
stringent than the emission control achieved in practice by the best-
controlled similar source. The MACT floor for existing sources can be 
less stringent than floors for new sources, but they cannot be less 
stringent than the average emission limitation achieved by the best-
performing 12 percent of existing sources in the category or 
subcategory (or the best-performing five sources for categories or 
subcategories with fewer than 30 sources). In developing MACT 
standards, we must also consider control options that are more 
stringent than the floor under CAA section 112(d)(2). We may establish 
standards more stringent than the floor, based on the consideration of 
the cost of achieving the emissions reductions, any non-air quality 
health and environmental impacts, and energy requirements.
    In the second stage of the regulatory process, the CAA requires the 
EPA to undertake two different analyses, which we refer to as the 
technology review and the residual risk review. Under the technology 
review, we must review the technology-based standards and revise them 
``as necessary (taking into account developments in practices, 
processes, and control technologies)'' no less frequently than every 8 
years, pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6). Under the residual risk 
review, we must evaluate the risk to public health remaining after 
application of the technology-based standards and revise the standards, 
if necessary, to provide an ample margin of safety to protect public 
health or to prevent, taking into consideration costs, energy, safety, 
and other relevant factors, an adverse environmental effect. The 
residual risk review is required within 8 years after promulgation of 
the technology-based standards, pursuant to CAA section 112(f). In 
conducting the residual risk review, if the EPA determines that the 
current standards provide an ample margin of safety to protect public 
health, it is not necessary to revise the MACT standards pursuant to 
CAA section 112(f).\1\ For more information on the statutory authority 
for this rule, see the proposal preamble (84 FR 25908, June 4, 2019) 
and the memorandum, CAA Section 112 Risk and Technology Reviews: 
Statutory Authority and Methodology, December 14, 2017, in the Surface 
Coating of Metal Cans Docket and the Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
Docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Court has affirmed this approach of implementing CAA 
section 112(f)(2)(A): NRDC v. EPA, 529 F.3d 1077, 1083 (D.C. Cir. 
2008) (``If EPA determines that the existing technology-based 
standards provide an `ample margin of safety,' then the Agency is 
free to readopt those standards during the residual risk 
rulemaking.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. What are the source categories and how do the NESHAP regulate HAP 
emissions from the source categories?

1. What is the Surface Coating of Metal Cans source category and how 
does the current NESHAP regulate its HAP emissions?
    The EPA promulgated the Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP on 
November 13, 2003 (68 FR 64432). The standards are codified at 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart KKKK. The Surface Coating of Metal Cans industry 
consists of facilities that are engaged in the surface coating of metal 
cans and ends (including decorative tins) and metal crowns and

[[Page 10831]]

closures. The source category covered by this MACT standard currently 
includes five facilities.
    The Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP (40 CFR 63.3561) defines a 
``metal can'' as ``a single-walled container manufactured from metal 
substrate equal to or thinner than 0.3785 millimeter (mm) (0.0149 
inch)'' and includes coating operations for four subcategories: (1) 
One- and two- piece draw and iron can body coating; (2) sheetcoating; 
(3) three-piece can body assembly coating; and (4) end coating. The 
Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP also defines a ``coating'' as ``a 
material that is applied to a substrate for decorative, protective, or 
functional purposes. Such materials include, but are not limited to, 
paints, sealants, caulks, inks, adhesives, and maskants.'' This source 
category is further described in the June 4, 2019, RTR proposal. See 84 
FR 25908.
    The primary HAP emitted from this source category are organic HAP 
and include glycol ethers, formaldehyde, xylenes, toluene, methyl 
isobutyl ketone, 2-(hexyloxy) ethanol, ethyl benzene, and methanol. 
These HAP account for 99 percent of the HAP emissions from the source 
category. The HAP emissions from the Surface Coating of Metal Cans 
source category are emitted from the coating materials which include 
the coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials used in the coating 
operations. The coating operations include: The equipment used to apply 
the coatings; the equipment to dry or cure the coatings after 
application; all storage containers and mixing vessels; all manual and 
automated equipment and containers used to convey the coating 
materials; and all storage containers and manual and automated 
equipment used for conveying waste materials generated by the coating 
operations. The coating application lines and the drying and curing 
ovens are the largest sources of HAP emissions. The coating application 
lines apply an exterior base coat to two- and three-piece cans using a 
lithographic/printing (i.e., roll) application process. The inside, 
side seam, and repair coatings are spray applied using airless spray 
equipment and are a minor portion of the can coating operations. As 
indicated by the name, repair spray coatings are used to cover breaks 
in the coating that are caused during the formation of the score in 
easy-open ends or to provide, after the manufacturing process, an 
additional protective layer for corrosion resistance.
    The Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP specifies numerical 
emission limits for existing sources and for new or reconstructed 
sources for organic HAP emissions from four subcategories of can 
coating operations. Within the four subcategories are several different 
types of coatings with separate emission limits. The specific organic 
HAP emission limits are provided in Tables 1 and 2 of 40 CRF part 63, 
subpart KKKK.
    The Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP provides that emission 
limits can be achieved using several different options, including a 
compliant material option, an emission rate without add-on controls 
option (averaging option), an emission rate with add-on controls 
option, or a control efficiency/outlet concentration option. For any 
coating operation(s) on which the facility uses the compliant material 
option or the emission rate without add-on controls option, the 
facility is not required to meet any work practice standards.
    If the facility uses the emission rate with add-on controls option, 
the facility must develop and implement a work practice plan to 
minimize organic HAP emissions from the storage, mixing, and conveying 
of coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials used in, and waste 
materials generated by, the coating operation(s) using that option. The 
plan must specify practices and procedures to ensure that a set of 
minimum work practices specified in the NESHAP are implemented. The 
facility must also comply with site-specific operating limits for the 
emission capture and control system.
2. What is the Surface Coating of Metal Coil source category and how 
does the current NESHAP regulate its HAP emissions?
    The EPA promulgated the Surface Coating of Metal Coil source 
category NESHAP on June 10, 2002 (67 FR 39794). The standards are 
codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSS. The Surface Coating of Metal 
Coil industry consists of facilities that operate a metal coil coating 
line. The source category covered by this MACT standard currently 
includes 48 facilities.
    The Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP (40 CFR 63.5110) defines a 
``coil coating line'' as ``a process and the collection of equipment 
used to apply an organic coating to the surface of metal coil.'' A coil 
coating line includes a web unwind or feed section, a series of one or 
more work stations, and any associated curing oven, wet section, and 
quench station. A work station is ``a unit on a coil coating line where 
the coating material is deposited onto the metal coil substrate'' or a 
coating application station. This source category is further described 
in the June 4, 2019, RTR proposal. See 84 FR 25909.
    The primary HAP emitted from metal coil coating operations are 
organic HAP and include xylenes, glycol ethers, naphthalene, 
isophorone, toluene, diethylene glycol monobutyl ether (DGME), and 
ethyl benzene. The majority of organic HAP emissions are from the 
coating application stations and the curing ovens.
    The Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP specifies numerical 
emission limits for organic HAP emissions from the coating application 
stations and associated curing ovens. The Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
NESHAP provides that emission limits can be achieved using several 
different options: (1) Use only individually compliant coatings with an 
organic HAP content that does not exceed 0.046 kilogram (kg)/liter of 
solids applied, (2) use coatings with an average organic HAP content 
that does not exceed 0.046 kg/liter of solids on a rolling 12-month 
average, (3) use a capture system and add-on control device to either 
reduce emissions by 98 percent or use a 100-percent efficient capture 
system (permanent total enclosure (PTE)) and an oxidizer to reduce 
organic HAP emissions to no more than 20 parts per million by volume as 
carbon, or (4) use a combination of compliant coatings and control 
devices to maintain an average equivalent emission rate of organic HAP 
not exceeding 0.046 kg/liter of solids on a rolling 12-month average 
basis. These compliance options apply to an individual coil coating 
line, to multiple lines as a group, or to the entire affected source.

C. What changes did we propose for the source categories in our June 4, 
2019, RTR proposal?

    On June 4, 2019, the EPA published proposed rule amendments in the 
Federal Register for the Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP, 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart KKKK, and the Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP, 40 
CFR part 63, subpart SSSS, that took into consideration the RTR 
analyses.
    For each source category, we proposed that the risks are 
acceptable, and that additional emission controls for each source 
category are not necessary to provide an ample margin of safety. For 
the technology reviews, we did not identify any developments in 
practices, processes, or control technologies, and, therefore, we did 
not propose any changes to the standards under CAA section 112(d)(6).
    We also proposed the following amendments:

[[Page 10832]]

     For each source category, a requirement for electronic 
submittal of notifications, semi-annual reports, and compliance reports 
(which include performance test reports);
     for each source category, revisions to the SSM provisions 
of each NESHAP in order to ensure that they are consistent with the 
Court decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F. 3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008), 
which vacated two provisions that exempted source owners and operators 
from the requirement to comply with otherwise applicable CAA section 
112(d) emission standards during periods of SSM;
     for the Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP, adding the 
option of conducting EPA Method 18 of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60, 
``Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas 
Chromatography,'' to measure and then subtract methane emissions from 
measured total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon;
     for the Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP, revising 40 
CFR 63.5090 to clarify that the NESHAP does not apply to the 
application of markings (including letters, numbers, or symbols) to 
bare metal coils that are used for product identification or for 
product inventory control;
     for each source category, removing references to paragraph 
(d)(4) of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA's) 
Hazard Communication standard (29 CFR 1910.1200), which dealt with 
OSHA-defined carcinogens, and replacing that reference with a list of 
HAP that must be regarded as potentially carcinogenic based on EPA 
guidelines;
     for each source category, a requirement to conduct 
performance testing and reestablish operating limits no less frequently 
than every 5 years for sources that are using add-on controls to 
demonstrate compliance; and
     for each source category, Incorporation by Reference (IBR) 
of alternative test methods and references to updated alternative test 
methods; and several minor editorial and technical changes in each 
subpart.

III. What is included in these final rules?

    This action finalizes the EPA's determinations pursuant to the RTR 
provisions of CAA section 112 for the Surface Coating of Metal Cans 
source category and the Surface Coating of Metal Coil source category. 
This action also finalizes other changes to the NESHAP for each source 
category, including:
     A requirement for electronic submittal of notifications, 
semi-annual reports, and compliance reports (which include performance 
test reports);
     revisions to the SSM provisions;
     removing references to paragraph (d)(4) of OSHA's Hazard 
Communication standard (29 CFR 1910.1200), which dealt with OSHA-
defined carcinogens, and replacing that reference with a list of HAP 
that must be regarded as potentially carcinogenic based on EPA 
guidelines;
     adding a requirement to conduct performance testing and 
reestablish operating limits no less frequently than every 5 years for 
sources that are using add-on controls to demonstrate compliance, 
unless they are already required to perform comparable periodic testing 
as a condition of renewing their title V operating permit;
     IBR of alternative test methods and references to updated 
alternative test methods; and
     several minor editorial and technical changes.

This action also finalizes the proposed changes to the NESHAP for the 
Surface Coating of Metal Coil source category by adding the option of 
conducting EPA Method 18 of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60, ``Measurement 
of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas Chromatography,'' to 
measure and then subtract methane emissions from measured total gaseous 
organic mass emissions as carbon; and by revising 40 CFR 63.5090 to 
clarify that the NESHAP does not apply to the application of markings 
(including letters, numbers, or symbols) to bare metal coils that are 
used for product identification or for product inventory control.

A. What are the final rule amendments based on the risk reviews for the 
Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil source 
categories?

    This section describes the final amendments to the Surface Coating 
of Metal Cans NESHAP (subpart KKKK) and the Surface Coating of Metal 
Coil NESHAP (subpart SSSS) being promulgated pursuant to CAA section 
112(f). In this action, we are finalizing our proposed determinations 
that risks from these two subparts are acceptable, and that the 
standards provide an ample margin of safety to protect public health 
and to prevent an adverse environmental effect. The EPA proposed no 
changes to these two subparts based on the risk reviews conducted 
pursuant to CAA section 112(f). The EPA received no new data or other 
information during the public comment period that causes us to change 
those proposed determinations. Therefore, we are not requiring 
additional controls under CAA section 112(f)(2) for either of the two 
subparts in this action.

B. What are the final rule amendments based on the technology reviews 
for the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and the Surface Coating of Metal 
Coil source categories?

    We determined that there are no developments in practices, 
processes, and control technologies that warrant revisions to the MACT 
standards for these source categories. Therefore, we are not finalizing 
revisions to the MACT standards under CAA section 112(d)(6).

C. What are the final rule amendments addressing emissions during 
periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction?

    We are finalizing the proposed amendments to the Surface Coating of 
Metal Cans NESHAP and the Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP to 
eliminate the SSM exemption. Consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F. 
3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008), the EPA is establishing standards in these 
rules that apply at all times. As detailed in section IV.C of the 
proposal preamble (84 FR 25904, June 4, 2019), Table 5 to Subpart KKKK 
of Part 63 and Table 2 to Subpart SSSS of Part 63 (General Provisions 
applicability tables) are being revised to change several references 
related to the provisions that apply during periods of SSM. We also 
eliminated or revised certain recordkeeping and reporting requirements 
related to the eliminated SSM exemption. The EPA also made other 
harmonizing changes to remove or modify inappropriate, unnecessary, or 
redundant language in the absence of the SSM exemption. We determined 
that facilities in both of these source categories can meet the 
applicable emission standards in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans 
NESHAP and the Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP at all times, 
including periods of startup and shutdown. Therefore, the EPA 
determined that no additional standards are needed to address emissions 
during these periods. The legal rationale and explanation of the 
changes for SSM periods are set forth in the proposed rule. See 84 FR 
25925 through 25929 and 25936 through 25939.
    Further, the EPA is not finalizing standards for malfunctions. As 
discussed in section IV.C of the June 4, 2019, proposal preamble, the 
EPA interprets CAA section 112 as not requiring emissions that occur 
during periods of malfunction to be factored into development of CAA 
section 112 standards, although the EPA has the discretion to set 
standards for malfunctions where feasible. For these

[[Page 10833]]

source categories, it is unlikely that a malfunction would result in a 
violation of the standards, and no comments or information were 
submitted that support a contrary conclusion. Refer to section IV.C of 
the June 4, 2019 proposal preamble for further discussion of the EPA's 
rationale for the decision not to set standards for malfunctions, as 
well as a discussion of the actions a source could take in the unlikely 
event that a source fails to comply with the applicable CAA section 
112(d) standards as a result of a malfunction event, given that 
administrative and judicial procedures for addressing exceedances of 
the standards fully recognize that violations may occur despite good 
faith efforts to comply and the EPA can consider all relevant 
information when determining the appropriate response to those 
situations.
    We are finalizing a revision to the performance testing 
requirements at 40 CFR 63.4164 and 40 CFR 63.5160. The final 
performance testing provisions prohibit performance testing during 
startup, shutdown, or malfunction as these conditions are not 
representative of steady state operating conditions. The final rules 
also require that operators maintain records to document that operating 
conditions during performance tests represent steady state conditions.

D. What other changes have been made to the NESHAPs?

    For both the Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP and the Surface 
Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP, the EPA is finalizing, as proposed, 
several other revisions that are described in the following paragraphs.
    To increase the ease and efficiency of data submittal and data 
accessibility, we are finalizing a requirement that owners and 
operators of facilities in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and 
Surface Coating of Metal Coil source categories submit electronic 
copies of required performance test reports through the EPA's Central 
Data Exchange (CDX) website using an electronic performance test report 
tool called the Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT). We also are 
finalizing, as proposed, provisions that allow facility operators the 
ability to seek extensions for submitting electronic reports for 
circumstances beyond the control of the facility, i.e., for a possible 
outage in the CDX or Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface 
(CEDRI) or for a force majeure event in the time just prior to a 
report's due date, as well as the process to assert such a claim.
    For each subpart, we also are changing the format of references to 
test methods in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A to indicate where, in the 
eight sections of appendix A, each method is found.
    For each subpart, we are finalizing the proposal to re-designate 
the list of applicable organic HAP that must be used when a facility 
chooses to use the compliant material option (i.e., for calculating 
total organic HAP content of a coating material present at 0.1 percent 
or greater by mass). To specify the applicable HAP, we are changing the 
rule to remove the reference to paragraph (d)(4) of OSHA's Hazard 
Communication standard (29 CFR 1910.1200) and replace it with a new 
table in each subpart (Table 8 in 40 CFR part 63, subpart KKKK and 
Table 3 in 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSS) that lists the applicable HAP. 
The organic HAP in these new tables are those HAP that were categorized 
in the EPA's ``Prioritized Chronic Dose-Response Values for Screening 
Risk Assessments'' (dated May 9, 2014) as a ``human carcinogen,'' 
``probable human carcinogen,'' or ``possible human carcinogen'' 
according to The Risk Assessment Guidelines of 1986 (EPA/600/8-87/045, 
August 1987) \2\ or as ``carcinogenic to humans,'' ``likely to be 
carcinogenic to humans,'' or with ``suggestive evidence of carcinogenic 
potential'' according to the Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment 
(EPA/630/P-03/001F, March 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See https://www.epa.gov/fera/dose-response-assessment-assessing-health-risks-associated-exposure-hazardous-air-pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are including in the final rule for each subpart a requirement 
for facilities that use control devices to conduct control device 
performance testing no less frequently than once every 5 years. For 
facilities with title V permits that require comparable periodic 
testing prior to permit renewal, no additional testing is required, and 
we included provisions in the rule to allow sources to harmonize the 
NESHAP testing schedule with a facility's current title V testing 
schedule.
1. Technical Amendments to the Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP
    In the final rule, we are amending 40 CFR 63.3481(c)(5), as 
proposed, to revise the reference to ``future subpart MMMM'' of this 
part by removing the word ``future'' because subpart MMMM was 
promulgated in 2004.
    We are revising the monitoring provisions for thermal and catalytic 
oxidizers, as proposed, to clarify that a thermocouple is part of the 
temperature sensor referred to in 40 CFR 63.3547(c)(3) and 40 CFR 
63.3557(c)(3) for purposes of performing periodic calibration and 
verification checks.
    Currently, 40 CFR 63.3513(a) allows records, ``where appropriate,'' 
to be maintained as ``electronic spreadsheets'' or a ``database.'' As 
proposed, we are adding a clarification to this provision that the 
allowance to retain electronic records applies to all records that were 
submitted as reports electronically via the EPA's CEDRI. We are also 
adding text to the same provision, as proposed, clarifying that this 
ability to maintain electronic copies does not affect the requirement 
for facilities to make records, data, and reports available upon 
request to a delegated air agency or the EPA as part of an on-site 
compliance evaluation.
    In the final rule, as proposed, we are adding and updating test 
methods that are incorporated by reference. In accordance with 
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is incorporating by reference the 
following voluntary consensus standards (VCS) described in the 
amendments to 40 CFR 63.14:
     ASTM D1475-13, Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid 
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products, proposed to be IBR approved for 
40 CFR 63.3521(c) and 63.3531(c);
     ASTM D2111-10 (2015), Standard Test Methods for Specific 
Gravity and Density of Halogenated Organic Solvents and Their 
Admixtures, proposed to be IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.3521(c) and 
63.3531(c);
     ASTM D2369-10 (2015), Test Method for Volatile Content of 
Coatings, proposed to be IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.3521(a)(2) and 
63.3541(i)(3);
     ASTM D2697-03 (2014), Standard Test Method for Volume 
Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings, proposed to be IBR 
approved for 40 CFR 63.3521(b)(1); and
     ASTM D6093-97 (2016), Standard Test Method for Percent 
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using Helium 
Gas Pycnometer, proposed to be IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.3521(b)(1).
2. Technical Amendments to the Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP
    We are finalizing, as proposed, changes to 40 CFR 63.5090 to 
clarify that 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSS does not apply to the 
application to bare metal coils of markings (including letters, 
numbers, or symbols) that are used for product identification or for 
product inventory control.
    We are finalizing amendments to 40 CFR 63.5160(d) in 40 CFR part 
63, subpart SSSS, as proposed, to add the option of conducting EPA 
Method 18 of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60,

[[Page 10834]]

``Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas 
Chromatography,'' to measure and then subtract methane emissions from 
measured total gaseous organic mass emissions, as carbon, for those 
facilities using the emission rate with add-on control compliance 
option and EPA Method 25A to measure control device destruction 
efficiency.
    Currently 40 CFR 63.5190 specifies records that must be maintained. 
We are adding, as proposed, clarification to 40 CFR 63.5190(c) that 
specifies the allowance to retain electronic records applies to all 
records that were submitted as reports electronically via the EPA's 
CEDRI. We are also adding text to the same provision clarifying that 
this ability to maintain electronic copies does not affect the 
requirement for facilities to make records, data, and reports available 
upon request to a delegated air agency or the EPA as part of an on-site 
compliance evaluation.
    We are clarifying and harmonizing, as proposed, the general duty 
requirement in 40 CFR 63.5140(a) with the reporting requirements in 40 
CFR 63.5180(g)(2)(v) and 40 CFR 63.5180(h)(4) and the recordkeeping 
requirement in 40 CFR 63.5190(a)(5), by including new language in 40 
CFR 63.5140(a) to read as, ``. . . you must be in compliance with the 
applicable emission standards in Sec.  63.5120 and the operating limits 
in Table 1 of this subpart at all times.''
    We are revising, as proposed, the text in the semi-annual reporting 
provisions of 40 CFR 63.5180(g)(2)(v) to read, ``A statement that there 
were no deviations from the applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.5120 
or the applicable operating limit(s) established according to Sec.  
63.5121 during the reporting period, and that no continuous emissions 
monitoring systems (CEMS) were inoperative, inactive, malfunctioning, 
out-of-control, repaired, or adjusted.'' Conforming changes are also 
being made to the reporting requirement at 40 CFR 63.5180(h)(4) and the 
recordkeeping requirement at 40 CFR 63.5190(a)(5).
    We are revising, as proposed, one instance in 40 CFR 63.5160(e) in 
which an erroneous rule citation, ``Sec.  63.5170(h)(2) through (4),'' 
is made by correcting the citation to ``Sec.  63.5170(g)(2) through 
(4).''
    We are amending, as proposed, 40 CFR 63.5130(a) to clarify that the 
compliance date for existing affected sources is June 10, 2005.
    We are amending, as proposed, 40 CFR 63.5160(d)(3)(ii)(D) to 
correct a typographical error in a reference to paragraphs 
``(d)(3)(ii)(D)(1 (3).'' The correct reference is to paragraphs 
(d)(3)(ii)(D)(1)-(3).
    We are amending, as proposed, 40 CFR 63.5170(c)(1) and (2) to 
correct the cross references to 40 CFR 63.5120(a)(1) or (2). The 
correct cross references are to 40 CFR 63.5120(a)(1) or (3).
    We are amending, as proposed, Equation 11 in 40 CFR 63.5170 so that 
the value calculated by the equation is correctly identified as 
``He'' instead of just ``e.''
    In the final rule, as proposed, we are adding and updating test 
methods that are incorporated by reference. In accordance with 
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is incorporating by reference the 
following methods and VCS described in the amendments to 40 CFR 63.14:
     ASTM D1475-13, Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid 
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products, proposed to be IBR approved for 
40 CFR 63.5160(c);
     ASTM D2111-10 (2015), Standard Test Methods for Specific 
Gravity and Density of Halogenated Organic Solvents and Their 
Admixtures, proposed to be IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.5160(c);
     ASTM D2369-10 (2015), Test Method for Volatile Content of 
Coatings, proposed to be IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.5160(b)(2);
     ASTM D2697-03 (2014), Standard Test Method for Volume 
Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings, proposed to be IBR 
approved for 40 CFR 63.5160(c); and
     ASTM D6093-97 (2016), Standard Test Method for Percent 
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using Helium 
Gas Pycnometer, proposed to be IBR approved for 40 CFR 63.5160(c).

E. What are the effective and compliance dates of the revisions to the 
standards?

    The revisions to the MACT standards being promulgated in this 
action are effective on February 25, 2020.
    The compliance date for existing affected sources in both the 
Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil source 
categories is August 24, 2020, with the exception of the electronic 
format for submitting semiannual compliance reports. New sources must 
comply with all of the standards immediately upon the effective date of 
the standard, February 25, 2020, or upon startup, whichever is later, 
with the exception of the electronic format for submitting semiannual 
compliance reports. For the electronic format for submitting semiannual 
compliance reports, both existing and new affected sources will have 1 
year after the electronic reporting templates are available on CEDRI, 
or 1 year after February 25, 2020, whichever is later. The EPA selected 
these compliance dates based on experience with similar industries and 
the EPA's detailed justification for the selected compliance dates is 
included in the preamble to the proposed rule (84 FR 25931 and 25942).

F. What are the requirements for submission of performance test data to 
the EPA?

    As proposed, the EPA is taking a step to increase the ease and 
efficiency of data submittal and data accessibility. Specifically, the 
EPA is finalizing the requirement for owners and operators of 
facilities in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of 
Metal Coil source categories to submit electronic copies of certain 
required performance test reports.
    Data will be collected by direct computer-to-computer electronic 
transfer using EPA-provided software. This EPA-provided software is an 
electronic performance test report tool called the ERT. The ERT will 
generate an electronic report package which will be submitted to CEDRI 
and then archived to the EPA's CDX. A description of the ERT and 
instructions for using ERT can be found at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/index.html. The CEDRI interface can be accessed through the 
CDX website (https://cdx.epa.gov/).
    The requirement to submit performance test data electronically to 
the EPA does not create any additional performance testing requirements 
and will apply only to those performance tests conducted using test 
methods that are supported by the ERT. A listing of the pollutants and 
test methods supported by the ERT is available at the ERT website. 
Through this approach, industry will save time in the performance test 
submittal process. Additionally, this rulemaking will benefit industry 
by reducing recordkeeping costs, as the performance test reports that 
are submitted to the EPA using CEDRI are no longer required to be kept 
in hard copy.
    State, local, and tribal agencies may benefit from a more 
streamlined and accurate review of performance test data that will 
become available to the public through WebFIRE. Having such data 
publicly available enhances transparency and accountability. For a more 
thorough discussion of electronic reporting of performance tests using 
direct computer-to-computer electronic transfer and using EPA-provided 
software, see the discussion in the

[[Page 10835]]

preamble of the proposed rules (84 FR 25904, June 24, 2019) and the 
memorandum, Electronic Reporting Requirements for New Source 
Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Rules, August 8, 2018, in the Surface 
Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil Dockets.
    In summary, in addition to supporting regulation development, 
control strategy development, and other air pollution control 
activities, having an electronic database populated with performance 
test data will save industry, state/local/tribal agencies, and the EPA 
significant time, money, and effort while improving the quality of 
emission inventories and air quality regulations.

