[Federal Register: January 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 1)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 129-192]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02ja04-10]
[[Page 129]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 63
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Surface
Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products; Final Rule
[[Page 130]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[OAR-2003-0116-FRL-7549-7]
RIN 2060-AG56
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Surface
Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action promulgates national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for miscellaneous metal parts and
products surface coating operations located at major sources of
hazardous air pollutants (HAP). The final rule implements section
112(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by requiring these operations to meet
HAP emission standards reflecting the application of the maximum
achievable control technology (MACT). The final rule will protect air
quality and promote the public health by reducing emissions of HAP from
facilities in the miscellaneous metal parts and products surface
coating source category. The organic HAP emitted by these operations
include xylenes, toluene, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), phenol, cresols/
cresylic acid, glycol ethers (including ethylene glycol monobutyl ether
(EGBE)), styrene, methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK), and ethyl benzene.
Exposure to these substances has been demonstrated to cause adverse
health effects such as irritation of the lung, skin, and mucous
membranes, and effects on the central nervous system, liver, and heart.
In general, these findings have only been shown with concentrations
higher than those typically in the ambient air. The final standards are
expected to reduce nationwide organic HAP emissions from major sources
in this source category by approximately 48 percent.
EFFECTIVE DATES: The final rule is effective January 2, 2004. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the final
rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of January
2, 2004.
ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0116 (formerly Docket No. A-
97-34) is located at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West (6102T), 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B-102, Washington, DC 20460.
Background Information Document. A background information document
(BID) for the promulgated NESHAP may be obtained from the docket; the
U.S. EPA Library (C267-01), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone
(919) 541-2777; or from the National Technical Information Service,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, telephone (703) 487-4650.
Refer to ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP): Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products--
Summary of Public Comments and Responses on Proposed Rule'' (EPA-453/R-
03-008).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Kim Teal, Coatings and Consumer
Products Group, Emission Standards Division (C539-03), U.S. EPA,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number (919) 541-5580;
facsimile number (919) 541-5689; electronic mail address:
teal.kim@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. The source category
definition includes facilities that apply coatings to miscellaneous
metal parts and products. In general, facilities that coat
miscellaneous metal parts and products are covered under the North
American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes listed in Table
1. However, facilities classified under other NAICS codes may be
subject to the final standards if they meet the applicability criteria.
Not all facilities classified under the NAICS codes in the following
table will be subject to the final standards because some of the
classifications cover products outside the scope of the NESHAP for
miscellaneous metal parts and products.
Table 1.--Categories and Entities Potentially Regulated by the Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially regulated
Category NAICS entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Automobile Parts...................... 335312, 336111, 336211, 336312, Engine parts, vehicle parts and
33632, 33633, 33634, 33637, 336399. accessories, brakes, axles, etc.
Extruded Aluminum..................... 331316, 331524, 332321, 332323..... Extruded aluminum, architectural
components, rod, and tubes.
Heavy Equipment....................... 33312, 333611, 333618.............. Tractors, earth moving machinery.
Job Shops............................. 332312, 332722, 332813, 332991, Any of the products from the
332999, 334119, 336413, 339999. miscellaneous metal parts and
products segments.
Large Trucks and Buses................ 33612, 336211...................... Large trucks and buses.
Magnet Wire........................... 331319, 331422, 335929............. Magnet wire.
Metal Buildings....................... 332311............................. Prefabricated metal: buildings,
carports, docks, dwellings,
greenhouses, panels for buildings.
Metal Containers...................... 33242, 81131, 322214, 326199, Drums, kegs, pails, shipping
331513, 332439. containers.
Metal Pipe and Foundry................ 331111, 331513, 33121, 331221, Plate, tube, rods, nails, spikes,
331511. etc.
Rail Transportation................... 33651, 336611, 482111.............. Brakes, engines, freight cars,
locomotives.
Recreational Vehicles................. 3369, 331316, 336991, 336211, Motorcycles, motor homes,
336112, 336213, 336214, 336399. semitrailers, truck trailers.
Rubber-to-Metal Products.............. 326291, 326299..................... Engine mounts, rubberized tank
tread, harmonic balancers.
Structural Steel...................... 332311, 332312..................... Joists, railway bridge sections,
highway bridge sections.
Other Transportation Equipment........ 336212, 336999, 33635, 56121, 8111, Miscellaneous transportation
56211. related equipment and parts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. To determine whether your coating operation is regulated by
this action, you should examine the applicability criteria in Sec.
63.3881 of the final rule.
Docket. The EPA has established an official public docket for this
action under Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0116 (formerly docket A-97-34). The
official public docket consists of the documents specifically
referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other
information related to this action. Although a part of the official
docket, the public docket does not include
[[Page 131]]
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection
of materials that is available for public viewing at the EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room B-102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566-1744,
and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742. A
reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket materials.
Electronic Docket Access. You may access this Federal Register
document electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal
Register'' listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.
An electronic version of the public docket is available through
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may
use EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to view public comments,
access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket,
and to access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available
electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available
docket materials through the docket facility identified above. Once in
the system, select ``search,'' then key in the appropriate docket
identification number.
WorldWide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of the final rule will be available on the http://WWW.
Following the Administrator's signature, a copy of the final rule will
be posted at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg on EPA's Technology Transfer
Network (TTN) policy and guidance page for newly proposed or
promulgated rules. The TTN provides information and technology exchange
in various areas of air pollution control. If more information
regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at (919) 541-5384.
Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial
review of the final rule is available only by the filing of a petition
for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit by March 2, 2004. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only
an objection to the rule that was raised with reasonable specificity
during the period for public comment can be raised during judicial
review. Under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements
established by the final rule may not be challenged separately in any
civil or criminal proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these
requirements.
Outline: The following outline is provided to aid in reading the
preamble to the final rule:
I. Background
A. What is the source of authority for development of NESHAP?
B. What criteria are used in the development of NESHAP?
C. What are the primary sources of emissions and what are the
emissions?
D. What are the health effects associated with organic HAP
emissions from the surface coating of metal parts and products?
II. Summary of the Final Rule
A. What source categories and subcategories are affected by the
final rule?
B. What is the relationship to other rules?
C. What is the affected source?
D. What are the emission limits, operating limits, and other
standards?
E. What are the testing and initial compliance requirements?
F. What are the continuous compliance provisions?
G. What are the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements?
III. What are the significant differences from proposal?
A. Applicability
B. Scope of Category
C. Emission Limits
D. Method for Determining HAP Content
E. Deviations From Operating Parameters
F. New Alternatives to Facilitate Compliance with Multiple
Coating NESHAP and Multiple Emission Limits
G. Initial and Continuous Compliance Demonstrations for Magnet
Wire Sources
IV. What are the responses to significant comments?
A. Applicability and Scope of Source Category
B. Need for Separate Source Category for Department of Defense
Coatings
C. Overlap with Activities Subject to Other Surface Coating
NESHAP
D. Complying with the Rule Representing the Majority of the
Substrate (Plastic or Metal) on Pre-assembled Parts
E. Complying with the Most Stringent NESHAP
F. Assembled On-road Vehicle Coating
G. The MACT Floor Approach and Database
H. Compliance Options for Meeting the Emission Limits
I. Methods for Expressing Organic HAP Content of Coatings
J. High Performance Coatings
K. Compliance Requirements for Sources with Add-on Controls
L. Compliance Requirements for Magnet Wire Sources
V. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts
A. What are the air impacts?
B. What are the cost impacts?
C. What are the economic impacts?
D. What are the non-air health, environmental, and energy
impacts?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
A. What Is the Source of Authority for Development of NESHAP?
Section 112 of the CAA requires us to list categories and
subcategories of major sources and area sources of HAP and to establish
NESHAP for the listed source categories and subcategories. The
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products (Surface Coating) category of
major sources was listed on July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576) under the
Surface Coating Processes industry group. Major sources of HAP are
those that emit or have the potential to emit considering controls
equal to or greater than 9.1 megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (10 tons per
year (tpy)) of any one HAP or 22.7 Mg/yr (25 tpy) of any combination of
HAP.
B. What Criteria Are Used in the Development of NESHAP?
Section 112(c)(2) of the CAA requires that we establish NESHAP for
the control of HAP from both new and existing major sources, based upon
the criteria set out in section 112(d). The CAA requires the NESHAP to
reflect the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of HAP that is
achievable, taking into consideration the cost of achieving the
emission reduction, any non-air quality health and environmental
impacts, and energy requirements. This level of control is commonly
referred to as MACT.
The MACT floor is the minimum control level allowed for NESHAP and
is defined under section 112(d)(3) of the CAA. In essence, the MACT
floor ensures that the standard is set at a level that assures that all
major sources achieve the level of control at least as stringent as
that already achieved by the better-controlled and lower-emitting
sources in each source category or subcategory. For new sources, the
MACT floor cannot be less stringent than the emission control that is
[[Page 132]]
achieved in practice by the best-controlled similar source. The MACT
standards for existing sources can be less stringent than standards for
new sources, but they cannot be less stringent than the average
emission limitation achieved by the 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 the final NESHAP, we considered control options that
are more stringent than the MACT floor, taking into account
consideration of the cost of achieving the emission reduction, any non-
air quality health and environmental impacts, and energy requirements.
In the final rule, EPA is promulgating standards for both existing and
new sources consistent with these statutory requirements.
C. What Are the Primary Sources of Emissions and What Are the
Emissions?
The final NESHAP regulate emissions of organic HAP. Available
emission data collected during the development of the final NESHAP show
that the primary organic HAP emitted from the surface coating of
miscellaneous metal parts and products include xylenes, toluene, MEK,
phenol, cresols/cresylic acid, glycol ethers (including EGBE), styrene,
MIBK, and ethyl benzene. These compounds account for approximately 90
percent of this category's nationwide organic HAP emissions.
The majority of organic HAP emissions from a facility engaged in
miscellaneous metal parts and products surface coating operations can
be attributed to the application, drying, and curing of coatings. The
remaining emissions are primarily from cleaning operations. In most
cases, organic HAP emissions from mixing, storage, and waste handling
are relatively small. The organic HAP emissions associated with
coatings (the term ``coatings'' includes protective and decorative
coatings as well as adhesives) occur at several points. Coatings are
most often applied either by using a spray gun in a spray booth or by
dipping the substrate in a tank containing the coating. In a spray
booth, volatile components evaporate from the coating as it is applied
to the part and from the overspray. The coated part then passes through
an open (flash-off) area where additional volatiles evaporate from the
coating. Finally, the coated part passes through a drying/curing oven,
or is allowed to air dry, where the remaining volatiles are evaporated.
Organic HAP emissions also occur from the activities undertaken
during cleaning operations, including paint stripping, where solvent is
used to remove coating residue or other unwanted materials. Cleaning in
this industry includes cleaning of spray guns and transfer lines (e.g.,
tubing or piping), tanks, and the interior of spray booths. Cleaning
also includes applying solvents to manufactured parts prior to coating
application and to equipment (e.g., cleaning rollers, pumps, conveyors,
etc.).
Mixing and storage are other sources of emissions. Organic HAP
emissions can occur from displacement of organic vapor-laden air in
containers used to store HAP solvents or to mix coatings containing HAP
solvents. The displacement of vapor-laden air can occur during the
filling of containers and can be caused by changes in temperature or
barometric pressure, or by agitation during mixing.
D. What Are the Health Effects Associated With Organic HAP Emissions
From the Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products?
The HAP to be controlled with the final rule are associated with a
variety of adverse health effects. These adverse health effects include
chronic health disorders (e.g., irritation of the lung, eyes, and
mucous membranes and effects on the central nervous system) and acute
health disorders (e.g., lung irritation and congestion, alimentary
effects such as nausea and vomiting, and effects on the central nervous
system).
We do not have the type of current detailed data on each of the
facilities covered by these emission standards for this source
category, and the people living around the facilities, that would be
necessary to conduct an analysis to determine the actual population
exposures to the organic HAP emitted from these facilities and
potential for resultant health effects. Therefore, we do not know the
extent to which the adverse health effects described above occur in the
populations surrounding these facilities. However, to the extent the
adverse effects do occur, the final rule will reduce emissions and
subsequent exposures.
II. Summary of the Final Rule
A. What Source Categories and Subcategories Are Affected by the Final
Rule?
The final rule applies to you if you own or operate a miscellaneous
metal parts and products surface coating facility that is a major
source, or is located at a major source, or is part of a major source
of HAP emissions. We define a miscellaneous metal parts and products
surface coating facility as any facility engaged in the surface coating
of any miscellaneous metal part or product. If application of coating
to a substrate occurs, then surface coating also includes associated
activities, such as surface preparation, cleaning, mixing, and storage.
However, these associated activities do not comprise surface coating if
the application of coating does not occur. Coating application with
handheld, non-refillable aerosol containers, touch-up markers, marking
pens, or the application of paper film or plastic film which may be
pre-coated with an adhesive by the manufacturer is not a coating
operation for the purposes of the final rule.
You will not be subject to the final rule if your miscellaneous
metal parts and products surface coating facility is located at an area
source. An area source of HAP is any facility that has the potential to
emit HAP but is not a major source. You may establish area source
status by limiting the source's potential to emit HAP through
appropriate mechanisms available through your permitting authority.
The final rule does not apply to surface coating or a coating
operation that meets any of the criteria listed below:
[sbull] A coating operation conducted at a source where the source
uses only coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning
materials that contain no organic HAP, as determined according to the
procedures in the final rule.
[sbull] Surface coating that occurs at research or laboratory
facilities, or is part of janitorial, building, and facility
maintenance operations, or that occurs at hobby shops operated for
noncommercial purposes.
[sbull] Coatings used in volumes of less than 189 liters (50
gallons (gal)) per year, provided that the total volume of coatings
exempt does not exceed 946 liters (250 gal) per year at the facility.
[sbull] Surface coating of metal parts and products performed on-
site at installations owned or operated by the Armed Forces of the
United States (including the Coast Guard and the National Guard of any
such State) or the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA), or the surface coating of military munitions manufactured by or
for the Armed Forces of the United States (including the Coast Guard
and the National Guard of any such State).
[sbull] Surface coating where plastic is extruded onto metal wire
or cable or metal parts or products to form a coating.
[[Page 133]]
[sbull] Surface coating of metal components of wood furniture that
meet the applicability criteria for wood furniture manufacturing (40
CFR part 63, subpart JJ).
[sbull] Surface coating of metal components of large appliances
that meet the applicability criteria for large appliance surface
coating (40 CFR part 63, subpart NNNN).
[sbull] Surface coating of metal components of metal furniture that
meet the applicability criteria for metal furniture surface coating (40
CFR part 63, subpart RRRR; 68 FR 28606, May 23, 2003).
[sbull] Surface coating of metal components of wood building
products that meet the applicability criteria for wood building
products surface coating (40 CFR part 63, subpart QQQQ; 68 FR 31746,
May 28, 2003).
[sbull] Surface coating of metal components of aerospace vehicles
that meet the applicability criteria for aerospace manufacturing and
rework (40 CFR part 63, subpart GG).
[sbull] The application of specialty coatings defined in appendix A
to 40 CFR part 63, subpart GG to a metal aerospace vehicle or
component.
[sbull] Surface coating of metal components of ships that meet the
applicability criteria for shipbuilding and ship repair (40 CFR part
63, subpart II).
[sbull] Surface coating of metal using a web coating process that
meets the applicability criteria for paper and other web coating (40
CFR part 63, subpart JJJJ).
[sbull] Surface coating of metal using a coil coating process that
meets the applicability criteria for metal coil coating (40 CFR part
63, subpart SSSS).
[sbull] Surface coating of boats or metal parts of boats
(including, but not limited to, the use of assembly adhesives) where
the facility meets the applicability criteria for boat manufacturing
facilities in the NESHAP for boat manufacturing (40 CFR part 63,
subpart VVVV), except where the surface coating of the boat is a metal
coating operation performed on personal watercraft or parts of personal
watercraft.
[sbull] Surface coating of assembled on-road vehicles that meet the
applicability criteria for the assembled on-road vehicle subcategory in
the NESHAP for the surface coating of plastic parts and products (40
CFR part 63, subpart PPPP).
[sbull] Surface coating of metal components of automobiles and
light-duty trucks that meet the applicability criteria for automobiles
and light-duty trucks surface coating (40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII
(scheduled for promulgation in February 2004).
If you perform surface coating of metal parts or products that meet
the applicability criteria for both the Automobiles and Light-Duty
Trucks NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII (scheduled for promulgation
in February 2004) and these NESHAP, then you may comply with the
requirements of the automobiles and light-duty trucks NESHAP for the
surface coating of all your metal parts used in automobile or light-
duty truck manufacturing in lieu of complying with each subpart
separately.
The final rule contains five subcategories: General use coating,
high performance coating, magnet wire coating, rubber-to-metal coating,
and extreme performance fluoropolymer coating. The general use
subcategory includes all surface coating operations in the
miscellaneous metal parts and products source category that are not
included in the other four subcategories. This includes operations that
coat a wide variety of substrates, surfaces, and types of miscellaneous
metal parts and products. It also includes asphalt/coal tar application
to metal pipes. High performance coating is any coating that meets the
definition of ``high performance architectural coating'' or ``high
temperature coating.'' Magnet wire coatings, commonly referred to as
magnet wire enamels, are applied to a continuous strand of wire which
will be used to make turns (windings) in electrical devices such as
coils, transformers, or motors. Magnet wire coatings provide high
dielectric strength and turn-to-turn conductor insulation. This allows
the turns of an electrical device to be placed in close proximity to
one another which leads to increased coil effectiveness and electrical
efficiency. Rubber-to-metal coating is any coating that contains heat-
activated polymer systems in either solvent or water that, when applied
to metal substrates, dries to a non-tacky surface and reacts chemically
with the rubber and metal during a vulcanization process. Extreme
performance fluoropolymer coating is a coating based on fluoropolymer
resins that typically meets one or more performance criteria that
include a nonstick low-energy surface, dry film lubrication, high
resistance to chemical attack, extremely wide operating temperature,
high electrical insulating properties, or that complies with government
or third party specifications for health, safety, reliability, or
performance. Each subcategory consists of all coating operations,
including associated surface preparation, equipment cleaning, mixing,
storage, and waste handling.
B. What Is the Relationship to Other Rules?
Affected sources that meet the applicability criteria in the final
miscellaneous metal parts and products rule may also meet the
applicability criteria of other coating NESHAP. For example, some
facilities that coat plastic and metal parts using the same or
different coatings, coating application processes, and conveyance
equipment, either simultaneously or at alternative times could be
subject to both the Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Surface
Coating NESHAP and the Plastic Parts and Products Surface Coating
NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPP).
In the final rule, we have minimized the burden of complying with
multiple surface coating emission limits by offering two alternatives
to complying separately with each applicable emission limit. The first
alternative allows a facility to have all applicable surface coating
operations comply with the emission limit that represents the
predominant type of coating activity at that facility. Predominant
activity means the coating activity that represents 90 percent or more
of the surface coating activities at a facility. For example, if a
facility is subject to both the Plastic Parts and Miscellaneous Metal
Parts NESHAP and the activities subject to the Miscellaneous Metal
Parts NESHAP account for 90 percent or more of the surface coating
activity at the facility, then the facility may comply with the
emission limitations for miscellaneous metal parts and products for
both types of surface coating operations.
The predominant activity alternative may be applied if 90 percent
or more of the surface coating is in the general use or magnet wire
coating subcategory; however, this alternative is not available where
high performance, rubber-to-metal, or extreme performance fluoropolymer
coating represents the predominant activity. The emission limits for
those three subcategories reflect specialized performance requirements
and the need for higher HAP-containing materials. It would not be
appropriate to apply emission limits specifically developed for unique
performance characteristics to other types of coatings.
You must include all surface coating activities that meet the
applicability criteria of a subcategory in a surface coating NESHAP and
constitute more than 1 percent of total coating activities. Coating
activities that meet the applicability criteria of a subcategory in a
surface coating NESHAP but comprise
[[Page 134]]
less than 1 percent of total coating activities need not be included in
the determination of predominant activity but they must be included in
the compliance calculations.
The second alternative allows a facility to calculate and comply
with a facility-specific emission limit for each 12-month rolling
average compliance period. The facility would use the relative amount
of coating activity subject to each emission limit in each NESHAP to
calculate a weighted, or composite, emission limit for that facility.
Compliance with that facility-specific emission limit for all surface
coating activities included in the facility-specific emission limit
constitutes compliance with the emission limits in the Miscellaneous
Metal Parts NESHAP, as well as other applicable NESHAP. As with the
predominant activity alternative, you must include all surface coating
activities that meet the applicability criteria of a subcategory in a
surface coating NESHAP and constitute more than 1 percent of total
coating activities. Coating activities that meet the applicability
criteria of a subcategory in a surface coating NESHAP but comprise less
than 1 percent of total coating activities need not be included in the
facility-specific emission limit calculation but they must be included
in the compliance calculations.
C. What Is the Affected Source?
We define an affected source as a stationary source, a group of
stationary sources, or part of a stationary source to which a specific
emission standard applies. The final rule defines the affected source
as the collection of all operations associated with the surface coating
of miscellaneous metal parts and products within each of the five
subcategories (general use, high performance, magnet wire, rubber-to-
metal, and extreme performance fluoropolymer). If application to a
substrate occurs, these operations include preparation of a coating for
application (e.g., mixing with thinners); surface preparation of the
miscellaneous metal parts and products (including paint stripping and
the use of a cleaning material to remove dried coating); coating
application and flash-off; drying and/or curing of applied coatings;
cleaning of equipment used in surface coating; storage of coatings,
thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials; and handling
and conveyance of waste materials from the surface coating operations.
The coating operation does not include the application of coatings
using hand-held nonrefillable aerosol containers, touch-up markers,
marking pens, or the application of paper film or plastic film that may
be pre-coated with an adhesive by the manufacturer.
D. What Are the Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and Other Standards?
Emission Limits. We are limiting organic HAP emissions from each
existing affected source using the emission limits in Table 2 of this
preamble. For each new or reconstructed affected source, the final
emission limits are given in Table 3 of this preamble. For each of the
subcategories, the emission limit is expressed as the mass of organic
HAP emissions per volume of coating solids used during each 12-month
compliance period.
Table 2.--Emission Limits for Existing Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission limit Emission limit (lbs
Coating type (kilograms HAP/liter HAP/gal of coating
of coating solids) solids)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General use subcategory..... 0.31 2.6
High performance subcategory 3.3 27.5
Magnet wire subcategory..... 0.12 1.0
Rubber-to-metal subcategory. 4.5 37.7
Extreme performance 1.5 12.4
fluoropolymer subcategory..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3.--Emission Limits for New and Reconstructed Affected Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission limit Emission limit (lbs
Coating type (kilograms HAP/liter HAP/gal of coating
of coating solids) solids)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General use subcategory........................................... 0.23 1.9
High performance subcategory...................................... 3.3 27.5
Magnet wire subcategory........................................... 0.050 0.44
Rubber-to-metal subcategory....................................... 0.81 6.8
Extreme performance fluoropolymer subcategory..................... 1.5 12.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You may choose from several compliance options in the final rule to
achieve the emission limits. You could comply by applying materials
(coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials)
that meet the emission limits, either individually or collectively,
during each compliance period. You could also use a capture system and
add-on control device to meet the emission limits. You could also
comply by using a combination of both approaches.
Operating Limits. If you reduce emissions by using a capture system
and add-on control device (other than a solvent recovery system for
which you conduct a liquid-liquid material balance), the operating
limits apply to you. These limits are site-specific parameter limits
that you determine during the initial performance test of the system.
For capture systems that are not permanent total enclosures, you
establish average volumetric flow rates or duct static pressure limits
for each capture device (or enclosure) in each capture system. For
capture systems that are permanent total enclosures, you establish
limits on average facial velocity or pressure drop across openings in
the enclosure.
For thermal oxidizers, you monitor the combustion temperature. For
catalytic oxidizers, you monitor the temperature immediately before and
after the catalyst bed, or you monitor the temperature before or after
the catalyst bed and implement a site-specific inspection and
maintenance plan for the catalytic oxidizer. For regenerative
[[Page 135]]
carbon adsorbers for which you do not conduct a liquid-liquid material
balance, you monitor the carbon bed temperature and the amount of steam
or nitrogen used to desorb the bed. For condensers, you monitor the
outlet gas temperature from the condenser. For concentrators, you
monitor the temperature of the desorption gas stream and the pressure
drop across the concentrator.
The site-specific parameter limits that you establish must reflect
operation of the capture system and control devices during a
performance test that demonstrates achievement of the emission limits
during representative operating conditions.
Work Practice Standards. If you use an emission capture system and
control device for compliance, you must develop and implement a work
practice plan to minimize organic HAP emissions from mixing operations;
storage tanks and other containers; and handling operations for
coatings, thinners and/or other additives, cleaning materials, and
waste materials. If your affected source has an existing documented
plan that incorporates steps taken to minimize emissions from the
aforementioned sources, you may be able to use your existing plan to
satisfy the requirement for a work practice plan.