IV. What is the rationale for our final decisions and amendments for 
the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
source categories?

    For each issue, this section provides a description of what we 
proposed and what we are finalizing for the issue, the EPA's rationale 
for the final decisions and amendments, and a summary of key comments 
and responses. For all comments not discussed in this preamble, comment 
summaries and the EPA's responses can be found in the comment summary 
and response document available in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans 
and Surface Coating of Metal Coil Dockets.

A. Residual Risk Reviews

    1. What did we propose pursuant to CAA section 112(f)?
a. Surface Coating of Metal Cans (40 CFR Part 63, subpart KKKK) Source 
Category
    Pursuant to CAA section 112(f), the EPA conducted a residual risk 
review and presented the results of this review, along with our 
proposed decisions regarding risk acceptability and ample margin of 
safety, in sections IV.A.2.a and b of the proposed rule preamble (84 FR 
25904, June 24, 2019). The results of this review are presented briefly 
below in Table 2 of this preamble. Additional detail is provided in the 
residual risk technical support document titled, Residual Risk 
Assessment for the Surface Coating of Metal Cans Source Category in 
Support of the 2019 Risk and Technology Review Proposed Rule, which is 
available in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans Docket.

                          Table 2--Surface Coating of Metal Cans Source Category Inhalation Risk Assessment Results at Proposal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Maximum individual     Estimated population      Estimated annual         Maximum chronic
                                   cancer risk (in 1     at increased risk of      cancer incidence       noncancer TOSHI \1\
                                       million)             cancer >=1-in-1        (cases per year)    ------------------------
                               ------------------------         million        ------------------------                          Maximum screening acute
        Risk assessment                                ------------------------                          Based on    Based on       noncancer HQ \2\
                                 Based on    Based on    Based on    Based on    Based on    Based on     actual     allowable
                                  actual     allowable    actual     allowable    actual     allowable   emissions   emissions
                                 emissions   emissions   emissions   emissions   emissions   emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Category...............           3           3         700         800      0.0009       0.001        0.02        0.02  HQREL = 0.4.
Whole Facility................           8  ..........       1,500  ..........       0.002  ..........         0.2  ..........  ........................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The target organ-specific hazard index (TOSHI) is the sum of the chronic noncancer hazard quotients (HQ) values for substances that affect the same
  target organ or organ system.
\2\ The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop HQ values (HQREL = hazard
  quotient reference exposure level).

    The results of the proposal inhalation risk modeling using actual 
emissions data, as shown in Table 2 of this preamble, indicate that the 
maximum individual cancer risk based on actual emissions (lifetime) is 
3-in-1 million (driven by formaldehyde), the maximum chronic noncancer 
TOSHI value based on actual emissions is 0.02 (driven by formaldehyde), 
and the maximum screening acute noncancer HQ value (off-facility site) 
could be up to 0.4 (driven by formaldehyde). At proposal, the total 
annual cancer incidence (national) from these facilities based on 
actual emission levels was estimated to be 0.0009 excess cancer cases 
per year, or one case in every 1,100 years.
    The results of the proposal inhalation risk modeling using 
allowable emissions data, as shown in Table 2 of this preamble, 
indicate that the maximum individual cancer risk based on allowable 
emissions (lifetime) is 3-in-1 million (driven by formaldehyde), and 
the maximum chronic noncancer TOSHI value based on allowable emissions 
is 0.02 (driven by formaldehyde). At proposal, the total annual cancer 
incidence (national) from these facilities based on allowable emissions 
was estimated to be 0.001 excess cancer cases per year, or one case in 
every 1,000 years.
    The maximum individual cancer risk (lifetime) for the whole 
facility was determined to be 8-in-1 million at proposal, driven by 
formaldehyde from miscellaneous industrial processes (other/not 
classified) and acetaldehyde from beer production (brew kettle). At 
proposal, the total estimated cancer incidence from the whole facility 
was determined to be 0.002 excess cancer cases per year, or one excess 
case in every 500 years. Approximately 1,500 people were estimated to 
have cancer risks above 1-in-1 million from exposure to HAP emitted 
from both MACT and non-MACT sources at three of the five facilities in 
this source category. The maximum facility-wide TOSHI for the source 
category was estimated to be 0.2, mainly driven by emissions of 
acetaldehyde from beer production (brew kettle) and formaldehyde from 
miscellaneous industrial processes (other/not classified).
    There are no persistent and bioaccumulative HAP (PB HAP) emitted by 
facilities in this source category; therefore, we did not estimate any 
human health multi-pathway risks from this source category. Two 
environmental HAP are emitted by sources within this source category: 
Hydrochloric acid (HCl) and hydrogen fluoride (HF). Therefore, at 
proposal, we conducted a screening-level evaluation of the potential 
adverse environmental risks associated with emissions of HCl and HF. 
Based on this evaluation, we proposed that we do not expect an adverse 
environmental effect as a result of HAP emissions from this source 
category.
    We weighed all health risk factors, including those shown in Table 
2 of this preamble, in our risk acceptability determination and 
proposed that the residual risks from the Surface Coating of Metal Cans 
source category are acceptable (section IV.A.2.a of proposal preamble, 
84 FR 25922, June 4, 2019).
    We then considered whether 40 CFR part 63, subpart KKKK provides an 
ample margin of safety to protect public health and prevents, taking 
into consideration costs, energy, safety, and other relevant factors, 
an adverse

[[Page 10836]]

environmental effect. In considering whether the standards should be 
tightened to provide an ample margin of safety to protect public 
health, we considered the same risk factors that we considered for our 
acceptability determination and also considered the costs, 
technological feasibility, and other relevant factors related to 
emissions control options that might further reduce risk associated 
with emissions from the source category. Related to risk, the baseline 
risks were low, and regardless of the availability of further control 
options, little risk reduction could be realized. As discussed further 
in section IV.B of this preamble, the only development identified in 
the technology review was the ongoing development and the potential 
future conversion from conventional interior can coatings that contain 
bisphenol A (BPA) to interior coatings that do not intentionally 
contain BPA (BPA-NI). Since BPA and BPA-NI are not HAP, this change 
would have no effect on the HAP emissions. There were no other 
technological developments identified that affect HAP emissions for the 
Surface Coating of Metal Cans source category. Therefore, given the low 
baseline risks and lack of options for further risk reductions, we 
proposed that additional emission controls for this source category are 
not necessary to provide an ample margin of safety (section IV.A.2.b of 
proposal preamble, 84 FR 25922, June 4, 2019).
b. Surface Coating of Metal Coil (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart KKKK) Source 
Category
    Pursuant to CAA section 112(f), the EPA conducted a residual risk 
review and presented the results of this review, along with our 
proposed decisions regarding risk acceptability and ample margin of 
safety, in sections IV.B.2.a and b of the proposed rule preamble (84 FR 
25904, June 24, 2019). The results of this review are presented briefly 
below in Table 3 of this preamble. Additional detail is provided in the 
residual risk technical support document titled, Residual Risk 
Assessment for the Surface Coating of Metal Coil Source Category in 
Support of the 2019 Risk and Technology Review Proposed Rule, which is 
available in the Surface Coating of Metal Coil Docket.

                          Table 3--Surface Coating of Metal Coil Source Category Inhalation Risk Assessment Results at Proposal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Maximum  individual    Estimated population      Estimated annual         Maximum chronic
                                    cancer risk  (in 1     at increased risk of      cancer incidence       noncancer TOSHI \1\
                                         million)            cancer >= 1-in-1        (cases per year)    ------------------------
                                 ------------------------         million        ------------------------                            Maximum screening
         Risk assessment                                 ------------------------                          Based on    Based on   acute noncancer HQ \2\
                                   Based on    Based on    Based on    Based on    Based on    Based on     actual     allowable
                                    actual     allowable    actual     allowable    actual     allowable   emissions   emissions
                                   emissions   emissions   emissions   emissions   emissions   emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Category.................          10          10      19,000      24,000       0.005       0.006         0.1         0.1  HQREL = 3.
Whole Facility..................          40  ..........     270,000  ..........        0.03  ..........           5  ..........  ......................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The TOSHI is the sum of the chronic noncancer HQ values for substances that affect the same target organ or organ system.
\2\ The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop HQ values (HQREL = hazard
  quotient reference exposure level).

    The results of the proposal inhalation risk modeling using actual 
emissions data, as shown in Table 3 of this preamble, indicate that the 
maximum individual cancer risk based on actual emissions (lifetime) is 
10-in-1 million (driven by naphthalene from solvent storage), the 
maximum chronic noncancer TOSHI value based on actual emissions is 0.1 
(driven by glycol ethers from prime and finish coating application), 
and the maximum screening acute noncancer HQ value (off-facility site) 
could be up to 3 (driven by DGME). At proposal, the total annual cancer 
incidence (national) from these facilities based on actual emission 
levels was estimated to be 0.005 excess cancer cases per year, or one 
case in every 200 years.
    The results of the proposal inhalation risk modeling using 
allowable emissions data, as shown in Table 3 of this preamble, 
indicate that the maximum individual cancer risk based on allowable 
emissions (lifetime) is 10-in-1 million (driven by naphthalene from 
solvent storage), and the maximum chronic noncancer TOSHI value based 
on allowable emissions is 0.1 (driven by glycol ethers from prime and 
finish coating application). At proposal, the total annual cancer 
incidence (national) from these facilities based on allowable emissions 
was estimated to be 0.006 excess cancer cases per year, or one case in 
every 167 years.
    The maximum individual cancer risk (lifetime) for the whole 
facility was determined to be 40-in-1 million at proposal, driven by 
naphthalene from equipment cleanup of metal coil coating processes. At 
proposal, the total estimated cancer incidence from the whole facility 
was determined to be 0.03 excess cancer cases per year, or one excess 
case in every 30 years. Approximately 270,000 people were estimated to 
have cancer risks above 1-in-1 million from exposure to HAP emitted 
from both MACT and non-MACT sources of the 48 facilities in this source 
category. The maximum facility-wide TOSHI for the source category was 
estimated to be 5, driven by emissions of chlorine from a secondary 
aluminum fluxing process.
    One PB HAP is emitted by facilities in the source category: lead. 
In evaluating the potential for multipathway effects from emissions of 
lead, the modeled maximum annual lead concentration of 0.0004 
micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) was compared to the National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for lead of 0.15 microgram per 
cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\). Results of this analysis confirmed that 
the NAAQS for lead would not be exceeded by any facility. Based on this 
evaluation, we proposed that there is no significant potential for 
human health multi-pathway risks as a result of HAP emissions from this 
source category. Two environmental HAP are emitted by sources within 
this source category: HF and lead. Therefore, at proposal we conducted 
a screening-level evaluation of the potential adverse environmental 
risks associated with emissions of HF and lead. Based on this 
evaluation, we proposed that we do not expect an adverse environmental 
effect as a result of HAP emissions from this source category.
    We weighed all health risk factors, including those shown in Table 
3 of this preamble, in our risk acceptability determination and 
proposed that the residual risks from the Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
source category are acceptable (section IV.B.2.a of proposal preamble, 
84 FR 25933 June 4, 2019).
    We then considered whether 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSS provides an 
ample margin of safety to protect public

[[Page 10837]]

health and prevents, taking into consideration costs, energy, safety, 
and other relevant factors, an adverse environmental effect. In 
considering whether the standards should be tightened to provide an 
ample margin of safety to protect public health, we considered the same 
risk factors that we considered for our acceptability determination and 
also considered the costs, technological feasibility, and other 
relevant factors related to emissions control options that might 
further reduce risk associated with emissions from the source category. 
As discussed further in section IV.B of this preamble, based on our 
technology review, we did not identify any developments in practices, 
processes, or control technologies, and, therefore, we did not propose 
any changes to the standards under CAA section 112(d)(6).
    Due to the low baseline risks for the Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
source category and lack of options for further risk reductions, we 
proposed that additional emission controls for this source category are 
not necessary to provide an ample margin of safety (section IV.B.2.b of 
proposal preamble, 84 FR 25934, June 4, 2019).
2. How did the risk reviews change?
    We have not changed any aspect of the risk assessment for either of 
these two source categories as a result of public comments received on 
the June 2019 proposal.
3. What key comments did we receive on the risk reviews, and what are 
our responses?
    We received comments in support of and against the proposed 
residual risk reviews and our determinations that no revisions were 
warranted under CAA section 112(f)(2) for either source category. 
Generally, the comments that were not supportive of our determinations 
based on the risk reviews suggested changes to the underlying risk 
assessment methodology. For example, one commenter stated that the EPA 
should lower the acceptability benchmark so that risks below 100-in-1 
million are deemed unacceptable, include emissions outside of the 
source categories in question in the risk assessment, and assume that 
pollutants with noncancer health risks have no safe level of exposure. 
After review of all the comments received, we determined that no 
changes to our Science Advisory Board-approved residual risk review 
process were necessary. The comments and our specific responses can be 
found in the document, Summary of Public Comments and Responses for the 
Risk and Technology Reviews for Surface Coating of Metal Cans and 
Surface Coating of Metal Coil, available in the dockets for these 
actions (Docket ID Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0684 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0685).
4. What is the rationale for our final approach and final decisions for 
the risk reviews?
    As noted in our proposal, the EPA sets standards under CAA section 
112(f)(2) using ``a two-step standard-setting approach, with an 
analytical first step to determine an `acceptable risk' that considers 
all health information, including risk estimation uncertainty, and 
includes a presumptive limit on the maximum individual risk (MIR) of 
``approximately 1-in-10 thousand'' (see 54 FR 38045, September 14, 
1989). We weigh all health risk factors in our risk acceptability 
determination, including the cancer MIR, cancer incidence, the maximum 
chronic noncancer TOSHI, the maximum acute noncancer HQ, the extent of 
noncancer risks, the distribution of cancer and noncancer risks in the 
exposed population, and the risk estimation uncertainties.
    Since proposal, neither the risk assessment nor our determinations 
regarding risk acceptability, ample margin of safety, or adverse 
environmental effects have changed. For the reasons explained in the 
proposed rule, we determined that the risks from the Surface Coating of 
Metal Cans and the Surface Coating of Metal Coil source categories are 
acceptable, and that the current standards provide an ample margin of 
safety to protect public health and prevent an adverse environmental 
effect. Therefore, we are not revising either subpart to require 
additional controls pursuant to CAA section 112(f)(2) based on the 
residual risk review, and we are readopting the existing standards 
under CAA section 112(f)(2).

B. Technology Reviews

1. What did we propose pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6)?
    Based on our review, we did not identify any developments in 
practices, processes, or control technologies for the Surface Coating 
of Metal Cans source category, and, therefore, we did not propose any 
changes to the standards under CAA section 112(d)(6). A brief summary 
of the EPA's findings in conducting the technology review of metal can 
coating operations was included in the preamble to the proposed rule 
(84 FR 25922, June 4, 2019), and a detailed discussion of the EPA's 
technology review and findings was included in the memorandum, 
Technology Review for Surface Coating Operations in the Metal Can 
Category, April 24, 2019, in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans Docket.
    Based on our review, we did not identify any developments in 
practices, processes, or control technologies for the Surface Coating 
of Metal Coil source category, and, therefore, we did not propose any 
changes to the standards under CAA section 112(d)(6). A brief summary 
of the EPA's findings in conducting the technology review of coil 
coating operations was included in the preamble to the proposed rule 
(84 FR 25934, June 4, 2019), and a detailed discussion of the EPA's 
technology review and findings was included in the memorandum, 
Technology Review for Surface Coating Operations in the Metal Coil 
Category, September 2017, in the Surface Coating of Metal Coil Docket.
2. How did the technology reviews change?
    We are making no changes to the conclusions of the technology 
reviews and are finalizing the results of the technology reviews for 
the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
source categories as proposed.
3. What key comments did we receive on the technology reviews, and what 
are our responses?
    We received two general comments supporting the results of our 
technology reviews for metal cans and metal coil surface coating and 
one comment objecting to our conclusions that there have been no 
technology developments in these two source categories.
    Comment: One commenter alleged that the EPA has not met the legal 
obligation under CAA section 112(d)(6) to review and revise emission 
standards ``as necessary'' to account for ``developments in practices, 
processes, and control technologies.'' The commenter objected that the 
EPA proposed no revisions to the emission limits and claimed the EPA 
provided no legally valid or rational explanation for its determination 
of a lack of ``developments'' for these two source categories. The 
commenter pointed out that the EPA identified several HAP control 
advancements, including alternative coatings, developments for similar 
source categories, and work practices and housekeeping measures for 
metal coil facilities, which would reduce emissions and are in use at a 
number of facilities, yet failed to determine that it was ``necessary'' 
to revise the standard. In addition, the

[[Page 10838]]

commenter alleged that the EPA technology review analysis did not 
consider some relevant sources to determine ``developments.'' As 
examples, the commenter stated that the EPA did not analyze any control 
methods or requirements from other national or state or local 
jurisdictions that might have proven more effective; did not appear to 
analyze the different methods or brands of emission controls 
implemented to see which was most effective, efficient, or reliable; 
and did not examine facility procedures or best practices, including 
records of malfunctions, to identify best practices to mitigate 
malfunctions.
    Response: We disagree with the commenter that the EPA has failed to 
meet the CAA's legal obligation to complete the technology reviews for 
the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
source categories. The EPA concluded there were no HAP control 
advancements for these source categories as a result of the technology 
reviews. The technology reviews included review of coatings currently 
used by these source categories and any advancements in the coatings; 
review of HAP control requirements in NESHAP for similar coating source 
categories and application of those HAP controls to the Surface Coating 
of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil source categories; 
state and local HAP control requirements in facility title V operating 
permits and application of those HAP controls to the Surface Coating of 
Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil source categories; and 
work practices and housekeeping measures currently used by these source 
categories and any advances that were applicable to these source 
categories.
    As stated in the proposal preamble (84 FR 25935) for the Surface 
Coating of Metal Coil source category, alternatives to solvent borne 
coatings have been in use by the coil coating industry since 
development of the 2002 Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP but are 
not considered to be suitable for all end-product applications. The 
2002 proposed NESHAP provided an alternative facility HAP emission 
limit of 0.24 pounds of HAP per gallon of solids applied which was 
established to provide a compliance option for facilities that chose to 
limit their coating line HAP emissions either through a combination of 
low-HAP coatings and add-on controls or through the use of waterborne, 
high solids, or other pollution prevention coatings. The EPA found no 
developments in alternative coating technologies during the technology 
review that would result in achievable emission rates that are 
substantially lower than those reflected in the current emission 
limits.
    The commenter also asserted that the EPA did not consider 
developments in control methods for similar source categories and did 
not analyze the regulations set by state or local jurisdictions that 
might have proven more effective than the NESHAP requirements. We 
disagree with the commenter and refer the commenter to the technology 
review memorandums titled Technology Review for Surface Coating 
Operations in the Metal Can Category and Technology Review for Surface 
Coating Operations in the Metal Coil Category which summarizes the 
EPA's review of the title V operating permits for the five metal can 
facilities and for 39 metal coil facilities that are major sources and 
subject to these NESHAP. The title V operating permits incorporate all 
relevant local, state, or Regional emission limitations, as well as 
federal limitations. In no case did the EPA find a facility subject to 
a HAP limit more stringent than the limits in the current NESHAP or a 
facility using a control technology that was not considered during 
development of the NESHAP and reflected in the current standards. The 
results of the technology reviews were documented in these memorandums 
in the respective docket for each proposed rule.
    The technology basis for MACT for metal coil coating operations in 
the 2002 Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP was emission capture and 
add on control with an overall control efficiency of 98 percent for new 
or reconstructed sources and existing sources. This overall control 
efficiency represents the use of PTE to achieve 100-percent capture of 
application station HAP emissions and a thermal oxidizer to achieve a 
destruction efficiency of 98 percent. No technology was identified 
during the technology review that could achieve a better overall 
control efficiency than the use of a PTE to capture HAP emissions from 
the coating application station and a thermal oxidizer to destroy HAP 
emissions from the coating application and the curing oven.
    It would not be feasible, nor is it required under CAA section 
112(d)(6), for the EPA to evaluate HAP control advancement by examining 
different brands of emission controls to see which was most effective, 
efficient, or reliable, as suggested by the commenter. Similarly, it 
would not be feasible to examine facility procedures or best practices, 
nor review records of malfunctions to identify best practices to 
mitigate malfunctions. That information is not currently available to 
the EPA. If the information was available, it would be difficult, if 
not impossible, to correlate that information with emissions 
performance and develop practical regulatory requirements. Instead, the 
current emission limits are based on actual performance of existing 
sources in the two categories determined to represent the MACT level of 
control for new and existing sources. The performance data used to 
develop the emission limits were collected during emission tests when 
the control devices were performing properly and the emission sources 
were at steady-state operating conditions. Data collected during 
periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction were not used to establish 
the emission limits. After the initial compliance demonstration, 
facilities using add-on controls must comply with operating limits to 
ensure the add-on controls continue to be properly operated and 
maintained to achieve the same level of performance as during the 
performance test. Facilities experiencing deviations from the emission 
limits or the operating limits must report these deviations to the EPA, 
and the EPA will then determine on a case-by-case basis whether the 
deviation constitutes a violation. Because of the diversity of factors 
that could lead to a malfunction in these source categories, it would 
not be practical for the EPA to prescribe specific actions that must be 
taken to reduce the frequency of malfunctions or to minimize emissions 
in the event of a malfunction.
    The commenter also asserted that the EPA identified work practices 
and housekeeping measures for metal coil facilities, which would reduce 
emissions and are in use at a number of facilities yet failed to 
determine that it was ``necessary'' to revise the standard. The 
commenter's assertion appears to be based on a statement in the 
preamble to the proposal where we note that the facility survey 
conducted as part of the development of the 2002 MACT standard for 
Surface Coating of Metal Coil had revealed several types of work 
practices and housekeeping measures in use at that time. (84 FR at 
25935). We also noted in the preamble, however, that we had identified 
no developments in work practices or procedures for the Surface Coating 
of Metal Coil source category. As the commenter has provided no 
additional information regarding possible developments and as the EPA 
has no information about developments in such work practices and 
housekeeping measures, we do not agree that it is necessary to revise 
the

[[Page 10839]]

standard for this source category as a result of the technology review.
4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the technology 
reviews?
    For the reasons explained in the preamble to the proposed rules (84 
FR 25922 and 25934, June 4, 2019), and in the comment responses above 
in section IV.B.3 of this preamble, we are making no changes and are 
finalizing the results of the technology reviews as proposed.

C. Electronic Reporting Provisions

1. What did we propose?
    In the June 4, 2019, notice we proposed to require owners and 
operators of surface coating of metal can and metal coil facilities to 
submit electronic copies of notifications, reports, and performance 
tests through the EPA's CDX, using the CEDRI. These include the initial 
notifications required in 40 CFR 63.9(b) and 63.3510(b) for metal can 
coating and 63.5180(b) for metal coil coating; notifications of 
compliance status required in 40 CFR 63.9(h) and 63.3510(c) for metal 
can coating and 63.5180(d) for metal coil coating; the performance test 
reports required in 40 CFR 63.3511(b) for metal can coating and 
63.5160(d) for metal coil coating; and the semiannual reports required 
in 40 CFR 63.3511(a) for metal can coating and 63.5180(g) for metal 
coil coating. A description of the electronic submission process is 
provided in the memorandum, Electronic Reporting Requirements for New 
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), August 8, 2018, in the Surface 
Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil Dockets. The 
proposed rule requirements would replace the current rule requirements 
to submit the notifications and reports to the Administrator at the 
appropriate address listed in 40 CFR 63.13. The proposed rule 
requirement would not affect submittals required by state air agencies. 
For metal can facilities, the proposed compliance schedule language in 
40 CFR 63.3511(f) for submission of semiannual compliance reports would 
have provided 181 days after the final rule is published to begin 
electronic reporting or 1 year after the 40 CFR part 63, subpart KKKK 
semiannual compliance report template is available in CEDRI, whichever 
is later. For metal coil facilities, the proposed compliance schedule 
language in 40 CFR 63.5181(c) for submission of semiannual compliance 
reports would have provided 1 year after the final rule is published to 
begin electronic reporting or 1 year after the 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
SSSS semiannual compliance report template is available in CEDRI, 
whichever is later.
2. What changed since proposal?
    For metal can facilities, the compliance schedule language in 
proposed 40 CFR 63.3511(f) for submission of semiannual compliance 
reports has been revised from the proposed 181 days, to either 1 year 
after the final rule is published or 1 year after the 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart KKKK, semiannual compliance report template is available in 
CEDRI, whichever is later. No changes were made to the metal coil 
compliance schedule.
3. What key comments did we receive and what are our responses?
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the EPA change the metal can 
compliance schedule language in proposed 40 CFR 63.3511(f) for 
submission of semiannual compliance reports to give facilities either 
1year (instead of 181 days) after the final rule is published to begin 
electronic reporting or 1 year after the 40 CFR part 63, subpart KKKK, 
semiannual compliance report template is available in CEDRI, whichever 
is later. The commenter recommended revising 40 CFR 63.3511(f) to say 
that on and after the date 1 year (instead of 181 days) after the date 
of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, or once the 
reporting template has been available on the CEDRI website for 1 year, 
whichever date is later, the owner or operator is required to submit 
the semiannual compliance report via the CEDRI. The commenter noted 
that the proposed 181-day requirement for 40 CFR part 63, subpart KKKK, 
is not consistent with the 1-year requirement the EPA is proposing for 
40 CFR 63.5181(c) in 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSS for the Surface 
Coating of Metal Coil source category. The commenter also argued that 1 
year would be justified because metal can coating facilities are not 
currently using CEDRI and would need to learn how to access and use 
CEDRI.
    Response: The EPA agrees that both rules should be consistent and 
that the owners and operators should have 1 year after the date of 
publication of the final rule or 1 year after the reporting template 
has been on CEDRI, whichever is later, before they are required to 
submit semiannual compliance reports via CEDRI. This will provide users 
1 year to become familiar with the template and electronic reporting 
system prior to being required to submit reports electronically. This 
will provide adequate time for facilities to adjust to electronic 
reporting, as well as assure that the forms will work properly, prior 
to the date that owners and operators must start submitting these 
reports electronically. The EPA encourages users to become familiar 
with the system well in advance of being required to use it. For 
previous rulemakings with reports required to be submitted 
electronically via CEDRI, prior to a compliance reporting deadline, the 
EPA has provided webinars to our various stakeholders on the access and 
reporting of the given report in CEDRI. The EPA is planning to provide 
this same service to the industry trade association and facilities 
subject to the 40 CFR part 63, subparts KKKK and SSSS electronic 
reporting requirements, if requested to do so. The EPA plans to publish 
the final template on CEDRI about the same time the final rule is 
signed and published. Although facilities will have up to 1 year after 
the final template is on CEDRI to begin using the template and 
submitting reports via CEDRI, facilities may begin submitting reports 
via CEDRI as soon as the final template is available.
    Comment: One commenter stated they will need an interactive 
discussion with the EPA (e.g., by conference call or webinar) to answer 
questions about how to use CEDRI and about the draft electronic 
reporting template before they can effectively comment on whether the 
template is appropriate and workable for metal can surface coating 
facilities subject to subpart 40 CFR part 63, KKKK. The commenter 
further asked that the EPA not finalize the reporting template until 
after the proposed rule is finalized.
    Response: The EPA agrees that interactive discussions via 
conference calls or a webinar with the industry trade organization and 
members would be appropriate to review the electronic reporting process 
using CEDRI and to collaborate on improvements to the draft electronic 
reporting template. The EPA has arranged interactive discussions with 
both the metal can and metal coil industry trade organizations and 
members in an attempt to finalize the electronic reporting templates 
concurrent with the final rule promulgation. If that is the case 
facilities will have 1 year after the final rule is published to submit 
notifications and semiannual compliance reports using the electronic 
reporting template in CEDRI. If the reporting templates are not 
finalized concurrent with the final rule promulgation, the EPA will 
continue to work with the industry trade organizations and members to 
finalize the templates and will make the final templates available on 
the CEDRI

[[Page 10840]]

website. Facilities would then be required to submit notifications and 
semiannual compliance reports using the electronic reporting template 
in CEDRI one year after the reporting template has been available on 
the CEDRI website.
    4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the electronic 
reporting provisions?
    For the reasons explained in the preamble to the proposed rules (84 
FR 25922 and 25934, June 4, 2019), and in the comment responses above 
in section IV.C.3 of this preamble, we are finalizing the electronic 
reporting provisions for both 40 CFR parts 63, subparts KKKK and SSSS, 
as proposed with the exception of the change in date by which 
electronic reporting must commence for the Surface Coating of Metal 
Cans source category (described in section IV.C.2 of this preamble).

D. SSM Provisions

1. What did we propose?
    In the June 4, 2019, action, we proposed amendments to the Surface 
Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP and the Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
NESHAP to remove and revise provisions related to SSM that are not 
consistent with the requirement that the standards apply at all times. 
More information concerning the elimination of SSM provisions is in the 
preamble to the proposed rule (84 FR 25909, June 4, 2019).
2. What changed since proposal?
    We are finalizing the SSM provisions as proposed with no changes 
(84 FR 25909, June 4, 2019).
3. What key comments did we receive and what are our responses?
    Comment: One commenter noted that new language has been proposed 
for 40 CFR 63.5150(a) which states that on and after the compliance 
date sources must also maintain the monitoring equipment at all times 
in accordance with 40 CFR 63.5140(b) and keep the necessary parts 
readily available for routine repairs of the monitoring equipment. The 
commenter expressed concern that different inspectors could have 
different interpretations of what parts would be ``necessary'' to be 
kept readily available and what repairs would be ``routine.'' The 
commenter recommended revising the proposed language for 40 CFR 
63.5150(a) to omit ``and keep the necessary parts readily available for 
routine repairs of the monitoring equipment.''
    The commenter argued that the compliance requirement language will 
always be open to some degree of interpretation, but the suggested 
change would minimize differences in how this new language is 
interpreted and allow the individual facilities to manage and defend 
their compliance practices required in this section as they see best.
    Response: The EPA disagrees with the commenter and is not accepting 
this recommended change. The requirement is not new, it was simply 
moved from the 40 CFR part 63 General Provisions to subparts KKKK and 
SSSS. The language proposed for 40 CFR 63.5150(a) replaces language in 
40 CFR 63.8(c)(1)(i) and (ii) that no longer applies. The EPA is 
amending Table 5 to Subpart KKKK of Part 63 so that 40 CFR 63.8(c)(1) 
no longer applies because 40 CFR 63.8(c)(1)(iii) requires, ``The owner 
or operator of an affected source must develop a written startup, 
shutdown, and malfunction plan for CMS as specified in Sec.  
63.6(e)(3).'' Because 40 CFR 63.8(c)(1) no longer applies as part of 
the amendments to remove the SSM exemptions, the provisions of 40 CFR 
63.8(c)(1)(i) and (ii) are being added to each subpart. The EPA 
disagrees that the proposed language would lead to differences in 
interpretation and the commenter provided no evidence that the same 
language led to compliance issues when it was located only in 40 CFR 
63.8(c)(1)(ii).
4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the SSM provisions?
    For the reasons explained in the proposed rule and after evaluation 
of the comments on the proposed amendments to the SSM provisions for 
the Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP and the Surface Coating of 
Metal Coil NESHAP, we are finalizing the proposed revisions related to 
SSM that are not consistent with the requirement that the standards 
apply at all times. More information concerning the proposed amendments 
to the SSM provisions is in the preamble to the proposed rule (84 FR 
25909, June 4, 2019).

E. Ongoing Compliance Demonstrations

1. What did we propose?
    In the June 4, 2019, action we proposed to require owners and 
operators of surface coating of metal can facilities and surface 
coating of metal coil facilities to conduct periodic performance 
testing of add-on control devices on a regular frequency of every 5 
years to ensure the equipment continues to operate properly for 
facilities using the emission rate with add-on controls compliance 
option. This proposed periodic testing requirement included an 
exception to the general requirement for periodic testing for 
facilities using the catalytic oxidizer control options and following 
catalyst maintenance procedures that are found in both 40 CFR part 63, 
subparts KKKK and SSSS. These catalyst maintenance procedures include 
annual testing of the catalyst and other maintenance procedures that 
provide ongoing demonstrations that the control system is operating 
properly and may, thus, be considered comparable to conducting a 
performance test. The proposed periodic performance testing requirement 
also allows an exception from periodic testing for facilities using 
CEMS to show actual emissions. The use of CEMS to demonstrate 
compliance would obviate the need for periodic testing.
    This proposed requirement did not require periodic testing or CEMS 
monitoring of facilities using the compliant materials option or the 
emission-rate without add-on controls compliance option because these 
two compliance options do not use any add-on controls or control 
efficiency measurements in the compliance calculations.
    The proposed periodic performance testing requirement requires 
facilities complying with the standards using emission capture systems 
and add-on controls and which are not already on a 5-year testing 
schedule to conduct the first of the periodic performance tests within 
3 years of the effective date of the revised standards. Afterward, they 
would generally conduct periodic testing before they renew their title 
V operating permits, but in no case more than 5 years following the 
previous performance test. Additionally, facilities that have already 
tested as a condition of their permit within the last 2 years before 
the effective date would be permitted to maintain their current 5-year 
schedule.
2. What changed since proposal?
    We have revised the proposed periodic testing language in 40 CFR 
part 63, subparts KKKK and SSSS, since proposal to clarify that 
facilities already conducting comparable periodic testing as a 
requirement of renewing their title V operating permit under 40 CFR 
part 70 or part 71 may continue with their current testing schedule. We 
also reformatted the electronic reporting language in 40 CFR part 63, 
subparts KKKK and SSSS, to provide clarification on the requirements 
for asserting a claim of EPA system outage or force majeure for failure 
to timely comply with the reporting requirements.

[[Page 10841]]

3. What key comments did we receive and what are our responses?
    Comment: One commenter recommended that language in the proposed 
rule for 40 CFR part 63, subpart KKKK should be revised to more clearly 
state that facilities are permitted to use the performance tests 
conducted under their title V permits, as required by state and local 
permitting authorities, to meet the proposed requirement for periodic 
performance testing under 40 CFR part 63, subpart KKKK. The commenter 
suggested that the EPA modify the proposed language for 40 CFR 
63.3540(a)(1)(ii), 63.3540(b)(1)(ii), 63.3550(a)(1)(ii), and 
63.3550(b)(1)(ii) and offered clarifying language to say that if a 
source is not required to complete periodic performance tests as a 
requirement of renewing its title V operating permit under 40 CFR part 
70 or 40 CFR part 71, it must conduct the first periodic performance 
test before the date 3 years after date of publication of the final 
rule in the Federal Register, unless the source has already conducted a 
performance test on or after the date 2 years before the date of 
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. The commenter 
then suggested adding language to say that if a source is already 
required to complete periodic performance tests as a requirement of 
renewing its title V operating permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR 
part 71, it must conduct the periodic testing in accordance with the 
terms and schedule required by its permit conditions.
    Response: The EPA agrees that the recommended changes would clarify 
that facilities can continue to use tests conducted under title V to 
meet the 40 CFR part 63, subpart KKKK requirement to conduct periodic 
performance tests. The EPA is making the recommended changes to 40 CFR 
63.3540(a)(1)(ii), 63.3540(b)(1)(ii), 63.3550(a)(1)(ii), and 
63.3550(b)(1)(ii) and is making comparable changes to Table 1 To 40 CFR 
63.5160--Required Performance Testing Summary, in 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart SSSS.
4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the ongoing 
compliance demonstrations?
    For the reasons explained in the preamble to the proposed rules (84 
FR 25922 and 25934, June 4, 2019), and in the comment responses above 
in section IV.C.3 of this preamble, we are finalizing the periodic 
testing provisions for both 40 CFR part 63, subparts KKKK and SSSS, as 
proposed with the exception of the rule clarification change described 
for 40 CFR part 63, subparts KKKK and SSSS in section IV.D.2 of this 
preamble.

V. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts and Additional 
Analyses Conducted

A. What are the affected sources?

    Currently, five major sources subject to the Surface Coating of 
Metal Cans NESHAP are operating in the United States. The affected 
source under the NESHAP is the collection of all equipment used to 
apply coating to a metal can or end (including decorative tins), or 
metal crown or closure, and to dry or cure the coating after 
application; all storage containers and mixing vessels in which 
coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials are stored or mixed; all 
manual and automated equipment and containers used for conveying 
coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials; and all storage containers 
and all manual and automated equipment and containers used for 
conveying waste materials generated by the coating operations. A 
coating operation always includes at least the point at which a coating 
is applied and all subsequent points in the affected source where 
organic HAP emissions from that coating occur. There may be multiple 
coating operations in an affected source.
    Currently, 48 major sources subject to the Surface Coating of Metal 
Coil NESHAP are operating in the United States. The affected source 
under the NESHAP is the collection of all the coil coating lines at a 
facility, including the equipment used to apply an organic coating to 
the surface of metal coil. A coil coating line includes a web unwind or 
feed section, a series of one or more work stations, and any associated 
curing oven, wet section, and quench station. A coil coating line does 
not include ancillary operations such as mixing/thinning, cleaning, 
wastewater treatment, and storage of coating material. Metal coil is a 
continuous metal strip that is at least 0.15 mm (0.006 inch) thick, 
which is packaged in a roll or coil prior to coating. Material less 
than 0.15 mm (0.006 inch) thick is considered metal foil, not metal 
coil. The NESHAP applies to coating lines on which more than 15 percent 
of the material coated, based on surface area, meets the definition of 
metal coil. There may be multiple coating operations in an affected 
source.

B. What are the air quality impacts?

    The EPA estimates the current emissions of volatile organic HAP 
from the Surface Coating of Metal Cans source category are 
approximately 77 tpy and the current emissions of volatile organic HAP 
from the Surface Coating of Metal Coil source category are 
approximately 291 tpy.
    The amendments require that all 53 major sources in the Surface 
Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil source 
categories comply with the relevant emission standards at all times, 
including periods of SSM. We were unable to quantify the emissions that 
occur during periods of SSM or the specific emissions reductions that 
will occur as a result of this action. However, eliminating the SSM 
exemption has the potential to reduce emissions by requiring facilities 
to meet the applicable standard during SSM periods.
    The amendments will have no effect on the energy needs of the 
affected facilities in either of the two source categories and will, 
therefore, have no adverse energy impacts or indirect or secondary air 
emissions impacts. Energy impacts consist of the electricity and steam 
needed to operate control devices and other equipment. Indirect or 
secondary air emissions impacts are impacts that would result from the 
increased energy usage associated with the operation of control devices 
(e.g., increased secondary emissions of criteria pollutants from power 
plants).

C. What are the cost impacts?

    We estimate that each facility in these two source categories will 
experience increased costs as a result of these final amendments for 
recordkeeping and reporting. Each facility will experience costs to 
read and understand the rule amendments. Costs associated with 
elimination of the SSM exemption were estimated as part of the 
reporting and recordkeeping costs and include time for re-evaluating 
and modifying, as necessary, previously developed SSM record systems. 
Costs associated with the requirement to electronically submit 
notifications and semi-annual compliance reports using CEDRI were 
estimated as part of the reporting and recordkeeping costs and include 
time for becoming familiar with CEDRI and the reporting template for 
semi-annual compliance reports. The recordkeeping and reporting costs 
are presented in section VI.C of this preamble.
    We are also finalizing a requirement for performance testing no 
less frequently than every 5 years for sources in each source category 
that use the add-on controls compliance options. We estimate that the 
new periodic testing requirement will impose additional costs for 22 
facilities across the two source categories. We estimate that one 
facility using three add-on control devices subject to the Surface 
Coating of

[[Page 10842]]

Metal Cans NESHAP will incur costs to conduct control device 
performance testing because it is using the emission rate with add-on 
controls compliance option and is not required by its title V operating 
permit to conduct testing every 5 years. We estimate that 21 facilities 
subject to the Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP will incur costs to 
conduct periodic testing because they are currently using the emission 
rate with add-on controls compliance option and are not required by 
their title V operating permits to conduct testing every 5 years. These 
21 metal coil coating facilities have a total of 30 add-on control 
devices. This total does not include facilities in the Surface Coating 
of Metal Coil source category that have add-on controls and are 
currently required to perform periodic performance testing as a 
condition of their title V operating permit. The cost for a facility to 
conduct a destruction or removal efficiency performance test using EPA 
Method 25 or 25A is estimated to be about $19,000, with tests of 
additional control devices at the same facility costing 25 percent less 
due to reduced travel costs. The estimated total cost for the one metal 
can surface coating facility to test three add-on control devices in a 
single year would be $47,000. The estimated total cost for all 21 metal 
coil facilities to test 30 add-on control devices in a single year, 
plus two retests to account for 5 percent of control devices failing to 
pass the first test, would be $560,000. The total annualized testing 
cost is estimated to be approximately $11,000 per year for the Surface 
Coating of Metal Cans source category, and $130,000 per year for the 
Surface Coating of Metal Coil source category, including retests. In 
addition to the testing costs, each facility performing a test will 
have an estimated additional $5,500 in reporting costs in the year in 
which the test occurs.
    As a result of changes to recordkeeping and reporting requirements, 
a one-time review of the updated rule language, and the addition of the 
periodic testing requirement for facilities using add-on controls, the 
costs of the final amendments are estimated to be $21,800 for the 
Surface Coating of Metal Cans source category and $271,000 for the 
Surface Coating of Metal Coil source category averaged over the first 3 
years after the amendments are finalized. For further information on 
the estimated costs, see the cost tables in the memoranda titled 
Estimated Costs/Impacts of the 40 CFR part 63 Subparts KKKK and SSSS 
Monitoring Review Revisions, February 2019, and the Economic Impact and 
Small Business Screening Assessments for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Metal Cans Coating Plants (Subpart KKKK) and the Economic Impact and 
Small Business Screening Assessments for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Metal Coil Coating Plants (Subpart SSSS) in the Surface Coating of 
Metal Cans and Surface Coating of Metal Coil Dockets.

D. What are the economic impacts?

    The economic impact analysis is designed to inform decision makers 
about the potential economic consequences of a regulatory action. For 
the final revisions, the EPA estimated the cost of becoming familiar 
with the rule and re-evaluating and revising, as necessary, previously 
developed SSM record systems and performing periodic emissions testing 
at certain facilities with add-on controls that are not already 
required to perform testing. To assess the maximum potential impact, 
the largest cost expected to be experienced in any 1 year is compared 
to the total sales for the ultimate owners of the affected facilities 
to estimate the total burden for each ultimate owner.
    For the final revisions to the NESHAP for the Surface Coating of 
Metal Cans, the annualized cost is estimated to be $11,000 for the five 
affected entities. The five affected facilities are owned by three 
different parent companies, and the total costs associated with the 
final requirements range from 0.00002 to 0.77 percent of annual sales 
revenue per ultimate owner. These costs are not expected to result in a 
significant market impact, regardless of whether they are passed on to 
the purchaser or absorbed by the firms.
    For the final revisions to the NESHAP for the Surface Coating of 
Metal Coil, the annualized cost is estimated to be $130,000 for the 48 
affected entities. The 48 affected facilities are owned by 25 different 
parent companies, and the total costs associated with the proposed 
requirements range from 0.00001 to 0.28 percent of annual sales revenue 
per ultimate owner. These costs are not expected to result in a 
significant market impact, regardless of whether they are passed on to 
the purchaser or absorbed by the firms.
    The EPA also prepared a small business screening assessment to 
determine whether any of the identified affected entities are small 
entities, as defined by the U.S. Small Business Administration. One of 
the facilities potentially affected by the final revisions to the 
NESHAP for the Surface Coating of Metal Cans is a small entity. Ten of 
the facilities potentially affected by the final revisions to the 
NESHAP for the Surface Coating of Metal Coil are small entities. 
However, the annualized costs associated with the final revisions for 
the seven ultimate owners of these eleven affected small entities range 
from 0.0029 to 0.77 percent of annual sales revenues per ultimate 
owner. Therefore, there are no significant economic impacts on a 
substantial number of small entities from these final amendments.
    More information and details of this analysis are provided in the 
technical documents titled Economic Impact and Small Business Screening 
Assessments for Proposed Amendments to the National Emission Standards 
for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Surface Coating of Metal Cans 
(Subpart KKKK) and Economic Impact and Small Business Screening 
Assessments for Proposed Amendments to the National Emission Standards 
for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
(Subpart SSSS), available in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and 
Surface Coating of Metal Coil Dockets, respectively.

E. What are the benefits?

    As stated above in section V.B of this preamble, we were unable to 
quantify the specific emissions reductions associated with eliminating 
the SSM exemption or as a result of adding the requirement to conduct 
periodic add-on control device performance tests, although these final 
revisions have the potential to reduce emissions of volatile organic 
HAP.
    Because these final amendments are not considered economically 
significant, as defined by Executive Order 12866, and because we were 
unable to quantify the specific emission reductions that will occur as 
a result of this action, we did not monetize the benefits of reducing 
these emissions. This does not mean that there are no benefits 
associated with the potential reduction in volatile organic HAP from 
this rule.

F. What analysis of environmental justice did we conduct?

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 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.

[[Page 10843]]

    To examine the potential for any environmental justice issues that 
might be associated with these source categories, we performed a 
demographic analysis for each source category, which is an assessment 
of risks to individual demographic groups of the populations living 
within 5 kilometers (km) and within 50 km of the facilities. In these 
analyses, we evaluated the distribution of HAP-related cancer and 
noncancer risks from each source category across different demographic 
groups within the populations living near facilities.
1. Surface Coating of Metal Cans
    The results of the demographic analysis for the Surface Coating of 
Metal Cans source category are summarized in Table 4 of this preamble. 
These results, for various demographic groups, are based on the 
estimated risk from actual emissions levels for the population living 
within 50 km of the facilities.
    The results of the Surface Coating of Metal Cans source category 
demographic analysis indicate that emissions from the source category 
expose approximately 700 people to a cancer risk at or above 1-in-1 
million and no one to a chronic noncancer TOSHI greater than 1. The 
percentages of the population exposed to emissions from the source 
category in three demographic groups (White, Above Poverty Level, and 
Over 25 with a High School Diploma) are greater than their respective 
nationwide percentages. The methodology and the results of the 
demographic analysis are presented in more detail in the technical 
report titled Risk and Technology Review--Analysis of Demographic 
Factors for Populations Living Near Surface Coating of Metal Cans 
Source Category Operations, May 2018, in the Surface Coating of Metal 
Cans Docket.

            Table 4--Surface Coating of Metal Cans Source Category Demographic Risk Analysis Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Population with cancer  Population with chronic
                                                                risk at or above 1-in-1    noncancer HI above 1
                                                  Nationwide     million due to surface   due to surface coating
                                                                 coating of metal cans        of metal cans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Population..............................     317,746,049                      700                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          White and Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White.........................................              62                       92                        0
Minority......................................              38                        8                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
African American..............................              12                        0                        0
Native American...............................             0.8                        0                        0
Hispanic......................................              18                        4                        0
Other and Multiracial.........................               7                        4                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Income by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below Poverty Level...........................              14                        4                        0
Above Poverty Level...........................              86                       96                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Education by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 25 and without High School Diploma.......              14                        4                        0
Over 25 and with a High School Diploma........              86                       96                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Linguistically Isolated by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linguistically Isolated.......................               6                        0                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Surface Coating of Metal Coil
    The results of the demographic analysis for the Surface Coating of 
Metal Coil source category are summarized in Table 5 of this preamble. 
These results, for various demographic groups, are based on the 
estimated risk from actual emissions levels for the population living 
within 50 km of the facilities.
    The results of the Surface Coating of Metal Coil source category 
demographic analysis indicate that emissions from the source category 
expose approximately 19,000 people to a cancer risk at or above 1-in-1 
million and no one is exposed to a chronic noncancer TOSHI greater than 
1. The percentages of the population exposed to emissions from the 
source category in three demographic groups (White, African American, 
and Over 25 and with a High School Diploma) are greater than their 
respective nationwide percentages.
    The methodology and the results of the demographic analysis are 
presented in a technical report, Risk and Technology Review--Analysis 
of Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near Surface Coating of 
Metal Coil Source Category Operations, May 2017, available in the 
Surface Coating of Metal Coil Docket.

[[Page 10844]]



            Table 5--Surface Coating of Metal Coil Source Category Demographic Risk Analysis Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Population with cancer  Population with chronic
                                                                risk at or above 1-in-1    noncancer HI above 1
                                                  Nationwide     million due to surface   due to surface coating
                                                                 coating of metal coil        of metal coil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Population..............................     317,746,049                   19,000                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          White and Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White.........................................              62                       70                        0
Minority......................................              38                       30                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
African American..............................              12                       21                        0
Native American...............................             0.8                      0.1                        0
Hispanic......................................              18                        4                        0
Other and Multiracial.........................               7                        5                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Income by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below Poverty Level...........................              14                       15                        0
Above Poverty Level...........................              86                       85                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Education by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 25 and without High School Diploma.......              14                       10                        0
Over 25 and with a High School Diploma........              86                       90                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Linguistically Isolated by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linguistically Isolated.......................               6                        1                        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. What analysis of children's environmental health did we conduct?