If you use a capture system and control device for compliance, you
are required to develop and operate according to a startup, shutdown,
and malfunction plan (SSMP) during periods of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction of the capture system and control device.
The NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) codify
certain procedures and criteria for all 40 CFR part 63 NESHAP and apply
to you as indicated in the final rule. The General Provisions contain
administrative procedures, preconstruction review procedures for new
sources, and procedures for conducting compliance-related activities
such as notifications, reporting and recordkeeping, performance
testing, and monitoring. The final rule refers to individual sections
of the General Provisions to emphasize key sections that are relevant.
However, unless specifically overridden in the final rule, all of the
applicable General Provisions requirements apply to you.
E. What Are the Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements?
Existing affected sources must be in compliance with the final rule
no later than January 2, 2007. New and reconstructed sources must be in
compliance upon initial startup of the affected source or by January 2,
2004, whichever is later. However, affected sources are not required to
demonstrate compliance until the end of the initial compliance period
when they will have accumulated the necessary records to document the
rolling 12-month organic HAP emission rate.
Compliance with the emission limits is based on a rolling 12-month
organic HAP emission rate determined each month. Each 12-month period
is a compliance period. The initial compliance period, therefore, is
the 12-month period beginning on the compliance date. If the compliance
date occurs on any day other than the first day of a month, then the
initial compliance period begins on the compliance date and extends
through the end of that month plus the following 12 months. In other
words, the initial compliance period could be almost 13 months long,
but all subsequent compliance periods will be 12 months long. We have
defined ``month'' as a calendar month or a pre-specified period of 28
to 35 days to allow for flexibility at sources where data are based on
a business accounting period.
Being ``in compliance'' means that the owner or operator of the
affected source meets the requirements to achieve the final emission
limitations during the initial compliance period. However, they will
not have accumulated the records for the rolling 12-month organic HAP
emission rate until the end of the initial compliance period. At the
end of the initial compliance period, the owner or operator uses the
data and records generated to determine whether or not the affected
source is in compliance with the organic HAP emission limit and other
applicable requirements for that period. If the affected source does
not meet the applicable limit and other requirements, it is out of
compliance for the entire compliance period.
Emission Limits. There are three options for complying with the
final emission limits, and the testing and initial compliance
requirements vary accordingly. You may choose to use one compliance
option for the entire affected source, or you may use different
compliance options for different coating operations within the affected
source. You may also use different compliance options for the same
coating operation at different times, different compliance options when
different coatings are applied to the same part, or when the same
coating is applied to different parts. However, you may not use
different compliance options at the same time on the same coating
operation.
Option 1: Compliant materials. This option is a pollution
prevention option that allows you to easily demonstrate compliance by
using low-HAP or non-HAP coatings and other materials. If you use
coatings that, based on their organic HAP content, individually meet
the kilogram (kg) (lb) organic HAP emitted per liter (gal) coating
solids used levels in the applicable emission limits and you use non-
HAP thinners and other additives and cleaning materials, this
compliance option is available to you. For this option, we have
minimized recordkeeping and reporting requirements. You may demonstrate
compliance by using manufacturer's formulation data and readily
available purchase records to determine the organic HAP content of each
coating or other material and the amount of each material used. You do
not need to perform any detailed emission rate calculations.
If you demonstrate compliance based on the coatings and other
materials used, you demonstrate that the organic HAP content of each
coating meets the emission limits for the appropriate subcategory as
shown in Tables 2 and 3 of this preamble, and that you used no organic
HAP-containing thinners and/or other additives, or cleaning materials.
For example, if you are using the compliant materials option and your
existing source has magnet wire, rubber-to-metal, extreme performance
fluoropolymer, and general use coating operations, you demonstrate
that: (1) Each coating used in the magnet wire coating operation has an
organic HAP content no greater than 0.12 kg organic HAP/liter coating
solids (1.0 lb organic HAP/gal coating solids) used; (2) each coating
used in the rubber-to-metal coating operation has an organic HAP
content no greater than 4.5 kg organic HAP/liter coating solids (37.7
lbs organic HAP/gal coating solids) used; (3) each coating used in the
extreme performance fluoropolymer coating operation has an organic HAP
content no greater than 1.5 kg organic HAP/liter coating solids (12.4
lbs HAP/gal coating solids) used; (4) each general use coating has an
organic HAP content no greater than 0.31 kg organic HAP/liter coating
solids (2.6 lbs HAP/gal coating solids) used; and (5) that you used no
organic HAP-containing thinners and/or other additives, or cleaning
materials. Note that ``no organic HAP'' is not intended to mean
absolute zero. Materials that contain ``no organic HAP'' means
materials that contain organic HAP levels below the levels specified in
Sec. 63.3941(a) of the final rule, which are typical Occupational
[[Page 136]]
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) reporting levels for material
safety data sheets. These typical reporting levels only count organic
HAP that are present at 0.1 percent or more by mass for OSHA-defined
carcinogens and at 1.0 percent or more by mass for other compounds.
To determine the mass of organic HAP in coatings, thinners and/or
other additives, and cleaning materials and the volume fraction of
coating solids, you may rely on manufacturer's formulation data. You
are not required to perform tests or analysis of the material if
formulation data are available. Alternatively, you could use results
from the test methods listed below. You may also use alternative test
methods provided you get EPA approval in accordance with the NESHAP
General Provisions, 40 CFR 63.7(f). However, if there is any
inconsistency between the test method results (either EPA's or an
approved alternative) and manufacturer's data, the test method results
prevail for compliance and enforcement purposes, unless, after
consultation you demonstrate to the satisfaction of the enforcement
agency that the formulation data are correct.
The following test methods are used to determine HAP content. For
organic HAP content, use Method 311 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A. You
may also use nonaqueous volatile matter as a surrogate for organic HAP,
which includes all organic HAP plus all other organic compounds,
excluding water. If you choose this option, use Method 24 of 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A. If you are determining HAP content for reactive
adhesives (that is, adhesives in which some of the HAP react to form
solids and are not emitted to the atmosphere), you may use the
alternative to Method 24 that is included in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
PPPP, appendix A. For determining volume fraction of coating solids,
use ASTM Method D2697-86 (Reapproved 1998), ``Standard Test Method for
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings,'' or ASTM
Method D6093-97 (Reapproved 2003), ``Standard Test Method for Percent
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using a Helium
Gas Pycnometer,'' an approved alternative method, or calculations based
on the volume of the volatile fraction.
Option 2: Compliance based on the emission rate without add-on
controls. This option is a pollution prevention option that allows you
to demonstrate compliance based on the organic HAP contained in the mix
of coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials
you use. This option offers the flexibility to use some individual
coatings that do not, by themselves, meet the kg (lb) organic HAP
emitted per liter (gal) coating solids used levels in the applicable
emission limits if you use other low-HAP or non-HAP coatings such that
overall emissions from the affected source over a 12-month period meet
the emission limits. You must use this option if you use HAP-containing
thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials and do not have
add-on controls. You keep track of the mass of organic HAP in each
coating, thinner or other additive, and cleaning material, and the
amount of each material you use in your affected source each month of
the compliance period. You use this information to determine the total
mass of organic HAP in all coatings, thinners and/or other additives,
and cleaning materials divided by the total volume of coating solids
used during the compliance period. You demonstrate that your emission
rate (in kg (lb) organic HAP emitted per liter (gal) coating solids
used) meets the applicable emission limit. You may use readily
available purchase records and manufacturer's formulation data to
determine the amount of each coating or other material you used and the
organic HAP in each material. The final rule contains equations that
show you how to perform the calculations to demonstrate compliance.
If you demonstrate compliance using Option 2, you are required to:
[sbull] Determine the quantity of each coating, thinner and/or
other additive, and cleaning material used.
[sbull] Determine the mass of organic HAP in each coating, thinner
and other additive, and cleaning material using the same types of data
and methods previously described for Option 1, including the
alternative methods for reactive coatings. You may rely on
manufacturer's formulation data or you may choose to use test results
as described under Option 1.
[sbull] Determine the volume fraction of coating solids for each
coating using the same types of data or methods described under Option
1. In this option, you may include the solids from powder coatings in
the compliance calculations. To determine the volume of solids in
powder coatings from their weight, use ASTM Method D5965-02, ``Standard
Test Method for Specific Gravity of Coating Powders.''
[sbull] Calculate the total mass of organic HAP in all materials
and total volume of coating solids used each month. You may subtract
from the total mass of organic HAP the amount contained in waste
materials you send to a hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facility regulated under 40 CFR part 262, 264, 265, or 266.
[sbull] Calculate the total mass of organic HAP emissions and total
volume of coating solids used for the initial compliance period by
adding together all the monthly values for mass of organic HAP and for
volume of coating solids used for the 12 months of the initial
compliance period.
[sbull] Calculate the ratio of the total mass of organic HAP
emitted for the materials used to the total volume of coating solids
used (kg (lb) organic HAP emitted per liter (gal) of coating solids
used) for the initial compliance period.
[sbull] Record the calculations and results and include them in
your Notification of Compliance Status.
Note that if you choose to use this option for a particular coating
operation rather than for all coating operations at the source, you
calculate the organic HAP emission rate using just the materials used
in that operation. Similarly, if your facility has multiple coating
operations using this option (e.g., a high performance coating
operation, a magnet wire coating operation, a rubber-to-metal coating
operation, and a general use coating operation), you do a separate
calculation for each coating operation to show that each coating
operation meets its emission limit. If you are complying with a
facility-specific emission limit, you include all coating operations
that are subject to the facility-specific emission limit in the
compliance calculations.
Option 3: Compliance based on using a capture system and add-on
control device. This option allows sources to use a capture system and
an add-on pollution control device, such as a combustion device or a
recovery device, to meet the emission limits. While we believe that,
based on typical emission characteristics, most sources will not use
control devices, we are providing this option for sources that use
control devices. Fewer than 10 percent of the existing sources for
which we have data use control devices. Under this option, testing is
required to demonstrate the capture system and control device
efficiencies. Alternatively, you may conduct a liquid-liquid material
balance to demonstrate the amount of organic HAP collected by your
recovery device. The final rule provides equations showing you how to
use records of materials usage, organic HAP contents of each material,
capture and control efficiencies, and coating solids content to
calculate your emission rate during the compliance period.
[[Page 137]]
If you demonstrate compliance based on this option, you demonstrate
that your emission rate considering controls (in kg (lb) organic HAP
emitted per liter (gal) of coating solids used) is less than the
applicable emission limit. For a capture system and add-on control
device, other than a solvent recovery system for which you conduct a
liquid-liquid material balance, your testing and initial compliance
requirements are as follows:
[sbull] Conduct an initial performance test to determine the
capture and control efficiencies of the equipment and to establish
operating limits to be achieved on a continuous basis. The performance
test must be completed no later than the compliance date for existing
sources and 180 days after the compliance date for new and
reconstructed sources.
[sbull] Determine the mass of organic HAP in each coating and other
material, and the volume fraction of coating solids for each coating
used during each month of the initial compliance period.
[sbull] Calculate the total mass of organic HAP in all coatings and
other materials, and total volume of coating solids used each month in
the controlled operation or group of coating operations. You may
subtract from the total mass of organic HAP the amount contained in
waste materials you send to a hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facility regulated under 40 CFR part 262, 264, 265, or 266.
[sbull] Calculate the organic HAP emissions from the controlled
coating operations each month using the capture and control
efficiencies determined during the performance test, and the total mass
of organic HAP in materials used in controlled coating operations that
month.
[sbull] Calculate the total mass of organic HAP emissions and total
volume of coating solids used for the initial compliance period by
adding together all the monthly values for mass of organic HAP
emissions and for volume of coating solids for the 12 months in the
initial compliance period.
[sbull] Calculate the ratio of the total mass of organic HAP
emissions to the total volume of coating solids used during the initial
compliance period.
[sbull] Record the calculations and results and include them in
your Notification of Compliance Status.
[sbull] Develop and implement a work practice plan to minimize
emissions from storage, mixing, and handling of organic HAP-containing
materials.
Note that if you choose to use this option for a particular coating
operation rather than for the entire affected source, you calculate the
organic HAP emission rate using just the materials used in that
operation. Similarly, if your facility has multiple coating operations
using this option (e.g., a high performance coating operation, a
rubber-to-metal coating operation, an extreme performance fluoropolymer
coating operation, and a general use coating operation), you do a
separate calculation for each coating operation to show that each
coating operation meets its emission limit. If you are complying with a
facility-specific emission limit, you would include all coating
operations that are subject to the facility-specific emission limit in
the compliance calculations.
If you use a capture system and add-on control device, other than a
solvent recovery system for which you conduct liquid-liquid material
balances, you use specified test methods to determine both the
efficiency of the capture system and the emission reduction efficiency
of the control device. To determine the capture efficiency, you would
either verify the presence of a permanent total enclosure using EPA
Method 204 of 40 CFR part 51, appendix M (and all materials must be
applied and dried within the enclosure); or use one of three protocols
in Sec. 63.3965 of the final rule to measure capture efficiency. If
you have a permanent total enclosure and all materials are applied and
dried within the enclosure and you route all exhaust gases from the
enclosure to a control device, you assume 100 percent capture. Magnet
wire coating operations may, with approval, conduct representative
capture efficiency testing of one magnet wire coating machine out of a
group of identical or very similar magnet wire coating machines rather
than testing every individual magnet wire coating machine.
To determine the emission reduction efficiency of the control
device, you conduct measurements of the inlet and outlet gas streams.
The test consists of three runs, each run lasting 1 hour, using the
following EPA Methods in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A:
[sbull] Method 1 or 1A for selection of the sampling sites.
[sbull] Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G to determine the gas
volumetric flow rate.
[sbull] Method 3, 3A, or 3B for gas analysis to determine dry
molecular weight.
[sbull] Method 4 to determine stack moisture.
[sbull] Method 25 or 25A to determine organic volatile matter
concentration. Alternatively, any other test method or data that have
been validated according to the applicable procedures in Method 301 of
40 CFR part 63, appendix A, and approved by the Administrator, could be
used.
An alternative procedure is provided in appendix A of the final
rule for determining the destruction efficiency of oxidizers used to
control emissions from magnet wire coating machines. This procedure
uses material consumption and material organic volatile content,
adjusted to account for any uncaptured emissions, to determine the
organic volatile content of the inlet stream to the control device.
Magnet wire coating operations may, with approval, conduct
representative control device efficiency testing of one magnet wire
coating machine out of a group of identical or very similar magnet wire
coating machines rather than testing every individual magnet wire
coating machine.
If you use a solvent recovery system, you could choose to determine
the overall control efficiency using a liquid-liquid material balance
instead of conducting an initial performance test. If you use the
material balance alternative, you are required to measure the amount of
all materials used in the controlled coating operations served by the
solvent recovery system during each month of the initial compliance
period, and to determine the total volatile matter contained in these
materials. You also measure the amount of volatile matter recovered by
the solvent recovery system during each month of the initial compliance
period. Then you compare the amount recovered to the amount used to
determine the overall control efficiency each month and apply this
efficiency to the total mass of organic HAP in the materials used to
determine total organic HAP emissions for the month. You total these 12
monthly organic HAP emission values and divide by the total of the 12
monthly values for coating solids used to calculate the emission rate
for the 12-month initial compliance period. You record the calculations
and results and include them in your Notification of Compliance Status.
Operating Limits. As mentioned above, you establish operating
limits as part of the initial performance test of a capture system and
control device, other than a solvent recovery system for which you
conduct liquid-liquid material balances. The operating limits are the
minimum or maximum (as applicable) values achieved for capture systems
and control devices during the most recent performance test, conducted
under representative conditions, that demonstrated compliance with the
emission limits.
The final rule specifies the parameters to monitor for the types of
emission control systems commonly used in the industry. You are
required to install,
[[Page 138]]
calibrate, maintain, and continuously operate all monitoring equipment
according to manufacturer's specifications and ensure that the
continuous parameter monitoring systems (CPMS) meet the requirements in
Sec. 63.3968 of the final rule. If you use control devices other than
those identified in the final rule, you submit the operating parameters
to be monitored to the Administrator for approval. The authority to
approve the parameters to be monitored is retained by EPA and is not
delegated to States.
If you use a thermal or catalytic oxidizer, you continuously
monitor the appropriate temperature and record it at least every 15
minutes. For thermal oxidizers, the temperature monitor is placed in
the firebox or in the duct immediately downstream of the firebox before
any substantial heat exchange occurs. The operating limit is the
average temperature measured during the performance test and for each
consecutive 3-hour period; the average temperature has to be at or
above this limit. For catalytic oxidizers, temperature monitors are
placed immediately before and after the catalyst bed. The operating
limits are the average temperature just before the catalyst bed and the
average temperature difference across the catalyst bed during the
performance test. For each 3-hour period, the average temperature and
the average temperature difference must be at or above these limits.
Alternatively, if you develop and implement an inspection and
maintenance plan for the catalytic oxidizer, then you are allowed to
monitor only the temperature before the catalyst bed and meet only the
temperature operating limit before the catalyst bed and are not
required to monitor the difference across the bed.
An alternative procedure for monitoring catalytic oxidizers on
magnet wire coating machines is provided in appendix A of the final
rule. This alternative allows you to develop and implement an
inspection and maintenance plan as described in appendix A of the final
rule and to measure the temperature either before or after the catalyst
bed and compare the measured temperature to the operating limit.
If you use a regenerative carbon adsorber and do not conduct
liquid-liquid material balances to demonstrate compliance, you monitor
the carbon bed temperature after each regeneration and the total amount
of steam or nitrogen used to desorb the bed for each regeneration. The
operating limits are the carbon bed temperature at the time the carbon
bed is returned to service (not to be exceeded) and the amount of steam
or nitrogen used for desorption (to be met as a minimum).
If you use a condenser and do not conduct liquid-liquid material
balances to demonstrate compliance, you monitor the outlet gas
temperature to ensure that the air stream is being cooled to a low
enough temperature. The operating limit is the average condenser outlet
gas temperature measured during the performance test and for each
consecutive 3-hour period, the average temperature must be at or below
this limit.
If you use a concentrator, you monitor the temperature of the
desorption concentrate stream and the pressure drop across the
concentrator. These values must be recorded at least once every 15
minutes. The operating limits must be the 3-hour average temperature
(to be met as a minimum) and the 3-hour average pressure drop (to be
met as a minimum) measured during the performance test.
For each capture system that is not a permanent total enclosure,
you establish operating limits for gas volumetric flow rate or duct
static pressure for each enclosure or capture device. The operating
limit is the average volumetric flow rate or duct static pressure
during the performance test, to be met as a minimum. For each capture
system that is a permanent total enclosure, the operating limit
requires the average facial velocity of air through all natural draft
openings to be at least 200 feet per minute or the pressure drop across
the enclosure to be at least 0.007 inches water.
An alternative procedure for monitoring capture systems on magnet
wire coating machines is provided in appendix A of this rule. This
alternative requires you to install an alarm or interlock which will be
triggered either when any oven exhaust fan is not operating or the oven
is overheating. This alternative also requires you to confirm every 6
months that the oven is operating at negative pressure.
Work Practices. If you use a capture system and control device for
compliance, you are required to develop and implement on an ongoing
basis a work practice plan for minimizing organic HAP emissions from
storage, mixing, material handling, and waste handling operations. This
plan must include a description of all steps taken to minimize
emissions from these sources (e.g., using closed storage containers,
practices to minimize emissions during filling and transfer of contents
from containers, using spill minimization techniques, placing solvent-
laden cloths in closed containers immediately after use, etc.). You
must make the plan available for inspection if the Administrator
requests to see it.
If you use a capture system and control device for compliance, you
are required to develop and operate according to a SSMP during periods
of startup, shutdown, or malfunction of the capture system and control
device.
F. What Are the Continuous Compliance Provisions?
Emission Limits. If you use the compliant materials option (Option
1), you demonstrate continuous compliance if each coating meets the
applicable emission limit and you use no organic HAP-containing
thinners and/or other additives, or cleaning materials. If you use the
emission rate without add-on controls option (Option 2), you
demonstrate continuous compliance if, for each 12-month compliance
period, the ratio of kg (lb) organic HAP emitted to liter (gal) coating
solids used is less than or equal to the applicable emission limit. You
follow the same procedures for calculating the organic HAP emitted to
coating solids used ratio that you used for the initial compliance
period.
For each coating operation on which you use a capture system and
control device (Option 3), other than a solvent recovery system for
which you conduct a liquid-liquid material balance, you use the
continuous parameter monitoring results for the month as part of the
determination of the mass of organic HAP emissions. If the monitoring
results indicate no deviations from the operating limits and there were
no bypasses of the control device, you assume the capture system and
control device are achieving the same percent emission reduction
efficiency as they did during the most recent performance test in which
compliance was demonstrated. You then apply this percent reduction to
the total mass of organic HAP in materials used in the controlled
coating operations to determine the emissions from those operations
during the month. If there were any deviations from the operating
limits during the month or any bypasses of the control device, you
account for them in the calculation of the monthly emissions by
assuming the capture system and control device were achieving zero
emission reduction during the periods of deviation, 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 is approved
by your permitting authority. Determine the organic HAP emission rate
by
[[Page 139]]
dividing the total mass of organic HAP emissions for the 12-month
compliance period by the total volume of coating solids used during the
12-month compliance period. Every month, you calculate the emission
rate for the previous 12-month period.
For each coating operation on which you use a solvent recovery
system and conduct a liquid-liquid material balance each month, you use
the liquid-liquid material balance to determine control efficiency. To
determine the overall control efficiency, you must measure the amount
of all materials used during each month and determine the volatile
matter content of these materials. You must also measure the amount of
volatile matter recovered by the solvent recovery system during the
month, calculate the overall control efficiency, and apply it to the
total mass of organic HAP in the materials used to determine total
organic HAP emissions each month. Then you determine the 12-month
organic HAP emission rate in the same manner described above.
Operating Limits. If you use a capture system and control device,
the final rule requires you to achieve on a continuous basis the
operating limits you establish during the performance test. If the
continuous monitoring shows that the capture system and control device
are operating outside the range of values established during the
performance test, you have deviated from the established operating
limits.
If you operate a capture system and control device with bypass
lines that could allow emissions to bypass the control device, you
demonstrate that captured organic HAP emissions within the affected
source are being routed to the control device by monitoring for
potential bypass of the control device. You may choose from the
following five monitoring procedures:
[sbull] Flow control position indicator to provide a record of
whether the exhaust stream is directed to the control device.
[sbull] Car-seal or lock-and-key valve closures to secure the
bypass line valve in the closed position when the control device is
operating.
[sbull] Valve closure monitoring to ensure any bypass line valve or
damper is closed when the control device is operating.
[sbull] Automatic shutdown system to stop the coating operation
when flow is diverted from the control device.
[sbull] Flow direction indicator to provide a record of whether the
exhaust stream is flowing toward the control device.
A deviation would occur for any period of time the bypass
monitoring indicates that emissions are not routed to the control
device.
Work Practices. If you use an emission capture system and control
device for compliance, you are required to implement, on an ongoing
basis, the work practice plan you developed during the initial
compliance period. If you did not develop a plan for reducing organic
HAP emissions or you do not implement the plan, this would be a
deviation from the work practice standard.
If you use a capture system and control device for compliance, you
are required to operate according to your SSMP during periods of
startup, shutdown, or malfunction of the capture system and control
device.
G. What Are the Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting
Requirements?
You are required to comply with the applicable requirements in the
NESHAP General Provisions, subpart A of 40 CFR part 63, as described in
the final rule. The General Provisions notification requirements
include: initial notifications, notification of performance test if you
are complying using a capture system and control device, notification
of compliance status, and additional notifications required for
affected sources with continuous monitoring systems. The General
Provisions also require certain records and periodic reports.
Initial Notifications. If you own or operate an existing affected
source, you must send a notification to the EPA Regional Office in the
region where your facility is located and to your State agency no later
than 1 year after publication of the final rule in the Federal
Register. For new and reconstructed sources, you must send the
notification within 120 days after the date of initial startup or 120
days after publication of the final rule, whichever is later. That
report notifies us and your State agency that you have an existing
affected source that is subject to the final standards or that you have
constructed a new affected source. Thus, it allows you and the
permitting authority to plan for compliance activities. You also need
to send a notification of planned construction or reconstruction of a
source that would be subject to the final rule and apply for approval
to construct or reconstruct.
Notification of Performance Test. If you demonstrate compliance by
using a capture system and control device for which you do not conduct
a liquid-liquid material balance, you must conduct a performance test.
The performance test is required no later than the compliance date for
an existing affected source. For a new or reconstructed affected
source, the performance test is required no later than 180 days after
startup or 180 days after Federal Register publication of the final
rule, whichever is later. You must notify EPA (or the delegated State
or local agency) at least 60 calendar days before the performance test
is scheduled to begin and submit a report of the performance test
results no later than 60 days after the test.