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is 
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and 
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety 
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to 
children. This action's health and risk assessments are summarized in 
section IV.A of this preamble and are further documented in the 
Residual Risk Assessment for the Surface Coating of Metal Cans Source 
Category in Support of the 2019 Risk and Technology Review Proposed 
Rule, and the Residual Risk Assessment for the Surface Coating of Metal 
Coil Source Category in Support of the 2019 Risk and Technology Review 
Proposed Rule, in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating 
of Metal Coil Dockets, respectively.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders 
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was, 
therefore, not submitted to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for 
review.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action 
because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    The information collection activities in this action have been 
submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA, as discussed for each 
source category covered by this action in sections VI.C.1 and 2.
1. Surface Coating of Metal Cans
    The Information Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA 
prepared for this source category has been assigned EPA ICR number 
2079.08. You can find a copy of the ICR document in the Surface Coating 
of Metal Cans Docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0684), and it is 
briefly summarized here. The information collection requirements are 
not enforced until OMB approves them.
    As part of the RTR for the Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP, 
the EPA is not revising the emission limit requirements. The EPA is 
revising the SSM provisions of the rule and requiring the use of 
electronic data reporting for future performance test data submittals, 
notifications, and reports. This information is being collected to 
assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart KKKK.
    Respondents/affected entities: Facilities performing surface 
coating of metal cans.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63, 
subpart KKKK).
    Estimated number of respondents: In the 3 years after the 
amendments are final, approximately five respondents per year will be 
subject to the NESHAP and no additional respondents are expected to 
become subject to the NESHAP during that period.
    Frequency of response: The total number of responses in year 1 is 
15 and in year 3 is one. Year 2 would have no responses.
    Total estimated burden: The average annual information collection 
burden to the five metal can facilities over the 3 years after the 
amendments are finalized is estimated to be 54 hours (per year). The 
average annual burden to the

[[Page 10845]]

Agency over the 3 years after the amendments are finalized is estimated 
to be 23 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: The average annual labor cost to the metal 
can facilities is estimated to be $6,200 in the first 3 years after the 
amendments are finalized. The average annual capital and operation and 
maintenance (O&M) cost is estimated to be $15,600 over this period. The 
average annual Agency cost over the first 3 years after the amendments 
are finalized is estimated to be $1,090.
2. Surface Coating of Metal Coil
    The ICR document that the EPA prepared for this source category has 
been assigned EPA ICR number 1957.10. You can find a copy of the ICR 
document in the Surface Coating of Metal Coil Docket (Docket ID No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0685), and it is briefly summarized here. The 
information collection requirements are not enforced until OMB approves 
them.
    As part of the RTR for the Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP, 
the EPA is not revising the emission limit requirements. The EPA is 
revising the SSM provisions of the rule and requiring the use of 
electronic data reporting for future performance test data submittals, 
notifications, and reports. This information is being collected to 
assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSS.
    Respondents/affected entities: Facilities performing surface 
coating of metal coil.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63, 
subpart SSSS).
    Estimated number of respondents: In the 3 years after the 
amendments are finalized, approximately 48 respondents per year will be 
subject to the NESHAP and no additional respondents are expected to 
become subject to the NESHAP during that period.
    Frequency of response: The total number of responses in year 1 is 
144 and in year 3 is 69. Year 2 would have no responses.
    Total estimated burden: The average annual burden to the 48 metal 
coil coating facilities over the 3 years after the amendments are 
finalized is estimated to be 738 hours (per year). The average annual 
burden to the Agency over the 3 years after the amendments are 
finalized is estimated to be 179 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 
5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: The average annual cost to the 48 metal coil 
coating facilities is estimated to be $85,000 in labor costs and 
$186,000 in capital and O&M costs in the first 3 years after the 
amendments are finalized. The average annual Agency cost over the first 
3 years after the amendments are finalized is estimated to be $8,530.
    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 the 
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB 
approves the ICRs, the Agency will announce that approval in the 
Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to 
display the OMB control number for the approved information collection 
actions contained in the final rule.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. The 
eleven small entities that are subject to the requirements of this 
action are small businesses. The Agency has determined that the seven 
ultimate owners of these eleven affected small entities (21 percent of 
the facilities affected by this action) so impacted may experience an 
impact of 0.0029 to 0.77 percent of annual sales revenues per ultimate 
owner. Details of this analysis are described in section V.D above and 
in the economic impact memorandums located in the dockets for this 
action.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or 
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes 
no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the 
private sector.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action 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.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. No tribal facilities are known to be engaged in 
any of the industries that would be affected by this action (metal can 
surface coating and metal coil surface coating). Thus, Executive Order 
13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is 
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and 
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety 
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to 
children. This action's health and risk assessments are contained in 
sections III.A and C, IV.A.1 and 2, IV.B.1 and 2, and IV.C.1 and 2 of 
the proposal preamble (84 FR 25904, June 4, 2019) and are further 
documented in the Residual Risk Assessment for the Surface Coating of 
Metal Cans Source Category in Support of the 2019 Risk and Technology 
Review Proposed Rule and the Residual Risk Assessment for the Surface 
Coating of Metal Coil Source Category in Support of the 2019 Risk and 
Technology Review Proposed Rule in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans 
Docket and the Surface Coating of Metal Coil Docket, respectively.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is 
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR 
Part 51

    This rulemaking involves technical standards. The EPA amended the 
Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP in this action to provide owners 
and operators with the option of conducting two new methods: EPA Method 
18 of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60, ``Measurement of Gaseous Organic 
Compound Emissions by Gas Chromatography,'' to measure and subtract 
methane emissions from measured total gaseous organic mass emissions as 
carbon, and ASTM Method D1475-13, ``Standard Test Method for Density of 
Liquid Coatings, Inks, and Related Products.'' We are incorporating 
ASTM Method D1475-13 by reference. We are adding these two standards to 
the Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP only, as these methods are 
already provided in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP.
    The EPA is also amending the Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP 
to update three ASTM test methods and

[[Page 10846]]

amend the Surface Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP to update two ASTM test 
methods. We are updating ASTM Method D1475-90, ``Standard Test Method 
for Density of Liquid Coatings, Inks, and Related Products,'' in the 
Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP by incorporating by reference ASTM 
Method D1475-13. The updated version, ASTM Method D1475-13, clarifies 
units of measure and reduces the number of determinations required. We 
are updating ASTM Method D2697-86 (1998), ``Standard Test Method for 
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings,'' in both the 
Surface Coating of Metal Cans and the Surface Coating of Metal Coil 
NESHAP by incorporating by reference ASTM D2697-03 (2014), which is the 
updated version of the previously approved method. We are also updating 
ASTM Method D6093-97 (2003), ``Standard Test Method for Percent Volume 
Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using Helium Gas 
Pycnometer,'' in both the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and the Surface 
Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP by incorporating by reference ASTM D6093-
97 (2016), which is the updated version of the previously approved 
method. ASTM D2697-03 (2014) is a test method that can be used to 
determine the volume of nonvolatile matter in clear and pigmented 
coatings and ASTM D6093-97 (2016) is a test method that can be used to 
determine the percent volume of nonvolatile matter in clear and 
pigmented coatings.
    For the Surface Coating of Metal Cans NESHAP and the Surface 
Coating of Metal Coil NESHAP, we are incorporating by reference ASTM 
D2369-10 (2015), ``Test Method for Volatile Content of Coatings,'' as 
an alternative to EPA Method 24 for the determination of the volatiles 
emitted by the surface coatings. The test method determines the weight 
percent volatile content of solvent borne and water borne coatings 
under specified test conditions. It is viable for coatings wherein one 
or more parts may, at ambient conditions, contain liquid co-reactants 
that are volatile until a chemical reaction has occurred with another 
component of a multi-package system.
    For the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and the Surface Coating of 
Metal Coil NESHAP, we are incorporating by reference ASTM D2111-10 
(2015), ``Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity and Density of 
Halogenated Organic Solvents and Their Admixtures,'' for the 
determination of the specific gravity of halogenated organic solvents 
and solvent admixtures in surface coatings. ASTM D2111-10 (2015) 
includes three test methods to measure specific gravity using suitable 
apparatus (i.e., a hydrometer, a pycnometer, or an electronic 
densitometer), procedures, and details underlying the interpretation of 
test data and the selection of numerical limits.
    The ASTM standards are available from the American Society for 
Testing and Materials (ASTM), 100 Barr Harbor Drive, Post Office Box 
C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. See http://www.astm.org/.
    The EPA decided not to include certain other VCS; these methods are 
impractical as alternatives because of the lack of equivalency, 
documentation, validation date, and other important technical and 
policy considerations. The search and review results have been 
documented and are in the memoranda titled Voluntary Consensus Standard 
Results for Surface Coating of Metal Cans, August 16, 2018, and 
Voluntary Consensus Standard Results for Surface Coating of Metal Coil, 
August 16, 2018, in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans Docket and the 
Surface Coating of Metal Coil Docket, respectively.
    Under 40 CFR 63.7(f) and 40 CFR 63.8(f) of subpart A of the General 
Provisions, a source may apply to the EPA for permission to use 
alternative test methods or alternative monitoring requirements in 
place of any required testing methods, performance specifications, or 
procedures in the final rule or any amendments.

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

    The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately 
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority 
populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as 
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) 
because it does not significantly affect the level of protection 
provided to human health or the environment. The documentation for this 
decision is contained in section IV of this preamble and the technical 
reports titled Risk and Technology Review--Analysis of Demographic 
Factors for Populations Living Near Surface Coating of Metal Cans 
Source Category Operations, May 2018, and Risk and Technology Review--
Analysis of Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near Surface 
Coating of Metal Coil Source Category Operations, May 2018, which are 
available in the Surface Coating of Metal Cans and Surface Coating of 
Metal Coil Dockets, respectively.

L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule 
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of 
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, 
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by 
reference, Surface Coating of Metal Cans, Surface Coating of Metal 
Coil, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Appendix A.

    Dated: December 20, 2019.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part 
63 as follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS 
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

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

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

Subpart A--General Provisions

0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraphs (h)(13), (21), (26), 
(29), (30), (78) and (79) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.14  Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (13) ASTM D1475-13, Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid 
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products, approved November 1, 2013, IBR 
approved for Sec. Sec.  63.3521(c), 63.3531(c), 63.4141(b) and (c), 
63.4741(b) and (c), 63.4751(c), 63.4941(b) and (c), and 63.5160(c).
* * * * *
    (21) ASTM D2111-10 (Reapproved 2015), Standard Test Methods for 
Specific Gravity and Density of Halogenated Organic Solvents and Their 
Admixtures, approved June 1, 2015, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  
63.3531(c), 63.4141(b) and (c), 63.4741(a), and 63.5160(c).
* * * * *
    (26) ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\, Standard Test Method for 
Volatile Content of Coatings, approved June 1, 2015, IBR approved for 
Sec. Sec.  63.3521(a), 63.3541(i), 63.4141(a) and (b), 63.4161(h), 
63.4321(e), 63.4341(e), 63.4351(d), 63.4741(a), 63.4941(a) and (b), 
63.4961(j), and 63.5160(b).
* * * * *

[[Page 10847]]

    (29) ASTM D2697-86 (Reapproved 1998), Standard Test Method for 
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings, IBR approved 
for Sec. Sec.  63.3161(f), 63.3941(b), 63.4141(b), 63.4741(b), and 
63.4941(b).
    (30) ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014), Standard Test Method for 
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings, approved July 
1, 2014, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  63.3521(b), 63.4141(b), 63.4741(a) 
and (b), 63.4941(b), and 63.5160(c).
* * * * *
    (78) ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved 2003), Standard Test Method for 
Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using 
a Helium Gas Pycnometer, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  63.3161 and 
63.3941.
    (79) ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved 2016), Standard Test Method for 
Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using 
a Helium Gas Pycnometer, Approved December 1, 2016, IBR approved for 
Sec. Sec.  63.3521(b), 63.4141(b), 63.4741(a) and (b), 63.4941(b), and 
63.5160(c).
* * * * *

Subpart KKKK--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Metal Cans

0
3. Section 63.3481 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(5) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.3481  Am I subject to this subpart?

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (5) Surface coating of metal pails, buckets, and drums. Subpart 
MMMM of this part covers surface coating of all miscellaneous metal 
parts and products not explicitly covered by another subpart.

0
4. Section 63.3492 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.3492  What operating limits must I meet?

* * * * *
    (b) For any controlled coating operation(s) on which you use the 
emission rate with add-on controls option or the control efficiency/
outlet concentration option, except those for which you use a solvent 
recovery system and conduct a liquid-liquid material balance according 
to Sec.  63.3541(i), you must meet the operating limits specified in 
Table 4 to this subpart. Those operating limits apply to the emission 
capture and control systems for the coating operation(s) used for 
purposes of complying with this subpart. You must establish the 
operating limits during the performance tests required in Sec.  63.3540 
or Sec.  63.3550 according to the requirements in Sec.  63.3546 or 
Sec.  63.3556. You must meet the operating limits established during 
the most recent performance tests required in Sec.  63.3540 or Sec.  
63.3550 at all times after they have been established during the 
performance test.
* * * * *

0
5. Section 63.3500 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1), (b), and 
(c) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3500  What are my general requirements for complying with this 
subpart?

    (a) * * *
    (1) Any coating operation(s) for which you use the compliant 
material option or the emission rate without add-on controls option, as 
specified in Sec.  63.3491(a) and (b), must be in compliance with the 
applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.3490 at all times.
* * * * *
    (b) Before August 24, 2020, you must always operate and maintain 
your affected source, including all air pollution control and 
monitoring equipment you use for purposes of complying with this 
subpart, according to the provisions in Sec.  63.6(e)(1)(i). On and 
after August 24, 2020, at all times, the owner or operator must operate 
and maintain any affected source, including associated air pollution 
control equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner consistent with 
safety and good air pollution control practices for minimizing 
emissions. The general duty to minimize emissions does not require the 
owner or operator to make any further efforts to reduce emissions if 
levels required by the applicable standard have been achieved. 
Determination of whether a source is operating in compliance with 
operation and maintenance requirements will be based on information 
available to the Administrator that may include, but is not limited to, 
monitoring results, review of operation and maintenance procedures, 
review of operation and maintenance records, and inspection of the 
affected source.
    (c) Before August 24, 2020, if your affected source uses an 
emission capture system and add-on control device for purposes of 
complying with this subpart, you must develop a written startup, 
shutdown, and malfunction plan (SSMP) according to the provisions in 
Sec.  63.6(e)(3). The plan must address startup, shutdown, and 
corrective actions in the event of a malfunction of the emission 
capture system or the add-on control device. The plan must also address 
any coating operation equipment that may cause increased emissions or 
that would affect capture efficiency if the process equipment 
malfunctions, such as conveyors that move parts among enclosures. On 
and after August 24, 2020, the SSMP is not required.

0
6. Section 63.3511 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(4), (a)(5) introductory text, (a)(5)(i), and 
(a)(5)(iv);
0
b. Adding paragraph (a)(5)(v);
0
c. Revising paragraph (a)(6) introductory text and (a)(6)(iii);
0
d. Adding paragraph (a)(6)(iv);
0
e. Revising paragraphs (a)(7) introductory text, (a)(7)(iii), 
(a)(7)(vi) through (viii), (a)(7)(x), and (a)(7)(xiii) and (xiv);
0
f. Adding paragraph (a)(7)(xv);
0
g. Revising paragraphs (a)(8) introductory text, (a)(8)(i), (a)(8)(iv) 
through (vi), (a)(8)(viii), and (a)(8)(xi) and (xii);
0
f. Adding paragraph (a)(8)(xiii);
0
g. Revising paragraph (c) introductory text; and
0
h. Adding paragraphs (d) through (h).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  63.3511  What reports must I submit?

    (a) * * *
    (4) No deviations. If there were no deviations from the emission 
limits, operating limits, or work practice standards in Sec. Sec.  
63.3490, 63.3492, and 63.3493 that apply to you, the semiannual 
compliance report must include a statement that there were no 
deviations from the emission limitations during the reporting period. 
If you used the emission rate with add-on controls option or the 
control efficiency/outlet concentration option and there were no 
periods during which the continuous parameter monitoring systems (CPMS) 
were out of control as specified in Sec.  63.8(c)(7), the semiannual 
compliance report must include a statement that there were no periods 
during which the CPMS were out of control during the reporting period.
    (5) Deviations: Compliant material option. If you used the 
compliant material option and there was a deviation from the applicable 
emission limit in Sec.  63.3490, the semiannual compliance report must 
contain the information in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through (v) of this 
section.
    (i) Identification of each coating used that deviated from the 
emission limit, each thinner used that contained organic HAP, and the 
date, time, and duration each was used.
* * * * *

[[Page 10848]]

    (iv) Before August 24, 2020, a statement of the cause of each 
deviation. On and after August 24, 2020, a statement of the cause of 
each deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
    (v) On and after August 24, 2020, the number of deviations and, for 
each deviation, a list of the affected source or equipment, an estimate 
of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over any applicable 
emission limit in Sec.  63.3490, a description of the method used to 
estimate the emissions, and the actions you took to minimize emissions 
in accordance with Sec.  63.3500(b).
    (6) Deviations: Emission rate without add-on controls option. If 
you used the emission rate without add-on controls option and there was 
a deviation from the applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.3490, the 
semiannual compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs 
(a)(6)(i) through (iv) of this section.
* * * * *
    (iii) Before August 24, 2020, a statement of the cause of each 
deviation. On and after August 24, 2020, a statement of the cause of 
each deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
    (iv) On and after August 24, 2020, the number of deviations, date, 
time, duration, a list of the affected source or equipment, an estimate 
of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over any applicable 
emission limit in Sec.  63.3490, a description of the method used to 
estimate the emissions, and the actions you took to minimize emissions 
in accordance with Sec.  63.3500(b).
    (7) Deviations: Emission rate with add-on controls option. If you 
used the emission rate with add-on controls option and there was a 
deviation from the applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.3490 or the 
applicable operating limit(s) in Table 4 to this subpart (including any 
periods when emissions bypassed the add-on control device and were 
diverted to the atmosphere), before August 24, 2020, the semiannual 
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(7)(i) 
through (xiv) of this section. That includes periods of startup, 
shutdown, and malfunction during which deviations occurred. On and 
after August 24, 2020, the semiannual compliance report must contain 
the information in paragraphs (a)(7)(i) through (xii), (a)(7)(xiv), and 
(a)(7)(xv) of this section. If you use the emission rate with add-on 
controls option and there was a deviation from the applicable work 
practice standards in Sec.  63.3493(b), the semiannual compliance 
report must contain the information in paragraph (a)(7)(xiii) of this 
section.
* * * * *
    (iii) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture system 
or add-on control devices started and stopped.
* * * * *
    (vi) Before August 24, 2020, the date and time that each CPMS was 
inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks. On and 
after August 24, 2020, the number of instances that the CPMS was 
inoperative, and for each instance, except for zero (low-level) and 
high-level checks, the date, time, and duration that the CPMS was 
inoperative; the cause (including unknown cause) for the CPMS being 
inoperative; and the actions you took to minimize emissions in 
accordance with Sec.  63.3500(b).
    (vii) Before August 24, 2020, the date, time, and duration that 
each CPMS was out of control, including the information in Sec.  
63.8(c)(8). On and after August 24, 2020, the number of instances that 
the CPMS was out of control as specified in Sec.  63.8(c)(7) and, for 
each instance, the date, time, and duration that the CPMS was out-of-
control; the cause (including unknown cause) for the CPMS being out-of-
control; and descriptions of corrective actions taken.
    (viii) Before August 24, 2020, the date and time period of each 
deviation from an operating limit in Table 4 to this subpart; date and 
time period of any bypass of the add-on control device; and whether 
each deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, or 
malfunction or during another period. On and after August 24, 2020, the 
number of deviations from an operating limit in Table 4 to this subpart 
and, for each deviation, the date, time, and duration of each 
deviation; the date, time, and duration of any bypass of the add-on 
control device.
* * * * *
    (x) Before August 24, 2020, a breakdown of the total duration of 
the deviations from the operating limits in Table 4 to this subpart and 
bypasses of the add-on control device during the semiannual reporting 
period into those that were due to startup, shutdown, control equipment 
problems, process problems, other known causes, and other unknown 
causes. On and after August 24, 2020, a breakdown of the total duration 
of the deviations from the operating limits in Table 4 to this subpart 
and bypasses of the add-on control device during the semiannual 
reporting period into those that were due to control equipment 
problems, process problems, other known causes, and other unknown 
causes.
* * * * *
    (xiii) Before August 24, 2020, for each deviation from the work 
practice standards, a description of the deviation; the date, and time 
period of the deviation; and the actions you took to correct the 
deviation. On and after August 24, 2020, for deviations from the work 
practice standards, the number of deviations, and, for each deviation, 
the information in paragraphs (a)(7)(xiii)(A) and (B) of this section:
    (A) A description of the deviation; the date, time, and duration of 
the deviation; and the actions you took to minimize emissions in 
accordance with Sec.  63.3500(b).
    (B) The description required in paragraph (a)(7)(xiii)(A) of this 
section must include a list of the affected sources or equipment for 
which a deviation occurred and the cause of the deviation (including 
unknown cause, if applicable.
    (xiv) Before August 24, 2020, a statement of the cause of each 
deviation. On and after August 24, 2020, for deviations from an 
emission limit in Sec.  63.3490 or an operating limit in Table 4 to 
this subpart, a statement of the cause of each deviation (including 
unknown cause, if applicable) and the actions you took to minimize 
emissions in accordance with Sec.  63.3500(b).
    (xv) On and after August 24, 2020, for each deviation from an 
emission limit in Sec.  63.3490 or operating limit in Table 4 to this 
subpart, a list of the affected sources or equipment for which a 
deviation occurred, an estimate of the quantity of each regulated 
pollutant emitted over any emission limit in Sec.  63.3490 or operating 
limit in Table 4 to this subpart, and a description of the method used 
to estimate the emissions.
    (8) Deviations: control efficiency/outlet concentration option. If 
you used the control efficiency/outlet concentration option, and there 
was a deviation from the applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.3490 or 
the applicable operating limit(s) in Table 4 to this subpart (including 
any periods when emissions bypassed the add-on control device and were 
diverted to the atmosphere), before August 24, 2020, the semiannual 
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) 
through (xii) of this section. This includes periods of startup, 
shutdown, and malfunction during which deviations occurred. On and 
after August 24, 2020, the semiannual compliance report must specify 
the number of deviations during the compliance period and contain the

[[Page 10849]]

information in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) through (x), (xii), and (xiii) of 
this section. If you use the control efficiency/outlet concentration 
option and there was a deviation from the applicable work practice 
standards in Sec.  63.3493(b), the semiannual compliance report must 
contain the information in paragraph (a)(8)(xi) of this section.
    (i) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture system 
or add-on control devices started and stopped.
* * * * *
    (iv) Before August 24, 2020, the date and time that each CPMS was 
inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks. On and 
after August 24, 2020, for each instance that the CPMS was inoperative, 
except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks, the date, time, and 
duration that the CPMS was inoperative; the cause (including unknown 
cause) for the CPMS being inoperative; and the actions you took to 
minimize emissions in accordance with Sec.  63.3500(b).
    (v) For each instance that the CPMS was out of control as specified 
in Sec.  63.8(c)(7), the date, time, and duration that the CPMS was out 
of control; the cause (including unknown cause) for the CPMS being out 
of control; and the actions you took to minimize emissions in 
accordance with Sec.  63.3500(b).
    (vi) Before August 24, 2020, the date and time period of each 
deviation from an operating limit in Table 4 to this subpart; date and 
time of any bypass of the add-on control device; and whether each 
deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction 
or during another period. On and after August 24, 2020, the date, time, 
and duration of each deviation from an operating limit in Table 4 to 
this subpart; and the date, time, and duration of any bypass of the 
add-on control device.
* * * * *
    (viii) Before August 24, 2020, a breakdown of the total duration of 
the deviations from the operating limits in Table 4 to this subpart and 
bypasses of the add-on control device during the semiannual reporting 
period into those that were due to startup, shutdown, control equipment 
problems, process problems, other known causes, and other unknown 
causes. On and after August 24, 2020, a breakdown of the total duration 
of the deviations from the operating limits in Table 4 to this subpart 
and bypasses of the add-on control device during the semiannual 
reporting period into those that were due to control equipment 
problems, process problems, other known causes, and other unknown 
causes.
* * * * *
    (xi) Before August 24, 2020, for each deviation from the work 
practice standards, a description of the deviation; the date and time 
period of the deviation; and the actions you took to correct the 
deviation. On and after August 24, 2020, for deviations from the work 
practice standards in Sec.  63.3493(b), the number of deviations, and, 
for each deviation, the information in paragraphs (a)(8)(xiii)(A) and 
(B) of this section:
    (A) A description of the deviation; the date, time, and duration of 
the deviation; and the actions you took to minimize emissions in 
accordance with Sec.  63.3500(b).
    (B) The description required in paragraph (a)(8)(xi)(A) of this 
section must include a list of the affected sources or equipment for 
which a deviation occurred and the cause of the deviation (including 
unknown cause, if applicable).
    (xii) Before August 24, 2020, a statement of the cause of each 
deviation. On and after August 24, 2020, for deviations from an 
emission limit in Sec.  63.3490 or operating limit in Table 4 to this 
subpart, a statement of the cause of each deviation (including unknown 
cause, if applicable).
    (xiii) On and after August 24, 2020, for each deviation from an 
emission limit in Sec.  63.3490 or operating limit in Table 4 to this 
subpart, a list of the affected sources or equipment for which a 
deviation occurred, an estimate of the quantity of each regulated 
pollutant emitted over any emission limit in Sec.  63.3490, and a 
description of the method used to estimate the emissions.
* * * * *
    (c) Startup, shutdown, malfunction reports. Before August 24, 2020, 
if you used the emission rate with add-on controls option or the 
control efficiency/outlet concentration option and you had a startup, 
shutdown, or malfunction during the semiannual reporting period, you 
must submit the reports specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this 
section. On and after August 24, 2020, the reports specified in 
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section are not required.
* * * * *
    (d) On and after August 24, 2020, you must submit the results of 
the performance test required in Sec. Sec.  63.3540 and 63.3550 
following the procedure specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through (3) of 
this section.
    (1) For data collected using test methods supported by the EPA's 
Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the EPA's ERT website 
(https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert) at the time of the test, you must submit the 
results of the performance test to the EPA via the Compliance and 
Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI). The CEDRI interface can be 
accessed through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). Performance test data must be submitted in a file format 
generated through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic 
file format consistent with the extensible markup language (XML) schema 
listed on the EPA's ERT website.
    (2) For data collected using test methods that are not supported by 
the EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the 
test, you must submit the results of the performance test in portable 
document format (PDF) using the attachment module of the ERT.
    (3) If you claim that some of the performance test information 
being submitted under paragraph (d)(1) of this section is confidential 
business information (CBI), you must submit a complete file generated 
through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file 
consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT website, 
including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact disc, flash 
drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium to the EPA. The 
electronic medium must be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/
OAPQS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy 
Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same ERT or 
alternate file with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA via 
the EPA's CDX as described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
    (e) On and after August 24, 2020, the owner or operator shall 
submit the initial notifications required in Sec.  63.9(b) and the 
notification of compliance status required in Sec. Sec.  63.9(h) and 
63.3510(c) to the EPA via the CEDRI. The CEDRI interface can be 
accessed through the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov). The owner or 
operator must upload to CEDRI an electronic copy of each applicable 
notification in PDF. The applicable notification must be submitted by 
the deadline specified in this subpart, regardless of the method in 
which the reports are submitted. Owners or operators who claim that 
some of the information required to be submitted via CEDRI is CBI shall 
submit a complete report generated using the appropriate form in CEDRI 
or an alternate electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed 
on the EPA's

[[Page 10850]]

CEDRI website, including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact 
disc, flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium to 
the EPA. The electronic medium shall be clearly marked as CBI and 
mailed to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, 
Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 
27703. The same file with the CBI omitted shall be submitted to the EPA 
via the EPA's CDX as described earlier in this paragraph.
    (f) On and after March 25, 2021, or once the reporting template has 
been available on the CEDRI website for 1 year, whichever date is 
later, the owner or operator shall submit the semiannual compliance 
report required in paragraph (a) of this section to the EPA via the 
CEDRI. The CEDRI interface can be accessed through the EPA's CDX 
(https://cdx.epa.gov). The owner or operator must use the appropriate 
electronic template on the CEDRI website for this subpart (https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/compliance-and-emissions-data-reporting-interface-cedri). The date report templates 
become available will be listed on the CEDRI website. If the reporting 
form for the semiannual compliance report specific to this subpart is 
not available in CEDRI at the time that the report is due, you must 
submit the report to the Administrator at the appropriate addresses 
listed in Sec.  63.13. Once the form has been available in CEDRI for 1 
year, you must begin submitting all subsequent reports via CEDRI. The 
reports must be submitted by the deadlines specified in this subpart, 
regardless of the method in which the reports are submitted. Owners or 
operators who claim that some of the information required to be 
submitted via CEDRI is CBI shall submit a complete report generated 
using the appropriate form in CEDRI, including information claimed to 
be CBI, on a compact disc, flash drive, or other commonly used 
electronic storage medium to the EPA. The electronic medium shall be 
clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, 
Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old 
Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file with the CBI omitted shall be 
submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as described earlier in this 
paragraph.
    (g) If you are required to electronically submit a report through 
the CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, you may assert a claim of the EPA system 
outage for failure to timely comply with the reporting requirement. To 
assert a claim of the EPA system outage, you must meet the requirements 
outlined in paragraphs (g)(1) through (7) of this section.
    (1) You must have been or will be precluded from accessing CEDRI 
and submitting a required report within the time prescribed due to an 
outage of either the EPA's CEDRI or CDX systems.
    (2) The outage must have occurred within the period of time 
beginning five business days prior to the date that the submission is 
due.
    (3) The outage may be planned or unplanned.
    (4) You must submit notification to the Administrator in writing as 
soon as possible following the date you first knew, or through due 
diligence should have known, that the event may cause or caused a delay 
in reporting.
    (5) You must provide to the Administrator a written description 
identifying:
    (i) The date(s) and time(s) when CDX or CEDRI was accessed and the 
system was unavailable;
    (ii) A rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the 
regulatory deadline to the EPA system outage;
    (iii) Measures taken or to be taken to minimize the delay in 
reporting; and
    (iv) The date by which you propose to report, or if you have 
already met the reporting requirement at the time of the notification, 
the date you reported.
    (6) The decision to accept the claim of the EPA system outage and 
allow an extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the 
discretion of the Administrator.
    (7) In any circumstance, the report must be submitted 
electronically as soon as possible after the outage is resolved.
    (h) If you are required to electronically submit a report through 
CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, you may assert a claim of force majeure for 
failure to timely comply with the reporting requirement. To assert a 
claim of force majeure, you must meet the requirements outlined in 
paragraphs (h)(1) through (5) of this section.
    (1) You may submit a claim if a force majeure event is about to 
occur, occurs, or has occurred or there are lingering effects from such 
an event within the period of time beginning five business days prior 
to the date the submission is due. For the purposes of this section, a 
force majeure event is defined as an event that will be or has been 
caused by circumstances beyond the control of the affected facility, 
its contractors, or any entity controlled by the affected facility that 
prevents you from complying with the requirement to submit a report 
electronically within the time period prescribed. Examples of such 
events are acts of nature (e.g., hurricanes, earthquakes, or floods), 
acts of war or terrorism, or equipment failure or safety hazard beyond 
the control of the affected facility (e.g., large scale power outage).
    (2) You must submit notification to the Administrator in writing as 
soon as possible following the date you first knew, or through due 
diligence should have known, that the event may cause or has caused a 
delay in reporting.
    (3) You must provide to the Administrator:
    (i) A written description of the force majeure event;
    (ii) A rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the 
regulatory deadline to the force majeure event;
    (iii) Measures taken or to be taken to minimize the delay in 
reporting; and
    (iv) The date by which you propose to report, or if you have 
already met the reporting requirement at the time of the notification, 
the date you reported.
    (4) The decision to accept the claim of force majeure and allow an 
extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the discretion of 
the Administrator.
    (5) In any circumstance, the reporting must occur as soon as 
possible after the force majeure event occurs.