Notification of Compliance Status. You must submit a Notification
of Compliance Status within 30 days after the end of the initial 12-
month compliance period. In the notification, you must certify whether
each affected source has complied with the final standards; identify
the option(s) you used to demonstrate initial compliance; summarize the
data and calculations supporting the compliance demonstration; and
provide information on any deviations from the emission limits,
operating limits, or other requirements.
If you elect to comply by using a capture system and control device
for which you conduct performance tests, you must provide the results
of the tests. Your notification must also include the measured range of
each monitored parameter, the operating limits established during the
performance test, and information showing whether the source has
complied with its operating limits during the initial compliance
period.
If you are complying with a single emission limit representing the
predominant surface coating activity under Sec. 63.3890(c)(1) of the
final rule, include all calculations and supporting documentation for
the predominant activity determination. If you are complying with a
facility-specific emission limit under Sec. 63.3890(c)(2) of the final
rule, include the calculation of the facility-specific emission limit
and any supporting information.
Recordkeeping Requirements. You must keep records of reported
information and all other information necessary to document compliance
with the final rule for 5 years. As required under the General
Provisions, records for the 2 most recent years must be kept on-site or
be readily accessible from the site (for example, by a computer
network); the other 3 years' records may be kept off-site. Records
pertaining to the design and operation of the control and monitoring
equipment must be kept for the life of the equipment.
Depending on the compliance option that you choose, you may need to
keep records of the following:
[sbull] Organic HAP content or volatile organic matter content and
coating
[[Page 140]]
solids content (for all compliance options).
[sbull] Quantity of the coatings, thinners and/or other additives,
and cleaning materials used during each compliance period. If you are
using the compliant material option for all coatings at the source, you
may maintain purchase records for each material used rather than a
record of the volume used.
[sbull] For the emission rate (with or without add-on controls)
compliance options, calculations of your emission rate for each 12-
month compliance period.
[sbull] All documentation supporting initial notifications and
notifications of compliance status.
If you demonstrate compliance by using a capture system and control
device, you must keep records of the following:
[sbull] All required measurements, calculations, and supporting
documentation needed to demonstrate compliance with the standards.
[sbull] All results of performance tests and parameter monitoring.
[sbull] All information necessary to demonstrate conformance with
your plan for minimizing emissions from mixing, storage, and waste
handling operations.
[sbull] All information necessary to demonstrate conformance with
the affected source's SSMP when the plan procedures are followed.
[sbull] The occurrence and duration of each startup, shutdown, or
malfunction of the emission capture system and control device.
[sbull] Actions taken during startup, shutdown, and malfunction
that are different from the procedures specified in the affected
source's SSMP.
[sbull] Each period during which a CPMS is malfunctioning or
inoperative (including out-of-control periods).
The final rule requires you to collect and keep records according
to certain minimum data requirements for the CPMS. Failure to collect
and keep the specified minimum data would be a deviation that is
separate from any emission limits, operating limits, or work practice
standards.
Deviations, as determined from these records, must be recorded and
also reported. A deviation is any instance when any requirement or
obligation established by the final rule including, but not limited to,
the emission limits, operating limits, and work practice standards, is
not met.
If you use a capture system and control device to reduce organic
HAP emissions, you must make your SSMP available for inspection if the
Administrator requests to see it. The plan stays in your records for
the life of the affected source or until the source is no longer
subject to the final standards. If you revise the plan, you must keep
the previous superseded versions on record for 5 years following the
revision.
If you are using the predominant activity or facility-specific
emission limit alternative, you must keep the records of the data and
calculations needed to determine the predominant activity or to
calculate the facility-specific emission limit for your facility.
Periodic Reports. Each reporting year is divided into two
semiannual reporting periods. If no deviations occur during a
semiannual reporting period, you submit a semiannual report stating
that the affected source has been in continuous compliance. If
deviations occur, you include them in the report as follows:
[sbull] Report each deviation from the emission limit.
[sbull] Report each deviation from the work practice standards if
you use an emission capture system and control device.
[sbull] If you use an emission capture system and control device,
other than a solvent recovery system for which you conduct liquid-
liquid material balances, report each deviation from an operating limit
and each time a bypass line diverts emissions from the control device
to the atmosphere.
[sbull] Report other specific information on the periods of time
the deviations occurred.
You also have to include in each semiannual report an
identification of the compliance option(s) you used for each affected
source and any time periods when you changed to another compliance
option.
Other Reports. You are required to submit reports for periods of
startup, shutdown, or malfunction of the capture system and control
device. If the procedures you follow during any startup, shutdown, or
malfunction are inconsistent with your SSMP, you report those
procedures with your semiannual reports in addition to immediate
reports required by 40 CFR 63.10(d)(5)(ii).
III. What Are the Significant Differences From Proposal?
A. Applicability
We have revised the applicability section to clarify who is subject
to the final rule. Specifically, the section includes activities
associated with coating operations such as surface preparation,
cleaning, mixing, and storage as long as these activities are
associated with coating application at the facility.
We have included an extreme performance fluoropolymer coatings
subcategory in the final rule. This new subcategory establishes a
specific emission limit for coatings that are formulated systems based
on fluoropolymer resins, which often contain ``bonding'' matrix
polymers dissolved in nonaqueous solvents as well as other ingredients.
Extreme performance fluoropolymer coatings are typically used when one
or more critical performance criteria are required including, but not
limited to, a nonstick low-energy surface, dry film lubrication, high
resistance to chemical attack, extremely wide operating temperature,
high electrical insulating properties, or that the surface complies
with government (e.g., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Drug
Administration (FDA)) or third party specifications for health, safety,
reliability, or performance.
We have revised the scope of the high performance subcategory to
remove ``military combat, tactical, and munitions coating'' from the
definition of high performance coating. As indicated in this preamble,
the surface coating of metal parts and products performed on-site at
installations owned or operated by the Armed Forces of the United
States, or the surface coating of military munitions manufactured by or
for the Armed Forces of the United States, will be addressed in the
NESHAP for defense land systems and miscellaneous equipment that is
currently under development.
We have clarified that when determining whether your facility is
below the applicability threshold, you may exclude coatings that meet
the definition of non-HAP coating when determining whether you use 946
liters (250 gal) per year, or more, of coatings in the surface coating
of miscellaneous metal parts and products (Sec. 63.3881(b) of the
final rule). Thus, a facility using mostly non-HAP coatings and less
than 250 gal per year of HAP-containing coatings will not be subject to
the final rule. In addition, we have included a definition of ``non-HAP
coating'' in the final rule.
B. Scope of Category
We have clarified the scope of the final rule to exclude surface
coating operations using only coatings, thinners and other additives,
and cleaning materials that contain no organic HAP. We also excluded
surface coating of metal that is subject to several other NESHAP. We
also included a provision that allows sources that meet the
applicability criteria of both the final rule and the automobiles and
light-duty
[[Page 141]]
trucks NESHAP to comply with the automobiles and light-duty trucks
NESHAP for all their surface coating operations associated with the
manufacturing of automobiles or light-duty trucks in lieu of complying
with each subpart separately.
C. Emission Limits
The emission limits remain as proposed, except for the addition of
the extreme performance fluoropolymer subcategory, which must limit
organic HAP emissions to no more than 1.5 kg organic HAP/liter coating
solids (12.4 lbs HAP/gal coating solids) used during each 12-month
compliance period.
D. Method for Determining HAP Content
In the final rule, we have included a method for determining the
HAP content for reactive adhesives based on the HAP actually emitted,
rather than determining the mass fraction of organic HAP in the
coatings using Method 311 or Method 24. Facilities may use the
alternative method for reactive adhesives contained in appendix A to
the final rule for plastic parts and products. In addition, we included
a provision for reactive adhesives to allow facilities to rely on
manufacturer's data that expressly states the organic HAP mass fraction
emitted.
We have included an option to calculate the volume fraction of
coating solids based on the mass fraction and density of the volatile
compounds in the coating. This method is an alternative to using ASTM
Method D2697-86 (Reapproved 1998), ``Standard Test Method for Volume
Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings,'' or ASTM Method
D6093-97 (Reapproved 2003), ``Standard Test Method for Percent Volume
Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using a Helium Gas
Pycnometer,'' to measure the volume solids.
We have also included a method, ASTM Method D5965-02, ``Standard
Test Method for Specific Gravity of Coating Powders,'' to determine the
density of powder coatings if a facility chooses to include the solids
from powder coatings in their compliance calculations.
E. Deviations From Operating Parameters
The proposed rule stated that if your add-on control system
deviates from the operating limit specified in Table 1 to subpart MMMM
of 40 CFR part 63, then you must assume that the emission capture
system and add-on control device were achieving zero efficiency during
the time period of the deviation. We have written the final rule to
allow the use of other data to indicate the actual efficiency of the
emission capture system and add-on control device, as long as the use
of these data is approved by the respective permitting authority.
F. New Alternatives To Facilitate Compliance With Multiple Coating
NESHAP and Multiple Emission Limits
The final rule allows facilities subject to more than one surface
coating emission limit to comply with each applicable emission limit
separately or to adopt one of two alternatives. The first alternative
allows all coating operations to comply with the emission limit
representing the predominant surface coating activity at the facility
(the predominant activity means the surface coating activity
representing 90 percent or more of the total surface coating activity).
The predominant activity approach is also available for sources that
are subject to more than one subcategory emission limit. That is, a
source may determine which subcategory represents 90 percent or more of
the coating activities that take place at the facility, and then have
all coating operations at the facility comply with the emission limit
that represents the predominant activity.
The second alternative allows a facility to comply with a facility-
specific emission limit calculated from the relative amount of coating
activity that is subject to individual emission limits. The facility-
specific emission limit may include separate emission limits from one
or more applicable NESHAP.
You must include all surface coating activities that meet the
applicability criteria of a subcategory in a surface coating NESHAP and
constitute more than 1 percent of total coating activities. Coating
activities that meet the applicability criteria of a subcategory in a
surface coating NESHAP but comprise less than 1 percent of total
coating activities need not be included in the facility-specific
emission limit calculation but they must be included in the compliance
calculations.
Another approach that you may use is the equivalency by permit
option in 40 CFR part 63, subpart E (Sec. 63.94). Under this approach,
you may design an emissions control program that is suited for your
process or plant as long as you can demonstrate that your program will
achieve the same emissions reductions as the NESHAP. You must then work
with your State, local, or tribal air pollution control agency to
submit an equivalency demonstration. This equivalency demonstration
will be reviewed by the appropriate EPA Regional Office. The
equivalency demonstration is approved as part of the operating permit
approval process. For more information, please see the section 112(l)
website at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/112(l)/112-lpg.html.
G. Initial and Continuous Compliance Demonstrations for Magnet Wire
Sources
In the final rule we have provided alternative testing and
monitoring requirements for magnet wire coating operations. These
alternative requirements are presented in appendix A to this rule.
An alternative procedure is provided for determining the
destruction efficiency of oxidizers used to control emissions from
magnet wire coating machines. This procedure uses material consumption
and material organic volatile content, adjusted to account for any
uncaptured emissions, to determine the organic volatile content of the
inlet stream to the control device.
In addition, magnet wire coating operations may, with approval,
conduct representative capture efficiency and control device efficiency
testing of one magnet wire coating machine out of a group of identical
or very similar magnet wire coating machines rather than testing every
individual magnet wire coating machine.
An alternative procedure is provided for monitoring capture systems
on magnet wire coating machines. This alternative requires you to
install an alarm or interlock which will be triggered either when any
oven exhaust fan is not operating or the oven is overheating. This
alternative also requires you to confirm every 6 months that the oven
is operating at negative pressure.
An alternative procedure is provided for monitoring catalytic
oxidizers on magnet wire coating machines. This alternative allows you
to develop and implement an inspection and maintenance plan as
described in appendix A to this rule and to measure the temperature
either before or after the catalyst bed and compare the measured
temperature to the operating limit. In addition to the inspection and
maintenance plan, you must either perform periodic catalyst activity
checks, or check the concentration of organic compounds in the oven
exhaust.
IV. What Are the Responses to Significant Comments?
For the full set of comment summaries and responses, refer to the
BID (``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products,'' August
2003, EPA-453/R-03-008), which contains EPA's
[[Page 142]]
responses to each public comment and is available in Docket ID No. OAR-
2002-0116 (formerly Docket No. A-97-34).
A. Applicability and Scope of Source Category
Comment: Two commenters requested that powder coatings be
specifically excluded from the final rule. One commenter stated that
powder coatings typically have no HAP or trace amounts of HAP that
would easily comply with the emission limits. One commenter stated that
powder coating operations should not be subject to a recordkeeping and
reporting burden that would have no resulting environmental benefit.
One commenter suggested that including powder coatings would reduce
``expected'' HAP reductions from these NESHAP and that averaging could
be limited to liquid coatings only.
Response: Powder coatings are included in the definition of a
coating in the final rule. However, if a source is using only powder
coating or powder coating and less than 250 gal of HAP-containing
coating, it would be excluded from all rule requirements based on the
use of non-HAP coating and less than 250 gal of HAP-containing coating.
If a source is using greater than 250 gal of HAP-containing coating and
also has a powder coating line, it may choose to comply with the
compliant material option for the powder coating line. The records
necessary to demonstrate compliance with the compliant material option
are significantly less than required under one of the emission rate
options. Alternatively, if a source chooses to use either of the
emission rate options, powder coatings may be included in the
compliance calculations for the emission rate options. Inclusion of
powder coatings in the compliance calculations was intended to serve as
an incentive for sources to use powder coatings in reducing their
overall emission level. We expect that increased use of powder coatings
will promote this technology as a pollution prevention alternative and
will result in greater emission reductions than if powder coatings were
specifically excluded from compliance calculations. If a source chooses
to omit powder coatings from the compliance calculations, the source
could document that the powder coatings are in compliance under the
compliant materials option since powder coatings are essentially 100
percent solids.
Comment: Several commenters requested that EPA revise the
definition of ``protective oil'' to clarify whether specific materials
cited by the commenters are considered protective oils. One commenter
requested that EPA revise the definition of protective oil to clarify
that protective oils include three specific coatings: temporary
protective coatings on metal products to protect them from rust and
corrosion during shipment and storage but that leave a soft removable
solid film, magnet wire lubrication that is put on the wire before it
is wound on a spool and forms a wax film, and bar seal lubrication that
prevents hand gloves from sticking to generator parts during taping.
Another commenter requested that EPA modify the definition of
protective oil to specifically include carrier solvents. The commenter
claimed that skin lubricants used on hypodermic needles do not meet the
definition of a coating because they do not cure and form a solid film.
The commenter stated that the skin lubricant is a viscous liquid that
uses a HAP as a carrier and remains liquid after the HAP evaporates.
Another commenter requested that aqueous-based rust inhibitors
should not be considered coatings under the final rule and that this
should be clarified in the definition of ``coating.'' The commenter
contended that the rule as proposed currently exempts protective oil-
type rust inhibitors and should also exempt aqueous-based materials
used for the same purpose.
Response: We agree with the commenters that the definition of
protective oils should be written to include those oils that include a
carrier solvent and that do not form a solid film (e.g., skin
lubricants on hypodermic needles). The definition of protective oils
has also been written to include magnet wire lubrication and soft
temporary protective coatings that are removed prior to installation or
further assembly of a part or component. Those materials that do not
form a solid film are not typically considered coatings. Aqueous rust
inhibitors, which are typically acids or bases, are already excluded
from the definition of coating as acids or bases.
We do not feel it is necessary to specifically include bar seal
lubricants used to prevent hand gloves from sticking to generator parts
during taping. This is a specific process using the bar seal lubricant
in a way that qualifies as a protective oil by providing lubrication.
Comment: Two commenters asked for clarification on whether non-HAP
coatings should be included in determining whether a facility is
subject to the final rule. The commenters noted that Sec.
63.3881(c)(5) of the proposed rule exempts coatings used in amounts of
less than 50 gal per year, provided the total amount that is exempt
does not exceed 250 gal per year. The commenters asked, for example,
whether a facility using 10,000 gal of non-HAP coating and less than 50
gal each of several other HAP-containing coatings totaling less than
250 gal per year would be subject to the final rule.
Response: In response to comment, we have written the final rule to
clearly state that the use of non-HAP materials (as defined in the
final rule) does not count toward the 250 gal applicability threshold
in the final rule. This would avoid a situation where a source would be
subject to the final rule even though it was using primarily non-HAP
coatings and less than 250 gal per year of HAP-containing coatings.
Because the purpose of the final rule is to control HAP, we agree that
it is appropriate to consider only HAP-containing coatings in
determining whether a source meets the applicability threshold. The
final rule includes a definition of non-HAP coating, which is a coating
containing less than 0.1 percent by weight of each individual organic
HAP that is an OSHA-defined carcinogen and less than 1.0 percent by
weight of all other individual HAP.
Comment: Several commenters requested clarification on the
exemption for facility maintenance surface coating operations. One
commenter requested clarification that surface coating of equipment and
tools used to manufacture parts and products are not covered by the
final rule. The commenter noted that miscellaneous metal parts and
products are defined as including ``industrial machinery'' and ``other
industrial products.'' The commenter requested that an additional
paragraph be added to Sec. 63.3881(c) of the final rule to clarify
that surface coating of manufacturing equipment, metal molds, and tools
are not covered except when these tools are sold or otherwise put into
interstate commerce. The commenter requested the definition of facility
maintenance state that the repair of metal molds is specifically cited
as facility maintenance.
A second commenter stated that it is unclear if the rule as
proposed applies to refurbishment activities and maintenance coating of
existing metal parts, or if the rule as proposed is intended to apply
only to ``new'' metal parts produced for sale. The commenter noted that
some maintenance activities conducted at facilities include coating
metal equipment and parts that are not part of the infrastructure of
the affected facility, such as trucks or other transport vessels for
raw materials or products.
One commenter requested clarification that coating activities at
industrial sites to maintain the
[[Page 143]]
structural and operational integrity of process equipment are not
covered by the final rule. Many industries coat new and existing
support structures, piping, and equipment as part of routine
maintenance activities, but they do not produce and coat metal parts
for commercial sale.
Two commenters requested that repainting of refillable gas
cylinders for the delivery of industrial gases should be considered
facility maintenance and not covered by the final rule. One commenter
argued that the gas cylinders are transferred back and forth to the
customer and that the principal activity of the facility is the
delivery of gases and not the repainting of cylinders. Another
commenter stated that the final rule should apply only to facilities
for which surface coating is the ``principal activity,'' rather than
merely discussing this applicability in the preamble.
Another commenter requested the facility maintenance exemption for
surface coating on tools and equipment also apply to tools used
occasionally off-site. Another commenter requested that EPA expand the
definition of facility maintenance to include the fabrication and
coating of equipment needed to support the function of the facility
(e.g., equipment required for supporting, holding, or reaching aircraft
or aircraft parts and components).
Response: The EPA agrees that the surface coating of equipment and
tools used by a manufacturing facility (compared to machinery and tools
that are sold as industrial products) should be considered part of
facility maintenance operations and not part of the miscellaneous metal
parts and products surface coating source category. The final rule
includes a definition of ``facility maintenance operations'' that
includes the routine repair or renovation (including the surface
coating) of the tools, equipment, machinery, and structures that
comprise the infrastructure of the affected facility. Infrastructure
may include buildings, tools, and equipment needed to support the
function of the facility that are fixed in place, or are occasionally
used off-site.
Since mold release agents are applied to molds and are not applied
to the part being produced and do not become part of the part being
produced, they would be considered part of facility maintenance and
would not be subject to the final rule. However, EPA does not believe
it is necessary to specifically include mold release agents in the
definition of facility maintenance since they would already be covered
as a surface coating applied to the tools and equipment of the affected
facility.
The regular painting of gas cylinders is not considered facility
maintenance because it is not incidental to the primary activity of a
facility delivering specialty gases. The repainting of the cylinders is
central to the reliable delivery of industrial gases to customers, even
if the cylinders are owned by and returned to the gas vendor. The
coating is not episodic or occasional, but is an ongoing operation at
the source for which dedicated, fixed machinery and equipment are
installed at the source. For these reasons, coating of the cylinders is
considered part of the principal activity of the facility, which is
providing gas to customers in sound and easily identifiable containers.
Facility maintenance activities, including episodic or occasional
surface coating, on the other hand, is ancillary or incidental to the
principal activity of the facility.
The coating of mobile equipment and fleet trucks is considered part
of facility maintenance for the Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products
NESHAP, as long as the coating of mobile equipment and fleet trucks is
not one of the principal activities of the source. The routine
maintenance of metal parts (such as rail car maintenance and drum
refurbishment) is not exempt from the final rule when it is performed
at sources for which their principal activity is the routine
maintenance, including surface coating, of metal parts that are not new
parts.
B. Need for Separate Source Category for Department of Defense Coatings
Comment: One commenter stated that EPA should establish a separate
source category for DoD surface coating operations not covered by the
Aerospace or the Shipbuilding and Ship Repair NESHAP (40 CFR part 63,
subparts GG and II, respectively) and exempt these coating operations
from the final rule for miscellaneous metal parts. The commenter
described the unique material requirements and operating conditions for
military coating operations that are different from commercial
operations. The commenter claimed that the proposed compliance options
would be impractical and extremely costly for DoD facilities because of
the complexity of military coating operations, the number of coatings
and solvents used, and the number of different items and substrates
coated. Many DoD installations (especially those that service or
remanufacture artillery, armored vehicles, weapons systems, and support
equipment) use thousands of different coatings, and each material is
subject to its own military specification.
Because DoD facilities use HAP-containing solvents, the commenter
claimed they could not use the proposed compliant materials option.
Reformulating solvents or coatings requires extensive field testing
before they may be approved for use in tactical field equipment and
weapons systems. In addition, updating the coatings for which there is
a military specification requires updating the documentation applicable
to military specifications and the documentation for the relevant
equipment and weapons systems that adopt those military specifications.
The proposed emission rate option and the add-on controls option
are not feasible because they would require DoD to be able to
accurately track the amount of coating or cleaning solvent used on each
item or substrate. As noted above, DoD installations may use thousands
of different coatings on a variety of substrates, including metal,
plastic, ceramics, rubber, fabric, wood, and composites.
The commenter requested a separate source category so that emission
limits and a regulatory format could be developed that would be most
appropriate for military coating needs. The commenter claimed that a
separate rule also would ensure that all DoD coatings could comply with
emission limits using the same units of measure. The commenter noted
that DoD facilities use many of the same high performance coatings on
plastic and metal items and substrates, and they could be potentially
regulated by both the NESHAP for plastic parts and products and the
NESHAP for miscellaneous metal parts and products.
Response: After several visits to DoD surface coating operations
and meetings with DoD stakeholders, EPA agrees that a separate source
category for DoD surface coating operations is warranted. One factor
that we considered in this decision is the unique military
specifications for coatings used on tactical and other military
equipment. Further data collection and analysis are required to
determine what emission limits are achievable for these coating
operations. Another factor that we considered is the issue that
military facilities may use thousands of different coatings, and that
the types of equipment that are coated and the types of coatings used
in a given time period are unpredictable and often influenced by world
events. Further analysis is needed to determine what emission limit
formats, compliance demonstration, and recordkeeping requirements are
practical for this type of situation. Another consideration was
[[Page 144]]
the high probability that these sources would be subject to multiple
NESHAP.
The EPA will be developing separate NESHAP for ``Defense Land
Systems and Miscellaneous Equipment'' surface coating operations. Those
NESHAP will include operations that do not meet the applicability
criteria of the Aerospace NESHAP or the Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
NESHAP. The comments pertaining to the format of the standards and
appropriate compliance options will be taken into consideration in the
development of those NESHAP.
Since a separate source category will be established for DoD
surface coating operations, the definition of high performance coating
in the final rule has been written so that it does not include
``military combat, tactical, and munitions coating'' and the definition
of ``military combat, tactical, and munitions coating'' is not included
in the final rule.
C. Exclusion of Activities Subject to Other Surface Coating NESHAP
Comment: Several commenters requested that EPA clarify that the
Aerospace NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart GG), rather than the
Miscellaneous Metal Parts NESHAP, cover parts necessary for the proper
functioning of aircraft. The commenters were concerned in particular
that the rule, as proposed, could be interpreted to apply to the
specialty coatings included in appendix A to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
GG. The commenters stated that the Aerospace NESHAP found that MACT
controls were not warranted for certain aerospace surface coating
operations and that regulating these operations under the Miscellaneous
Metal Parts and Products NESHAP would be an unexplained change in
policy.
Another commenter suggested that the final rule include an
alternative compliance option for facilities subject to the final
NESHAP under development for the surface coating of automobiles and
light-duty trucks that also coat metal parts that would not be subject
to the Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks NESHAP. The commenter noted
that some automobile and light-duty truck facilities will be subject to
the final rule for metal parts coating, the NESHAP for the surface
coating of automobiles and light-duty trucks, and the Plastic Parts and
Products NESHAP. The commenter suggested that a source be allowed to
comply with the final NESHAP for automobiles and light-duty trucks for
all coating operations if the principle activity is the surface coating
of automobiles and light-duty truck bodies. The commenter noted that
the metal and plastic parts coating operations are often integrated
with the body coating operations, since all three coating operations
may share common coating supplies, application equipment, cleaning
solvents, and emission controls. The shared equipment and materials
could make tracking separate compliance for each NESHAP overly
burdensome and would reduce the certainty of compliance.
One commenter requested that EPA clarify that shipbuilding or ship
repair surface coating operations are subject to only the Shipbuilding
and Ship Repair NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart II). The commenter
noted that the Shipbuilding and Ship Repair NESHAP covers only paints
and thinners, and does not cover caulks, sealants, and adhesives. Since
the metal parts rule covers all coating materials, the commenter was
concerned that it would cover those materials that were not
specifically addressed by the Shipbuilding and Ship Repair NESHAP and
will make shipbuilding and ship repair sources subject to multiple
NESHAP.
Response: We agree with the commenter that coating operations that
are addressed in the Aerospace NESHAP, and for which EPA determined
that MACT controls were not needed, are not intended to be regulated
under the Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products NESHAP. To clarify
this intent, the final miscellaneous metal parts rule includes a
provision that specifies that the final rule does not apply to coatings
that meet the applicability criteria for the Aerospace NESHAP (40 CFR
part 63, subpart GG). In addition, the final rule excludes the
application of specialty coatings, as defined in appendix A to subpart
GG, to metal parts of aerospace vehicles or components.
The coating of metal parts that would not meet the applicability of
the Aerospace NESHAP or that would not require any of the specialty
coatings defined in appendix A to 40 CFR part 63, subpart GG would be
subject to the miscellaneous metal parts final rule. Information
provided during the comment period indicates that any miscellaneous
metal coating activities would comprise less than 5 percent of total
coating activities at an aerospace facility. Consequently, the facility
could elect to comply with the predominant activity compliance
alternative to reduce its recordkeeping and reporting burden.
We agree that the final rule for the surface coating of
miscellaneous metal parts is not intended to apply to coating
operations that meet the applicability criteria of the Shipbuilding and
Ship Repair NESHAP. Although the Shipbuilding and Ship Repair NESHAP
did not establish emission limits for sealants, caulks, and adhesives
used in shipbuilding or ship repair, such types of coatings used for
shipbuilding or ship repair operations are more appropriately addressed
under the Shipbuilding and Ship Repair NESHAP. The review of the
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair NESHAP, required by section 112(d)(6)of
the CAA, is an appropriate mechanism for evaluating whether emission
limits are needed for sealants, caulks, and adhesives used in
shipbuilding or ship repair.
For sources that will be subject to the final Automobiles and
Light-Duty Trucks NESHAP, the final miscellaneous metal parts and
products rule includes a provision to mitigate the overlap at these
facilities. For these metal part surface coating operations, a facility
has the option to comply with the requirements of the final Automobiles
and Light-Duty Trucks NESHAP as long as the metal parts are for use in
automobiles or light-duty trucks.
D. Complying With the Rule Representing the Majority of the Substrate
(Plastic or Metal) on Pre-assembled Parts.
Comment: Several commenters supported this provision of the
proposed rule while others did not. Several commenters noted that the
source would be required to determine every month whether the majority
of substrate on pre-assembled parts was metal or plastic based on the
coatings applied during the previous 12-month period and argued this
would be overly burdensome. Two commenters suggested that because the
relative amount of metal and plastic coated could change over time, a
facility could potentially fluctuate between applicable NESHAP. Two
commenters also suggested that the final rule require facilities to
establish whether the majority of surfaces coated are metal or plastic
only at the time of their title V permit renewal, rather than on a 12-
month rolling basis, to provide stability and reduce recordkeeping
burden.
Other commenters claimed that the rule does not adequately address
situations where separate plastic and metal parts are coated on the
same line. As proposed, separate metal and plastic parts coated on the
same line would need to comply separately with the plastic parts and
the metal parts rules. The commenters noted that the same coatings and
feed systems are often used for both plastic and metal parts on a
[[Page 145]]
single line. The commenters recommended that the final rule adopt a
``predominant activity'' concept, whereby the facility could determine
the predominant coating activity of a line and then comply with a
single NESHAP.
Response: We recognize and appreciate some of the problems that
were identified with this approach by the commenters. Although some
commenters supported this approach, it is not included in the final
rule. The final rule instead offers more practical compliance
approaches, including a predominant activity alternative as suggested
by some of the commenters.
The predominant activity alternative allows a facility to identify
its predominant type of coating activity and comply with the NESHAP or
the subcategory emission limit that applies to that activity for all
coating operations. The predominant activity is defined as the activity
that represents 90 percent or more of the surface coating that occurs
at a facility.
We have analyzed the relative differences in emission limits that
are included in the predominant activity compliance option, as it would
apply to the NESHAP for plastic parts and products and the NESHAP for
miscellaneous metal parts and products. We have determined, for certain
subcategories, that the environmental impact of complying with the
emission limit for the predominant activity is essentially equivalent
to complying separately with each emission limit. For other
subcategories, the environmental impact could be substantially
different. To prevent situations that could lead to substantial
emissions increases, the following activities cannot be used as the
predominant activity at a facility: high performance, rubber-to-metal,
and extreme performance fluoropolymer coatings. Emission limits for
these coating operations reflect the need for specialized performance
requirements that can currently be accomplished only with materials
that contain substantially higher-HAP than materials used at other
types of coating operations. It would be inappropriate to allow coating
operations that can be performed with lower-HAP materials to comply
with substantially higher-HAP emission limits than would otherwise be
applicable.
Under the predominant activity alternative, if all coating
operations subject to NESHAP comply with the emission limit applicable
to the predominant activity, the facility will be considered in
compliance with the emission limits otherwise applicable to the
minority surface coating operations (i.e, those that amount to less
than 10 percent of the coating activity).
Another compliance option to eliminate the need to comply with more
than one coating NESHAP has also been added to the final rule. This
second option allows a facility to calculate and comply with a
facility-specific emission limit.
E. Comply With the Most Stringent NESHAP
Comment: Several commenters supported this provision. One commenter
agreed that complying with only one NESHAP would prevent excessive
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting. One commenter suggested that
this option would require less recordkeeping than tracking and
determining which substrate represents the greatest coating activity.
However, several commenters stated that different units of measure
(e.g., lb organic HAP per lb solids versus lb organic HAP per gal
solids) make it difficult to determine which surface coating NESHAP
among several is more stringent. Additionally, one commenter noted that
case-by-case demonstrations of relative stringency based on total
estimated annual emissions are difficult because of the different
standards and units of measure in the various NESHAP. One commenter
noted that when different NESHAP have different methods of compliance
demonstration, sources must track and allocate material usage
differently for different parts. Cleaning solvents in particular are a
problem, since some NESHAP emission limits include cleaning solvents
while others impose work practices instead.
One commenter noted that the rule as proposed places the burden on
the source to determine the most stringent limit, and that the
different units used for different surface coating rules may cause a
source to mistakenly fall out of compliance through miscalculation or
misunderstanding.
Several commenters suggested options so that sources would not have
to determine which rule is most stringent on a case-by-case basis. Some
commenters suggested that the relative stringency of different NESHAP
should be stated in each rulemaking so that facilities subject to more
than one NESHAP do not need to perform a case-by-case determination of
which applicable rule is most stringent. Another commenter suggested
that the different surface coating rules contain factors or equations
so a source could convert emission limits from one unit to another
(e.g., lb organic HAP/lb solids to lb organic HAP/gal solids).
One commenter recommended that EPA allow facilities subject to both
the Plastic Parts and Products NESHAP and the Miscellaneous Metal Parts
and Products NESHAP the option of complying with the standards of their
choice since both NESHAP will significantly reduce organic HAP
emissions.
Response: Through clarification of the applicability provisions of
the final rule, as described in this preamble, we have significantly
reduced the potential for sources to be subject to multiple surface
coating NESHAP. In addition, EPA is providing in the final rule, the
opportunity for a source to determine and comply with a facility-
specific weighted emission limit for all coating operations that take
place at the source. The emission limit would be weighted according to
the relative amount of coatings used that would be subject to separate
emission limits. This alternative emission limit may include applicable
emission limits from two or more NESHAP.
In calculating the facility-specific emission limit, the basis for
the weighting of the individual emission limits must be the volume of
coating solids used in each subcategory. The volume coating solids used
in the different coating operations may be calculated by a variety of
methods, as long as it is accepted by the permitting authority. For
example, in some cases a facility that uses the same coating for
plastic and metal parts may be able to use the design specifications of
the parts coated and the numbers of each type of part coated to
calculate the volume of coating solids used for metal and plastic
surfaces subject to the individual emission limits. In other
situations, actual records of coating usage for each operation may be
needed to provide a valid calculation.
In calculating a facility-specific emission limit for operations
subject to NESHAP with emission limits in different formats, you will
need to convert emission limits to the same format. To do so, you must
use a default value for solids density of 10.5 lbs solids per gal
solids (1.26 kg solids/liter solids) to convert emission limits in the
Plastic Parts and Products NESHAP that are in ``HAP per mass solids''
to the ``HAP per volume solids'' units of the Miscellaneous Metal Parts
and Products NESHAP. This default value was calculated from the
weighted-average solids density of coatings in the plastic parts survey
database and represents the average solids density of plastic parts
coatings.
The following example illustrates how the facility-specific
emission limit
[[Page 146]]
may be used. Assume a facility has three coating operations subject to
the following emission limits:
[sbull] Plastic parts general use (0.16 lb organic HAP/lb solids);
[sbull] Miscellaneous metal parts extreme performance flouropolymer
coatings (12.4 lb organic HAP/gal solids); and
[sbull] Miscellaneous metal parts general use (2.6 lb organic HAP/
gal solids).
The three coating operations used the following volumes of coating
solids in the 12 months of the compliance period:
[sbull] Plastic parts general use: 40,000 gal solids;
[sbull] Miscellaneous metal parts extreme performance flouropolymer
coatings: 2,000 gal solids; and
[sbull] Miscellaneous metal parts general use: 58,000 gal solids.
First, the plastic parts general use emission limit must be
converted to lb organic HAP/gal solids units using the default solids
density of 10.5 lb solids per gal solids:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.000
Next, the facility-specific emission limit is calculated using
Equation 1 in Sec. 63.3890 of the final rule:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.001
If all coating operations comply with an emission limit of 2.4 lb
organic HAP/gal solids and with the other compliance provisions of the
final rule, the facility will be in compliance with the final rule for
that compliance period. The calculation must be repeated for each 12-
month compliance period. In this example, compliance will also
constitute compliance with the Plastic Parts and Products NESHAP for
the plastic parts coating operations. The facility may use either the
compliant materials option, the emission rate without add-on controls
option, or the emission rate with add-on controls option to demonstrate
compliance with the facility-specific emission limit.
This approach is consistent with the CAA because the emission
limits from which the facility-specific emission limit would be
calculated are based on the MACT emission limits for each applicable
coating operation. We believe that overall emissions would be
essentially the same as if each coating operation were complying
separately with each applicable emission limit. The facility-specific
emission limit needs to be calculated each month of the 12 month
compliance period because of the wide differences in the various
emission limits available for inclusion. A relatively small change in
the mix of coating operations conducted during a compliance period may
have a significant effect on the weighted emission limit. Thus, it
would not be appropriate for a facility to establish and maintain a
fixed facility-specific emission limit based on historical data or long
term projections.
In the final rule, the facility-specific emission limit and
predominant activity alternatives provide sources with comprehensive
and flexible approaches that will reduce the recordkeeping associated
with sources that coat multiple substrates and whose workload could
fluctuate over time. These alternatives reduce the likelihood of
overlap among multiple surface coating NESHAP.
F. Assembled On-Road Vehicle Coating
Comment: Two commenters recommended that the predominant substrate
type on motor homes and other recreational vehicles (RV) be established
as the most restrictive substrate type (i.e., plastics). They argued
that a single emission limit should be established for coating motor
homes and other assembled on-road vehicles (AORV) that reflects the
restrictions of the plastic substrate used on the bodies of motor homes
and other RV. The commenters argued that the recordkeeping to document
the fraction of plastic and metal on RV would be a major challenge
because of the different options for each RV that can be chosen by the
customer which affect the ratio of metal-to-plastic that is coated on
each vehicle.
One commenter requested that the metal parts rule specifically
exclude aftermarket repairs and refinishing of heavy duty trucks,
buses, and other vehicles. Other commenters requested that the final
rule exempt auto refinishing operations and requested that the final
rule state that the refinishing of assembled vehicles is covered under
the AORV coating subcategory in the Plastic Parts and Products NESHAP.
One commenter also requested that the AORV subcategory in the plastic
parts rule, and not the miscellaneous metal parts rule, apply to
vehicle parts that are separate from the assembled vehicle at the time
of coating application, if the part is eventually to be incorporated
into the vehicle. The commenter reasoned that emissions from such
operations are negligible in comparison to overall refinish coating
emissions, and tremendous costs would be involved with having to
reformulate all the colors required to color match under two different
regulatory limits and units of measure.
Response: We agree that a single emission limit should apply to all
surface coating operations on motor homes and other fully assembled
vehicles. Even though fully assembled vehicles may contain a mix of
plastic and metal substrates, the majority of the surface coatings
applied to the vehicle are automotive-type refinish coatings. In the
proposed rule for plastic parts and product surface coating (40 CFR
part 63, subpart PPPP; 67 FR 72276, December 4, 2002), we proposed an
emission limit for an AORV surface coating subcategory, and an emission
limit for that subcategory has been included in the final plastic parts
rule.
The AORV subcategory in the final plastic parts rule includes all
surface coating operations (regardless of the relative amount of metal
and plastic) on fully assembled vehicles, including, for example, motor
homes and other RV, refinishing of cars and trucks following body
repair, and the painting of fleet trucks. Surface coating operations
that
[[Page 147]]
are subject to the AORV surface coating emission limit in the plastic
parts rule are not subject to any of the emission limits in the
miscellaneous metal parts and products rule. These include incidental
coating of parts that have been removed from the vehicle, such as
grille fronts, to facilitate access and coverage.
G. The MACT Floor Approach and Database
Comment: Several commenters supported the approach of using State
volatile organic compounds (VOC) rules to develop the MACT floor. Some
found the VOC rules to be a good indicator of HAP emissions and to
represent emission levels that have been shown to be achievable for the
range of sources in the category and supported the assumptions made by
EPA in that approach. However, one commenter contended that EPA
improperly used State VOC emission limits instead of levels ``actually
achieved'' by the best performing 12 percent of sources to set the MACT
floor. The commenter argued that one legal precedent (Sierra Club v.
U.S. EPA, 167 F.3d 658, 664 D.C. Cir. 1999) has found that the use of
regulatory permit data in place of actual performance data is only
permissible for setting a MACT floor when a rational relationship
exists between permitted emissions and actual emissions. The commenter
argued that a significant difference existed between the allowable VOC
emissions under State rules and actual HAP emissions of the best
performing facilities because EPA improperly assumed that all
facilities operated at the allowable VOC level in the State rules. That
is, EPA assumed that VOC emissions were no lower than the State VOC
limits.
In place of using State VOC rules, the commenter argued that EPA
should use the average emission rate of 0.1 lb organic HAP/gal coating
solids that was the result of a preliminary ranking presented in the
preamble to the proposed rule (67 FR 52791, August 13, 2002). The
commenter further argued that unless EPA sees a need to establish
additional subcategories, this limit should apply to all sources in the
general use coating category.
The commenter noted that the HAP limits for the general use
category are higher than the actual emissions of ``a large portion'' of
the existing sources that will be regulated by the final rule. From
this observation, the commenter concluded that the final rule will
allow several hundred sources to increase HAP emissions.
The commenter also contended that data from the miscellaneous metal
parts and products industry indicated that coating formulations with
less HAP do not result in less VOC, and it is incorrect to assume that
VOC control is a proxy for HAP control. The commenter concluded from
this observation that using State VOC rules to develop the MACT floor
for HAP emissions was inconsistent with the CAA because no rational
relationship existed between permitted VOC emissions and actual HAP
emissions.
Response: For most of the sources in this source category, the
State VOC rules constituted the only applicable and measurable emission
limitation that could be used in a MACT floor ranking for some
subcategories. We did not adopt the emission level indicated by the
preliminary MACT ranking because that level was not achievable for the
extremely diverse facilities in the relevant subcategories, as
represented by the miscellaneous metal parts and products database.
Along with various stakeholder groups, we also considered MACT rankings
for individual industry segments, but the results for individual
segments would not be achievable for all sources within those segments
because of diversity even within those segments. The only exceptions
were for the rubber-to-metal subcategory and the magnet-wire
subcategory, where the MACT emission limits are based on the MACT
database rankings for these segments. Therefore, we chose the final
approach of basing HAP limits on State VOC limits for the general use
and high performance categories. State VOC limits have been
demonstrated to be achievable emission limitations for the range of
sources included within these two miscellaneous metal parts and
products subcategories.
We started our development of HAP limits with the State VOC limits
and then applied the appropriate HAP/VOC ratio to determine a good
representation of the HAP content of coatings that meet the VOC limits.
If we had just used the VOC limits as HAP limits without adjusting for
the HAP/VOC ratio, then the assertion in the comment would be more
accurate.
Although we agree that some sources achieved nominally lower-HAP
emission limitations than those derived from the State VOC limits, it
is not clear that those lower-emitting facilities represent the range
of sources in the source category or in any distinct or clearly
definable subcategory or industry segment.
Contrary to the commenter's assertion, VOC limits do limit HAP
emissions indirectly from this source category because nearly all
organic HAP used in coatings and related solvents are also VOC.
Although many VOC are not HAP, limiting VOC also limits HAP because the
HAP content cannot exceed the VOC limit. Therefore, those sources
subject to VOC limits have also reduced HAP emissions to comply with
the VOC emission limits.
We have established for this source category that a reasonable
relationship exists between State VOC rule limits and actual VOC
emissions for most facilities. Using the miscellaneous metal parts and
products survey data, we calculated the average VOC content (in lb VOC
per gal of coating, less water) for each facility subject to a State
VOC rule limit. The average VOC content of the coatings reported for
each facility subject to a State VOC limit is nominally lower than the
applicable State VOC limit, consistent with allowing a reasonable
margin for compliance.
Comment: One commenter supported the HAP-to-VOC ratio that was used
to convert the VOC limits in State coating rules to HAP limits.
However, another commenter argued against using the average HAP-to-VOC
ratio for all sources in setting the MACT floor, stating that among the
best performing sources, the HAP-to-VOC ratio is much less than the 43-
percent overall average ratio used by EPA. The commenter did not
provide specific HAP-to-VOC ratios for any of the lower emitting
facilities. The commenter argued that if EPA decides to base the rule
on State VOC limits, EPA should replace the 43-percent HAP-to-VOC ratio
with the average HAP-to-VOC ratio for the best performing 12 percent of
sources.
Another commenter noted that the EPA database did not include or
account for HAP contained in solvent blends. The commenter claimed that
the default fractions for these products could ``significantly impact
the baseline'' and requested that the VOC-to-HAP conversion factor be
reviewed.
Response: As suggested by one commenter, we assessed the HAP-to-VOC
ratio of those facilities that represented the MACT floor. And as
suggested by other commenters, we reviewed the solvent blends that were
used by a representative sample of sources and adjusted the emission
limits is proposed to account for the organic HAP in solvent blends.
The sources included in the MACT floor 12-percent determination are the
facilities in the metal parts database that are subject to the most
stringent State VOC coating rules.
Contrary to the one commenter's contention, we found that the HAP-
to-VOC ratio for sources subject to the most stringent State VOC rules
was
[[Page 148]]
neither lower than nor substantially different from the 0.43 ratio used
to develop the proposed emission limits. We estimated that the organic
HAP from solvent blends accounts for about 2 percent of all HAP.
Therefore, the HAP-to-VOC ratio used for calculating the general use
limits has been increased from 0.43 to 0.44 to account for the organic
HAP in solvent blends, and the general use limits were recalculated and
then rounded to two significant figures. The revised existing source
limit is 2.6 lb organic HAP/gal (0.31 kg organic HAP/liter) coating
solids used. The revised new source limit is 1.9 lb organic HAP/gal
(0.23 kg organic HAP/liter). Some of the emission limits changed
slightly due to rounding the proposed emission limits to two or three
significant figures.
Since the high performance, magnet wire, and rubber-to-metal
coating emission limits were not developed using the HAP-to-VOC ratio
of 0.43, the emission limits for these coating operations were not
recalculated. For the high performance limit, a ratio of 0.70 provided
by industry was used. For magnet wire and rubber-to-metal, HAP content
from the survey database were used to establish the floor, so no HAP-
to-VOC ratio was needed for these subcategories.
Comment: Several commenters stated that the HAP from cleaning
materials should not be included in the MACT floor or in calculating
emission limits for general use coatings. The commenters argued that
the State VOC rules on which these limits are based do not include
cleaning solvents. Two commenters pointed out that State VOC rules
follow the recommendations of EPA's control technique guideline
document for miscellaneous metal parts and products surface coating,
which recommends excluding cleaning solvents. By including the cleaning
solvents in the miscellaneous metal parts and products MACT floor, the
commenters claimed that EPA made the proposed limits more stringent
than allowed by the MACT analysis based on State VOC rules. Two
commenters suggested that if a cleaning solvent limit were necessary,
it should be listed separately or averaged separately and then added
directly to the proposed HAP limits.
Several commenters suggested changes to the rule as proposed if
cleaning solvent emissions were to be regulated. Three commenters
stated that cleaning solvents should be exempt from the final emission
limits provided cleaning operations are conducted in closed containers.
Two commenters suggested that the final rule should include work
practices for cleaning solvents. One commenter noted that the
Industrial Cleaning Solvent Alternative Control Technique document
suggested solvent accounting and plant management practices to address
emissions from solvent cleaning. The same commenter also noted that EPA
has used its authority under section 112(h) of the CAA to incorporate
work practices for cleaning solvents for the Wood Furniture, Aerospace,
and Shipbuilding and Ship Repair NESHAP. One commenter suggested
cleaning solvents be regulated separately from coatings based on HAP
composition or vapor pressure.
Response: The EPA reviewed the cleaning material reported in the
database for the miscellaneous metal parts rule and concluded that no-
HAP cleaners are a viable option for sources subject to the final rule.
The proposed and final emission limits reflect the fact that
miscellaneous metal parts and products sources, for which EPA had data,
were using cleaning solvents that contained no organic HAP or were
using solvent blends containing only small percentages of organic HAP
(i.e., 6 percent HAP or less), which would have little, if any, effect
on their emission rate. As described earlier, we have adjusted the HAP-
to-VOC ratio used to establish the emission limits to account for the
organic HAP contained in solvent blends.
The final rule accounts for cleaning operations that are conducted
in closed containers, although there is no specific requirement to
perform cleaning in closed containers. In the compliance calculations
used in the emission rate without add-on controls option and the
emission rate with add-on controls option, you only need to include the
organic HAP contained in materials that are consumed during the
previous 12-month period and you may take credit for organic HAP
contained in materials that are sent off-site for recycling or
disposal. If cleaning is performed in closed containers, the amount
that evaporates to the atmosphere is minimized.
H. Compliance Options for Meeting the Emission Limits
Comment: Many commenters requested clarification on how the
different compliance options could be applied to different coating
lines at the same facility. Several commenters asked EPA to verify that
a facility can choose different control options for different lines at
a single facility.
Response: You may choose different compliance options for different
lines at the same facility. For example, one line may be able to use
the compliant materials option, while another line may need the
flexibility to use higher- and lower-HAP materials under one of the
emission rate compliance options. You may also use different compliance
options within a single line, as long as different compliance options
are not applied at the same time to the same coating applied to a
single part. For example, most of the coatings used on a particular
line may be able to individually meet the emission limit for a
particular subcategory, but a few coatings may need a higher-HAP
content. You could average these higher-HAP coatings with some of the
lower-HAP materials under the emission rate without add-on controls
option and demonstrate compliance for these separately, while the other
lower-HAP coatings comply under the compliant materials option.
It may be more practical to use an add-on control for some coating
operations, such as a specific line, than for others. If you have an
add-on control device on some coating operations, the work practice
standards apply to only the coatings and operations controlled by the
add-on controls.
Comment: One commenter requested that EPA clarify how to switch
between compliance options, specifically when switching between the
compliant materials option and one of the two options that require
calculating a 12-month rolling average emission rate. The commenter
suggested that the final rule should allow maximum flexibility in
switching between options as long as all compliance periods demonstrate
compliance under at least one option, and the necessary data are
available for calculating the needed 12-month averages.