0
 7. Section 63.3512 is amended by revising paragraphs (i), (j) 
introductory text, and (j)(1) and (2) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3512  What records must I keep?

* * * * *
    (i) Before August 24, 2020, a record of the date, time, and 
duration of each deviation. On and after August 24, 2020, for each 
deviation from an emission limitation reported under Sec.  
63.3511(a)(5) through (8), a record of the information specified in 
paragraphs (i)(1) through (4) of this section, as applicable.
    (1) The date, time, and duration of the deviation, as reported 
under Sec.  63.3511(a)(5) through (8).
    (2) A list of the affected sources or equipment for which the 
deviation occurred and the cause of the deviation, as reported under 
Sec.  63.3511(a)(5) through (8).
    (3) An estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted 
over any applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.3490 or any applicable 
operating limit in Table 4 to this subpart, and a description of the 
method used to calculate the estimate, as reported under Sec.  
63.3511(a)(5) through (8).
    (4) A record of actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance 
with Sec.  63.3500(b) and any corrective actions taken to return the 
affected unit to its normal or usual manner of operation.

[[Page 10851]]

    (j) If you use the emission rate with add-on controls option or the 
control efficiency/outlet concentration option, you must also keep the 
records specified in paragraphs (j)(1) through (8) of this section.
    (1) Before August 24, 2020, for each deviation, a record of whether 
the deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, or 
malfunction. On and after August 24, 2020, a record of whether the 
deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction 
is not required.
    (2) Before August 24, 2020, the records in Sec.  63.6(e)(3)(iii) 
through (v) related to startup, shutdown, and malfunction. On and after 
August 24, 2020, the records in Sec.  63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) 
related to startup, shutdown, and malfunction are not required.
* * * * *

0
8. Section 63.3513 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.3513  In what form and for how long must I keep my records?

    (a) Your records must be kept in a form suitable and readily 
available for expeditious review, according to Sec.  63.10(b)(1). Where 
appropriate, the records may be maintained as electronic spreadsheets 
or as a database. On and after August 24, 2020, any records required to 
be maintained by this subpart that are in reports that were submitted 
electronically via the EPA's CEDRI may be maintained in electronic 
format. This ability to maintain electronic copies does not affect the 
requirement for facilities to make records, data, and reports available 
upon request to a delegated air agency or the EPA as part of an on-site 
compliance evaluation.
* * * * *

0
9. Section 63.3521 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(2), 
(a)(4), (b)(1), and (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3521  How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the 
emission limitations?

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Count each organic HAP in Table 8 to this subpart that is 
measured to be present at 0.1 percent by mass or more and at 1.0 
percent by mass or more for other compounds. For example, if toluene 
(not listed in Table 8 to this subpart) is measured to be 0.5 percent 
of the material by mass, you do not have to count it. Express the mass 
fraction of each organic HAP you count as a value truncated to four 
places after the decimal point (e.g., 0.3791).
* * * * *
    (2) Method 24 (appendix A to 40 CFR part 60). For coatings, you may 
use Method 24 to determine the mass fraction of nonaqueous volatile 
matter and use that value as a substitute for mass fraction of organic 
HAP. As an alternative to using Method 24, you may use ASTM D2369-10 
(2015), ``Test Method for Volatile Content of Coatings'' (incorporated 
by reference, see Sec.  63.14).
* * * * *
    (4) Information from the supplier or manufacturer of the material. 
You may rely on information other than that generated by the test 
methods specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section, 
such as manufacturer's formulation data, if it represents each organic 
HAP in Table 8 to this subpart that is present at 0.1 percent by mass 
or more and at 1.0 percent by mass or more for other compounds. For 
example, if toluene (not listed in Table 8 to this subpart) is 0.5 
percent of the material by mass, you do not have to count it. If there 
is a disagreement between such information and results of a test 
conducted according to paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section, 
then the test method results will take precedence unless, after 
consultation, a regulated source can demonstrate to the satisfaction of 
the enforcement agency that the formulation data are correct.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) ASTM Method D2697-03 (2014) or D6093-97 (2016). You may use 
ASTM D2697-03 (2014), ``Standard Test Method for Volume Nonvolatile 
Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings,'' (incorporated by reference, 
see Sec.  63.14) or ASTM D6093-97 (2016), ``Standard Test Method for 
Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using 
a Helium Gas Pycnometer'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14), 
to determine the volume fraction of coating solids for each coating. 
Divide the nonvolatile volume percent obtained with the methods by 100 
to calculate volume fraction of coating solids. If these values cannot 
be determined using these methods, the owner/operator may submit an 
alternative technique for determining the values for approval by the 
Administrator.
* * * * *
    (c) Determine the density of each coating. Determine the density of 
each coating used during the compliance period from test results using 
ASTM Method D1475-13 ``Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid 
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products'' (incorporated by reference, see 
Sec.  63.14) or information from the supplier or manufacturer of the 
material. If there is disagreement between ASTM Method D1475-13 test 
results and the supplier's or manufacturer's information, the test 
results will take precedence.
* * * * *

0
10. Section 63.3531 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.3531  How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the 
emission limitations?

* * * * *
    (c) Determine the density of each material. Determine the density 
of each coating and thinner used during each month from test results 
using ASTM D1475-13 or ASTM D2111-10 (2015) (both incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  63.14), information from the supplier or 
manufacturer of the material, or reference sources providing density or 
specific gravity data for pure materials. If there is disagreement 
between ASTM D1475-13 or ASTM D2111-10 (2015) test results and such 
other information sources, the test results will take precedence.
* * * * *

0
11. Section 63.3540 is amended by revising the section heading and 
paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(4), and (b)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3540  By what date must I conduct performance tests and 
initial compliance demonstrations?

    (a) * * *
    (1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS 
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance 
date specified in Sec.  63.3483. Except for solvent recovery systems 
for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to 
Sec.  63.3541(i), you must conduct according to the schedule in 
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section initial and periodic 
performance tests of each capture system and add-on control device 
according to the procedures in Sec. Sec.  63.3543, 63.3544, and 63.3545 
and establish the operating limits required by Sec.  63.3492. For a 
solvent recovery system for which you conduct liquid-liquid material 
balances according to Sec.  63.3541(i), you must initiate the first 
material balance no later than the applicable compliance date specified 
in Sec.  63.3483.
    (i) You must conduct the initial performance test and establish the 
operating limits required by Sec.  63.3492 no later than 180 days after 
the applicable compliance date specified in Sec.  63.3483.
    (ii) If you are not required to complete periodic performance tests 
as a requirement of renewing your facility's

[[Page 10852]]

operating permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, you must 
conduct the first periodic performance test before March 25, 2023, 
unless you already have conducted a performance test on or after March 
25, 2018. Thereafter you must conduct a performance test no later than 
5 years following the previous performance test. Operating limits must 
be confirmed or reestablished during each performance test. If you are 
required to complete periodic performance tests as a requirement of 
renewing your facility's operating permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 40 
CFR part 71, you must conduct the periodic testing in accordance with 
the terms and schedule required by your permit conditions.
* * * * *
    (4) For the initial compliance demonstration, you do not need to 
comply with the operating limits for the emission capture system and 
add-on control device required by Sec.  63.3492 until after you have 
completed the initial performance tests specified in paragraph (a)(1) 
of this section. Instead, you must maintain a log detailing the 
operation and maintenance of the emission capture system, add-on 
control device, and continuous parameter monitors during the period 
between the compliance date and the performance test. You must begin 
complying with the operating limits established based on the initial 
performance tests specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section for 
your affected source on the date you complete the performance tests. 
The requirements in this paragraph (a)(4) do not apply to solvent 
recovery systems for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances 
according to the requirements in Sec.  63.3541(i).
    (b) * * *
    (1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS 
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance 
date specified in Sec.  63.3483. Except for solvent recovery systems 
for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to 
Sec.  63.3541(i), you must conduct according to the schedule in 
paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section initial and periodic 
performance tests of each capture system and add-on control device 
according to the procedures in Sec. Sec.  63.3543, 63.3544, and 63.3545 
and establish the operating limits required by Sec.  63.3492. For a 
solvent recovery system for which you conduct liquid-liquid material 
balances according to Sec.  63.3541(i), you must initiate the first 
material balance no later than the compliance date specified in Sec.  
63.3483.
    (i) You must conduct the initial performance test and establish the 
operating limits required by Sec.  63.3492 no later than 180 days after 
the applicable compliance date specified in Sec.  63.3483.
    (ii) If you are not required to complete periodic performance tests 
as a requirement of renewing your facility's operating permit under 40 
CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, you must conduct the first periodic 
performance test before March 25, 2023, unless you already have 
conducted a performance test on or after March 25, 2018. Thereafter you 
must conduct a performance test no later than 5 years following the 
previous performance test. Operating limits must be confirmed or 
reestablished during each performance test. If you are required to 
complete periodic performance tests as a requirement of renewing your 
facility's operating permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, you 
must conduct the periodic testing in accordance with the terms and 
schedule required by your permit conditions.
* * * * *

0
12. Section 63.3541 is amended by revising paragraphs (h) introductory 
text and (i)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3541  How do I demonstrate initial compliance?

* * * * *
    (h) Calculate the organic HAP emission reduction for each 
controlled coating operation not using liquid-liquid material balances. 
For each controlled coating operation using an emission capture system 
and add-on control device, other than a solvent recovery system for 
which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances, calculate the 
organic HAP emission reduction, using Equation 1 of this section. The 
calculation applies the emission capture system efficiency and add-on 
control device efficiency to the mass of organic HAP contained in the 
coatings and thinners that are used in the coating operation served by 
the emission capture system and add-on control device during each 
month. For any period of time a deviation specified in Sec.  63.3542(c) 
or (d) occurs in the controlled coating operation, you must assume zero 
efficiency for the emission capture system and add-on control device, 
unless you have other data indicating the actual efficiency of the 
emission capture system and add-on control device, and the use of these 
data has been approved by the Administrator. Equation 1 of this section 
treats the materials used during such a deviation as if they were used 
on an uncontrolled coating operation for the time period of the 
deviation.
* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (3) Determine the mass fraction of volatile organic matter for each 
coating and thinner used in the coating operation controlled by the 
solvent recovery system during the month, in kg volatile organic matter 
per kg coating. You may determine the volatile organic matter mass 
fraction using Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, ASTM D2369-10 
(2015), ``Test Method for Volatile Content of Coatings'' (incorporated 
by reference, see Sec.  63.14), or an EPA approved alternative method. 
Alternatively, you may determine the volatile organic matter mass 
fraction using information provided by the manufacturer or supplier of 
the coating. In the event of any inconsistency between information 
provided by the manufacturer or supplier and the results of Method 24 
of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, ASTM D2369-10 (2015) or an approved 
alternative method, the test method results will take precedence 
unless, after consultation, a regulated source can demonstrate to the 
satisfaction of the enforcement agency that the formulation data are 
correct.
* * * * *

0
13. Section 63.3542 is amended by revising paragraphs (f) and (h) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  63.3542  How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the 
emission limitations?

* * * * *
    (f) As part of each semiannual compliance report required in Sec.  
63.3511, you must identify the coating operation(s) for which you used 
the emission rate with add-on controls option. If there were no 
deviations from the emission limits in Sec.  63.3490, the operating 
limits in Sec.  63.3492, and the work practice standards in Sec.  
63.3493, submit a statement that you were in compliance with the 
emission limitations during the reporting period because the organic 
HAP emission rate for each compliance period was less than or equal to 
the applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.3490, and you achieved the 
operating limits required by Sec.  63.3492 and the work practice 
standards required by Sec.  63.3493 during each compliance period.
* * * * *
    (h) Before August 24, 2020, consistent with Sec. Sec.  63.6(e) and 
63.7(e)(1), deviations that occur during a period of startup, shutdown, 
or malfunction of the emission capture system, add-on control device, 
or coating operation that may

[[Page 10853]]

affect emission capture or control device efficiency are not violations 
if you demonstrate to the Administrator's satisfaction that you were 
operating in accordance with Sec.  63.6(e)(1). The Administrator will 
determine whether deviations that occur during a period you identify as 
a startup, shutdown, or malfunction are violations according to the 
provisions in Sec.  63.6(e). On and after August 24, 2020, deviations 
that occur due to malfunction of the emission capture system, add-on 
control device, or coating operation that may affect emission capture 
or control device efficiency are required to operate in accordance with 
Sec.  63.3500(b). The Administrator will determine whether the 
deviations are violations according to the provisions in Sec.  
63.3500(b).
* * * * *

0
14. Section 63.3543 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory 
text and (a)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3543  What are the general requirements for performance tests?

    (a) Before August 24, 2020, you must conduct each performance test 
required by Sec.  63.3540 according to the requirements in Sec.  
63.7(e)(1) and under the conditions in this section unless you obtain a 
waiver of the performance test according to the provisions in Sec.  
63.7(h). On and after August 24, 2020, you must conduct each 
performance test required by Sec.  63.3540 according to the 
requirements in this section unless you obtain a waiver of the 
performance test according to the provisions in Sec.  63.7(h).
    (1) Representative coating operation operating conditions. You must 
conduct the performance test under representative operating conditions 
for the coating operation. Operations during periods of startup, 
shutdown, or nonoperation do not constitute representative conditions 
for purposes of conducting a performance test. The owner or operator 
may not conduct performance tests during periods of malfunction. You 
must record the process information that is necessary to document 
operating conditions during the test and explain why the conditions 
represent normal operation. Upon request, you must make available to 
the Administrator such records as may be necessary to determine the 
conditions of performance tests.
* * * * *

0
15. Section 63.3544 is amended by revising the introductory text to 
read as follows:


Sec.  63.3544  How do I determine the emission capture system 
efficiency?

    You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to 
determine capture efficiency as part of each performance test required 
by Sec.  63.3540.
* * * * *

0
16. Section 63.3545 is amended by revising the introductory text, 
paragraph (b) introductory text, and paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  63.3545  How do I determine the add-on control device emission 
destruction or removal efficiency?

    You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to 
determine the add-on control device emission destruction or removal 
efficiency as part of the performance tests required by Sec.  63.3540. 
For each performance test, you must conduct three test runs as 
specified in Sec.  63.7(e)(3) and each test run must last at least 1 
hour.
* * * * *
    (b) Measure total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon at the 
inlet and outlet of the add-on control device simultaneously using 
either Method 25 or 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 as specified 
in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section. You must use the same 
method for both the inlet and outlet measurements.
    (1) Use Method 25 of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 if the add-on 
control device is an oxidizer and you expect the total gaseous organic 
concentration as carbon to be more than 50 ppm at the control device 
outlet.
    (2) Use Method 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 if the add-on 
control device is an oxidizer and you expect the total gaseous organic 
concentration as carbon to be 50 ppm or less at the control device 
outlet.
    (3) Use Method 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 if the add-
control device is not an oxidizer.
    (4) You may use Method 18 of appendix A-6 to 40 CFR part 60 to 
subtract methane emissions from measured total gaseous organic mass 
emissions as carbon.
* * * * *

0
17. Section 63.3546 is amended by revising the introductory text and 
paragraphs (a)(1) and (2), (b)(1) through (3), (d)(1), (e)(1) and (2), 
(f)(1) through (3), and (f)(5) and (6) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3546  How do I establish the emission capture system and add-
on control device operating limits during the performance test?

    During performance tests required by Sec.  63.3540 and described in 
Sec. Sec.  63.3543, 63.3544, and 63.3545, you must establish the 
operating limits required by Sec.  63.3492 unless you have received 
approval for alternative monitoring and operating limits under Sec.  
63.8(f) as specified in Sec.  63.3492.
    (a) * * *
    (1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the 
combustion temperature at least once every 15 minutes during each of 
the three test runs. You must monitor the temperature in the firebox of 
the thermal oxidizer or immediately downstream of the firebox before 
any substantial heat exchange occurs.
    (2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the 
performance test to calculate and record the average combustion 
temperature maintained during the performance test. That average 
combustion temperature is the minimum operating limit for your thermal 
oxidizer.
    (b) * * *
    (1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the 
temperature at the inlet to the catalyst bed and the temperature 
difference across the catalyst bed at least once every 15 minutes 
during each of the three test runs.
    (2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the 
performance test to calculate and record the average temperature at the 
inlet to the catalyst bed and the average temperature difference across 
the catalyst bed maintained during the performance test. The average 
temperature difference is the minimum operating limit for your 
catalytic oxidizer.
    (3) As an alternative to monitoring the temperature difference 
across the catalyst bed, you may monitor the temperature at the inlet 
to the catalyst bed and implement a site-specific inspection and 
maintenance plan for your catalytic oxidizer as specified in paragraph 
(b)(4) of this section. During performance tests, you must monitor and 
record the temperature at the inlet to the catalyst bed at least once 
every 15 minutes during each of the three test runs. For each 
performance test, use the data collected during the performance test to 
calculate and record the average temperature at the inlet to the 
catalyst bed during the performance test. That is the minimum operating 
limit for your catalytic oxidizer.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the total 
regeneration desorbing gas (e.g., steam or nitrogen) mass flow for each 
regeneration cycle, and the carbon bed temperature after each carbon 
bed regeneration and cooling cycle for the regeneration cycle either 
immediately preceding or immediately following the performance test.
* * * * *

[[Page 10854]]

    (e) * * *
    (1) During performance tests, monitor and record the condenser 
outlet (product side) gas temperature at least once every 15 minutes 
during each of the three test runs of the performance test.
    (2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the 
performance test to calculate and record the average condenser outlet 
(product side) gas temperature maintained during the performance test. 
This average condenser outlet gas temperature is the maximum operating 
limit for your condenser.
    (f) * * *
    (1) During performance tests, monitor and record the inlet 
temperature to the desorption/reactivation zone of the concentrator at 
least once every 15 minutes during each of the three runs of the 
performance test.
    (2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the 
performance test to calculate and record the average temperature. This 
is the minimum operating limit for the desorption/reactivation zone 
inlet temperature.
    (3) During each performance test, monitor and record an 
indicator(s) of performance for the desorption/reactivation fan 
operation at least once every 15 minutes during each of the three runs 
of the performance test. The indicator can be speed in revolutions per 
minute (rpm), power in amps, static pressure, or flow rate.
* * * * *
    (5) During each performance test, monitor the rotational speed of 
the concentrator at least once every 15 minutes during each of the 
three runs of the performance test.
    (6) For each performance test, use the data collected during the 
performance test to calculate and record the average rotational speed. 
This is the minimum operating limit for the rotational speed of the 
concentrator. However, the indicator range for the rotational speed may 
be changed if an engineering evaluation is conducted and a 
determination made that the change in speed will not affect compliance 
with the emission limit.
* * * * *

0
18. Section 63.3547 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4) and (5), 
(a)(7), and (c)(3) introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3547  What are the requirements for continuous parameter 
monitoring system installation, operation, and maintenance?

    (a) * * *
    (4) Before August 24, 2020, you must maintain the CPMS at all times 
and have available necessary parts for routine repairs of the 
monitoring equipment. On and after August 24, 2020, you must maintain 
the CPMS at all times in accordance with Sec.  63.3500(b) and keep 
necessary parts readily available for routine repairs of the monitoring 
equipment.
    (5) Before August 24, 2020, you must operate the CPMS and collect 
emission capture system and add-on control device parameter data at all 
times that a controlled coating operation is operating, except during 
monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, and required quality 
assurance or control activities (including, if applicable, calibration 
checks and required zero and span adjustments). On and after August 24, 
2020, you must operate the CPMS and collect emission capture system and 
add-on control device parameter data at all times in accordance with 
Sec.  63.3500(b).
* * * * *
    (7) A monitoring malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not 
reasonably preventable failure of the CPMS to provide valid data. 
Monitoring failures that are caused, in part, by poor maintenance or 
careless operation are not malfunctions. Before August 24, 2020, any 
period for which the monitoring system is out of control and data are 
not available for required calculations is a deviation from the 
monitoring requirements. On and after August 24, 2020, except for 
periods of required quality assurance or control activities, any period 
for which the CPMS fails to operate and record data continuously as 
required by paragraph (a)(5) of this section, or generates data that 
cannot be included in calculating averages as specified in (a)(6) of 
this section constitutes a deviation from the monitoring requirements.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) For all thermal oxidizers and catalytic oxidizers, you must 
meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (c)(3)(i) through (ii) of 
this section for each gas temperature monitoring device. For the 
purposes of this paragraph (c)(3), a thermocouple is part of the 
temperature sensor.
* * * * *

0
19. Section 63.3550 is amended by revising the section heading and 
paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(4), and (b)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3550  By what date must I conduct performance tests and 
initial compliance demonstrations?

    (a) * * *
    (1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS 
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance 
date specified in Sec.  63.3483. You must conduct according to the 
schedule in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section initial and 
periodic performance tests of each capture system and add-on control 
device according to Sec. Sec.  63.3553, 63.3554, and 63.3555 and 
establish the operating limits required by Sec.  63.3492.
    (i) You must conduct the initial performance test and establish the 
operating limits required by Sec.  63.3492 no later than 180 days after 
the applicable compliance date specified in Sec.  63.3483.
    (ii) If you are not required to complete periodic performance tests 
as a requirement of renewing your facility's operating permit under 40 
CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, you must conduct the first periodic 
performance test before March 25, 2023, unless you already have 
conducted a performance test on or after March 25, 2018. Thereafter you 
must conduct a performance test no later than 5 years following the 
previous performance test. Operating limits must be confirmed or 
reestablished during each performance test. If you are required to 
complete periodic performance tests as a requirement of renewing your 
facility's operating permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, you 
must conduct the periodic testing in accordance with the terms and 
schedule required by your permit conditions.
* * * * *
    (4) For the initial compliance demonstration, you do not need to 
comply with the operating limits for the emission capture system and 
add-on control device required by Sec.  63.3492 until after you have 
completed the initial performance tests specified in paragraph (a)(1) 
of this section. Instead, you must maintain a log detailing the 
operation and maintenance of the emission capture system, add-on 
control device, and continuous parameter monitors during the period 
between the compliance date and the performance test. You must begin 
complying with the operating limits established based on the initial 
performance tests specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section on the 
date you complete the performance tests.
    (b) * * *
    (1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS 
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance 
date specified in Sec.  63.3483. Except for solvent recovery systems 
for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to 
Sec.  63.3541(i), you must conduct

[[Page 10855]]

according to the schedule in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this 
section initial and periodic performance tests of each capture system 
and add-on control device according to the procedures in Sec. Sec.  
63.3543, 63.3544, and 63.3545 and establish the operating limits 
required by Sec.  63.3492.
    (i) You must conduct the initial performance test and establish the 
operating limits required by Sec.  63.3492 no later than 180 days after 
the applicable compliance date specified in Sec.  63.3483.
    (ii) If you are not required to complete periodic performance tests 
as a requirement of renewing your facility's operating permit under 40 
CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, you must conduct the first periodic 
performance test before March 25, 2023, unless you already have 
conducted a performance test on or after March 25, 2018. Thereafter you 
must conduct a performance test no later than 5 years following the 
previous performance test. Operating limits must be confirmed or 
reestablished during each performance test. If you are required to 
complete periodic performance tests as a requirement of renewing your 
facility's operating permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, you 
must conduct the periodic testing in accordance with the terms and 
schedule required by your permit conditions.
* * * * *

0
20. Section 63.3552 is amended by revising paragraph (g) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.3552  How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the 
emission limitations?

* * * * *
    (g) Before August 24, 2020, consistent with Sec. Sec.  63.6(e) and 
63.7(e)(1), deviations that occur during a period of startup, shutdown, 
or malfunction of the emission capture system, add-on control device, 
or coating operation that may affect emission capture or control device 
efficiency are not violations if you demonstrate to the Administrator's 
satisfaction that you were operating in accordance with Sec.  
63.6(e)(1). The Administrator will determine whether deviations that 
occur during a period you identify as a startup, shutdown, or 
malfunction are violations, according to the provisions in Sec.  
63.6(e). On and after August 24, 2020 deviations that occur due to 
malfunction of the emission capture system, add-on control device, or 
coating operation that may affect emission capture or control device 
efficiency are required to operate in accordance with Sec.  63.3500(b). 
The Administrator will determine whether the deviations are violations 
according to the provisions in Sec.  63.3500(b).
* * * * *

0
21. Section 63.3553 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory 
text and (a)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3553  What are the general requirements for performance tests?