Response: You may switch between compliance options at any time as
long as you notify your permitting authority in your next semiannual
compliance report, and you comply with all monitoring, recordkeeping,
and reporting needed for the compliance option to which you are
switching. Keep in mind, however, that if you switch from one
compliance option to another, you must be able to demonstrate
compliance based on the previous 12 months of data. As a result, you
may need data from the previous 12 months of operation that were not
specifically required by the option under which you were previously
demonstrating compliance. This could be especially true if you switched
from the compliant materials option to the emission rate without add-on
controls option or the emission rate with add-on controls option.
[[Page 149]]
If you began using an add-on control device and complying with the
emission rate with add-on controls option, you may apply the emission
reduction credit to only those coatings that were applied after you
began using the add-on control device. You would also need to
demonstrate compliance with the operating limits for the add-on control
device only after you began using it. Conversely, if you stopped using
an add-on control device and began complying with the emission rate
without add-on controls option, you could no longer apply the emission
reduction credit to coatings applied after the add-on control was shut
down, but you would also no longer need to demonstrate compliance with
the operating limits. In both cases, your 12-month compliance
calculations would include a period when the control device was in use
and a period when it was not. As you moved through time and performed
subsequent monthly compliance calculations, the fraction of coating
activity under the previous compliance option would decrease and the
fraction under the current compliance option would increase.
Comment: One commenter requested that the HAP content of thinners
and solvents not be restricted to absolute zero for the compliant
materials option because thinners and solvents can pick up trace
amounts of HAP during the recycling process.
Response: In the final rule, we have clarified that under the
compliant materials compliance option, thinners and cleaning solvents
do not need to be absolutely zero-HAP. We have included a definition of
non-HAP materials based on common reporting thresholds that are already
in use. Thinners and other additives, cleaning solvents, and coatings
are considered non-HAP as long as the organic HAP level does not exceed
the OSHA reporting thresholds for HAP (0.1 percent by weight for OSHA-
defined carcinogens and 1.0 percent by weight for other HAP). In
addition, we have included a provision that you do not need to
redetermine the organic HAP content of solvents that are recycled off-
site, if you have documentation showing that you received back the
exact same solvent you originally sent off-site for recycling. This
documentation ensures that the solvent you receive back does not
represent a potential net increase in the organic HAP being brought to
the site. The final rule contains a provision that you do not need to
redetermine the organic HAP content of solvent recycled on site.
Comment: One commenter suggested that HAP emissions from storage,
mixing, conveying, and waste management of coatings, thinners, cleaning
materials, and associated wastes should be explicitly excluded in the
emission calculations in the rule. The commenter noted that it is
difficult to directly quantify these emissions and that there is often
a lack of general agreement on how to quantify such losses. The
commenter also noted that EPA stated in the preamble to the proposed
rule that we were not able to obtain data to adequately quantify HAP
emissions from storage, mixing, and waste handling (67 FR 52790).
Response: Under the compliant material option you must demonstrate
that the organic HAP content of each coating used in the coating
operation(s) is less than or equal to the applicable emission limit in
Sec. 63.3890, and that each thinner, additive, and cleaning material
used contains no organic HAP. The compliant material option focuses on
the organic HAP content of coatings, thinners, additives, and cleaning
materials as received from the manufacturer or supplier and prior to
any alteration. No separate or direct accounting of emissions from
storage, mixing, and conveying of coatings, thinners, additives,
cleaning materials and associated wastes is required under the
compliant material option. Such an accounting clearly is not needed
when each coating is a compliant coating and each thinner, additive,
and cleaning material contains no organic HAP.
Under the emission rate without add-on controls option and the
emission rate with add-on controls option all of the organic HAP
content of coatings, thinners, additives, and cleaning materials is
initially assumed to be emitted. (See calculation of the terms A, B,
and C in Sec. 63.3951(e).) Any emissions from storage, mixing, and
conveying of coatings, thinners, additives, cleaning materials, and
associated wastes are implicitly included in this assumption. The rule
does include provisions which allow for reclaimed materials to be
excluded from material usage. (See introductory language to Sec.
63.3951.) The rule also includes provisions for the organic HAP in
waste materials sent or designated for shipment to a hazardous waste
TSDF for treatment or disposal to be excluded from the total mass of
organic HAP emissions. No separate or direct accounting of emissions
from storage, mixing, and conveying of coatings, thinners, additives,
cleaning materials, and associated wastes is required under either the
emission rate without add-on controls option or the emission rate with
add-on controls option. Such an accounting clearly is not needed when
all of the organic HAP content of coatings, thinners, additives, and
cleaning materials is initially assumed to be emitted and provisions
are made to exclude reclaimed materials from material usage and to
exclude organic HAP in waste materials sent or designated for shipment
to a hazardous waste TSDF for treatment or disposal to be excluded from
the total mass of organic HAP emissions.
We agree that no separate or direct accounting of emissions from
storage, mixing, and conveying of coatings, thinners, additives,
cleaning materials, and associated wastes is required under this rule.
We believe that this is sufficiently clear in the final rule. We have
not made any changes in the final rule in regard to this comment.
I. Methods for Expressing Organic HAP Content of Coatings
Comment: Several commenters stated that the emission limits should
be in units of pounds of HAP per gal of coating (lbs HAP/gal coating),
rather than lbs HAP/gal solids to be consistent with existing permits
and State coating rules. One commenter noted that changing the units
from lb/gal coating to lb/gal solids would not allow the facility to
continue to track performance improvements from VOC emission reduction
initiatives. One commenter, a representative of the recreational
vehicle industry, stated that using lb organic HAP/gal solids would be
consistent with other coating rules that affect the recreational
vehicle industry.
Response: The emission limits in many State VOC rules for
miscellaneous metal parts coating are expressed in units of mass of VOC
per volume of coating less water and less exempt compounds. Similar
units were used for the emission limit recommendations in the 1978
guidance document for this source category titled Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources--Volume VI: Surface
Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products (EPA-450/2-78-015).
These ``less water'' units are difficult to work with and are
impractical for facilities with add-on control equipment. As a result
of 1987 EPA guidance (52 FR 45108, November 24, 1987), some States have
changed their VOC limits to mass of VOC per volume of solids, and most
States have added alternative limits in units of mass of VOC per volume
of solids for facilities with add-on control equipment.
The use of ``less water'' units for HAP in the final rule would
lead to even more difficulties and probable confusion. In order to
provide a meaningful basis for comparison of the HAP content of
different coatings, the
[[Page 150]]
units would need to be mass of HAP per volume of coating less water and
less non-HAP organic volatiles. Most coatings contain non-HAP organic
volatiles. In order to express the HAP content of such coatings in
these units, the weight fraction and density of each non-HAP organic
volatile would be needed. This could be a significant additional data
gathering burden. In addition, these units would be unworkable for
facilities with add-on control equipment.
Comment: Additional commenters objected to expressing the emission
limits in lb organic HAP/gal solids, claiming that this unit of measure
is hard to understand and verify for several reasons: Estimating gal of
solids is based on theoretical calculations; manufacturers do not
routinely measure gal solids; and the two ASTM methods specified for
measuring volume solids, ASTM Methods D2697-86 (Reapproved 1998) and
D6093-97, are inaccurate and costly to run. The commenter also
specifically claimed that the emission limits were based on an
arbitrarily chosen default density for coating solids. The commenters
recommended using lb organic HAP/lb coating solids because this metric
is readily available from the manufacturers, is based on a reliable
method, and is more universally used by the surface coating industry.
Response: Many Federal and State VOC rules use units of mass of VOC
per volume of solids. In over 20 years of use, there have been no
significant difficulties identified or reported in the use or
understanding of these units. The volume solids content of coatings is
routinely used by both coating manufacturers and coating users as a
measure of coverage. The survey data that EPA collected on
miscellaneous metal parts and products coatings indicate that volume
solids data are commonly available.
The test methods for volume solids are one option for generating
volume solids content data. Formulation data for volume solids may also
be used. The final rule states that the test method results will take
precedence unless, after consultation, you demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the enforcement agency that the formulation data are
correct.
The emissions limits were, in part, determined by using a standard
VOC density to convert State emission limits from units of mass of VOC
per volume of coating less water and less exempt compounds to mass of
VOC per volume of solids. The VOC density used for this conversion was
7.36 lbs per gal. This VOC density was used in EPA's 1978 guidance for
this source category and is commonly used for converting emissions
limits for this source category from a ``less water'' to a volume
solids basis. This document is ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions
from Existing Stationary Sources--Volume VI: Surface Coating of
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products,'' EPA-450/2-78-015. The density
of coating solids is not needed and was not used to make this
conversion.
Comment: One commenter requested that the final rule clarify how
powder coatings can be used in calculations to show compliance with the
emission rate option. The commenter noted that the compliance units and
equations are based on volume, which is not applicable for non-liquid
coatings, which are purchased by weight. The commenter suggested that
the rule include a method for determining the density of powder
coatings so the gal of solids for powder coatings can be determined.
Response: In the final rule, you may include the solids from powder
coatings in the denominator for the emission rate calculations in the
emission rate without add-on controls and the emission rate with add-on
controls compliance options. By allowing facilities to include powder
coatings in the compliance demonstrations, we hope to encourage greater
use of this lower-emitting technology. The final rule includes ASTM
Method D5965-02, ``Standard Test Method for Specific Gravity of Coating
Powders,'' to measure the density of powder coatings. The density (or
applied coating solids density) is density of the powder coating after
application and curing. The bulk density (or apparent density) of the
powder coating prior to application cannot be used in the compliance
calculations because the bulk density will include air spaces in the
powder that are not present in the cured coating.
Comments: One commenter stated that the final rule should allow
sources or materials suppliers to use alternatives to EPA Method 24 to
determine the amount of HAP that is actually emitted from reactive
adhesives as they are used. The proposed rule and associated test
methods assumed that all HAP contained in coatings or additives are
emitted. However, in reactive adhesives, some of the HAP species react
with other ingredients to form solids and are not emitted to the
atmosphere. Therefore, the amount of HAP emitted can be significantly
less than the amount of HAP present in the liquid adhesive.
Response: An alternative method for determining the fraction of HAP
emitted from reactive adhesives has been included in appendix A to
subpart PPPP 40 CFR part 63. Sources using reactive adhesives may use
this method for demonstrating compliance based on the organic HAP
actually emitted, rather than using Method 311, Method 24, or
composition data. The method relies on preparing a sample (of known
weight) of the adhesive as it will be applied, allowing it to fully
cure, baking the sample, and then weighing the cured adhesive to
determine the weight loss. The weight loss represents the volatile
fraction that is emitted from the adhesive.
J. High Performance Coatings
Several commenters suggested that EPA expand the definition of high
performance coating to include several types of specialized coatings:
Paints for offshore oil platform structures, extreme performance
oilfield coatings, and coatings exposed to food grade products in rail
tank cars and in drums.
Two commenters requested that EPA expand the definition of high
performance coating to include paints used for off shore oil platforms
since general use coatings cannot withstand saltwater. The commenters
noted that in Louisiana, the coatings used for large off shore
structures are subject to the same State limits as those for the
shipbuilding and ship repair industry and are not subject to the
general use limits in the State miscellaneous metal parts and products
rule. The commenters also noted that the definition of coating in the
State rule and the Shipbuilding and Ship Repair NESHAP includes just
paints and thinners, but the definition in the Miscellaneous Metal
Parts and Products NESHAP includes adhesives, caulks, and cleaning
solvents.
One commenter requested that extreme performance oilfield coatings
should be included in the definition of high performance coating.
According to the commenter, internal oilfield pipe coatings must
withstand elevated temperature (as high as 400 degrees Fahrenheit),
extreme pressure, corrosive materials, and abrasive service and these
criteria are generally considered in defining the extreme performance
category used in California VOC rules. According to the commenter,
approximately 15 plants perform oilfield equipment coating.
Another commenter suggested that high performance coatings should
include ``extreme performance coatings'' as defined by South Coast Air
Quality Management District Rule 1107 with the addition of coatings
exposed to food grade commodities. The commenter argued that this
revision is needed for coatings used on rail tank car interiors
[[Page 151]]
and exteriors to protect them from harsh chemicals or food grade
products such as wine and noted that coatings used in tank cars
carrying food must meet FDA requirements. The commenter explained that
tank car exteriors are exposed to spillage, fumes, salt air, snow, and
temperature extremes.
One commenter added that EPA should expand the high performance
coatings category to include the coatings applied to the interior of
drums and pails to protect substrates from hazardous materials and
safeguard food-grade products and prevent leakage. The commenter asked
that EPA acknowledge that interior coatings for steel and other metal
drums and pails are universally accepted as high performance coatings.
Response: We analyzed the metal parts survey data that represented
the types of coating operations that the commenters argued should be
included in the high performance coating category. In all cases, we
found that the general use emission limit is achievable for these types
of coating operations. The commenters submitted no coating HAP content
data to support the need for including these coating types in the
definition of high performance coatings.
The metal parts database includes data for facilities that coat off
shore oil platforms and internal oilfield pipes. These data indicate
that these facilities could comply with the general use emission limit.
Therefore, based on the information available to the Administrator, the
final rule does not include oil platform and internal oilfield pipe
coatings in the definition of high performance coatings.
The metal parts database includes data from 21 sources performing
coating operations on rail cars. These data indicate that the general
use emission limit is achievable for these types of sources. Therefore,
we did not write the final rule to include rail tank car interior or
exterior coatings in the definition of high performance coatings.
The metal parts database includes data from 17 sources performing
drum coating operations. These data indicate that the general use
emission limit is achievable for these types of sources. Therefore, we
did not write the final rule to include coatings applied to pails and
drums in the definition of high performance coatings.
Comment: One commenter suggested that extreme performance
fluoropolymer (EPFP) coatings should be exempt from the final rule or
subject to the limit for high performance coatings. According to the
commenter, these coatings are used when one or more of several
performance criteria are required including creating a non-stick
surface, providing solid film lubrication, providing chemical
resistance, providing resistance to a wide range of temperatures,
complying with certain FDA specifications, and others. The commenter
claimed that water-borne EPFP coatings, for many applications, do not
achieve satisfactory abrasion resistance, adhesion, thinness, and other
performance criteria.
The commenter offered a definition of EPFP coatings, data on the
HAP content of ten different EPFP coatings, and an estimate of national
HAP emissions from EPFP coatings. According to the commenter, total
estimated EPFP coating use is about 60,000 gal nationally with HAP
emissions of about 45 tpy. The HAP content of the ten EPFP coatings
submitted by the commenter ranged from 1.1 lb organic HAP/gal solids to
12.4 lb organic HAP/gal solids. The commenter did not provide any data
on representative emission rates from EPFP coating operations. Data on
HAP content for only a few of these coatings were included in the metal
parts database, but these data were consistent with the data provided
by the commenter.
Response: Based on the HAP content data and performance
requirements fulfilled by EPFP coatings, we agree that EPFP coatings
should not be subject to the general use emission limit. Therefore, the
final rule includes a subcategory for EPFP coatings subject to an
emission limit for new and existing sources of 1.5 kg organic HAP/liter
coating solids (12.4 lb organic HAP/gal coating solids) used based on
the data received with the public comments. This limit is more
stringent than the high performance limit because the data provided by
the commenter indicate that these coatings can meet a more stringent
limit. Since sufficient data were available to establish a HAP content
limit for these coatings, an exemption for these coatings is not needed
in the final miscellaneous metal parts rule.
Comment: One commenter requested that the final rule exempt the
coating of NASA launch support equipment or include the coating of this
equipment in the surface coating NESHAP being developed for defense
land systems and miscellaneous equipment. The commenter explained that
these coatings have unique performance requirements, such as the
ability to withstand the exhaust from rocket engines, and the coatings
that meet these requirements must be qualified for use under NASA
specifications.
Response: We agree that the coatings used on NASA launch support
equipment have unique performance requirements. These performance
requirements and the coatings needed to meet them will require further
analysis before emission limits can be established. Since the process
for qualifying coatings under NASA specifications is similar to the
process of qualifying coatings for use under military specifications,
these coating operations will be included in the development of the
surface coating NESHAP being developed for defense land systems and
miscellaneous equipment.
K. Compliance Requirements for Sources With Add-on Controls
Comment: Several commenters stated that the compliance calculations
in Sec. 63.3961(h) as proposed should not use an assumption of zero-
efficiency when deviations occur. According to one commenter, any
quantitative data on emissions should be allowed to be considered if
agreed to by the enforcing agency. Other commenters stated that a
source should be allowed to demonstrate through monitoring of other
parameters, compliance with standard procedures, or other means (such
as fuel consumption or manual temperature recordings) that some or all
of the emissions were controlled. One commenter requested that EPA
allow a facility to estimate capture or destruction efficiency during
deviations, based on design data or test data. One commenter stated
that facilities should be able to test over a range of operating
conditions, so that the source can estimate control efficiency during
the deviation rather than having to assume zero-percent efficiency in
the compliance calculations.
Response: If a source has manually collected parameter data
indicating that an emission capture system or control device was
operating normally during a parameter monitoring system malfunction,
these data could be used to support and document a different control
efficiency, and the source would not have to assume zero-percent
efficiency.
If a source has data indicating the actual performance of an add-on
emission capture system and control device (e.g., data from previous
tests measuring percent capture at reduced flow rates or percent
destruction efficiency at reduced thermal oxidizer temperatures) during
a deviation from operating limits, then the source may use the actual
performance in determining compliance, if the use of the data is
approved by the Administrator. The final rule does not allow a source
to otherwise estimate the efficiency of a capture system or control
[[Page 152]]
device during a deviation because this would provide no assurance of
the quality of the data used in the compliance calculation.
L. Compliance Requirements for Magnet Wire Sources
Comment: Several commenters from the magnet wire industry argued
that the testing and monitoring provisions for sources with add-on
controls were not applicable to magnet wire coating machines. The
commenters noted that magnet wire coating machines require an oven to
cure the coating that is applied to the wire as it passes through the
machine. The heat used to maintain the temperature of the oven is
provided by the combustion of the solvents that are evaporated from the
coating. Although a supplemental burner or heater is used to heat the
oven at startup, once the oven is running, the temperature is
maintained only by combustion of the solvent vapors. Combustion is
maintained in modern ovens by a bed of catalyst that is located in the
recirculating gas stream within the oven. In some older ovens, a burner
tube is used in place of the catalyst bed to maintain temperature,
although the solvent vapors are still the primary source of fuel for
the oven. Air is re-circulated from an evaporative zone in the oven,
through the catalyst bed or burner tube, and back to the evaporative
zone. A fraction of the air is vented to the atmosphere after
combustion and replaced with air drawn in through the openings in the
oven to maintain oxygen levels inside the oven.
According to the commenters, magnet wire ovens are different from
other surface coating sources in several ways. First, the coating is
applied by an automated machine that runs continuously until the
product on that machine is changed. Second, the curing oven is
essentially a narrow tube and is different from a spray booth or other
type of enclosure used in other coating operations. Third, the catalyst
bed or burner tube in the curing oven is integral to the curing oven
and it must function properly to make a salable product. If the curing
oven, catalyst bed, or burner tube malfunction, the machine cannot make
a product, regardless of the air quality impacts of the malfunction.
Therefore, proper operation of the machine is inherently consistent
with good air pollution control practices.
The commenters argued that these differences make the testing and
monitoring requirements for sources with add-on controls inappropriate
for magnet wire coating machines. In particular, emissions at the inlet
of the burner tube or catalyst bed cannot be measured in order to
determine destruction efficiency across the burner tube or catalyst
bed. Measuring destruction efficiency is also complicated by the fact
that the oven recirculates emissions before a portion of the flow is
vented to the atmosphere.
The commenters also noted that since magnet wire ovens are
different from spray booths and other types of enclosures, the capture
efficiency monitoring provisions are inappropriate. Since workers must
access the wire inlets and outlets of the ovens while the machines are
operating, it would be difficult to maintain the operating limits
specified for enclosures used with add-on controls. Worker access would
also prevent many ovens from meeting the criteria for permanent total
enclosures.
Finally, the commenters noted that many magnet wire facilities have
dozens, and occasionally hundreds, of magnet wire coating machines and
that each machine has its own oven and burner tube or catalyst bed.
Therefore, it would be overly burdensome to require emission testing of
each magnet wire coating machine as part of an initial compliance
demonstration and to require continuous parameter monitoring to
demonstrate ongoing compliance. The commenters proposed changes
included alternative emission testing and monitoring provisions.
Response: We agree with the commenters that magnet wire facilities
are substantially different from other surface coating sources with
conventional capture systems and add-on controls, and these differences
were not reflected in the proposed rule. The final rule incorporates
emission testing and parameter monitoring provisions that reflect the
practical constraints of this industry.
The final rule includes alternative procedures for capture
efficiency and destruction efficiency measurement where the control
device is internal and integral to the oven so that it is difficult or
infeasible to make gas measurements at the inlet to the control device.
These alternative procedures for the magnet wire industry have been
consolidated into appendix A to the final rule.
The alternative procedures determine the organic carbon content of
the volatile matter entering the control device based on the quantity
of coating used, the carbon content of the volatile portion of the
coating, and the efficiency of the capture system. The organic carbon
content of the control device outlet (oven exhaust for ovens without an
external afterburner) is determined using Method 25 or 25A. You do not
need to test every magnet wire coating machine. Instead, with approval
you may test a single unit that represents identical or very similar
magnet wire coating machines. We agree with the commenters that
identical or very similar magnet wire coating machines achieve very
similar capture and control device efficiencies, and it would be overly
burdensome to test every machine at a facility. However, it is
important to note that every untested magnet wire coating machine must
comply with the operating limits that are established during the
performance test of the representative unit.
If the capture system for a magnet wire coating machine meets the
definition of a permanent total enclosure, then you may assume capture
efficiency is 100 percent and no measure of capture efficiency is
needed. Otherwise, capture efficiency can be measured using a liquid-
to-uncaptured-gas protocol using a temporary total enclosure, or an
alternative capture efficiency protocol meeting data quality objectives
or lower confidence limits as described in appendix A to the National
Emission Standards for the Printing and Publishing Industry (40 CFR
part 63, subpart KK). These approaches are more appropriate when it is
difficult or infeasible to make gas measurements at the inlet to the
control device for measuring capture efficiency with a gas-to-gas
protocol.
Capture efficiency of each magnet wire coating machine will be
monitored by requiring each oven to be fitted with an interlock that
will stop the coating process or with an alarm that will sound if a fan
becomes inoperable or if the oven begins to overheat. Overheating is an
indirect indicator that a fan in the oven is inoperable. Each oven must
also be checked once every 6 months with a smoke stick to ensure that
air is being pulled into the oven.
An alternative procedure for monitoring catalytic oxidizers on
magnet wire coating machines is provided in appendix A of the final
rule. This alternative allows you to develop and implement an
inspection and maintenance plan as described in appendix A of the final
rule and to measure the temperature either before or after the catalyst
bed and compare the measured temperature to the operating limit. In
addition to the inspection and maintenance plan, you must either
perform periodic catalyst activity checks, or check the concentration
of organic compounds in the oven exhaust.
Comment: Two commenters argued that annual sampling of catalyst
activity in Sec. 63.3967(b)(4)(i) as proposed is too frequent and
would cause excessive downtime and unreasonable costs to
[[Page 153]]
remove and sample the catalyst for the magnet wire industry. The
commenter noted that catalyst beds routinely perform at compliance
levels for 2 or more years. The commenter believes that the final rule
should require periodic sampling following the manufacturer's and
catalyst supplier's recommended schedule and procedures and dictated by
unit operation and maintenance records. In addition, the commenter
stated that it is not necessary to conduct a performance test whenever
the catalyst is replaced. Replacing the catalyst in itself ensures
compliance, as long as the operating limits specified in Table 1 of the
rule as proposed are achieved.
Response: We agree with the commenter that periodic sampling and
analysis of the catalyst activity is sufficient for the magnet wire
industry because the catalyst bed is integral to the proper functioning
of the oven and the coating process. Therefore, for the magnet wire
industry, periodic sampling and analysis consistent with the catalyst
suppliers recommendations are sufficient. We also agree that
replacement of the catalyst bed generally does not require a new
performance test. Therefore, the final rule does not require a new test
as long as the catalyst is similar to the old catalyst in kind and
quality. Otherwise, a new test will be required.
Comment: Two commenters contended that the proposed requirements in
Sec. 63.3967(b)(4)(ii) and (iii) to perform monthly inspections of
catalytic oxidizers are not practical or necessary for magnet wire
coating machines because the burners and catalyst beds are inside the
machine and integral to the proper functioning of the coating process.
The commenters suggested a monthly external inspection and an annual
internal inspection.