    (a) Before August 24, 2020, you must conduct each performance test 
required by Sec.  63.3550 according to the requirements in Sec.  
63.7(e)(1) and under the conditions in this section unless you obtain a 
waiver of the performance test according to the provisions in Sec.  
63.7(h). On and after August 24, 2020, you must conduct each 
performance test required by Sec.  63.3550 according to the 
requirements in this section unless you obtain a waiver of the 
performance test according to the provisions in Sec.  63.7(h).
    (1) Representative coating operating conditions. You must conduct 
the performance test under representative operating conditions for the 
coating operation(s). Operations during periods of startup, shutdown, 
or nonoperation do not constitute representative conditions for 
purposes of conducting a performance test. The owner or operator may 
not conduct performance tests during periods of malfunction. You must 
record the process information that is necessary to document operating 
conditions during the test and explain why the conditions represent 
normal operation. Upon request, you must make available to the 
Administrator such records as may be necessary to determine the 
conditions of performance tests.
* * * * *

0
22. Section 63.3555 is amended by revising the introductory text, 
paragraph (b) introductory text, and paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  63.3555  How do I determine the outlet THC emissions and add-on 
control device emission destruction or removal efficiency?

    You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to 
determine either the outlet THC emissions or add-on control device 
emission destruction or removal efficiency as part of the performance 
tests required by Sec.  63.3550. You must conduct three test runs as 
specified in Sec.  63.7(e)(3), and each test run must last at least 1 
hour.
* * * * *
    (b) Measure total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon at the 
inlet and outlet of the add-on control device simultaneously using 
either Method 25 or 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 as specified 
in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section. You must use the same 
method for both the inlet and outlet measurements.
    (1) Use Method 25 of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 if the add-on 
control device is an oxidizer, and you expect the total gaseous organic 
concentration as carbon to be more than 50 ppm at the control device 
outlet.
    (2) Use Method 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 if the add-on 
control device is an oxidizer, and you expect the total gaseous organic 
concentration as carbon to be 50 ppm or less at the control device 
outlet.
    (3) Use Method 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60 if the add-on 
control device is not an oxidizer.
    (4) You may use Method 18 of appendix A-6 to 40 CFR part 60 to 
subtract methane emissions from measured total gaseous organic mass 
emissions as carbon.
* * * * *

0
23. Section 63.3556 is amended by revising the introductory text and 
paragraphs (a)(1) and (2), (b)(1) through (3), (d)(1), (e)(1) and (2), 
(f)(1) through (3), and (f)(5) and (6) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3556  How do I establish the emission capture system and add-
on control device operating limits during the performance test?

    During the performance tests required by Sec.  63.3550 and 
described in Sec. Sec.  63.3553, 63.3554, and 63.3555, you must 
establish the operating limits required by Sec.  63.3492 according to 
this section, unless you have received approval for alternative 
monitoring and operating limits under Sec.  63.8(f) as specified in 
Sec.  63.3492.
    (a) * * *
    (1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the 
combustion temperature at least once every 15 minutes during each of 
the three test runs. You must monitor the temperature in the firebox of 
the thermal oxidizer or immediately downstream of the firebox before 
any substantial heat exchange occurs.
    (2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the 
performance test to calculate and record the average combustion 
temperature maintained during the performance test. That average 
combustion temperature is the minimum operating limit for your thermal 
oxidizer.
    (b) * * *
    (1) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the 
temperature at the inlet to the catalyst bed and the temperature 
difference across the catalyst bed at least once every 15 minutes 
during each of the three test runs.

[[Page 10856]]

    (2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the 
performance test to calculate and record the average temperature at the 
inlet to the catalyst bed and the average temperature difference across 
the catalyst bed maintained during the performance test. The average 
temperature difference is the minimum operating limit for your 
catalytic oxidizer.
    (3) As an alternative to monitoring the temperature difference 
across the catalyst bed, you may monitor the temperature at the inlet 
to the catalyst bed and implement a site-specific inspection and 
maintenance plan for your catalytic oxidizer as specified in paragraph 
(b)(4) of this section. During performance tests, you must monitor and 
record the temperature at the inlet to the catalyst bed at least once 
every 15 minutes during each of the three test runs. Use the data 
collected during each performance test to calculate and record the 
average temperature at the inlet to the catalyst bed during the 
performance test. That is the minimum operating limit for your 
catalytic oxidizer.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) You must monitor and record the total regeneration desorbing 
gas (e.g., steam or nitrogen) mass flow for each regeneration cycle, 
and the carbon bed temperature after each carbon bed regeneration and 
cooling cycle for the regeneration cycle either immediately preceding 
or immediately following performance tests.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) During performance tests, monitor and record the condenser 
outlet (product side) gas temperature at least once every 15 minutes 
during each of the three test runs.
    (2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the 
performance test to calculate and record the average condenser outlet 
(product side) gas temperature maintained during the performance test. 
This average condenser outlet gas temperature is the maximum operating 
limit for your condenser.
    (f) * * *
    (1) During performance tests, monitor and record the inlet 
temperature to the desorption/reactivation zone of the concentrator at 
least once every 15 minutes during each of the three runs of the 
performance test.
    (2) For each performance test, use the data collected during the 
performance test to calculate and record the average temperature. This 
is the minimum operating limit for the desorption/reactivation zone 
inlet temperature.
    (3) During performance tests, monitor and record an indicator(s) of 
performance for the desorption/reactivation fan operation at least once 
every 15 minutes during each of the three runs of the performance test. 
The indicator can be speed in rpm, power in amps, static pressure, or 
flow rate.
* * * * *
    (5) During performance tests, monitor the rotational speed of the 
concentrator at least once every 15 minutes during each of the three 
runs of a performance test.
    (6) For each performance test, use the data collected during the 
performance test to calculate and record the average rotational speed. 
This is the minimum operating limit for the rotational speed of the 
concentrator. However, the indicator range for the rotational speed may 
be changed if an engineering evaluation is conducted and a 
determination made that the change in speed will not affect compliance 
with the emission limit.
* * * * *

0
24. Section 63.3557 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4) and (5), 
(a)(7), and (c)(3) introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3557  What are the requirements for continuous parameter 
monitoring system installation, operation, and maintenance?

    (a) * * *
    (4) You must maintain the CPMS at all times in accordance with 
Sec.  63.3500(b) and have readily available necessary parts for routine 
repairs of the monitoring equipment.
    (5) You must operate the CPMS and collect emission capture system 
and add-on control device parameter data at all times in accordance 
with Sec.  63.3500(b) that a controlled coating operation is operating, 
except during monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, and required 
quality assurance or control activities (including, if applicable, 
calibration checks and required zero and span adjustments).
* * * * *
    (7) A monitoring malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not 
reasonably preventable failure of the CPMS to provide valid data. 
Monitoring failures that are caused, in part, by poor maintenance or 
careless operation are not malfunctions. Before August 24, 2020, any 
period for which the monitoring system is out of control and data are 
not available for required calculations is a deviation from the 
monitoring requirements. On and after August 24, 2020, except for 
periods of required quality assurance or control activities, any period 
for which the CPMS fails to operate and record data continuously as 
required by paragraph (a)(5) of this section, or generates data that 
cannot be included in calculating averages as specified in (a)(6) of 
this section constitutes a deviation from the monitoring requirements.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) For all thermal oxidizers and catalytic oxidizers, you must 
meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (c)(3)(i) through (ii) of 
this section for each gas temperature monitoring device. For the 
purposes of this paragraph (c)(3), a thermocouple is part of the 
temperature sensor.
* * * * *

0
25. Section 63.3561 is amended by removing the definition for 
``Deviation'' and adding definitions for ``Deviation, before'' and 
``Deviation, on and after'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec.  63.3561  What definitions apply to this subpart?

* * * * *
    Deviation, before August 24, 2020, means any instance in which an 
affected source subject to this subpart or an owner or operator of such 
a source:
    (1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this 
subpart including but not limited to any emission limit, operating 
limit, or work practice standard; or
    (2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to 
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is 
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to 
obtain such a permit; or
    (3) Fails to meet any emission limit, operating limit, or work 
practice standard in this subpart during startup, shutdown, or 
malfunction regardless of whether or not such failure is permitted by 
this subpart.
    Deviation, on and after August 24, 2020, means any instance in 
which an affected source subject to this subpart or an owner or 
operator of such a source:
    (1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this 
subpart including but not limited to any emission limit, operating 
limit, or work practice standard; or
    (2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to 
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is 
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to 
obtain such a permit.
* * * * *

0
26. Table 5 to subpart KKKK of part 63 is revised to read as follows:

[[Page 10857]]



             Table 5 to Subpart KKKK of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart KKKK
      You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements according to the following table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Applicable to subpart
               Citation                        Subject                    KKKK                 Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   63.1(a)(1)-(4)................  General Applicability..  Yes....................
Sec.   63.1(a)(6)....................  Source Category Listing  Yes....................
Sec.   63.1(a)(10)-(12)..............  Timing and Overlap       Yes....................
                                        Clarifications.
Sec.   63.1(b)(1)....................  Initial Applicability    Yes....................  Applicability to
                                        Determination.                                    subpart KKKK is also
                                                                                          specified in Sec.
                                                                                          63.3481.
Sec.   63.1(b)(3)....................  Applicability            Yes....................
                                        Determination
                                        Recordkeeping.
Sec.   63.1(c)(1)....................  Applicability after      Yes....................
                                        Standard Established.
Sec.   63.1(c)(2)....................  Applicability of Permit  No.....................  Area sources are not
                                        Program for Area                                  subject to subpart
                                        Sources.                                          KKKK.
Sec.   63.1(c)(5)....................  Extensions and           Yes....................
                                        Notifications.
Sec.   63.1(e).......................  Applicability of Permit  Yes....................
                                        Program before
                                        Relevant Standard is
                                        Set.
Sec.   63.2..........................  Definitions............  Yes....................  Additional definitions
                                                                                          are specified in Sec.
                                                                                           63.3561.
Sec.   63.3..........................  Units and Abbreviations  Yes....................
Sec.   63.4(a)(1)-(2)................  Prohibited Activities..  Yes....................
Sec.   63.4(b)-(c)...................  Circumvention/           Yes....................
                                        Fragmentation.
Sec.   63.5(a).......................  Construction/            Yes....................
                                        Reconstruction.
Sec.   63.5(b)(1), (3), (4), (6).....  Requirements for         Yes....................
                                        Existing, Newly
                                        Constructed, and
                                        Reconstructed Sources.
Sec.   63.5(d)(1)(i)-(ii)(F),          Application for          Yes....................
 (d)(1)(ii)(H), (d)(1)(ii)(J),          Approval of
 (d)(1)(iii), (d)(2)-(4).               Construction/
                                        Reconstruction.
Sec.   63.5(e).......................  Approval of              Yes....................
                                        Construction/
                                        Reconstruction.
Sec.   63.5(f).......................  Approval of              Yes....................
                                        Construction/
                                        Reconstruction Based
                                        on Prior State Review.
Sec.   63.6(a).......................  Compliance with          Yes....................
                                        Standards and
                                        Maintenance
                                        Requirements--Applicab
                                        ility.
Sec.   63.6(b)(1)-(5), (b)(7)........  Compliance Dates for     Yes....................  Section 63.3483
                                        New and Reconstructed                             specifies the
                                        Sources.                                          compliance dates.
Sec.   63.6(c)(1), (2), (5)..........  Compliance Dates for     Yes....................  Section 63.3483
                                        Existing Sources.                                 specifies the
                                                                                          compliance dates.
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(i)-(ii)............  Operation and            Yes before August 24,    See Sec.   63.3500(b)
                                        Maintenance.             2020, No on and after    for general duty
                                                                 August 24, 2020.         requirement.
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(iii)...............  Operation and            Yes....................
                                        Maintenance.
Sec.   63.6(e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(iii)-     SSMP...................  Yes before August 24,
 (ix).                                                           2020, No on and after
                                                                 August 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.6(f)(1)....................  Compliance Except        Yes before August 24,
                                        during Startup,          2020, No on and after
                                        Shutdown, and            August 24, 2020.
                                        Malfunction.
Sec.   63.6(f)(2)-(3)................  Methods for Determining  Yes....................
                                        Compliance.
Sec.   63.6(g).......................  Use of an Alternative    Yes....................
                                        Standard.
Sec.   63.6(h).......................  Compliance with Opacity/ No.....................  Subpart KKKK does not
                                        Visible Emission                                  establish opacity
                                        Standards.                                        standards and does not
                                                                                          require continuous
                                                                                          opacity monitoring
                                                                                          systems (COMS).
Sec.   63.6(i)(1)-(14)...............  Extension of Compliance  Yes....................
Sec.   63.6(i)(16)...................  Compliance Extensions    Yes....................
                                        and Administrator's
                                        Authority.
Sec.   63.6(j).......................  Presidential Compliance  Yes....................
                                        Exemption.
Sec.   63.7(a)(1)....................  Performance Test         Yes....................  Applies to all affected
                                        Requirements--Applicab                            sources. Additional
                                        ility.                                            requirements for
                                                                                          performance testing
                                                                                          are specified in Sec.
                                                                                          Sec.   63.3543,
                                                                                          63.3544, 63.3545,
                                                                                          63.3554, and 63.3555.
Sec.   63.7(a)(2) except (a)(2)(i)-    Performance Test         Yes....................  Applies only to
 (viii).                                Requirements--Dates.                              performance tests for
                                                                                          capture system and
                                                                                          control device
                                                                                          efficiency at sources
                                                                                          using these to comply
                                                                                          with the standards.
                                                                                          Sections 63.3540 and
                                                                                          63.3550 specify the
                                                                                          schedule for
                                                                                          performance test
                                                                                          requirements that are
                                                                                          earlier than those
                                                                                          specified in Sec.
                                                                                          63.7(a)(2).

[[Page 10858]]

 
Sec.   63.7(a)(3)....................  Performance Tests        Yes....................
                                        Required by the
                                        Administrator.
Sec.   63.7(b)-(d)...................  Performance Test         Yes....................  Applies only to
                                        Requirements--Notifica                            performance tests for
                                        tion, Quality                                     capture system and add-
                                        Assurance, Facilities                             on control device
                                        Necessary for Safe                                efficiency at sources
                                        Testing, Conditions                               using these to comply
                                        During Test.                                      with the standards.
Sec.   63.7(e)(1)....................  Conduct of Performance   Yes before August 24,    See Sec.  Sec.
                                        Tests.                   2020, No on and after    63.3543 and 63.3553.
                                                                 August 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.7(e)(2)-(4)................  Conduct of Performance   Yes....................
                                        Tests.
Sec.   63.7(f).......................  Performance Test         Yes....................  Applies to all test
                                        Requirements--Use of                              methods except those
                                        Alternative Test                                  used to determine
                                        Method.                                           capture system
                                                                                          efficiency.
Sec.   63.7(g)-(h)...................  Performance Test         Yes....................  Applies only to
                                        Requirements--Data                                performance tests for
                                        Analysis,                                         capture system and add-
                                        Recordkeeping,                                    on control device
                                        Reporting, Waiver of                              efficiency at sources
                                        Test.                                             using these to comply
                                                                                          with the standards.
Sec.   63.8(a)(1)-(2)................  Monitoring               Yes....................  Applies only to
                                        Requirements--Applicab                            monitoring of capture
                                        ility.                                            system and add-on
                                                                                          control device
                                                                                          efficiency at sources
                                                                                          using these to comply
                                                                                          with the standards.
                                                                                          Additional
                                                                                          requirements for
                                                                                          monitoring are
                                                                                          specified in Sec.
                                                                                          Sec.   63.3547 and
                                                                                          63.3557.
Sec.   63.8(a)(4)....................  Additional Monitoring    No.....................  Subpart KKKK does not
                                        Requirements.                                     have monitoring
                                                                                          requirements for
                                                                                          flares.
Sec.   63.8(b).......................  Conduct of Monitoring..  Yes....................
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)....................  Continuous Monitoring    Yes before August 24,    Sections 63.3547 and
                                        System (CMS) Operation   2020, No on and after    63.3557 specify the
                                        and Maintenance.         August 24, 2020.         requirements for the
                                                                                          operation of CMS for
                                                                                          capture systems and
                                                                                          add-on control devices
                                                                                          at sources using these
                                                                                          to comply.
Sec.   63.8(c)(2)-(3)................  CMS Operation and        Yes....................  Applies only to
                                        Maintenance.                                      monitoring of capture
                                                                                          system and add-on
                                                                                          control device
                                                                                          efficiency at sources
                                                                                          using these to comply
                                                                                          with the standards.
                                                                                          Additional
                                                                                          requirements for CMS
                                                                                          operations and
                                                                                          maintenance are
                                                                                          specified in Sec.
                                                                                          Sec.   63.3547 and
                                                                                          63.3557.
Sec.   63.8(c)(4)....................  CMS....................  No.....................  Sections 63.3547 and
                                                                                          63.3557 specify the
                                                                                          requirements for the
                                                                                          operation of CMS for
                                                                                          capture systems and
                                                                                          add-on control devices
                                                                                          at sources using these
                                                                                          to comply.
Sec.   63.8(c)(5)....................  COMS...................  No.....................  Subpart KKKK does not
                                                                                          have opacity or
                                                                                          visible emission
                                                                                          standards.
Sec.   63.8(c)(6)....................  CMS Requirements.......  No.....................  Sections 63.3547 and
                                                                                          63.3557 specify the
                                                                                          requirements for
                                                                                          monitoring systems for
                                                                                          capture systems and
                                                                                          add-on control devices
                                                                                          at sources using these
                                                                                          to comply.
Sec.   63.8(c)(7)....................  CMS Out-of-Control       Yes....................
                                        Periods.
Sec.   63.8(c)(8)....................  CMS Out-of-Control       No.....................  Section 63.3511
                                        Periods Reporting.                                requires reporting of
                                                                                          CMS out of control
                                                                                          periods.
Sec.   63.8(d)-(e)...................  Quality Control Program  No.....................
                                        and CMS Performance
                                        Evaluation.
Sec.   63.8(f)(1)-(5)................  Use of an Alternative    Yes....................
                                        Monitoring Method.
Sec.   63.8(f)(6)....................  Alternative to Relative  No.....................  Section 63.8(f)(6)
                                        Accuracy Test.                                    provisions are not
                                                                                          applicable because
                                                                                          subpart KKKK does not
                                                                                          require CEMS.

[[Page 10859]]

 
Sec.   63.8(g).......................  Data Reduction.........  No.....................  Sections 63.3542,
                                                                                          63.3547, 63.3552 and
                                                                                          63.3557 specify
                                                                                          monitoring data
                                                                                          reduction.
Sec.   63.9(a).......................  Notification             Yes....................
                                        Applicability.
Sec.   63.9(b)(1)-(2)................  Initial Notifications..  Yes....................
Sec.   63.9(b)(4)(i), (b)(4)(v),       Application for          Yes....................
 (b)(5).                                Approval of
                                        Construction or
                                        Reconstruction.
Sec.   63.9(c).......................  Request for Extension    Yes....................
                                        of Compliance.
Sec.   63.9(d).......................  Special Compliance       Yes....................
                                        Requirement
                                        Notification.
Sec.   63.9(e).......................  Notification of          Yes....................  Applies only to capture
                                        Performance Test.                                 system and add-on
                                                                                          control device
                                                                                          performance tests at
                                                                                          sources using these to
                                                                                          comply with the
                                                                                          standards.
Sec.   63.9(f).......................  Notification of Visible  No.....................  Subpart KKKK does not
                                        Emissions/Opacity Test.                           have opacity or
                                                                                          visible emission
                                                                                          standards.
Sec.   63.9(g).......................  Additional               No.....................
                                        Notifications When
                                        Using CMS.
Sec.   63.9(h)(1)-(3)................  Notification of          Yes....................  Section 63.3510
                                        Compliance Status.                                specifies the dates
                                                                                          for submitting the
                                                                                          notification of
                                                                                          compliance status.
Sec.   63.9(h)(5)-(6)................  Clarifications.........  Yes....................
Sec.   63.9(i).......................  Adjustment of Submittal  Yes....................
                                        Deadlines.
Sec.   63.9(j).......................  Change in Previous       Yes....................
                                        Information.
Sec.   63.10(a)......................  Recordkeeping/           Yes....................
                                        Reporting--Applicabili
                                        ty and General
                                        Information.
Sec.   63.10(b)(1)...................  General Recordkeeping    Yes....................  Additional requirements
                                        Requirements.                                     are specified in Sec.
                                                                                          Sec.   63.3512 and
                                                                                          63.3513.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(i)-(ii)...........  Recordkeeping of         Yes before August 24,    See Sec.   63.3512(i).
                                        Occurrence and           2020, No on and after
                                        Duration of Startups     August 24, 2020.
                                        and Shutdowns and of
                                        Failures to Meet
                                        Standards.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(iii)..............  Recordkeeping Relevant   Yes....................
                                        to Maintenance of Air
                                        Pollution Control and
                                        Monitoring Equipment.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(v)...........  Actions Taken to         Yes before August 24,    See Sec.
                                        Minimize Emissions       2020, No on and after    63.3512(i)(4) for a
                                        During Startup,          August 24, 2020.         record of actions
                                        Shutdown, and                                     taken to minimize
                                        Malfunction.                                      emissions duration a
                                                                                          deviation from the
                                                                                          standard.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(vi)...............  Recordkeeping for CMS    Yes before August 24,    See Sec.   63.3512(i)
                                        Malfunctions.            2020, No on and after    for records of periods
                                                                 August 24, 2020.         of deviation from the
                                                                                          standard, including
                                                                                          instances where a CMS
                                                                                          is inoperative or out-
                                                                                          of-control.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2) (vii)-(xii).......  Records................  Yes....................
Sec.   63.10(b)(2) (xiii)............  .......................  No.....................
Sec.   63.10(b)(2) (xiv).............  .......................  Yes....................
Sec.   63.10(b)(3)...................  Recordkeeping            Yes....................
                                        Requirements for
                                        Applicability
                                        Determinations.
Sec.   63.10(c)(1)...................  Additional               Yes....................
                                        Recordkeeping
                                        Requirements for
                                        Sources with CMS.
Sec.   63.10(c)(5)-(6)...............  .......................  Yes....................
Sec.   63.10(c)(7)-(8)...............  Additional               No.....................  See Sec.   63.3512(i)
                                        Recordkeeping                                     for records of periods
                                        Requirements for                                  of deviation from the
                                        Sources with CMS.                                 standard, including
                                                                                          instances where a CMS
                                                                                          is inoperative or out-
                                                                                          of-control.
Sec.   63.10(c)(10)-(14).............  Additional               Yes....................
                                        Recordkeeping
                                        Requirements for
                                        Sources with CMS.
Sec.   63.10(c)(15)..................  Records Regarding the    Yes before August 24,
                                        Startup, Shutdown, and   2020, No on and after
                                        Malfunction Plan.        August 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.10(d)(1)...................  General Reporting        Yes....................  Additional requirements
                                        Requirements.                                     are specified in Sec.
                                                                                           63.3511.

[[Page 10860]]

 
Sec.   63.10(d)(2)...................  Report of Performance    Yes....................  Additional requirements
                                        Test Results.                                     are specified in Sec.
                                                                                           63.3511(b).
Sec.   63.10(d)(3)...................  Reporting Opacity or     No.....................  Subpart KKKK does not
                                        Visible Emissions                                 require opacity or
                                        Observations.                                     visible emissions
                                                                                          observations.
Sec.   63.10(d)(4)...................  Progress Reports for     Yes....................
                                        Sources with
                                        Compliance Extensions.
Sec.   63.10(d)(5)...................  Startup, Shutdown,       Yes before August 24,    See Sec.
                                        Malfunction Reports.     2020, No on and after    63.3511(a)(7) and (8).
                                                                 August 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.10(e)(1)-(2)...............  Additional CMS Reports.  No.....................
Sec.   63.10(e)(3)...................  Excess Emissions/CMS     No.....................  Section 63.3511(b)
                                        Performance Reports.                              specifies the contents
                                                                                          of periodic compliance
                                                                                          reports.
Sec.   63.10(e)(4)...................  COMS Data Reports......  No.....................  Subpart KKKK does not
                                                                                          specify requirements
                                                                                          for opacity or COMS.
Sec.   63.10(f)......................  Recordkeeping/Reporting  Yes....................
                                        Waiver.
Sec.   63.11.........................  Control Device           No.....................  Subpart KKKK does not
                                        Requirements/Flares.                              specify use of flares
                                                                                          for compliance.
Sec.   63.12.........................  State Authority and      Yes....................
                                        Delegations.
Sec.   63.13(a)......................  Addresses..............  Yes before August 24,
                                                                 2020, No on and after
                                                                 August 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.13(b)......................  Submittal to State       Yes....................
                                        Agencies.
Sec.   63.13(c)......................  Submittal to State       Yes before August 24,
                                        Agencies.                2020, No unless the
                                                                 state requires the
                                                                 submittal via CEDRI,
                                                                 on and after August
                                                                 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.14.........................  Incorporation by         Yes....................
                                        Reference.
Sec.   63.15.........................  Availability of          Yes....................
                                        Information/
                                        Confidentiality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


0
27. Table 8 to subpart KKKK of part 63 is added to read as follows:

  Table 8 to Subpart KKKK of Part 63--List of Hazardous Air Pollutants
 That Must Be Counted Toward Total Organic HAP Content if Present at 0.1
                         Percent or More by Mass
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Chemical name                           CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane...............................         79-34-5
1,1,2-Trichloroethane...................................         79-00-5
1,1-Dimethylhydrazine...................................         57-14-7
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane.............................         96-12-8
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine...................................        122-66-7
1,3-Butadiene...........................................        106-99-0
1,3-Dichloropropene.....................................        542-75-6
1,4-Dioxane.............................................        123-91-1
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol...................................         88-06-2
2,4/2,6-Dinitrotoluene (mixture)........................      25321-14-6
2,4-Dinitrotoluene......................................        121-14-2
2,4-Toluene diamine.....................................         95-80-7
2-Nitropropane..........................................         79-46-9
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine..................................         91-94-1
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine.................................        119-90-4
3,3'-Dimethylbenzidine..................................        119-93-7
4,4'-Methylene bis(2-chloroaniline).....................        101-14-4
Acetaldehyde............................................         75-07-0
Acrylamide..............................................         79-06-1
Acrylonitrile...........................................        107-13-1
Allyl chloride..........................................        107-05-1
alpha-Hexachlorocyclohexane (a-HCH).....................        319-84-6
Aniline.................................................         62-53-3
Benzene.................................................         71-43-2
Benzidine...............................................         92-87-5
Benzotrichloride........................................         98-07-7
Benzyl chloride.........................................        100-44-7
beta-Hexachlorocyclohexane (b-HCH)......................        319-85-7
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate..............................        117-81-7

[[Page 10861]]

 
Bis(chloromethyl)ether..................................        542-88-1
Bromoform...............................................         75-25-2
Captan..................................................        133-06-2
Carbon tetrachloride....................................         56-23-5
Chlordane...............................................         57-74-9
Chlorobenzilate.........................................        510-15-6
Chloroform..............................................         67-66-3
Chloroprene.............................................        126-99-8
Cresols (mixed).........................................       1319-77-3
DDE.....................................................       3547-04-4
Dichloroethyl ether.....................................        111-44-4
Dichlorvos..............................................         62-73-7
Epichlorohydrin.........................................        106-89-8
Ethyl acrylate..........................................        140-88-5
Ethylene dibromide......................................        106-93-4
Ethylene dichloride.....................................        107-06-2
Ethylene oxide..........................................         75-21-8
Ethylene thiourea.......................................         96-45-7
Ethylidene dichloride (1,1-Dichloroethane)..............         75-34-3
Formaldehyde............................................         50-00-0
Heptachlor..............................................         76-44-8
Hexachlorobenzene.......................................        118-74-1
Hexachlorobutadiene.....................................         87-68-3
Hexachloroethane........................................         67-72-1
Hydrazine...............................................        302-01-2
Isophorone..............................................         78-59-1
Lindane (hexachlorocyclohexane, all isomers)............         58-89-9
m-Cresol................................................        108-39-4
Methylene chloride......................................         75-09-2
Naphthalene.............................................         91-20-3
Nitrobenzene............................................         98-95-3
Nitrosodimethylamine....................................         62-75-9
o-Cresol................................................         95-48-7
o-Toluidine.............................................         95-53-4
Parathion...............................................         56-38-2
p-Cresol................................................        106-44-5
p-Dichlorobenzene.......................................        106-46-7
Pentachloronitrobenzene.................................         82-68-8
Pentachlorophenol.......................................         87-86-5
Propoxur................................................        114-26-1
Propylene dichloride....................................         78-87-5
Propylene oxide.........................................         75-56-9
Quinoline...............................................         91-22-5
Tetrachloroethene.......................................        127-18-4
Toxaphene...............................................       8001-35-2
Trichloroethylene.......................................         79-01-6
Trifluralin.............................................       1582-09-8
Vinyl bromide...........................................        593-60-2
Vinyl chloride..........................................         75-01-4
Vinylidene chloride.....................................         75-35-4
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subpart SSSS--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Metal Coil

0
28. Section 63.5090 is amended by revising paragraph (a) and adding 
paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.5090  Does this subpart apply to me?

    (a) The provisions of this subpart apply to each facility that is a 
major source of HAP, as defined in Sec.  63.2, at which a coil coating 
line is operated, except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (e) of this 
section.
* * * * *
    (e) This subpart does not apply to the application of incidental 
markings (including letters, numbers, or symbols) that are added to 
bare metal coils and that are used for only product identification or 
for product inventory control. The application of letters, numbers, or 
symbols to a coated metal coil is considered a coil coating process and 
part of the coil coating affected source.

0
29. Section 63.5110 is amended by removing the definition for 
``Deviation'' and adding definitions for ``Deviation, before'' and 
``Deviation, on and after'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec.  63.5110  What special definitions are used in this subpart?

* * * * *
    Deviation, before August 24, 2020, means any instance in which an 
affected source, subject to this subpart, or an owner or operator of 
such a source:
    (1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this 
subpart including, but not limited to, any

[[Page 10862]]

emission limitation (including any operating limit) or work practice 
standard; or
    (2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to 
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is 
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to 
obtain such a permit; or
    (3) Fails to meet any emission limitation (including any operating 
limit) or work practice standard in this subpart during start-up, 
shutdown, or malfunction, regardless of whether or not such failure is 
permitted by this subpart.
    Deviation, on and after August 24, 2020, means any instance in 
which an affected source, subject to this subpart, or an owner or 
operator of such a source:
    (1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this 
subpart including, but not limited to, any emission limitation 
(including any operating limit) or work practice standard; or
    (2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to 
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is 
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to 
obtain such a permit.
* * * * *

0
30. Section 63.5121 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.5121  What operating limits must I meet?

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, for any 
coil coating line for which you use an add-on control device, unless 
you use a solvent recovery system and conduct a liquid-liquid material 
balance according to Sec.  63.5170(e)(1), you must meet the applicable 
operating limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart. You must 
establish the operating limits during performance tests according to 
the requirements in Sec.  63.5160(d)(3) and Table 1 to Sec.  63.5160. 
You must meet the operating limits established during the most recent 
performance test required in Sec.  63.5160 at all times after you 
establish them.
* * * * *

0
31. Section 63.5130 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.5130  When must I comply?

    (a) For an existing affected source, the compliance date is June 
10, 2005.
* * * * *

0
32. Section 63.5140 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a);
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (b) as (c); and
0
c. Adding paragraph (b).
    The revision and addition read as follows:


Sec.  63.5140  What general requirements must I meet to comply with the 
standards?

    (a) Before August 24, 2020, you must be in compliance with the 
applicable emission standards in Sec.  63.5120 and the operating limits 
in Table 1 to this subpart at all times, except during periods of 
start-up, shutdown, and malfunction of any capture system and control 
device used to comply with this subpart. On and after August 24, 2020 
you must be in compliance with the applicable emission standards in 
Sec.  63.5120 and the operating limits in Table 1 to this subpart at 
all times. If you are complying with the emission standards of this 
subpart without the use of a capture system and control device, you 
must be in compliance with the standards at all times.
    (b) Before August 24, 2020, you must always operate and maintain 
your affected source, including air pollution control and monitoring 
equipment, according to the provisions in Sec.  63.6(e)(1). On and 
after August 24, 2020, at all times, you must operate and maintain your 
affected source, including associated air pollution control equipment 
and monitoring equipment, in a manner consistent with safety and good 
air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions. The general 
duty to minimize emissions does not require the owner or operator to 
make any further efforts to reduce emissions if levels required by the 
applicable standard have been achieved. Determination of whether a 
source is operating in compliance with operation and maintenance 
requirements will be based on information available to the 
Administrator that may include, but is not limited to, monitoring 
results, review of operation and maintenance procedures, review of 
operation and maintenance records, and inspection of the affected 
source.
* * * * *

0
33. Section 63.5150 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory 
text, paragraph (a)(4)(i), and paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.5150  If I use a control device to comply with the emission 
standards, what monitoring must I do?

* * * * *
    (a) To demonstrate continuing compliance with the standards, you 
must monitor and inspect each capture system and each control device 
required to comply with Sec.  63.5120 following the date on which the 
initial performance test of the capture system and control device is 
completed. You must install and operate the monitoring equipment as 
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section. On and 
after August 24, 2020, you must also maintain the monitoring equipment 
at all times in accordance with Sec.  63.5140(b) and keep the necessary 
parts readily available for routine repairs of the monitoring 
equipment.
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) The monitoring plan must identify the operating parameter to be 
monitored to ensure that the capture efficiency measured during 
compliance tests is maintained, explain why this parameter is 
appropriate for demonstrating ongoing compliance, and identify the 
specific monitoring procedures.
* * * * *
    (b) If an operating parameter monitored in accordance with 
paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) of this section is out of the allowed range 
specified in Table 1 to this subpart it will be considered a deviation 
from the operating limit.

0
34. Section 63.5160 is amended by revising Table 1 and paragraphs 
(b)(1)(i), (b)(2), (b)(4), (c), (d) introductory text, (d)(1) 
introductory text, (d)(1)(vi) introductory text, (d)(1)(vii), (d)(2), 
(d)(3) introductory text, (d)(3)(i)(A), (d)(3)(ii)(D) introductory 
text, and (e) introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  63.5160  What performance tests must I complete?

     Table 1 to Sec.   63.5160--Required Performance Testing Summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  If you control HAP on your
    coil coating line by:                      You must:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Limiting HAP or Volatile    Determine the HAP or volatile matter and
 matter content of coatings.    solids content of coating materials
                                according to the procedures in Sec.
                                63.5160(b) and (c).

[[Page 10863]]

 
2. Using a capture system and  Except as specified in paragraph (a) of
 add-on control device.         this section, conduct an initial
                                performance test within 180 days of the
                                applicable compliance date in Sec.
                                63.5130, and conduct periodic
                                performance tests within 5 years
                                following the previous performance test,
                                as follows: If you are not required to
                                complete periodic performance tests as a
                                requirement of renewing your facility's
                                operating permit under 40 CFR part 70 or
                                40 CFR part 71, you must conduct the
                                first periodic performance test before
                                March 25, 2023, unless you already have
                                conducted a performance test on or after
                                March 25, 2018; thereafter, you must
                                conduct a performance test no later than
                                5 years following the previous
                                performance test. Operating limits must
                                be confirmed or reestablished during
                                each performance test. If you are
                                required to complete periodic
                                performance tests as a requirement of
                                renewing your facility's operating
                                permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR
                                part 71, you must conduct the periodic
                                testing in accordance with the terms and
                                schedule required by your permit
                                conditions. For each performance test:
                                (1) For each capture and control system,
                                determine the destruction or removal
                                efficiency of each control device
                                according to Sec.   63.5160(d) and the
                                capture efficiency of each capture
                                system according to Sec.   63.5160(e),
                                and (2) confirm or re-establish the
                                operating limits.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Count only those organic HAP in Table 3 to this subpart that 
are measured to be present at greater than or equal to 0.1 weight 
percent and greater than or equal to 1.0 weight percent for other 
organic HAP compounds.
* * * * *
    (2) Method 24 in appendix A-7 of part 60. For coatings, you may 
determine the total volatile matter content as weight fraction of 
nonaqueous volatile matter and use it as a substitute for organic HAP, 
using Method 24 in appendix A-7 of part 60. As an alternative to using 
Method 24, you may use ASTM D2369-10 (2015), ``Test Method for Volatile 
Content of Coatings'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14). The 
determination of total volatile matter content using a method specified 
in this paragraph (b)(2) or as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this 
section may be performed by the manufacturer of the coating and the 
results provided to you.
* * * * *
    (4) Formulation data. You may use formulation data provided that 
the information represents each organic HAP in Table 3 to this subpart 
that is present at a level equal to or greater than 0.1 percent and 
equal to or greater than 1.0 percent for other organic HAP compounds in 
any raw material used, weighted by the mass fraction of each raw 
material used in the material. Formulation data may be provided to you 
by the manufacturer of the coating material. In the event of any 
inconsistency between test data obtained with the test methods 
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section and 
formulation data, the test data will govern.
    (c) Solids content and density. You must determine the solids 
content and the density of each coating material applied. You may 
determine the volume solids content using ASTM D2697-03(2014) Standard 
Test Method for Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented 
Coatings (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14) or ASTM D6093-97 
(2016) Standard Test Method for Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in 
Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using a Helium Gas Pycnometer (incorporated 
by reference, see Sec.  63.14), or an EPA approved alternative method. 
You must determine the density of each coating using ASTM D1475-13 
``Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid Coatings, Inks, and 
Related Products'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14) or ASTM 
D2111-10 (2015) ``Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity and 
Density of Halogenated Organic Solvents and Their Admixtures'' 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14). The solids determination 
using ASTM D2697-03(2014) or ASTM D6093-97 (2016) and the density 
determination using ASTM D1475-13 or ASTM 2111-10 (2015) may be 
performed by the manufacturer of the material and the results provided 
to you. Alternatively, you may rely on formulation data provided by 
material providers to determine the volume solids. In the event of any 
inconsistency between test data obtained with the ASTM test methods 
specified in this section and formulation data, the test data will 
govern.
    (d) Control device destruction or removal efficiency. If you are 
using an add-on control device, such as an oxidizer, to comply with the 
standard in Sec.  63.5120, you must conduct performance tests according 
to Table 1 to Sec.  63.5160 to establish the destruction or removal 
efficiency of the control device or the outlet HAP concentration 
achieved by the oxidizer, according to the methods and procedures in 
paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section. During performance tests, 
you must establish the operating limits required by Sec.  63.5121 
according to paragraph (d)(3) of this section.
    (1) Performance tests conducted to determine the destruction or 
removal efficiency of the control device must be performed such that 
control device inlet and outlet testing is conducted simultaneously. To 
determine the outlet organic HAP concentration achieved by the 
oxidizer, only oxidizer outlet testing must be conducted. The data must 
be reduced in accordance with the test methods and procedures in 
paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (ix).
* * * * *
    (vi) Method 25 or 25A in appendix A-7 of part 60 is used to 
determine total gaseous non-methane organic matter concentration. You 
may use Method 18 in appendix A-6 of part 60 to subtract methane 
emissions from measured total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon. 
Use the same test method for both the inlet and outlet measurements, 
which must be conducted simultaneously. You must submit notification of 
the intended test method to the Administrator for approval along with 
notification of the performance test required under Sec.  63.7 (b). You 
must use Method 25A if any of the conditions described in paragraphs 
(d)(1)(vi)(A) through (D) of this section apply to the control device.
* * * * *
    (vii) Each performance test must consist of three separate runs, 
except as provided by Sec.  63.7(e)(3); each run must be conducted for 
at least 1 hour under the conditions that exist when the affected 
source is operating under normal operating conditions. For the purpose 
of determining volatile organic matter concentrations and mass flow 
rates, the average of the results of all runs will apply. If you are 
demonstrating compliance with the outlet organic HAP concentration 
limit in Sec.  63.5120(a)(3), only the average outlet volatile organic 
matter concentration must be determined.
* * * * *
    (2) You must record such process information as may be necessary to 
determine the conditions in existence at the time of the performance 
test. Before August 24, 2020, operations during periods of start-up, 
shutdown, and

[[Page 10864]]

malfunction will not constitute representative conditions for the 
purpose of a performance test. On and after August 24, 2020, you must 
conduct the performance test under representative operating conditions 
for the coating operation. Operations during periods of start-up, 
shutdown, or nonoperation do not constitute representative conditions 
for the purpose of a performance test. The owner or operator may not 
conduct performance tests during periods of malfunction. You must 
record the process information that is necessary to document operating 
conditions during the test and explain why the conditions represent 
normal operation. Upon request, you must make available to the 
Administrator such records as may be necessary to determine the 
conditions of performance tests.
    (3) Operating limits. If you are using a capture system and add-on 
control device other than a solvent recovery system for which you 
conduct a liquid-liquid material balance to comply with the 
requirements in Sec.  63.5120, you must establish the applicable 
operating limits required by Sec.  63.5121. These operating limits 
apply to each capture system and to each add-on emission control device 
that is not monitored by CEMS, and you must establish the operating 
limits during performance tests required by paragraph (d) of this 
section according to the requirements in paragraphs (d)(3)(i) through 
(iii) of this section.
    (i) * * *
    (A) During performance tests, you must monitor and record the 
combustion temperature at least once every 15 minutes during each of 
the three test runs. You must monitor the temperature in the firebox of 
the thermal oxidizer or immediately downstream of the firebox before 
any substantial heat exchange occurs.
* * * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (D) You must develop and implement an inspection and maintenance 
plan for your catalytic oxidizer(s) for which you elect to monitor 
according to paragraph (d)(3)(ii)(C) of this section. The plan must 
address, at a minimum, the elements specified in paragraphs 
(d)(3)(ii)(D) (1) through (3) of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) Capture efficiency. If you are required to determine capture 
efficiency to meet the requirements of Sec.  63.5170(e)(2), (f)(1) and 
(2), (g)(2) through (4), or (i)(2) and (3), you must determine capture 
efficiency using the procedures in paragraph (e)(1), (2), or (3) of 
this section, as applicable.
* * * * *

0
35. Section 63.5170 is amended by revising Table 1 and paragraphs 
(c)(1) and (2), (c)(4) introductory text, (e)(2) introductory text, 
(f)(1) introductory text, (f)(2), (g)(2) introductory text, (g)(3) 
introductory text, (g)(4) introductory text, Equation 11 of paragraph 
(h)(6), (i) introductory text, and (i)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.5170  How do I demonstrate compliance with the standards?

* * * * *

 Table 1 to Sec.   63.5170--Compliance Demonstration Requirements Index
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   If you choose to demonstrate
          compliance by:               Then you must demonstrate that:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Use of ``as purchased''          a. Each coating material used during
 compliant coatings.                 the 12-month compliance period does
                                     not exceed 0.046 kg HAP per liter
                                     solids, as purchased. Paragraph (a)
                                     of this section.
2. Use of ``as applied'' compliant  a. Each coating material used does
 coatings.                           not exceed 0.046 kg HAP per liter
                                     solids on a rolling 12-month
                                     average as applied basis,
                                     determined monthly. Paragraphs
                                     (b)(1) of this section; or
                                    b. Average of all coating materials
                                     used does not exceed 0.046 kg HAP
                                     per liter solids on a rolling 12-
                                     month average as applied basis,
                                     determined monthly. Paragraph
                                     (b)(2) of this section.
3. Use of a capture system and      Overall organic HAP control
 control device.                     efficiency is at least 98 percent
                                     on a monthly basis for individual
                                     or groups of coil coating lines; or
                                     overall organic HAP control
                                     efficiency is at least 98 percent
                                     during performance tests conducted
                                     according to Table 1 to Sec.
                                     63.5170 and operating limits are
                                     achieved continuously for
                                     individual coil coating lines; or
                                     oxidizer outlet HAP concentration
                                     is no greater than 20 ppmv and
                                     there is 100-percent capture
                                     efficiency during performance tests
                                     conducted according to Table 1 to
                                     Sec.   63.5170 and operating limits
                                     are achieved continuously for
                                     individual coil coating lines.
                                     Paragraph (c) of this section.
4. Use of a combination of          Average equivalent emission rate
 compliant coatings and control      does not exceed 0.046 kg HAP per
 devices and maintaining an          liter solids on a rolling 12-month
 acceptable equivalent emission      average as applied basis,
 rate.                               determined monthly. Paragraph (d)
                                     of this section.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) If the affected source uses one compliance procedure to limit 
organic HAP emissions to the level specified in Sec.  63.5120(a)(1) or 
(3) and has only always-controlled work stations, then you must 
demonstrate compliance with the provisions of paragraph (e) of this 
section when emissions from the affected source are controlled by one 
or more solvent recovery devices.
    (2) If the affected source uses one compliance procedure to limit 
organic HAP emissions to the level specified in Sec.  63.5120(a)(1) or 
(3) and has only always-controlled work stations, then you must 
demonstrate compliance with the provisions of paragraph (f) of this 
section when emissions are controlled by one or more oxidizers.
* * * * *
    (4) The method of limiting organic HAP emissions to the level 
specified in Sec.  63.5120(a)(3) is the installation and operation of a 
PTE around each work station and associated curing oven in the coating 
line and the ventilation of all organic HAP emissions from each PTE to 
an oxidizer with an outlet organic HAP concentration of no greater than 
20 ppmv on a dry basis. An enclosure that meets the requirements in 
Sec.  63.5160(e)(1) is considered a PTE. Compliance of the oxidizer 
with the outlet organic HAP concentration limit is demonstrated either 
through continuous emission monitoring according to paragraph 
(c)(4)(ii) of this section or through performance tests according to 
the requirements of Sec.  63.5160(d) and Table 1 to Sec.  63.5160. If 
this method is selected, you must meet the requirements of paragraph 
(c)(4)(i) of this section to demonstrate continuing achievement of 100 
percent capture of organic HAP emissions and either paragraph 
(c)(4)(ii) or paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of this section, respectively, to 
demonstrate continuous compliance with the oxidizer outlet organic HAP 
concentration limit through continuous

[[Page 10865]]

emission monitoring or continuous operating parameter monitoring:
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) Continuous emission monitoring of control device performance. 
Use continuous emission monitors to demonstrate recovery efficiency, 
conduct performance tests of capture efficiency and volumetric flow 
rate, and continuously monitor a site specific operating parameter to 
ensure that capture efficiency and volumetric flow rate are maintained 
following the procedures in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (xi) of this 
section:
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) Continuous monitoring of capture system and control device 
operating parameters. Demonstrate compliance through performance tests 
of capture efficiency and control device efficiency and continuous 
monitoring of capture system and control device operating parameters as 
specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (xi) of this section:
* * * * *
    (2) Continuous emission monitoring of control device performance. 
Use continuous emission monitors, conduct performance tests of capture 
efficiency, and continuously monitor a site specific operating 
parameter to ensure that capture efficiency is maintained. Compliance 
must be demonstrated in accordance with paragraph (e)(2) of this 
section.
    (g) * * *
    (2) Solvent recovery system using performance test and continuous 
monitoring compliance demonstration. For each solvent recovery system 
used to control one or more coil coating stations for which you choose 
to comply by means of performance testing of capture efficiency, 
continuous emission monitoring of the control device, and continuous 
monitoring of a capture system operating parameter, each month of the 
12-month compliance period you must meet the requirements of paragraphs 
(g)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section:
* * * * *
    (3) Oxidizer using performance tests and continuous monitoring of 
operating parameters compliance demonstration. For each oxidizer used 
to control emissions from one or more work stations for which you 
choose to demonstrate compliance through performance tests of capture 
efficiency, control device efficiency, and continuous monitoring of 
capture system and control device operating parameters, each month of 
the 12-month compliance period you must meet the requirements of 
paragraphs (g)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section:
* * * * *
    (4) Oxidizer using continuous emission monitoring compliance 
demonstration. For each oxidizer used to control emissions from one or 
more work stations for which you choose to demonstrate compliance 
through capture efficiency testing, continuous emission monitoring of 
the control device, and continuous monitoring of a capture system 
operating parameter, each month of the 12-month compliance period you 
must meet the requirements in paragraphs (g)(4)(i) and (ii) of this 
section:
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (6) * * *
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25FE20.001
    
* * * * *
    (i) Capture and control system compliance demonstration procedures 
using a CPMS for a coil coating line. If you use an add-on control 
device, to demonstrate compliance for each capture system and each 
control device through performance tests and continuous monitoring of 
capture system and control device operating parameters, you must meet 
the requirements in paragraphs (i)(1) through (3) of this section.
    (1) Conduct performance tests according to the schedule in Table 1 
to Sec.  63.5160 to determine the control device destruction or removal 
efficiency, DRE, according to Sec.  63.5160(d) and Table 1 to Sec.  
63.5160.
* * * * *

0
36. Section 63.5180 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (f) introductory text and (f)(1);
0
b. Removing and reserving paragraph (f)(2);
0
c. Revising paragraphs (g)(2)(v), (h) introductory text, (h)(2) and 
(3);
0
d. Adding paragraph (h)(4); and
0
e. Revising paragraphs (i) introductory text, (i)(1) through (4), 
(i)(6), and (i)(9).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:


Sec.  63.5180  What reports must I submit?

* * * * *
    (f) Before August 24, 2020, you must submit start-up, shutdown, and 
malfunction reports as specified in Sec.  63.10(d)(5) if you use a 
control device to comply with this subpart.
    (1) Before August 24, 2020, if your actions during a start-up, 
shutdown, or malfunction of an affected source (including actions taken 
to correct a malfunction) are not completely consistent with the 
procedures specified in the source's start-up, shutdown, and 
malfunction plan specified in Sec.  63.6 (e)(3) and required before 
August 24, 2020, you must state such information in the report. The 
start-up, shutdown, or malfunction report will consist of a letter 
containing the name, title, and signature of the responsible official 
who is certifying its accuracy, that will be submitted to the 
Administrator. Separate start-up, shutdown, or malfunction reports are 
not required if the information is included in the report specified in 
paragraph (g) of this section. The start-up, shutdown, and malfunction 
plan and start-up, shutdown, and malfunction report are no longer 
required on and after August 24, 2020.
* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (v) A statement that there were no deviations from the applicable 
emission limit in Sec.  63.5120 or the applicable operating limit(s) 
established according to Sec.  63.5121 during the reporting period, and 
that no CEMS were inoperative, inactive, malfunctioning, out-of-
control, repaired, or adjusted.
    (h) You must submit, for each deviation occurring at an affected 
source where you are not using CEMS to comply with the standards in 
this subpart, the semi-annual compliance report containing the 
information in paragraphs (g)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section and 
the information in paragraphs (h)(1) through (4) of this section:
* * * * *
    (2) Before August 24, 2020, you must provide information on the 
number, duration, and cause of deviations

[[Page 10866]]

(including unknown cause, if applicable) as applicable, and the 
corrective action taken. On and after August 24, 2020, you must provide 
information on the number, date, time, duration, and cause of 
deviations from an emission limit in Sec.  63.5120 or any applicable 
operating limit established according to Sec.  63.5121 (including 
unknown cause, if applicable) as applicable, and the corrective action 
taken.
    (3) Before August 24, 2020, you must provide information on the 
number, duration, and cause for continuous parameter monitoring system 
downtime incidents (including unknown cause other than downtime 
associated with zero and span and other daily calibration checks, if 
applicable). On and after August 24, 2020, you must provide the 
information specified in paragraphs (h)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.
    (i) Number, date, time, duration, cause (including unknown cause), 
and descriptions of corrective actions taken for continuous parameter 
monitoring systems that are inoperative (except for zero (low-level) 
and high-level checks).
    (ii) Number, date, time, duration, cause (including unknown cause), 
and descriptions of corrective actions taken for continuous parameter 
monitoring systems that are out of control as specified in Sec.  
63.8(c)(7).
    (4) On and after August 24, 2020, for each deviation from an 
emission limit in Sec.  63.5120 or any applicable operating limit 
established according to Sec.  63.5121, you must provide a list of the 
affected source or equipment, an estimate of the quantity of each 
regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit in Sec.  63.5120, a 
description of the method used to estimate the emissions, and the 
actions you took to minimize emissions in accordance with Sec.  
63.5140(b).
    (i) You must submit, for each deviation from the applicable 
emission limit in Sec.  63.5120 or the applicable operation limit(s) 
established according to Sec.  63.5121 occurring at an affected source 
where you are using CEMS to comply with the standards in this subpart, 
the semi-annual compliance report containing the information in 
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section, and the information 
in paragraphs (i)(1) through (12) of this section:
    (1) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture system 
or add-on control devices started and stopped.
    (2) Before August 24, 2020, the date and time that each CEMS was 
inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks. On and 
after August 24, 2020, for each instance that the CEMS was inoperative, 
except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks, the date, time, and 
duration that the CEMS was inoperative; the cause (including unknown 
cause) for the CEMS being inoperative; and a description of corrective 
actions taken.
    (3) Before August 24, 2020, the date and time that each CEMS was 
out-of-control, including the information in Sec.  63.8(c)(8). On and 
after August 24, 2020, for each instance that the CEMS was out-of-
control, as specified in Sec.  63.8(c)(7), the date, time, and duration 
that the CEMS was out-of-control; the cause (including unknown cause) 
for the CEMS being out-of-control; and descriptions of corrective 
actions taken.
    (4) Before August 24, 2020, the date and time that each deviation 
started and stopped, and whether each deviation occurred during a 
period of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction or during another period. 
On and after August 24, 2020, the date, time, and duration of each 
deviation from an emission limit in Sec.  63.5120. For each deviation, 
an estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over 
any emission limit in Sec.  63.5120 to this subpart, and a description 
of the method used to estimate the emissions.
* * * * *
    (6) Before August 24, 2020, a breakdown of the total duration of 
the deviations during the reporting period into those that are due to 
start-up, shutdown, control equipment problems, process problems, other 
known causes, and other unknown causes. On and after August 24, 2020, a 
breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during the reporting 
period into those that are due to control equipment problems, process 
problems, other known causes, and other unknown causes.
* * * * *
    (9) Before August 24, 2020, a brief description of the metal coil 
coating line. On and after August 24, 2020, a list of the affected 
source or equipment, including a brief description of the metal coil 
coating line.
* * * * *

0
37. Section 63.5181 is added to read as follows:


Sec.  63.5181  What are my electronic reporting requirements?