Response: We agree with the commenters that the proposed provisions
were not practical or necessary for magnet wire sources. The final rule
requires a monthly external inspection and an annual internal
inspection. The annual internal inspection is not required for internal
catalysts which cannot be accessed without disassembling the oven.
V. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts
Model plants were developed to aid in estimating the impacts the
final rule would have on miscellaneous metal parts and products surface
coating operations. Five model plants distinguished by size, as
measured by the total volume of coating solids used, were developed.
Impacts were then developed for each model plant, and these individual
impacts were scaled to nationwide levels based on the number of
facilities corresponding to each model plant size. We used the model
plant approach because we did not have adequate data to estimate
impacts for each actual facility.
A variety of compliance methods are available to the industry to
meet the emission limits. We analyzed the information obtained from the
industry survey responses, industry site visits, trade groups, and
industry representatives to determine which compliance methods would
most likely be used by existing and new sources. We expect that the
most widely-used method for existing sources would be low-HAP content
liquid coatings (coatings with HAP contents at or below the emission
limits). Powder coatings, non-HAP cleaning materials, and add-on
capture and control systems would likely be used by existing sources,
but to a lesser extent. Various combinations of these methods may be
used. New sources are expected to use a combination of powder coatings,
low-HAP coatings, and non-HAP cleaning materials.
For the purpose of assessing potential cost and emission reduction
impacts, we assumed that all existing sources would convert to liquid
coatings and thinners with lower-HAP content than presently used and
non-HAP cleaning materials. We assumed that new sources would use
either powder coatings or lower-HAP coatings and non-HAP cleaning
materials.
We first estimated the impacts of the emission limits on the five
model plants. To scale up the model plant impacts to nationwide levels,
we multiplied the individual model plant impacts by the estimated
number of major sources in the United States corresponding to each
plant size. We estimated that there are 1,500 existing major source
facilities nationwide, and that an additional 45 new facilities will
become affected sources each year.
A. What Are the Air Impacts?
For existing major sources, we estimated that compliance with the
emission limits would result in reductions of nationwide organic HAP
emissions of 25,822 tpy. This represents a reduction of about 48
percent from the 1997 baseline organic HAP emissions of 53,869 tpy.
To estimate the impacts of the final rule on new sources, we
estimated the percentage of new facilities that would, in the absence
of the standards, emit HAP at levels that would exceed the final rule.
For new sources, we believe that many will use coating technologies
that are considered to be ``state-of-the-art'' (e.g., powder coatings
and low-HAP liquid coatings). However, we assumed for the impacts
estimation that the same percentage of both new and existing facilities
would be noncomplying at baseline conditions. The baseline emission
rate for these noncomplying facilities was assumed to be the same as
that determined for the existing source model plants. Using these
assumptions, we have estimated the nationwide organic HAP reductions
resulting from new facilities complying with the final rule would be
about 803 tpy from the 45 new sources that would become subject to the
rule each year.
We predict that the emission limitations will not result in any
significant secondary air impacts. We expect that the majority of
facilities will switch to lower-or non-organic-HAP-containing materials
to comply with the standards, rather than installing add-on control
devices. Thus, increases in electricity consumption (which could lead
to increases in emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, carbon
monoxide, and carbon dioxide from electric utilities) will be minimal.
B. What Are the Cost Impacts?
We have estimated the costs related to complying with the emission
limitations and meeting the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements. The costs to comply with the emission limitations include
the increased cost of lower-HAP or non-HAP coating materials.
Alternatively, facilities could choose to purchase, install, and
operate capture systems and add-on control devices. We have assumed for
this analysis that all affected facilities will comply through the use
of lower-HAP containing or non-HAP coatings, thinners, and cleaning
materials, and that these materials can be utilized without the need
for capital expenditures. Annual costs for meeting the monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of the final rule have also
been included.
Existing Sources. We estimate total nationwide annual costs in the
5th year to comply with the emission limits to be $47.5 million for
existing sources. These costs include approximately $8.9 million for
direct costs associated with material usage and $38.6 million for
recordkeeping and reporting.
To comply with the final rule, existing facilities will likely use
lower-HAP or non-HAP coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials because
such materials are generally available and becoming more widely
available each year. Compliance costs were estimated
[[Page 154]]
to be the incremental cost difference between the materials currently
used and the complying materials. Estimates of cost impacts were based
on five model plants that were developed to represent the range of
sizes and coating materials found throughout the industry. Each model
plant was assumed to comply with the final rule by switching to non-HAP
adhesives, surface preparation materials and cleaning materials and
reducing the organic HAP content of the coatings and thinners. The
annual incremental cost of the reformulated raw materials ranged from
approximately $2,635 for model plant 1, representing the segment of
industry with the lowest coating solids usage; to $114,540 for model
plant 5, representing the segment of industry that uses over 75,000 gal
of coating solids. The nationwide cost impact was estimated for each
industry segment by multiplying the annual costs for each model plant
by the number of facilities represented by that model plant. A total
nationwide cost impact associated with material usage was estimated by
summing the nationwide costs for each of the five industry segments. In
addition, we included estimates for monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting costs for all 1,500 existing affected sources.
New Sources. We estimated total nationwide annual costs in the 5th
year to comply with the emission limits to be $9.8 million for new
sources. These costs include approximately $3.6 million for direct
costs associated with material usage and $6.2 million for the costs of
recordkeeping and reporting. These costs were estimated applying the
same assumptions for estimating costs for existing sources. We
estimated the number of new major sources to be 45 per year, based on
an average growth rate of 3 percent per year.
C. What Are the Economic Impacts?
We prepared an economic impact analysis (EIA) to provide an
estimate of the impacts the proposed rule would have on facilities,
firms, and markets within this source category. Given the wide
diversity of products that will be affected by the final rule, EPA
relied upon estimated compliance costs and publicly available financial
data on affected firms to determine these impacts.
In general, we expect the economic impacts of the final rule to be
minimal, with little or no change in market prices or production.
Therefore, no adverse impact will occur for those industries that
consume coated metal parts such as building and construction,
transportation equipment and vehicle parts, and other industrial and
consumer products.
Based on the industry survey responses, EPA was able to identify
176 companies that owned 321 potentially affected facilities within
this source category. Of this total, we obtained sales data for 147
companies and net income data for 76 companies. For those companies
with sales data, the EIA indicates that these regulatory costs average
less than 0.1 percent of company sales with a range from zero to 1.25
percent. For those companies with net income data, these regulatory
costs average 0.2 percent of company net income with a range from zero
to 3.6 percent. This analysis indicates that the cost of the final rule
should not cause producers to cease or significantly alter their
current operations. Hence, no firms or facilities are expected to be at
risk of closure because of the final rule. For more information,
consult Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0116 (formerly Docket No. A-97-34).
D. What Are the Non-Air Health, Environmental, and Energy Impacts?
Based on information from the industry survey responses, we found
no indication that the use of lower-HAP or non-HAP content coatings,
thinners, and cleaning materials at existing sources would result in
any increase or decrease in non-air health, environmental, and energy
impacts. There would be no change in the utility requirements
associated with the use of these materials, so there would be no change
in the amount of energy consumed as a result of the material
conversion. Because new sources are expected to comply with the final
rule through the use of lower-HAP or non-HAP coating technologies
rather than add-on control devices, there would be no significant
change in energy usage.
We estimate that the emission limitations will have a minimal
impact on water quality because only a few facilities are expected to
comply by making process modifications or by using add-on control
devices that would generate wastewater. However, because many lower-HAP
and non-HAP materials are waterborne, an increase in wastewater
generation from cleaning activities may result. Although additional
wastewater may be generated by facilities switching to waterborne
coatings, the amount of wastewater generated by these facilities is not
expected to increase significantly. We also estimate that the emission
limitations will result in a decrease in the amount of both solid and
hazardous waste from facilities, as the majority of facilities will be
using lower-organic-HAP-containing materials which will result in a
decrease in the amount of waste materials that will have to be disposed
of as hazardous.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order
defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to
result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligation of recipients
thereof; or
(4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that the final rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is
therefore not subject to OMB review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in the final rule have been
submitted for approval to OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq. The information collection requirements are not
enforceable until OMB approves them.
The information collection requirements are based on notification,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General
Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all
operators subject to national emission standards. These recordkeeping
and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by section 114
of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information submitted to EPA pursuant
to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a claim of
confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to EPA policies set
forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
[[Page 155]]
The final rule requires maintaining records of all coatings,
thinners, and cleaning materials data and calculations used to
determine compliance. This information includes the volume used during
each 12-month compliance period, mass fraction of organic HAP, density,
and, for coatings only, volume fraction of coating solids.
If an add-on control device is used, records must be kept of the
capture efficiency of the capture system, destruction or removal
efficiency of the add-on control device, and the monitored operating
parameters. In addition, records must be kept of each calculation of
the affected sourcewide emissions for each 12-month compliance period
and all data, calculations, test results, and other supporting
information used to determine this value.
The monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting burden in the 5th year
after the effective date of the promulgated rule is estimated to be
824,343 labor hours at a cost of $44.76 million for new and existing
sources.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose, or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When this information
collection request is approved by OMB, the Agency will publish a
technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 in the Federal Register to display
the OMB control number for the approved information collection
requirements contained in the final rule.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a
regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with the final rule. The
EPA has also determined that the final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. For purposes
of assessing the impact of the final rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business according to Small Business
Administration (SBA) size standards by NAICS code ranging from 100 to
1,000 employees or less than $5 million in annual sales; (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, town, county,
school district, or special district with a population of less than
50,000; or (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise that is independently operated and is not dominant in its
field. It should be noted that companies affected by the final rule and
the small business definition applied to each industry by NAICS code is
that listed in the SBA size standards (13 CFR part 121).
After considering the economic impacts of the final rule on small
entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of the final rule on small
entities, EPA conducted an assessment of the final rule on small
businesses within the miscellaneous metal parts source category. Based
on SBA size definitions and reported sales and employment data, EPA's
survey identified 29 of the 147 companies owning major source
facilities as small businesses. The average (median) total annual
compliance cost is projected to be $59,000 ($36,000) per small company.
Under the final rule, the average (median) annual compliance cost share
of sales for small businesses was only 0.25 (0.04) percent with a range
of zero to 1.25 percent.
Although the final rule will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has worked
aggressively to minimize the impact of the final rule on small
entities. We solicited input from small entities during the data-
gathering phase of the rulemaking. We are promulgating compliance
options that give small entities flexibility in choosing the most cost-
effective and least burdensome alternative for their operation. For
example, a facility could purchase and use lower-or non-HAP coatings,
thinners, and cleaning materials (i.e., pollution prevention) that meet
the final rule rather than being required to purchase add-on control
systems. The lower- or non-HAP option can be demonstrated with minimum
burden by using already-maintained purchase and usage records. No
testing of materials would be required as the facility owner could show
that their coatings meet the emission limits by providing formulation
data supplied by the manufacturer.
We are also providing one option that allows compliance
demonstrations to be conducted on a rolling 12-month basis, meaning
that the facility would each month calculate a 12-month organic HAP
emission rate for the previous 12 months to determine compliance. This
will give affected small entities extra flexibility in complying with
the emission limits since small entities are more likely to use lower
monthly volumes and/or a limited number of materials. Furthermore, we
are promulgating the minimum monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements needed for enforcement and compliance assurance.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under Section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and
[[Page 156]]
informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
The EPA has determined that the final rule does not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more
to State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the
private sector in any 1 year. The maximum total annual cost of the
final rule for any 1 year has been estimated to be about $57.5 million.
Thus, the final rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202
and 205 of the UMRA. In addition, EPA has determined that the final
rule contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments because it contains no requirements
that apply to such governments or impose obligations upon them.
Therefore, the final rule is not subject to the requirements of Section
203 of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have
federalism implications'' are defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government.''
The final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. Pursuant to the terms of
Executive Order 13132, it has been determined that the final rule does
not have ``federalism implications'' because it does not meet the
necessary criteria. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the
final rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' The final rule does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The EPA is not
aware of tribal governments that own or operate miscellaneous metal
parts and products surface coating facilities. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to the final rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. The final rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish
environmental standards based on an assessment of health or safety
risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
The final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a ``significant energy action''
under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113; section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. The VCS are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
VCS bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and
applicable VCS.
The final rule involves technical standards. The EPA cites the
following standards in the final rule: EPA Methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C,
2D, 2F, 2G, 3, 3A, 3B, 4, 24, 25, 25A, 204, 204A-F, 311, and an
alternative method to determine weight volatile matter content and
weight solids content for reactive adhesives. Consistent with the
NTTAA, EPA conducted searches to identify VCS in addition to these EPA
methods/performance specifications. No applicable VCS were identified
for EPA Methods 1A, 2A, 2D, 2F, 2G, 204, 204A through 204F, 311, and an
alternative method to determine weight volatile matter content and
weight solids content for reactive adhesives. The search and review
results have been documented and are placed in Docket ID No. OAR-2003-
0116 (formerly Docket No. A-97-34).
Six VCS: ASTM D1475-90, ASTM D2369-95, ASTM D3792-91, ASTM D4017-
96a, ASTM D4457-85 (Reapproved 1991), and ASTM D5403-93 are already
incorporated by reference (IBR) in EPA Method 24. In addition, we are
separately specifying the use of ASTM D1475-98, ``Standard Test Method
for Density of Liquid Coatings, Inks, and Related Products,'' for
measuring the density of each coating, thinner and/or additive, and
cleaning material. Five VCS: ASTM D1979-91, ASTM D3432-89, ASTM D4747-
87, ASTM D4827-93, and ASTM PS9-94 are IBR in EPA Method 311.
Two VCS were identified for determining the volume fraction of
coating solids for the final rule. The VCS are ASTM D2697-86
(Reapproved 1998), ``Standard Test Method for Volume Nonvolatile Matter
in Clear or Pigmented Coatings,'' and ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved 2003),
``Standard Test Method for Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear
or Pigmented Coatings Using a Helium Gas Pycnometer.'' These VCS fill a
void in EPA Method 24 which directs that volume solids content be
calculated from the coating manufacturer's formulation. The final rule
does allow for the use of the volume solids content values calculated
from the coating manufacturer's formulation; however, test results will
take precedence if they do not agree with calculated values, unless
after consultation you demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
enforcement agency that the formulation data are correct. In addition,
ASTM D5965-02, ``Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Coating
Powders,'' is specified in the final rule as a method to determine the
volume solids of powder coatings.
The VCS, ASTM D5291-02, ``Standard Test Methods for Instrumental
Determination of Carbon,
[[Page 157]]
Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in Petroleum Products and Lubricants,'' is
specified in this rule to determine the weight fraction carbon content
of each volatile distillate fraction obtained with Method 204F.
The VCS, ASTM D6053-00, ``Standard Test Method for Determination of
Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Content of Electrical Insulating
Varnishes,'' is also specified in this rule as an alternative method to
EPA Method 24 to determine the mass fraction of total volatile
hydrocarbon for magnet wire enamels.
In addition to the VCS EPA uses in the final rule, the search for
emissions measurement procedures identified 14 other VCS. The EPA
determined that 11 of these 14 VCS identified for measuring emissions
of the HAP or surrogates subject to emission standards in the final
rule are impractical alternatives to EPA test methods for the purposes
of the final rule. Therefore, EPA does not intend to adopt the VCS for
this purpose.
Three of the 14 VCS identified in this search were not available at
the time the review was conducted for the purposes of the final rule
because they are under development by a VCS body: ASME/BSR MFC 13M,
``Flow Measurement by Velocity Traverse,'' for EPA Method 2 (and
possibly 1); ASME/BSR MFC 12M, ``Flow in Closed Conduits Using
Multiport Averaging Pitot Primary Flowmeters,'' for EPA Method 2; and
ISO/CD 17895, ``Paints and Varnishes-Determination of the Volatile
Organic Compound Content of Water-based Emulsion Paints,'' for EPA
Method 24.
Under 40 CFR 63.7(f) and 63.8(f) of subpart A of the General
Provisions, a source may apply to EPA for permission to use alternative
test methods or alternative monitoring requirements in place of any of
the EPA testing methods, performance specifications, or procedures.
J. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing
the final rule and other required information to the United States
Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to publication of the final rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days
after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a
major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The rule will be effective
January 2, 2004.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: August 20, 2003.
Marianne Lamont Horinko,
Acting Administrator.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
Subpart A--[Amended]
0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(24) (25), and
(26), and adding new paragraphs (b)(31), (32), and (33) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.14 Incorporations by reference
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(24) ASTM D2697-86 (Reapproved 1998), Standard Test Method for
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings, IBR approved
for Sec. Sec. 63.3521(b)(1), 63.3941(b)(1), 63.4141(b)(1),
63.4741(b)(1), 63.4941(b)(1), and 63.5160(c).
(25) 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. 63.3521(b)(1),
63.3941(b)(1), 63.4141(b)(1), 63.4741(b)(1), 63.4941(b)(1), and
63.5160(c).
(26) ASTM D1475-98, Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
63.3941(b)(4), 63.3941(c), 63.3951(c), 63.4141(b)(3), and 63.4141(c).
* * * * *
(31) ASTM D5291-02, Standard Test Methods for Instrumental
Determination of Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in Petroleum Products
and Lubricants, IBR approved for Sec. 63.3981, appendix A.
(32) ASTM D5965-02, Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of
Coating Powders, IBR approved for Sec. 63.3951(c).
(33) ASTM D6053-00, Standard Test Method for Determination of
Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Content of Electrical Insulating
Varnishes, IBR approved for Sec. 63.3981, appendix A.
* * * * *
0
3. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart MMMM to read as follows:
Subpart MMMM--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and
Products
Sec.
What This Subpart Covers
63.3880 What is the purpose of this subpart?
63.3881 Am I subject to this subpart?
63.3882 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
63.3883 When do I have to comply with this subpart?
Emission Limitations
63.3890 What emission limits must I meet?
63.3891 What are my options for meeting the emission limits?
63.3892 What operating limits must I meet?
63.3893 What work practice standards must I meet?
General Compliance Requirements
63.3900 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?
63.3901 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?
Notifications, Reports, and Records
63.3910 What notifications must I submit?
63.3920 What reports must I submit?
63.3930 What records must I keep?
63.3931 In what form and for how long must I keep my records?
Compliance Requirements for the Compliant Material Option
63.3940 By what date must I conduct the initial compliance
demonstration?
63.3941 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission
limitations?
63.3942 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission
limitations?
Compliance Requirements for the Emission Rate Without Add-On Controls
Option
63.3950 By what date must I conduct the initial compliance
demonstration?
63.3951 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission
limitations?
63.3952 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission
limitations?
Compliance Requirements for the Emission Rate With Add-On Controls
Option
63.3960 By what date must I conduct performance tests and other
initial compliance demonstrations?
63.3961 How do I demonstrate initial compliance?
63.3962 [Reserved]
[[Page 158]]
63.3963 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission
limitations?
63.3964 What are the general requirements for performance tests?
63.3965 How do I determine the emission capture system efficiency?
63.3966 How do I determine the add-on control device emission
destruction or removal efficiency?
63.3967 How do I establish the emission capture system and add-on
control device operating limits during the performance test?
63.3968 What are the requirements for continuous parameter
monitoring system installation, operation, and maintenance?
Other Requirements and Information
63.3980 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
63.3981 What definitions apply to this subpart?
Tables to Subpart MMMM of Part 63
Table 1 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63--Operating Limits if Using the
Emission Rate with Add-on Controls Option
Table 2 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart MMMM of Part 63
Table 3 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63--Default Organic HAP Mass
Fraction for Solvents and Solvent Blends
Table 4 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63--Default Organic HAP Mass
Fraction for Petroleum Solvent Groups
Appendix A to Subpart MMMM of Part 63--Alternative Capture Efficiency
and Destruction Efficiency Measurement and Capture Efficiency
Monitoring Procedures for Magnet Wire Coating Operations
Subpart MMMM--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and
Products
What This Subpart Covers
Sec. 63.3880 What is the purpose of this subpart?
This subpart establishes national emission standards for hazardous
air pollutants (NESHAP) for miscellaneous metal parts and products
surface coating facilities. This subpart also establishes requirements
to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the emission
limitations.
Sec. 63.3881 Am I subject to this subpart?
(a) Miscellaneous metal parts and products include, but are not
limited to, metal components of the following types of products as well
as the products themselves: motor vehicle parts and accessories,
bicycles and sporting goods, recreational vehicles, extruded aluminum
structural components, railroad cars, heavy duty trucks, medical
equipment, lawn and garden equipment, electronic equipment, magnet
wire, steel drums, industrial machinery, metal pipes, and numerous
other industrial, household, and consumer products. Except as provided
in paragraph (c) of this section, the source category to which this
subpart applies is the surface coating of any miscellaneous metal parts
or products, as described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, and it
includes the subcategories listed in paragraphs (a)(2) through (6) of
this section.
(1) Surface coating is the application of coating to a substrate
using, for example, spray guns or dip tanks. When application of
coating to a substrate occurs, then surface coating also includes
associated activities, such as surface preparation, cleaning, mixing,
and storage. However, these activities do not comprise surface coating
if they are not directly related to the application of the coating.
Coating application with handheld, non-refillable aerosol containers,
touch-up markers, marking pens, or the application of paper film or
plastic film which may be pre-coated with an adhesive by the
manufacturer are not coating operations for the purposes of this
subpart.
(2) The general use coating subcategory includes all surface
coating operations that are not high performance, magnet wire, rubber-
to-metal, or extreme performance fluoropolymer coating operations.
(3) The high performance coating subcategory includes surface
coating operations that are performed using coatings that meet the
definition of high performance architectural coating or high
temperature coating in Sec. 63.3981.
(4) The magnet wire coating subcategory includes surface coating
operations that are performed using coatings that meet the definition
of magnet wire coatings in Sec. 63.3981.
(5) The rubber-to-metal coatings subcategory includes surface
coating operations that are performed using coatings that meet the
definition of rubber-to-metal coatings in Sec. 63.3981.
(6) The extreme performance fluoropolymer coatings subcategory
includes surface coating operations that are performed using coatings
that meet the definition of extreme performance fluoropolymer coatings
in Sec. 63.3981.
(b) You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a new,
reconstructed, or existing affected source, as defined in Sec.
63.3882, that uses 946 liters (250 gallons (gal)) per year, or more, of
coatings that contain hazardous air pollutants (HAP) in the surface
coating of miscellaneous metal parts and products defined in paragraph
(a) of this section; and that is a major source, is located at a major
source, or is part of a major source of emissions of HAP. A major
source of HAP emissions is any stationary source or group of stationary
sources located within a contiguous area and under common control that
emits or has the potential to emit any single HAP at a rate of 9.07
megagrams (Mg) (10 tons) or more per year or any combination of HAP at
a rate of 22.68 Mg (25 tons) or more per year. You do not need to
include coatings that meet the definition of non-HAP coating contained
in Sec. 63.3981 in determining whether you use 946 liters (250 gal)
per year, or more, of coatings in the surface coating of miscellaneous
metal parts and products.
(c) This subpart does not apply to surface coating or a coating
operation that meets any of the criteria of paragraphs (c)(1) through
(17) of this section.
(1) A coating operation conducted at a facility where the facility
uses only coatings, thinners and other additives, and cleaning
materials that contain no organic HAP, as determined according to Sec.
63.3941(a).
(2) Surface coating operations that occur at research or laboratory
facilities, or is part of janitorial, building, and facility
maintenance operations, or that occur at hobby shops that are operated
for noncommercial purposes.
(3) Coatings used in volumes of less than 189 liters (50 gal) per
year, provided that the total volume of coatings exempt under this
paragraph does not exceed 946 liters (250 gal) per year at the
facility.
(4) The surface coating of metal parts and products performed on-
site at installations owned or operated by the Armed Forces of the
United States (including the Coast Guard and the National Guard of any
such State) or the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, or
the surface coating of military munitions manufactured by or for the
Armed Forces of the United States (including the Coast Guard and the
National Guard of any such State).
(5) Surface coating where plastic is extruded onto metal wire or
cable or metal parts or products to form a coating.
(6) Surface coating of metal components of wood furniture that meet
the applicability criteria for wood furniture manufacturing (subpart JJ
of this part).
(7) Surface coating of metal components of large appliances that
meet the applicability criteria for large appliance surface coating
(subpart NNNN of this part).
(8) Surface coating of metal components of metal furniture that
meet
[[Page 159]]
the applicability criteria for metal furniture surface coating (subpart
RRRR of this part).
(9) Surface coating of metal components of wood building products
that meet the applicability criteria for wood building products surface
coating (subpart QQQQ of this part).
(10) Surface coating of metal components of aerospace vehicles that
meet the applicability criteria for aerospace manufacturing and rework
(40 CFR part 63, subpart GG).
(11) Surface coating of metal parts intended for use in an
aerospace vehicle or component using specialty coatings as defined in
appendix A to subpart GG of this part.
(12) Surface coating of metal components of ships that meet the
applicability criteria for shipbuilding and ship repair (subpart II of
this part).
(13) Surface coating of metal using a web coating process that
meets the applicability criteria for paper and other web coating
(subpart JJJJ of this part).
(14) Surface coating of metal using a coil coating process that
meets the applicability criteria for metal coil coating (subpart SSSS
of this part).
(15) Surface coating of boats or metal parts of boats (including,
but not limited to, the use of assembly adhesives) where the facility
meets the applicability criteria for boat manufacturing facilities
(subpart VVVV of this part), except where the surface coating of the
boat is a metal coating operation performed on personal watercraft or
parts of personal watercraft. This subpart does apply to metal coating
operations performed on personal watercraft and parts of personal
watercraft.
(16) Surface coating of assembled on-road vehicles that meet the
applicability criteria for the assembled on-road vehicle subcategory in
plastic parts and products surface coating (40 CFR part 63, subpart
PPPP).
(17) Reserved.
(d) Reserved.
(e) If you own or operate an affected source that meets the
applicability criteria of this subpart and at the same facility you
also perform surface coating that meets the applicability criteria of
any other final surface coating NESHAP in this part you may choose to
comply as specified in paragraph (e)(1), (2), or (3) of this section.
(1) You may have each surface coating operation that meets the
applicability criteria of a separate NESHAP comply with that NESHAP
separately.
(2) You may comply with the emission limitation representing the
predominant surface coating activity at your facility, as determined
according to paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (ii) of this section.
However, you may not establish high performance, rubber-to-metal, and
extreme performance fluoropolymer coating operations as the predominant
activity.
(i) If a surface coating operation accounts for 90 percent or more
of the surface coating activity at your facility (that is, the
predominant activity), then compliance with the emission limitations of
the predominant activity for all surface coating operations constitutes
compliance with these and other applicable surface coating NESHAP. In
determining predominant activity, you must include coating activities
that meet the applicability criteria of other surface coating NESHAP
and constitute more than 1 percent of total coating activities at your
facility. Coating activities that meet the applicability criteria of
other surface coating NESHAP but comprise less than 1 percent of
coating activities need not be included in the determination of
predominant activity but must be included in the compliance
calculation.
(ii) You must use liters (gal) of solids used as a measure of
relative surface coating activity over a representative period of
operation. You may estimate the relative volume of coating solids used
from parameters other than coating consumption and volume solids
content (e.g., design specifications for the parts or products coated
and the number of items produced). The determination of predominant
activity must accurately reflect current and projected coating
operations and must be verifiable through appropriate documentation.
The use of parameters other than coating consumption and volume solids
content must be approved by the Administrator. You may use data for any
reasonable time period of at least 1 year in determining the relative
amount of coating activity, as long as they represent the way the
source will continue to operate in the future and are approved by the
Administrator. You must determine the predominant activity at your
facility and submit the results of that determination with the initial
notification required by Sec. 63.3910(b). You must also determine
predominant activity annually and include the determination in the next
semi-annual compliance report required by Sec. 63.3920(a).
(3) You may comply with a facility-specific emission limit
calculated from the relative amount of coating activity that is subject
to each emission limit. If you elect to comply using the facility-
specific emission limit alternative, then compliance with the facility-
specific emission limit and the emission limitations in this subpart
for all surface coating operations constitutes compliance with this and
other applicable surface coating NESHAP. The procedures for calculating
the facility-specific emission limit are specified in Sec. 63.3890. In
calculating a facility-specific emission limit, you must include
coating activities that meet the applicability criteria of other
surface coating NESHAP and constitute more than 1 percent of total
coating activities at your facility. Coating activities that meet the
applicability criteria of other surface coating NESHAP but comprise
less than 1 percent of total coating activities need not be included in
the calculation of the facility-specific emission limit. Compliance
with the facility-specific emission limit and all other applicable
provisions of this subpart for all surface coating operations
constitutes compliance with this and all other applicable surface
coating NESHAP.
Sec. 63.3882 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
(a) This subpart applies to each new, reconstructed, and existing
affected source within each of the four subcategories listed in Sec.
63.3881(a).
(b) The affected source is the collection of all of the items
listed in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section that are used
for surface coating of miscellaneous metal parts and products within
each subcategory.
(1) All coating operations as defined in Sec. 63.3981;
(2) All storage containers and mixing vessels in which coatings,
thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials are stored or
mixed;
(3) All manual and automated equipment and containers used for
conveying coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning
materials; and
(4) All storage containers and all manual and automated equipment
and containers used for conveying waste materials generated by a
coating operation.
(c) An affected source is a new affected source if you commenced
its construction after August 13, 2002 and the construction is of a
completely new miscellaneous metal parts and products surface coating
facility where previously no miscellaneous metal parts and products
surface coating facility had existed.
(d) An affected source is reconstructed if it meets the criteria as
defined in Sec. 63.2.
(e) An affected source is existing if it is not new or
reconstructed.
[[Page 160]]
Sec. 63.3883 When do I have to comply with this subpart?
The date by which you must comply with this subpart is called the
compliance date. The compliance date for each type of affected source
is specified in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section. The
compliance date begins the initial compliance period during which you
conduct the initial compliance demonstration described in Sec. Sec.
63.3940, 63.3950, and 63.3960.
(a) For a new or reconstructed affected source, the compliance date
is the applicable date in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section:
(1) If the initial startup of your new or reconstructed affected
source is before January 2, 2004, the compliance date is January 2,
2004.
(2) If the initial startup of your new or reconstructed affected
source occurs after January 2, 2004, the compliance date is the date of
initial startup of your affected source.
(b) For an existing affected source, the compliance date is the
date 3 years after January 2, 2004.
(c) For an area source that increases its emissions or its
potential to emit such that it becomes a major source of HAP emissions,
the compliance date is specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this
section.
(1) For any portion of the source that becomes a new or
reconstructed affected source subject to this subpart, the compliance
date is the date of initial startup of the affected source or January
2, 2004, whichever is later.
(2) For any portion of the source that becomes an existing affected
source subject to this subpart, the compliance date is the date 1 year
after the area source becomes a major source or 3 years after January
2, 2004, whichever is later.
(d) You must meet the notification requirements in Sec. 63.3910
according to the dates specified in that section and in subpart A of
this part. Some of the notifications must be submitted before the
compliance dates described in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this
section.
Emission Limitations
Sec. 63.3890 What emission limits must I meet?
(a) For a new or reconstructed affected source, you must limit
organic HAP emissions to the atmosphere from the affected source to the
applicable limit specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this
section, except as specified in paragraph (c) of this section,
determined according to the requirements in Sec. 63.3941, Sec.
63.3951, or Sec. 63.3961.
(1) For each new general use coating affected source, limit organic
HAP emissions to no more than 0.23 kilograms (kg) (1.9 pound (lb))
organic HAP per liter (gal) coating solids used during each 12-month
compliance period.
(2) For each new high performance coating affected source, limit
organic HAP emissions to no more than 3.3 kg (27.5 lb) organic HAP per
liter (gal) coating solids used during each 12-month compliance period.
(3) For each new magnet wire coating affected source, limit organic
HAP emissions to no more than 0.050 kg (0.44 lb) organic HAP per liter
(gal) coating solids used during each 12-month compliance period.
(4) For each new rubber-to-metal coating affected source, limit
organic HAP emissions to no more than 0.81 kg (6.8 lb) organic HAP per
liter (gal) coating solids used during each 12-month compliance period.
(5) For each new extreme performance fluoropolymer coating affected
source, limit organic HAP emissions to no more than 1.5 kg (12.4 lb)
organic HAP per liter (gal) coating solids used during each 12-month
compliance period.
(b) For an existing affected source, you must limit organic HAP
emissions to the atmosphere from the affected source to the applicable
limit specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section,
except as specified in paragraph (c) of this section, determined
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.3941, Sec. 63.3951, or Sec.
63.3961.
(1) For each existing general use coating affected source, limit
organic HAP emissions to no more than 0.31 kg (2.6 lb) organic HAP per
liter (gal) coating solids used during each 12-month compliance period.
(2) For each existing high performance coating affected source,
limit organic HAP emissions to no more than 3.3 kg (27.5 lb) organic
HAP per liter (gal) coating solids used during each 12-month compliance
period.
(3) For each existing magnet wire coating affected source, limit
organic HAP emissions to no more than 0.12 kg (1.0 lb) organic HAP per
liter (gal) coating solids used during each 12-month compliance period.
(4) For each existing rubber-to-metal coating affected source,
limit organic HAP emissions to no more than 4.5 kg (37.7 lb) organic
HAP per liter (gal) coating solids used during each 12-month compliance
period.
(5) For each existing extreme performance fluoropolymer coating
affected source, limit organic HAP emissions to no more than 1.5 kg
(12.4 lbs) organic HAP per liter (gal) coating solids used during each
12-month compliance period.
(c) If your facility's surface coating operations meet the
applicability criteria of more than one of the subcategory emission
limits specified in paragraphs (a) or (b) of this section, you may
comply separately with each subcategory emission limit or comply using
one of the alternatives in paragraph (c)(1) or (2) of this section.
(1) If the general use or magnet wire surface coating operations
subject to only one of the emission limits specified in paragraphs
(a)(1), (3), (b)(1), or (3) of this section account for 90 percent or
more of the surface coating activity at your facility (i.e., it is the
predominant activity at your facility), then compliance with that one
emission limitations in this subpart for all surface coating operations
constitutes compliance with the other applicable emission limits. You
must use liters (gal) of solids used as a measure of relative surface
coating activity over a representative period of operation. You may
estimate the relative volume of coating solids used from parameters
other than coating consumption and volume solids content (e.g., design
specifications for the parts or products coated and the number of items
produced). The determination of predominant activity must accurately
reflect current and projected coating operations and must be verifiable
through appropriate documentation. The use of parameters other than
coating consumption and volume solids content must be approved by the
Administrator. You may use data for any reasonable time period of at
least 1 year in determining the relative amount of coating activity, as
long as they represent the way the source will continue to operate in
the future and are approved by the Administrator. You must determine
the predominant activity at your facility and submit the results of
that determination with the initial notification required by Sec.
63.3910(b). Additionally, you must determine the facility's predominant
activity annually and include the determination in the next semi-annual
compliance report required by Sec. 63.3920(a).
(2) You may calculate and comply with a facility-specific emission
limit as described in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (iii) of this
section. If you elect to comply using the facility-specific emission
limit alternative, then compliance with the facility-specific emission
limit and the emission limitations in this subpart for all surface
coating operations constitutes compliance with this and other
[[Page 161]]
applicable surface coating NESHAP. In calculating a facility-specific
emission limit, you must include coating activities that meet the
applicability criteria of the other subcategories and constitute more
than 1 percent of total coating activities. Coating activities that
meet the applicability criteria of other surface coating NESHAP but
comprise less than 1 percent of coating activities need not be included
in the determination of predominant activity but must be included in
the compliance calculation.
(i) You are required to calculate the facility-specific emission
limit for your facility when you submit the notification of compliance
status required in Sec. 63.3910(c), and on a monthly basis afterward
using the coating data for the relevant 12-month compliance period.
(ii) Use Equation 1 of this section to calculate the facility-
specific emission limit for your surface coating operations for each
12-month compliance period.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.002
Where:
Facility-specific emission limit = Facility-specific emission limit for
each 12-month compliance period, kg (lb) organic HAP per kg (lb)
coating solids used.
Limiti = The new source or existing source emission limit
applicable to coating operation, i, included in the facility-specific
emission limit, converted to kg (lb) organic HAP per kg (lb) coating
solids used, if the emission limit is not already in those units. All
emission limits included in the facility-specific emission limit must
be in the same units.
Solidsi = The liters (gal) of solids used in coating
operation, i, in the 12-month compliance period that is subject to
emission limit, i. You may estimate the volume of coating solids used
from parameters other than coating consumption and volume solids
content (e.g., design specifications for the parts or products coated
and the number of items produced). The use of parameters other than
coating consumption and volume solids content must be approved by the
Administrator.
n = The number of different coating operations included in the
facility-specific emission limit.
(iii) If you need to convert an emission limit in another surface
coating NESHAP from kg (lb) organic HAP per kg (lb) coating solids used
to kg (lb) organic HAP per liter (gal) coating solids used, you must
use the default solids density of 1.26 kg solids per liter coating
solids (10.5 lb solids per gal solids).
Sec. 63.3891 What are my options for meeting the emission limits?
You must include all coatings (as defined in Sec. 63.3981),
thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials used in the
affected source when determining whether the organic HAP emission rate
is equal to or less than the applicable emission limit in Sec.
63.3890. To make this determination, you must use at least one of the
three compliance options listed in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this
section. You may apply any of the compliance options to an individual
coating operation, or to multiple coating operations as a group, or to
the entire affected source. You may use different compliance options
for different coating operations, or at different times on the same
coating operation. You may employ different compliance options when
different coatings are applied to the same part, or when the same
coating is applied to different parts. However, you may not use
different compliance options at the same time on the same coating
operation. If you switch between compliance options for any coating
operation or group of coating operations, you must document this switch
as required by Sec. 63.3930(c), and you must report it in the next
semiannual compliance report required in Sec. 63.3920.
(a) Compliant material option. Demonstrate that the organic HAP
content of each coating used in the coating operation(s) is less than
or equal to the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, and that
each thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning material used contains
no organic HAP. You must meet all the requirements of Sec. Sec.
63.3940, 63.3941, and 63.3942 to demonstrate compliance with the
applicable emission limit using this option.
(b) Emission rate without add-on controls option. Demonstrate that,
based on the coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning
materials used in the coating operation(s), the organic HAP emission
rate for the coating operation(s) is less than or equal to the
applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, calculated as a rolling 12-
month emission rate and determined on a monthly basis. You must meet
all the requirements of Sec. Sec. 63.3950, 63.3951, and 63.3952 to
demonstrate compliance with the emission limit using this option.
(c) Emission rate with add-on controls option. Demonstrate that,
based on the coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning
materials used in the coating operation(s), and the emissions
reductions achieved by emission capture systems and add-on controls,
the organic HAP emission rate for the coating operation(s) is less than
or equal to the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, calculated
as a rolling 12-month emission rate and determined on a monthly basis.
If you use this compliance option, you must also demonstrate that all
emission capture systems and add-on control devices for the coating
operation(s) meet the operating limits required in Sec. 63.3892,
except for solvent recovery systems for which you conduct liquid-liquid
material balances according to Sec. 63.3961(j), and that you meet the
work practice standards required in Sec. 63.3893. You must meet all
the requirements of Sec. Sec. 63.3960 through 63.3968 to demonstrate
compliance with the emission limits, operating limits, and work
practice standards using this option.
Sec. 63.3892 What operating limits must I meet?
(a) For any coating operation(s) on which you use the compliant
material option or the emission rate without add-on controls option,
you are not required to meet any operating limits.
(b) For any controlled coating operation(s) on which you use the
emission rate with add-on controls option, except those for which you
use a solvent recovery system and conduct
[[Page 162]]
a liquid-liquid material balance according to Sec. 63.3961(j), you
must meet the operating limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart.
These operating limits apply to the emission capture and control
systems on the coating operation(s) for which you use this option, and
you must establish the operating limits during the performance test
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.3967. You must meet the
operating limits at all times after you establish them.
(c) If you use an add-on control device other than those listed in
Table 1 to this subpart, or wish to monitor an alternative parameter
and comply with a different operating limit, you must apply to the
Administrator for approval of alternative monitoring under Sec.
63.8(f).
Sec. 63.3893 What work practice standards must I meet?
(a) For any coating operation(s) on which you use the compliant
material option or the emission rate without add-on controls option,
you are not required to meet any work practice standards.
(b) If you use the emission rate with add-on controls option, you
must develop and implement a work practice plan to minimize organic HAP
emissions from the storage, mixing, and conveying of coatings, thinners
and/or other additives, and cleaning materials used in, and waste
materials generated by the controlled coating operation(s) for which
you use this option; or you must meet an alternative standard as
provided in paragraph (c) of this section. The plan must specify
practices and procedures to ensure that, at a minimum, the elements
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section are
implemented.
(1) All organic-HAP-containing coatings, thinners and/or other
additives, cleaning materials, and waste materials must be stored in
closed containers.
(2) Spills of organic-HAP-containing coatings, thinners and/or
other additives, cleaning materials, and waste materials must be
minimized.
(3) Organic-HAP-containing coatings, thinners and/or other
additives, cleaning materials, and waste materials must be conveyed
from one location to another in closed containers or pipes.
(4) Mixing vessels which contain organic-HAP-containing coatings
and other materials must be closed except when adding to, removing, or
mixing the contents.
(5) Emissions of organic HAP must be minimized during cleaning of
storage, mixing, and conveying equipment.
(c) As provided in Sec. 63.6(g), we, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, may choose to grant you permission to use an
alternative to the work practice standards in this section.
General Compliance Requirements
Sec. 63.3900 What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?
(a) You must be in compliance with the emission limitations in this
subpart as specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) Any coating operation(s) for which you use the compliant
material option or the emission rate without add-on controls option, as
specified in Sec. 63.3891(a) and (b), must be in compliance with the
applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890 at all times.
(2) Any coating operation(s) for which you use the emission rate
with add-on controls option, as specified in Sec. 63.3891(c), must be
in compliance with the emission limitations as specified in paragraphs
(a)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) The coating operation(s) must be in compliance with the
applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890 at all times except during
periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
(ii) The coating operation(s) must be in compliance with the
operating limits for emission capture systems and add-on control
devices required by Sec. 63.3892 at all times except during periods of
startup, shutdown, and malfunction, and except for solvent recovery
systems for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances according
to Sec. 63.3961(j).
(iii) The coating operation(s) must be in compliance with the work
practice standards in Sec. 63.3893 at all times.
(b) You must always operate and maintain your affected source,
including all air pollution control and monitoring equipment you use
for purposes of complying with this subpart, according to the
provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i).
(c) If your affected source uses an emission capture system and
add-on control device, you must develop and implement a written
startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan according to the provisions in
Sec. 63.6(e)(3). The plan must address the startup, shutdown, and
corrective actions in the event of a malfunction of the emission
capture system or the add-on control device. The plan must also address
any coating operation equipment that may cause increased emissions or
that would affect capture efficiency if the process equipment
malfunctions, such as conveyors that move parts among enclosures.
Sec. 63.3901 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?
Table 2 to this subpart shows which parts of the General Provisions
in Sec. Sec. 63.1 through 63.15 apply to you.
Notifications, Reports, and Records
Sec. 63.3910 What notifications must I submit?
(a) General. You must submit the notifications in Sec. Sec.
63.7(b) and (c), 63.8(f)(4), and 63.9(b) through (e) and (h) that apply
to you by the dates specified in those sections, except as provided in
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.
(b) Initial notification. You must submit the initial notification
required by Sec. 63.9(b) for a new or reconstructed affected source no
later than 120 days after initial startup or 120 days after January 2,
2004, whichever is later. For an existing affected source, you must
submit the initial notification no later than 1 year after January 2,
2004. If you are using compliance with the Automobiles and Light-Duty
Trucks NESHAP (subpart IIII of this part) under Sec. 63.3881(d) to
constitute compliance with this subpart for your metal part coating
operations, then you must include a statement to this effect in your
initial notification and no other notifications are required under this
subpart. If you are complying with another NESHAP that constitutes the
predominant activity at your facility under Sec. 63.3881(e)(2) to
constitute compliance with this subpart for your metal coating
operations, then you must include a statement to this effect in your
initial notification and no other notifications are required under this
subpart.
(c) Notification of compliance status. You must submit the
notification of compliance status required by Sec. 63.9(h) no later
than 30 calendar days following the end of the initial compliance
period described in Sec. Sec. 63.3940, 63.3950, or 63.3960 that
applies to your affected source. The notification of compliance status
must contain the information specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through
(11) of this section and in Sec. 63.9(h).
(1) Company name and address.
(2) Statement by a responsible official with that official's name,
title, and signature, certifying the truth, accuracy, and completeness
of the content of the report.
(3) Date of the report and beginning and ending dates of the
reporting period. The reporting period is the initial compliance period
described in Sec. Sec. 63.3940, 63.3950, or 63.3960 that applies to
your affected source.
[[Page 163]]
(4) Identification of the compliance option or options specified in
Sec. 63.3891 that you used on each coating operation in the affected
source during the initial compliance period.
(5) Statement of whether or not the affected source achieved the
emission limitations for the initial compliance period.
(6) If you had a deviation, include the information in paragraphs
(c)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) A description and statement of the cause of the deviation.
(ii) If you failed to meet the applicable emission limit in Sec.
63.3890, include all the calculations you used to determine the kg (lb)
of organic HAP emitted per liter (gal) coating solids used. You do not
need to submit information provided by the materials' suppliers or
manufacturers, or test reports.
(7) For each of the data items listed in paragraphs (c)(7)(i)
through (iv) of this section that is required by the compliance
option(s) you used to demonstrate compliance with the emission limit,
include an example of how you determined the value, including
calculations and supporting data. Supporting data may include a copy of
the information provided by the supplier or manufacturer of the example
coating or material, or a summary of the results of testing conducted
according to Sec. 63.3941(a), (b), or (c). You do not need to submit
copies of any test reports.
(i) Mass fraction of organic HAP for one coating, for one thinner
and/or other additive, and for one cleaning material.
(ii) Volume fraction of coating solids for one coating.
(iii) Density for one coating, one thinner and/or other additive,
and one leaning material, except that if you use the compliant material
option, only the example coating density is required.
(iv) The amount of waste materials and the mass of organic HAP
contained in the waste materials for which you are claiming an
allowance in Equation 1 of Sec. 63.3951.
(8) The calculation of kg (lb) of organic HAP emitted per liter
(gal) coating solids used for the compliance option(s) you used, as
specified in paragraphs (c)(8)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) For the compliant material option, provide an example
calculation of the organic HAP content for one coating, using Equation
2 of Sec. 63.3941.
(ii) For the emission rate without add-on controls option, provide
the calculation of the total mass of organic HAP emissions for each
month; the calculation of the total volume of coating solids used each
month; and the calculation of the 12-month organic HAP emission rate
using Equations 1 and 1A through 1C, 2, and 3, respectively, of Sec.
63.3951.
(iii) For the emission rate with add-on controls option, provide
the calculation of the total mass of organic HAP emissions for the
coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials used
each month, using Equations 1 and 1A through 1C of Sec. 63.3951; the
calculation of the total volume of coating solids used each month using
Equation 2 of Sec. 63.3951; the mass of organic HAP emission reduction
each month by emission capture systems and add-on control devices using
Equations 1 and 1A through 1D of Sec. 63.3961 and Equations 2, 3, and
3A through 3C of Sec. 63.3961 as applicable; the calculation of the
total mass of organic HAP emissions each month using Equation 4 of
Sec. 63.3961; and the calculation of the 12-month organic HAP emission
rate using Equation 5 of Sec. 63.3961.
(9) For the emission rate with add-on controls option, you must
include the information specified in paragraphs (c)(9)(i) through (iv)
of this section, except that the requirements in paragraphs (c)(9)(i)
through (iii) of this section do not apply to solvent recovery systems
for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to
Sec. 63.3961(j).
(i) For each emission capture system, a summary of the data and
copies of the calculations supporting the determination that the
emission capture system is a permanent total enclosure (PTE) or a
measurement of the emission capture system efficiency. Include a
description of the protocol followed for measuring capture efficiency,
summaries of any capture efficiency tests conducted, and any
calculations supporting the capture efficiency determination. If you
use the data quality objective (DQO) or lower confidence limit (LCL)
approach, you must also include the statistical calculations to show
you meet the DQO or LCL criteria in appendix A to subpart KK of this
part. You do not need to submit complete test reports.
(ii) A summary of the results of each add-on control device
performance test. You do not need to submit complete test reports.
(iii) A list of each emission capture system's and add-on control
device's operating limits and a summary of the data used to calculate
those limits.
(iv) A statement of whether or not you developed and implemented
the work practice plan required by Sec. 63.3893.
(10) If you are complying with a single emission limit representing
the predominant activity under Sec. 63.3890(c)(1), include the
calculations and supporting information used to demonstrate that this
emission limit represents the predominant activity as specified in
Sec. 63.3890(c)(1).
(11) If you are complying with a facility-specific emission limit
under Sec. 63.3890(c)(2), include the calculation of the facility-
specific emission limit and any supporting information as specified in
Sec. 63.3890(c)(2).
Sec. 63.3920 What reports must I submit?
(a) Semiannual compliance reports. You must submit semiannual
compliance reports for each affected source according to the
requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) through (7) of this section. The
semiannual compliance reporting requirements may be satisfied by
reports required under other parts of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as
specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(1) Dates. Unless the Administrator has approved or agreed to a
different schedule for submission of reports under Sec. 63.10(a), you
must prepare and submit each semiannual compliance report according to
the dates specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iv) of this
section. Note that the information reported for each of the months in
the reporting period will be based on the last 12 months of data prior
to the date of each monthly calculation.