    (a) Beginning no later than August 24, 2020, you must submit the 
results of each performance test as required in Sec.  63.5180(e) 
following the procedure specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of 
this section.
    (1) For data collected using test methods supported by the EPA's 
Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the EPA's ERT website 
(https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert) at the time of the test, you must submit the 
results of the performance test to the EPA via the Compliance and 
Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI). The CEDRI interface can be 
accessed through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). Performance test data must be submitted in a file format 
generated through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic 
file format consistent with the extensible markup language (XML) schema 
listed on the EPA's ERT website.
    (2) For data collected using test methods that are not supported by 
the EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the 
test, you must submit the results of the performance test in portable 
document format (PDF) using the attachment module of the ERT.
    (3) If you claim that some of the performance test information 
being submitted under paragraph (a)(1) of this section is confidential 
business information (CBI), you must submit a complete file generated 
through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file 
consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT website, 
including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact disc, flash drive 
or other commonly used electronic storage medium to the EPA. The 
electronic medium must be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/
OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy 
Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same ERT or 
alternate file with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA via 
the EPA's CDX as described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
    (b) Beginning on August 24, 2020, the owner or operator shall 
submit the initial notifications required in Sec.  63.9(b) and the 
notification of compliance status required in Sec. Sec.  63.9(h) and 
63.5180(d) to the EPA via the CEDRI. The CEDRI interface can be 
accessed through the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov). The owner or 
operator must upload to CEDRI an electronic copy of each applicable 
notification in PDF. The applicable notification must be submitted by 
the deadline specified in this subpart, regardless of the method in 
which the reports are submitted. Owners or operators who claim that 
some of the information required to be submitted via CEDRI is CBI shall 
submit a complete report generated using the appropriate form in CEDRI 
or an

[[Page 10867]]

alternate electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed on the 
EPA's CEDRI website, including information claimed to be CBI, on a 
compact disc, flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage 
medium to the EPA. The electronic medium shall be clearly marked as CBI 
and mailed to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, 
Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 
27703. The same file with the CBI omitted shall be submitted to the EPA 
via the EPA's CDX as described earlier in this paragraph.
    (c) Beginning on March 25, 2021, or once the reporting template has 
been available on the CEDRI website for 1 year, whichever date is 
later, the owner or operator shall submit the semiannual compliance 
report required in Sec.  63.5180(g) through (i), as applicable, to the 
EPA via the CEDRI. The CEDRI interface can be accessed through the 
EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov). The owner or operator must use the 
appropriate electronic template on the CEDRI website for this subpart 
(https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/compliance-and-emissions-data-reporting-interface-cedri). The date on which the report 
templates become available will be listed on the CEDRI website. If the 
reporting form for the semiannual compliance report specific to this 
subpart is not available in CEDRI at the time that the report is due, 
you must submit the report to the Administrator at the appropriate 
addresses listed in Sec.  63.13. Once the form has been available in 
CEDRI for 1 year, you must begin submitting all subsequent reports via 
CEDRI. The reports must be submitted by the deadlines specified in this 
subpart, regardless of the method in which the reports are submitted. 
Owners or operators who claim that some of the information required to 
be submitted via CEDRI is CBI shall submit a complete report generated 
using the appropriate form in CEDRI, including information claimed to 
be CBI, on a compact disc, flash drive, or other commonly used 
electronic storage medium to the EPA. The electronic medium shall be 
clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, 
Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old 
Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file with the CBI omitted shall be 
submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as described earlier in this 
paragraph.
    (d) If you are required to electronically submit a report through 
the CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, you may assert a claim of EPA system outage 
for failure to timely comply with the reporting requirement. To assert 
a claim of EPA system outage, you must meet the requirements outlined 
in paragraphs (g)(1) through (7) of this section.
    (1) You must have been or will be precluded from accessing CEDRI 
and submitting a required report within the time prescribed due to an 
outage of either the EPA's CEDRI or CDX systems.
    (2) The outage must have occurred within the period of time 
beginning five business days prior to the date that the submission is 
due.
    (3) The outage may be planned or unplanned.
    (4) You must submit notification to the Administrator in writing as 
soon as possible following the date you first knew, or through due 
diligence should have known, that the event may cause or caused a delay 
in reporting.
    (5) You must provide to the Administrator a written description 
identifying:
    (i) The date(s) and time(s) when CDX or CEDRI was accessed and the 
system was unavailable;
    (ii) A rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the 
regulatory deadline to the EPA system outage;
    (iii) Measures taken or to be taken to minimize the delay in 
reporting; and
    (iv) The date by which you propose to report, or if you have 
already met the reporting requirement at the time of the notification, 
the date you reported.
    (6) The decision to accept the claim of EPA system outage and allow 
an extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the discretion 
of the Administrator.
    (7) In any circumstance, the report must be submitted 
electronically as soon as possible after the outage is resolved.
    (e) If you are required to electronically submit a report through 
CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, you may assert a claim of force majeure for 
failure to timely comply with the reporting requirement. To assert a 
claim of force majeure, you must meet the requirements outlined in 
paragraphs (h)(1) through (5) of this section.
    (1) You may submit a claim if a force majeure event is about to 
occur, occurs, or has occurred or there are lingering effects from such 
an event within the period of time beginning five business days prior 
to the date the submission is due. For the purposes of this section, a 
force majeure event is defined as an event that will be or has been 
caused by circumstances beyond the control of the affected facility, 
its contractors, or any entity controlled by the affected facility that 
prevents you from complying with the requirement to submit a report 
electronically within the time period prescribed. Examples of such 
events are acts of nature (e.g., hurricanes, earthquakes, or floods), 
acts of war or terrorism, or equipment failure or safety hazard beyond 
the control of the affected facility (e.g., large scale power outage).
    (2) You must submit notification to the Administrator in writing as 
soon as possible following the date you first knew, or through due 
diligence should have known, that the event may cause or has caused a 
delay in reporting.
    (3) You must provide to the Administrator:
    (i) A written description of the force majeure event;
    (ii) A rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the 
regulatory deadline to the force majeure event;
    (iii) Measures taken or to be taken to minimize the delay in 
reporting; and
    (iv) The date by which you propose to report, or if you have 
already met the reporting requirement at the time of the notification, 
the date you reported.
    (4) The decision to accept the claim of force majeure and allow an 
extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the discretion of 
the Administrator.
    (5) In any circumstance, the reporting must occur as soon as 
possible after the force majeure event occurs.

0
38. Section 63.5190 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(5) and (c) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  63.5190  What records must I maintain?

    (a) * * *
    (5) On and after August 24, 2020, for each deviation from an 
emission limitation reported under Sec.  63.5180(h) or (i), a record of 
the information specified in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through (iv) of this 
section, as applicable.
    (i) The date, time, and duration of the deviation, as reported 
under Sec.  63.5180(h) and (i).
    (ii) A list of the affected sources or equipment for which the 
deviation occurred and the cause of the deviation, as reported under 
Sec.  63.5180(h) and (i).
    (iii) An estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant 
emitted over any applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.5120 to this 
subpart or any applicable operating limit established according to 
Sec.  63.5121 to this subpart, and a description of the method used to 
calculate the estimate, as reported under Sec.  63.5180(h) and (i).
    (iv) A record of actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance 
with Sec.  63.5140(b) and any corrective actions taken to return the 
affected unit to its normal or usual manner of operation.
* * * * *

[[Page 10868]]

    (c) Any records required to be maintained by this subpart that are 
in reports that were submitted electronically via the EPA's CEDRI may 
be maintained in electronic format. This ability to maintain electronic 
copies does not affect the requirement for facilities to make records, 
data, and reports available upon request to a delegated air agency or 
the EPA as part of an on-site compliance evaluation.

0
39. Table 2 to subpart SSSS of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
    Table 2 to Subpart SSSS of Part 63--Applicability of General 
Provisions to Subpart SSSS
    You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements 
according to the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Applicable to subpart
     General provisions reference              Subject                    SSSS                 Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   63.1(a)(1)-(4)................  General Applicability..  Yes....................
Sec.   63.1(a)(6)....................  Source Category Listing  Yes....................
Sec.   63.1(a)(10)-(12)..............  Timing and Overlap       Yes....................
                                        Clarifications.
Sec.   63.1(b)(1)....................  Initial Applicability    Yes....................  Applicability to
                                        Determination.                                    Subpart SSSS is also
                                                                                          specified in Sec.
                                                                                          63.5090.
Sec.   63.1(b)(3)....................  Applicability            Yes....................
                                        Determination
                                        Recordkeeping.
Sec.   63.1(c)(1)....................  Applicability after      Yes....................
                                        Standard Established.
Sec.   63.1(c)(2)....................  Applicability of Permit  Yes....................
                                        Program for Area
                                        Sources.
Sec.   63.1(c)(5)....................  Extensions and           Yes....................
                                        Notifications.
Sec.   63.1(e).......................  Applicability of Permit  Yes....................
                                        Program Before
                                        Relevant Standard is
                                        Set.
Sec.   63.2..........................  Definitions............  Yes....................  Additional definitions
                                                                                          are specified in Sec.
                                                                                           63.5110.
Sec.   63.3..........................  Units and Abbreviations  Yes....................
Sec.   63.4(a)(1)-(2)................  Prohibited Activities..  Yes....................
Sec.   63.4(b)-(c)...................  Circumvention/           Yes....................
                                        Fragmentation.
Sec.   63.5(a).......................  Construction/            Yes....................
                                        Reconstruction.
Sec.   63.5(b)(1), (3), (4), (6).....  Requirements for         Yes....................
                                        Existing, Newly
                                        Constructed, and
                                        Reconstructed Sources.
Sec.   63.5(d)(1)(i)-(ii)(F),          Application for          Yes....................  Only total HAP
 (d)(1)(ii)(H), (d)(1)(ii)(J),          Approval of                                       emissions in terms of
 (d)(1)(iii), (d)(2)-(4).               Construction/                                     tons per year are
                                        Reconstruction.                                   required for Sec.
                                                                                          63.5(d)(1)(ii)(H).
Sec.   63.5(e).......................  Approval of              Yes....................
                                        Construction/
                                        Reconstruction.
Sec.   63.5(f).......................  Approval of              Yes....................
                                        Construction/
                                        Reconstruction Based
                                        on Prior State Review.
Sec.   63.6(a).......................  Compliance with          Yes....................
                                        Standards and
                                        Maintenance
                                        Requirements-
                                        Applicability.
Sec.   63.6(b)(1)-(5), (b)(7)........  Compliance Dates for     Yes....................  Section 63.5130
                                        New and Reconstructed                             specifies the
                                        Sources.                                          compliance dates.
Sec.   63.6(c)(1), (2), (5)..........  Compliance Dates for     Yes....................  Section 63.5130
                                        Existing Sources.                                 specifies the
                                                                                          compliance dates.
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(i)-(ii)............  General Duty to          Yes before August 24,    See Sec.   63.5140(b)
                                        Minimize Emissions and   2020, No on and after    for general duty
                                        Requirement to Correct   August 24, 2020.         requirement.
                                        Malfunctions As Soon
                                        As Possible.
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(iii)...............  Operation and            Yes....................
                                        Maintenance
                                        Requirements.
Sec.   63.6(e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(iii)-     SSMP Requirements......  Yes before August 24,
 (ix).                                                           2020, No on and after
                                                                 August 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.6(f)(1)....................  SSM Exemption..........  Yes before August 24,    See Sec.   63.5140(b)
                                                                 2020, No on and after    for general duty
                                                                 August 24, 2020.         requirement.
Sec.   63.6(f)(2)-(3)................  Compliance with Non-     Yes....................
                                        Opacity Emission
                                        Standards.
Sec.   63.6(g).......................  Alternative Non-Opacity  Yes....................
                                        Emission Standard.
Sec.   63.6(h).......................  Compliance with Opacity/ No.....................  Subpart SSSS does not
                                        Visible Emission                                  establish opacity
                                        Standards.                                        standards or visible
                                                                                          emission standards.
Sec.   63.6(i)(1)-(14), (i)(16)......  Extension of Compliance  Yes....................
                                        and Administrator's
                                        Authority.
Sec.   63.6(j).......................  Presidential Compliance  Yes....................
                                        Exemption.
Sec.   63.7(a)-(d) except (a)(2)(i)-   Performance Test         Yes....................
 (viii).                                Requirements.
Sec.   63.7(e)(1)....................  Performance Testing....  Yes before August 24,    See Sec.
                                                                 2020, No on and after    63.5160(d)(2).
                                                                 August 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.7(e)(2)-(4)................  Conduct of Performance   Yes....................
                                        Tests.
Sec.   63.7(f).......................  Alternative Test Method  Yes....................  EPA retains approval
                                                                                          authority.

[[Page 10869]]

 
Sec.   63.7(g)-(h)...................  Data Analysis and        Yes....................
                                        Waiver of Tests.
Sec.   63.8(a)(1)-(2)................  Monitoring               Yes....................  Additional requirements
                                        Requirements--Applicab                            for monitoring are
                                        ility.                                            specified in Sec.
                                                                                          63.5150(a).
Sec.   63.8(a)(4)....................  Additional Monitoring    No.....................  Subpart SSSS does not
                                        Requirements.                                     have monitoring
                                                                                          requirements for
                                                                                          flares.
Sec.   63.8(b).......................  Conduct of Monitoring..  Yes....................
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)....................  Operation and            Yes before August 24,    Section 63.5150(a)
                                        Maintenance of           2020, No on and after    specifies the
                                        Continuous Monitoring    August 24, 2020.         requirements for the
                                        System (CMS).                                     operation of CMS for
                                                                                          capture systems and
                                                                                          add-on control devices
                                                                                          at sources using these
                                                                                          to comply.
Sec.   63.8(c)(2)-(3)................  CMS Operation and        Yes....................  Applies only to
                                        Maintenance.                                      monitoring of capture
                                                                                          system and add-on
                                                                                          control device
                                                                                          efficiency at sources
                                                                                          using these to comply
                                                                                          with the standards.
                                                                                          Additional
                                                                                          requirements for CMS
                                                                                          operations and
                                                                                          maintenance are
                                                                                          specified in Sec.
                                                                                          63.5170.
Sec.   63.8(c)(4)-(5)................  CMS Continuous           No.....................  Subpart SSSS does not
                                        Operation Procedures.                             require COMS.
Sec.   63.8(c)(6)-(8)................  CMS Requirements.......  Yes....................  Provisions only apply
                                                                                          if CEMS are used.
Sec.   63.8(d)-(e)...................  CMS Quality Control,     Yes....................  Provisions only apply
                                        Written Procedures,                               if CEMS are used.
                                        and Performance
                                        Evaluation.
Sec.   63.8(f)(1)-(5)................  Use of an Alternative    Yes....................  EPA retains approval
                                        Monitoring Method.                                authority.
Sec.   63.8(f)(6)....................  Alternative to Relative  No.....................  Section 63.8(f)(6)
                                        Accuracy Test.                                    provisions are not
                                                                                          applicable because
                                                                                          subpart SSSS does not
                                                                                          require CEMS.
Sec.   63.8(g).......................  Data Reduction.........  No.....................  Sections 63.5170,
                                                                                          63.5140, 63.5150, and
                                                                                          63.5150 specify
                                                                                          monitoring data
                                                                                          reduction.
Sec.   63.9(a).......................  Notification of          Yes....................
                                        Applicability.
Sec.   63.9(b)(1)....................  Initial Notifications..  Yes....................
Sec.   63.9(b)(2)....................  Initial Notifications..  Yes....................  With the exception that
                                                                                          Sec.   63.5180(b)(1)
                                                                                          provides 2 years after
                                                                                          the proposal date for
                                                                                          submittal of the
                                                                                          initial notification
                                                                                          for existing sources.
Sec.   63.9(b)(4)(i), (b)(4)(v),       Application for          Yes....................
 (b)(5).                                Approval of
                                        Construction or
                                        Reconstruction.
Sec.   63.9(c)-(e)...................  Request for Extension    Yes....................  Notification of
                                        of Compliance, New                                performance test
                                        Source Notification                               requirement applies
                                        for Special Compliance                            only to capture system
                                        Requirements, and                                 and add-on control
                                        Notification of                                   device performance
                                        Performance Test.                                 tests at sources using
                                                                                          these to comply with
                                                                                          the standards.
Sec.   63.9(f).......................  Notification of Visible  No.....................  Subpart SSSS does not
                                        Emissions/Opacity Test.                           require opacity and
                                                                                          visible emissions
                                                                                          observations.
Sec.   63.9(g).......................  Additional               No.....................  Provisions for COMS are
                                        Notifications When                                not applicable.
                                        Using CMS.
Sec.   63.9(h)(1)-(3)................  Notification of          Yes....................  Section 63.5130
                                        Compliance Status.                                specifies the dates
                                                                                          for submitting the
                                                                                          notification of
                                                                                          compliance status.
Sec.   63.9(h)(5)-(6)................  Clarifications.........  Yes....................
Sec.   63.9(i).......................  Adjustment of Submittal  Yes....................
                                        Deadlines.
Sec.   63.9(j).......................  Change in Previous       Yes....................
                                        Information.
Sec.   63.10(a)......................  Recordkeeping/           Yes....................
                                        Reporting--Applicabili
                                        ty and General
                                        Information.
Sec.   63.10(b)(1)...................  General Recordkeeping    Yes....................  Additional requirements
                                        Requirements.                                     are specified in Sec.
                                                                                           63.5190.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(i)-(ii)...........  Recordkeeping of         Yes before August 24,    See Sec.
                                        Occurrence and           2020, No on and after    63.5190(a)(5).
                                        Duration of Startups     August 24, 2020.
                                        and Shutdowns and
                                        Recordkeeping of
                                        Failures to Meet
                                        Standards.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(iii)..............  Maintenance Records....  Yes....................

[[Page 10870]]

 
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(v)...........  Actions Taken to         Yes before August 24,    See Sec.
                                        Minimize Emissions       2020, No on and after    63.5190(a)(5).
                                        During Startup,          August 24, 2020.
                                        Shutdown, and
                                        Malfunction.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(vi)...............  Recordkeeping for CMS    Yes before August 24,    See Sec.
                                        Malfunctions.            2020, No on and after    63.5190(a)(5).
                                                                 August 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(vii)-(xiv)........  Other CMS Requirements.  Yes....................
Sec.   63.10(b)(3)...................  Recordkeeping            Yes....................
                                        Requirements for
                                        Applicability
                                        Determinations.
Sec.   63.10(c)......................  Additional CMS           No.....................  See Sec.
                                        Recordkeeping                                     63.5190(a)(5).
                                        Requirements.
Sec.   63.10(d)(1)-(2)...............  General Reporting        Yes....................  Additional requirements
                                        Requirements and                                  are specified in Sec.
                                        Report of Performance                              63.5180(e).
                                        Test Results.
Sec.   63.10(d)(3)...................  Reporting Opacity or     No.....................  Subpart SSSS does not
                                        Visible Emissions                                 require opacity and
                                        Observations.                                     visible emissions
                                                                                          observations.
Sec.   63.10(d)(4)...................  Progress Reports for     Yes....................
                                        Sources with
                                        Compliance Extensions.
Sec.   63.10(d)(5)...................  Startup, Shutdown,       Yes before August 24,
                                        Malfunction Reports.     2020, No on and after
                                                                 August 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.10(e)......................  Additional Reporting     No.....................
                                        Requirements for
                                        Sources with CMS.
Sec.   63.10(f)......................  Recordkeeping/Reporting  Yes....................
                                        Waiver.
Sec.   63.11.........................  Control Device           No.....................  Subpart SSSS does not
                                        Requirements/Flares.                              specify use of flares
                                                                                          for compliance.
Sec.   63.12.........................  State Authority and      Yes....................
                                        Delegations.
Sec.   63.13(a)......................  Addresses..............  Yes before August 24,
                                                                 2020, No on and after
                                                                 August 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.13(b)......................  Submittal to State       Yes....................
                                        Agencies.
Sec.   63.13(c)......................  Submittal to State       Yes before August 24,
                                        Agencies.                2020, No unless the
                                                                 state requires the
                                                                 submittal via CEDRI,
                                                                 on and after August
                                                                 24, 2020.
Sec.   63.14.........................  Incorporation by         Yes....................  Subpart SSSS includes
                                        Reference.                                        provisions for
                                                                                          alternative ASTM and
                                                                                          ASME test methods that
                                                                                          are incorporated by
                                                                                          reference.
Sec.   63.15.........................  Availability of          Yes....................
                                        Information/
                                        Confidentiality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


0
40. Table 3 to subpart SSSS of part 63 is added to read as follows:

  Table 3 to Subpart SSSS of Part 63--List of Hazardous Air Pollutants
 That Must Be Counted Toward Total Organic HAP Content if Present at 0.1
                         Percent or More by Mass
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Chemical name                           CAS No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane............................            79-34-5
1,1,2-Trichloroethane................................            79-00-5
1,1-Dimethylhydrazine................................            57-14-7
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane..........................            96-12-8
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine................................           122-66-7
1,3-Butadiene........................................           106-99-0
1,3-Dichloropropene..................................           542-75-6
1,4-Dioxane..........................................           123-91-1
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol................................            88-06-2
2,4/2,6-Dinitrotoluene (mixture).....................         25321-14-6
2,4-Dinitrotoluene...................................           121-14-2
2,4-Toluene diamine..................................            95-80-7
2-Nitropropane.......................................            79-46-9
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine...............................            91-94-1
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine..............................           119-90-4
3,3'-Dimethylbenzidine...............................           119-93-7
4,4'-Methylene bis(2-chloroaniline)..................           101-14-4
Acetaldehyde.........................................            75-07-0
Acrylamide...........................................            79-06-1
Acrylonitrile........................................           107-13-1
Allyl chloride.......................................           107-05-1
alpha-Hexachlorocyclohexane (a-HCH)..................           319-84-6
Aniline..............................................            62-53-3
Benzene..............................................            71-43-2

[[Page 10871]]

 
Benzidine............................................            92-87-5
Benzotrichloride.....................................            98-07-7
Benzyl chloride......................................           100-44-7
beta-Hexachlorocyclohexane (b-HCH)...................           319-85-7
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate...........................           117-81-7
Bis(chloromethyl)ether...............................           542-88-1
Bromoform............................................            75-25-2
Captan...............................................           133-06-2
Carbon tetrachloride.................................            56-23-5
Chlordane............................................            57-74-9
Chlorobenzilate......................................           510-15-6
Chloroform...........................................            67-66-3
Chloroprene..........................................           126-99-8
Cresols (mixed)......................................          1319-77-3
DDE..................................................          3547-04-4
Dichloroethyl ether..................................           111-44-4
Dichlorvos...........................................            62-73-7
Epichlorohydrin......................................           106-89-8
Ethyl acrylate.......................................           140-88-5
Ethylene dibromide...................................           106-93-4
Ethylene dichloride..................................           107-06-2
Ethylene oxide.......................................            75-21-8
Ethylene thiourea....................................            96-45-7
Ethylidene dichloride (1,1-Dichloroethane)...........            75-34-3
Formaldehyde.........................................            50-00-0
Heptachlor...........................................            76-44-8
Hexachlorobenzene....................................           118-74-1
Hexachlorobutadiene..................................            87-68-3
Hexachloroethane.....................................            67-72-1
Hydrazine............................................           302-01-2
Isophorone...........................................            78-59-1
Lindane (hexachlorocyclohexane, all isomers).........            58-89-9
m-Cresol.............................................           108-39-4
Methylene chloride...................................            75-09-2
Naphthalene..........................................            91-20-3
Nitrobenzene.........................................            98-95-3
Nitrosodimethylamine.................................            62-75-9
o-Cresol.............................................            95-48-7
o-Toluidine..........................................            95-53-4
Parathion............................................            56-38-2
p-Cresol.............................................           106-44-5
p-Dichlorobenzene....................................           106-46-7
Pentachloronitrobenzene..............................            82-68-8
Pentachlorophenol....................................            87-86-5
Propoxur.............................................           114-26-1
Propylene dichloride.................................            78-87-5
Propylene oxide......................................            75-56-9
Quinoline............................................            91-22-5
Tetrachloroethene....................................           127-18-4
Toxaphene............................................          8001-35-2
Trichloroethylene....................................            79-01-6
Trifluralin..........................................          1582-09-8
Vinyl bromide........................................           593-60-2
Vinyl chloride.......................................            75-01-4
Vinylidene chloride..................................            75-35-4
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2020-00303 Filed 2-24-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