(i) The first semiannual compliance report must cover the first
semiannual reporting period which begins the day after the end of the
initial compliance period described in Sec. 63.3940, Sec. 63.3950, or
Sec. 63.3960 that applies to your affected source and ends on June 30
or December 31, whichever date is the first date following the end of
the initial compliance period.
(ii) Each subsequent semiannual compliance report must cover the
subsequent semiannual reporting period from January 1 through June 30
or the semiannual reporting period from July 1 through December 31.
(iii) Each semiannual compliance report must be postmarked or
delivered no later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date is the
first date following the end of the semiannual reporting period.
(iv) For each affected source that is subject to permitting
regulations pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, and if the
permitting authority has established dates for submitting semiannual
reports pursuant to 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR
71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), you may submit the first and subsequent compliance
reports according to the dates the permitting authority has established
instead of
[[Page 164]]
according to the date specified in paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this
section.
(2) Inclusion with title V report. Each affected source that has
obtained a title V operating permit pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40
CFR part 71 must report all deviations as defined in this subpart in
the semiannual monitoring report required by 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A)
or 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A). If an affected source submits a
semiannual compliance report pursuant to this section along with, or as
part of, the semiannual monitoring report required by 40 CFR
70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), and the semiannual
compliance report includes all required information concerning
deviations from any emission limitation in this subpart, its submission
will be deemed to satisfy any obligation to report the same deviations
in the semiannual monitoring report. However, submission of a
semiannual compliance report shall not otherwise affect any obligation
the affected source may have to report deviations from permit
requirements to the permitting authority.
(3) General requirements. The semiannual compliance report must
contain the information specified in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (vii)
of this section, and the information specified in paragraphs (a)(4)
through (7) and (c)(1) of this section that is applicable to your
affected source.
(i) Company name and address.
(ii) Statement by a responsible official with that official's name,
title, and signature, certifying the truth, accuracy, and completeness
of the content of the report.
(iii) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the
reporting period. The reporting period is the 6-month period ending on
June 30 or December 31. Note that the information reported for each of
the 6 months in the reporting period will be based on the last 12
months of data prior to the date of each monthly calculation.
(iv) Identification of the compliance option or options specified
in Sec. 63.3891 that you used on each coating operation during the
reporting period. If you switched between compliance options during the
reporting period, you must report the beginning and ending dates for
each option you used.
(v) If you used the emission rate without add-on controls or the
emission rate with add-on controls compliance option (Sec. 63.3891(b)
or (c)), the calculation results for each rolling 12-month organic HAP
emission rate during the 6-month reporting period.
(vi) If you used the predominant activity alternative (Sec.
63.3890(c)(1)), include the annual determination of predominant
activity if it was not included in the previous semi-annual compliance
report.
(vii) If you used the facility-specific emission limit alternative
(Sec. 63.3890(c)(2)), include the calculation of the facility-specific
emission limit for each 12-month compliance period during the 6-month
reporting period.
(4) No deviations. If there were no deviations from the emission
limitations in Sec. Sec. 63.3890, 63.3892, and 63.3893 that apply to
you, the semiannual compliance report must include a statement that
there were no deviations from the emission limitations during the
reporting period. If you used the emission rate with add-on controls
option and there were no periods during which the continuous parameter
monitoring systems (CPMS) were out-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
organic HAP content requirements in Sec. 63.3890, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(5)(i)
through (iv) of this section.
(i) Identification of each coating used that deviated from the
applicable emission limit, and each thinner and/or other additive, and
cleaning material used that contained organic HAP, and the dates and
time periods each was used.
(ii) The calculation of the organic HAP content (using Equation 2
of Sec. 63.3941) for each coating identified in paragraph (a)(5)(i) of
this section. You do not need to submit background data supporting this
calculation (e.g., information provided by coating suppliers or
manufacturers, or test reports).
(iii) The determination of mass fraction of organic HAP for each
thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning material identified in
paragraph (a)(5)(i) of this section. You do not need to submit
background data supporting this calculation (e.g., information provided
by material suppliers or manufacturers, or test reports).
(iv) A statement of the cause of each deviation.
(6) Deviations: Emission rate without add-on controls option. If
you used the emission rate without add-on controls option and there was
a deviation from the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, the
semiannual compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs
(a)(6)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period during
which the 12-month organic HAP emission rate exceeded the applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.3890.
(ii) The calculations used to determine the 12-month organic HAP
emission rate for the compliance period in which the deviation
occurred. You must submit the calculations for Equations 1, 1A through
1C, 2, and 3 of Sec. 63.3951; and if applicable, the calculation used
to determine mass of organic HAP in waste materials according to Sec.
63.3951(e)(4). You do not need to submit background data supporting
these calculations (e.g., information provided by materials suppliers
or manufacturers, or test reports).
(iii) A statement of the cause of each deviation.
(7) Deviations: Emission rate with add-on controls option. If you
used the emission rate with add-on controls option and there was a
deviation from an emission limitation (including any periods when
emissions bypassed the add-on control device and were diverted to the
atmosphere), the semiannual compliance report must contain the
information in paragraphs (a)(7)(i) through (xiv) of this section. This
includes periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction during which
deviations occurred.
(i) The beginning and ending dates of each compliance period during
which the 12-month organic HAP emission rate exceeded the applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.3890.
(ii) The calculations used to determine the 12-month organic HAP
emission rate for each compliance period in which a deviation occurred.
You must provide the calculation of the total mass of organic HAP
emissions for the coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and
cleaning materials used each month using Equations 1 and 1A through 1C
of Sec. 63.3951; and, if applicable, the calculation used to determine
mass of organic HAP in waste materials according to Sec.
63.3951(e)(4); the calculation of the total volume of coating solids
used each month using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.3951; the calculation of
the mass of organic HAP emission reduction each month by emission
capture systems and add-on control devices using Equations 1 and 1A
through 1D of Sec. 63.3961, and Equations 2, 3, and 3A through 3C of
Sec. 63.3961, as applicable; the calculation of the total mass of
organic HAP emissions each month using Equation 4 of Sec. 63.3961; and
the calculation of the 12-month
[[Page 165]]
organic HAP emission rate using Equation 5 of Sec. 63.3961. You do not
need to submit the background data supporting these calculations (e.g.,
information provided by materials suppliers or manufacturers, or test
reports).
(iii) The date and time that each malfunction started and stopped.
(iv) A brief description of the CPMS.
(v) The date of the latest CPMS certification or audit.
(vi) The date and time that each CPMS was inoperative, except for
zero (low-level) and high-level checks.
(vii) The date, time, and duration that each CPMS was out-of-
control, including the information in Sec. 63.8(c)(8).
(viii) The date and time period of each deviation from an operating
limit in Table 1 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.
(ix) A summary of the total duration of each deviation from an
operating limit in Table 1 to this subpart and each bypass of the add-
on control device during the semiannual reporting period, and the total
duration as a percent of the total source operating time during that
semiannual reporting period.
(x) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations from the
operating limits in Table 1 of this subpart and bypasses of the add-on
control device during the semiannual reporting period into those that
were due to startup, shutdown, control equipment problems, process
problems, other known causes, and other unknown causes.
(xi) A summary of the total duration of CPMS downtime during the
semiannual reporting period and the total duration of CPMS downtime as
a percent of the total source operating time during that semiannual
reporting period.
(xii) A description of any changes in the CPMS, coating operation,
emission capture system, or add-on control device since the last
semiannual reporting period.
(xiii) For each deviation from the work practice standards, a
description of the deviation, the date and time period of the
deviation, and the actions you took to correct the deviation.
(xiv) A statement of the cause of each deviation.
(b) Performance test reports. If you use the emission rate with
add-on controls option, you must submit reports of performance test
results for emission capture systems and add-on control devices no
later than 60 days after completing the tests as specified in Sec.
63.10(d)(2).
(c) Startup, shutdown, malfunction reports. If you used the
emission rate with add-on controls option and you had a startup,
shutdown, or malfunction during the semiannual reporting period, you
must submit the reports specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this
section.
(1) If your actions were consistent with your startup, shutdown,
and malfunction plan, you must include the information specified in
Sec. 63.10(d) in the semiannual compliance report required by
paragraph (a) of this section.
(2) If your actions were not consistent with your startup,
shutdown, and malfunction plan, you must submit an immediate startup,
shutdown, and malfunction report as described in paragraphs (c)(2)(i)
and (ii) of this section.
(i) You must describe the actions taken during the event in a
report delivered by facsimile, telephone, or other means to the
Administrator within 2 working days after starting actions that are
inconsistent with the plan.
(ii) You must submit a letter to the Administrator within 7 working
days after the end of the event, unless you have made alternative
arrangements with the Administrator as specified in Sec.
63.10(d)(5)(ii). The letter must contain the information specified in
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(ii).
Sec. 63.3930 What records must I keep?
You must collect and keep records of the data and information
specified in this section. Failure to collect and keep these records is
a deviation from the applicable standard.
(a) A copy of each notification and report that you submitted to
comply with this subpart, and the documentation supporting each
notification and report. If you are using the predominant activity
alternative under Sec. 63.3890(c), you must keep records of the data
and calculations used to determine the predominant activity. If you are
using the facility-specific emission limit alternative under Sec.
63.3890(c), you must keep records of the data used to calculate the
facility-specific emission limit for the initial compliance
demonstration. You must also keep records of any data used in each
annual predominant activity determination and in the calculation of the
facility-specific emission limit for each 12-month compliance period
included in the semi-annual compliance reports.
(b) A current copy of information provided by materials suppliers
or manufacturers, such as manufacturer's formulation data, or test data
used to determine the mass fraction of organic HAP and density for each
coating, thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning material, and the
volume fraction of coating solids for each coating. If you conducted
testing to determine mass fraction of organic HAP, density, or volume
fraction of coating solids, you must keep a copy of the complete test
report. If you use information provided to you by the manufacturer or
supplier of the material that was based on testing, you must keep the
summary sheet of results provided to you by the manufacturer or
supplier. You are not required to obtain the test report or other
supporting documentation from the manufacturer or supplier.
(c) For each compliance period, the records specified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (4) of this section.
(1) A record of the coating operations on which you used each
compliance option and the time periods (beginning and ending dates and
times) for each option you used.
(2) For the compliant material option, a record of the calculation
of the organic HAP content for each coating, using Equation 2 of Sec.
63.3941.
(3) For the emission rate without add-on controls option, a record
of the calculation of the total mass of organic HAP emissions for the
coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials used
each month using Equations 1, 1A through 1C, and 2 of Sec. 63.3951;
and, if applicable, the calculation used to determine mass of organic
HAP in waste materials according to Sec. 63.3951(e)(4); the
calculation of the total volume of coating solids used each month using
Equation 2 of Sec. 63.3951; and the calculation of each 12-month
organic HAP emission rate using Equation 3 of Sec. 63.3951.
(4) For the emission rate with add-on controls option, records of
the calculations specified in paragraphs (c)(4)(i) through (v) of this
section.
(i) The calculation of the total mass of organic HAP emissions for
the coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials
used each month using Equations 1 and 1A through 1C of Sec. 63.3951
and, if applicable, the calculation used to determine mass of organic
HAP in waste materials according to Sec. 63.3951(e)(4);
(ii) The calculation of the total volume of coating solids used
each month using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.3951;
(iii) The calculation of the mass of organic HAP emission reduction
by emission capture systems and add-on control devices using Equations
1 and 1A through 1D of Sec. 63.3961 and
[[Page 166]]
Equations 2, 3, and 3A through 3C of Sec. 63.3961, as applicable;
(iv) The calculation of each month's organic HAP emission rate
using Equation 4 of Sec. 63.3961; and
(v) The calculation of each 12-month organic HAP emission rate
using Equation 5 of Sec. 63.3961.
(d) A record of the name and volume of each coating, thinner and/or
other additive, and cleaning material used during each compliance
period. If you are using the compliant material option for all coatings
at the source, you may maintain purchase records for each material used
rather than a record of the volume used.
(e) A record of the mass fraction of organic HAP for each coating,
thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning material used during each
compliance period unless the material is tracked by weight.
(f) A record of the volume fraction of coating solids for each
coating used during each compliance period.
(g) If you use either the emission rate without add-on controls or
the emission rate with add-on controls compliance option, the density
for each coating, thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning material
used during each compliance period.
(h) If you use an allowance in Equation 1 of Sec. 63.3951 for
organic HAP contained in waste materials sent to or designated for
shipment to a treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF)
according to Sec. 63.3951(e)(4), you must keep records of the
information specified in paragraphs (h)(1) through (3) of this section.
(1) The name and address of each TSDF to which you sent waste
materials for which you use an allowance in Equation 1 of Sec.
63.3951; a statement of which subparts under 40 CFR parts 262, 264,
265, and 266 apply to the facility; and the date of each shipment.
(2) Identification of the coating operations producing waste
materials included in each shipment and the month or months in which
you used the allowance for these materials in Equation 1 of Sec.
63.3951.
(3) The methodology used in accordance with Sec. 63.3951(e)(4) to
determine the total amount of waste materials sent to or the amount
collected, stored, and designated for transport to a TSDF each month;
and the methodology to determine the mass of organic HAP contained in
these waste materials. This must include the sources for all data used
in the determination, methods used to generate the data, frequency of
testing or monitoring, and supporting calculations and documentation,
including the waste manifest for each shipment.
(i) [Reserved]
(j) You must keep records of the date, time, and duration of each
deviation.
(k) If you use the emission rate with add-on controls option, you
must keep the records specified in paragraphs (k)(1) through (8) of
this section.
(1) For each deviation, a record of whether the deviation occurred
during a period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction.
(2) The records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to
startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
(3) The records required to show continuous compliance with each
operating limit specified in Table 1 to this subpart that applies to
you.
(4) For each capture system that is a PTE, the data and
documentation you used to support a determination that the capture
system meets the criteria in Method 204 of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51
for a PTE and has a capture efficiency of 100 percent, as specified in
Sec. 63.3965(a).
(5) For each capture system that is not a PTE, the data and
documentation you used to determine capture efficiency according to the
requirements specified in Sec. Sec. 63.3964 and 63.3965(b) through
(e), including the records specified in paragraphs (k)(5)(i) through
(iii) of this section that apply to you.
(i) Records for a liquid-to-uncaptured gas protocol using a
temporary total enclosure or building enclosure. Records of the mass of
total volatile hydrocarbon (TVH) as measured by Method 204A or 204F of
appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 for each material used in the coating
operation, and the total TVH for all materials used during each capture
efficiency test run, including a copy of the test report. Records of
the mass of TVH emissions not captured by the capture system that
exited the temporary total enclosure or building enclosure during each
capture efficiency test run, as measured by Method 204D or 204E of
appendix M to 40 CFR part 51, including a copy of the test report.
Records documenting that the enclosure used for the capture efficiency
test met the criteria in Method 204 of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 for
either a temporary total enclosure or a building enclosure.
(ii) Records for a gas-to-gas protocol using a temporary total
enclosure or a building enclosure. Records of the mass of TVH emissions
captured by the emission capture system as measured by Method 204B or
204C of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 at the inlet to the add-on control
device, including a copy of the test report. Records of the mass of TVH
emissions not captured by the capture system that exited the temporary
total enclosure or building enclosure during each capture efficiency
test run as measured by Method 204D or 204E of appendix M to 40 CFR
part 51, including a copy of the test report. Records documenting that
the enclosure used for the capture efficiency test met the criteria in
Method 204 of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 for either a temporary total
enclosure or a building enclosure.
(iii) Records for an alternative protocol. Records needed to
document a capture efficiency determination using an alternative method
or protocol as specified in Sec. 63.3965(e), if applicable.
(6) The records specified in paragraphs (k)(6)(i) and (ii) of this
section for each add-on control device organic HAP destruction or
removal efficiency determination as specified in Sec. 63.3966.
(i) Records of each add-on control device performance test
conducted according to Sec. Sec. 63.3964 and 63.3966.
(ii) Records of the coating operation conditions during the add-on
control device performance test showing that the performance test was
conducted under representative operating conditions.
(7) Records of the data and calculations you used to establish the
emission capture and add-on control device operating limits as
specified in Sec. 63.3967 and to document compliance with the
operating limits as specified in Table 1 to this subpart.
(8) A record of the work practice plan required by Sec. 63.3893
and documentation that you are implementing the plan on a continuous
basis.
Sec. 63.3931 In what form and for how long must I keep my records?
(a) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). Where
appropriate, the records may be maintained as electronic spreadsheets
or as a database.
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.10(b)(1), you must keep each record
for 5 years following the date of each occurrence, measurement,
maintenance, corrective action, report, or record.
(c) You must keep each record on-site for at least 2 years after
the date of each occurrence, measurement, maintenance, corrective
action, report, or record according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). You may keep
the records off-site for the remaining 3 years.
[[Page 167]]
Compliance Requirements for the Compliant Material Option
Sec. 63.3940 By what date must I conduct the initial compliance
demonstration?
You must complete the initial compliance demonstration for the
initial compliance period according to the requirements in Sec.
63.3941. The initial compliance period begins on the applicable
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.3883 and ends on the last day of
the 12th month following the compliance date. If the compliance date
occurs on any day other than the first day of a month, then the initial
compliance period extends through that month plus the next 12 months.
The initial compliance demonstration includes the calculations
according to Sec. 63.3941 and supporting documentation showing that
during the initial compliance period, you used no coating with an
organic HAP content that exceeded the applicable emission limit in
Sec. 63.3890, and that you used no thinners and/or other additives, or
cleaning materials that contained organic HAP as determined according
to Sec. 63.3941(a).
Sec. 63.3941 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limitations?
You may use the compliant material option for any individual
coating operation, for any group of coating operations in the affected
source, or for all the coating operations in the affected source. You
must use either the emission rate without add-on controls option or the
emission rate with add-on controls option for any coating operation in
the affected source for which you do not use this option. To
demonstrate initial compliance using the compliant material option, the
coating operation or group of coating operations must use no coating
with an organic HAP content that exceeds the applicable emission limits
in Sec. 63.3890 and must use no thinner and/or other additive, or
cleaning material that contains organic HAP as determined according to
this section. Any coating operation for which you use the compliant
material option is not required to meet the operating limits or work
practice standards required in Sec. Sec. 63.3892 and 63.3893,
respectively. You must conduct a separate initial compliance
demonstration for each general use, high performance, magnet wire,
rubber-to-metal, and extreme performance fluoropolymer coating
operation unless you are demonstrating compliance with a predominant
activity or facility-specific emission limit as provided in Sec.
63.3890(c). If you are demonstrating compliance with a predominant
activity or facility-specific emission limit as provided in Sec.
63.3890(c), you must demonstrate that all coating operations included
in the predominant activity determination or calculation of the
facility-specific emission limit comply with that limit. You must meet
all the requirements of this section. Use the procedures in this
section on each coating, thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning
material in the condition it is in when it is received from its
manufacturer or supplier and prior to any alteration. You do not need
to redetermine the organic HAP content of coatings, thinners and/or
other additives, and cleaning materials that are reclaimed on-site (or
reclaimed off-site if you have documentation showing that you received
back the exact same materials that were sent off-site) and reused in
the coating operation for which you use the compliant material option,
provided these materials in their condition as received were
demonstrated to comply with the compliant material option.
(a) Determine the mass fraction of organic HAP for each material
used. You must determine the mass fraction of organic HAP for each
coating, thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning material used
during the compliance period by using one of the options in paragraphs
(a)(1) through (5) of this section.
(1) Method 311 (appendix A to 40 CFR part 63). You may use Method
311 for determining the mass fraction of organic HAP. Use the
procedures specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section
when performing a Method 311 test.
(i) Count each organic HAP that is measured to be present at 0.1
percent by mass or more for Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA)-defined carcinogens as specified in 29 CFR
1910.1200(d)(4) and at 1.0 percent by mass or more for other compounds.
For example, if toluene (not an OSHA carcinogen) is measured to be 0.5
percent of the material by mass, you do not have to count it. Express
the mass fraction of each organic HAP you count as a value truncated to
four places after the decimal point (e.g., 0.3791).
(ii) Calculate the total mass fraction of organic HAP in the test
material by adding up the individual organic HAP mass fractions and
truncating the result to three places after the decimal point (e.g.,
0.763).
(2) Method 24 (appendix A to 40 CFR part 60). For coatings, you may
use Method 24 to determine the mass fraction of nonaqueous volatile
matter and use that value as a substitute for mass fraction of organic
HAP. For reactive adhesives in which some of the HAP react to form
solids and are not emitted to the atmosphere, you may use the
alternative method contained in appendix A to subpart PPPP of this
part, rather than Method 24. You may use the volatile fraction that is
emitted, as measured by the alternative method in appendix A to subpart
PPPP of this part, as a substitute for the mass fraction of organic
HAP.
(3) Alternative method. You may use an alternative test method for
determining the mass fraction of organic HAP once the Administrator has
approved it. You must follow the procedure in Sec. 63.7(f) to submit
an alternative test method for approval.
(4) Information from the supplier or manufacturer of the material.
You may rely on information other than that generated by the test
methods specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section,
such as manufacturer's formulation data, if it represents each organic
HAP that is present at 0.1 percent by mass or more for OSHA-defined
carcinogens as specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(d)(4) and at 1.0 percent
by mass or more for other compounds. For example, if toluene (not an
OSHA carcinogen) is 0.5 percent of the material by mass, you do not
have to count it. For reactive adhesives in which some of the HAP react
to form solids and are not emitted to the atmosphere, you may rely on
manufacturer's data that expressly states the organic HAP or volatile
matter mass fraction emitted. 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, you demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the enforcement agency that the formulation data are
correct.
(5) Solvent blends. Solvent blends may be listed as single
components for some materials in data provided by manufacturers or
suppliers. Solvent blends may contain organic HAP which must be counted
toward the total organic HAP mass fraction of the materials. When test
data and manufacturer's data for solvent blends are not available, you
may use the default values for the mass fraction of organic HAP in
these solvent blends listed in Table 3 or 4 to this subpart. If you use
the tables, you must use the values in Table 3 for all solvent blends
that match Table 3 entries according to the instructions for Table 3,
and you may use Table 4 only if the solvent blends in the materials you
use do not match any of the solvent blends in Table 3 and you know only
whether the blend is aliphatic or aromatic. However, if the
[[Page 168]]
results of a Method 311 (appendix A to 40 CFR part 63) test indicate
higher values than those listed on Table 3 or 4 to this subpart, the
Method 311 results will take precedence unless, after consultation, you
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the enforcement agency that the
formulation data are correct.
(b) Determine the volume fraction of coating solids for each
coating. You must determine the volume fraction of coating solids
(liters (gal) of coating solids per liter (gal) of coating) for each
coating used during the compliance period by a test, by information
provided by the supplier or the manufacturer of the material, or by
calculation, as specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this
section. If test results obtained according to paragraph (b)(1) of this
section do not agree with the information obtained under paragraph
(b)(3) or (4) of this section, the test results will take precedence
unless, after consultation, you demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
enforcement agency that the formulation data are correct.
(1) ASTM Method D2697-86 (Reapproved 1998) or ASTM Method D6093-97
(Reapproved 2003). You may use ASTM Method D2697-86 (Reapproved 1998),
``Standard Test Method for Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or
Pigmented Coatings'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), or
ASTM Method D6093-97 (Reapproved 2003), ``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.
(2) Alternative method. You may use an alternative test method for
determining the solids content of each coating once the Administrator
has approved it. You must follow the procedure in Sec. 63.7(f) to
submit an alternative test method for approval.
(3) Information from the supplier or manufacturer of the material.
You may obtain the volume fraction of coating solids for each coating
from the supplier or manufacturer.
(4) Calculation of volume fraction of coating solids. You may
determine the volume fraction of coating solids using Equation 1 of
this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.003
Where:
Vs = Volume fraction of coating solids, liters (gal) coating
solids per liter (gal) coating.
mvolatiles = Total volatile matter content of the coating,
including HAP, volatile organic compounds (VOC), water, and exempt
compounds, determined according to Method 24 in appendix A of 40 CFR
part 60, grams volatile matter per liter coating.
Davg = Average density of volatile matter in the coating,
grams volatile matter per liter volatile matter, determined from test
results using ASTM Method D1475-98, ``Standard Test Method for Density
of Liquid Coatings, Inks, and Related Products'' (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 Method D1475-98 test results and other information
sources, the test results will take precedence unless, after
consultation you demonstrate to the satisfaction of the enforcement
agency that the formulation data are correct.
(c) Determine the density of each coating. Determine the density of
each coating used during the compliance period from test results using
ASTM Method D1475-98, ``Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products'' (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 63.14), information from the supplier or manufacturer of the
material, or specific gravity data for pure chemicals. If there is
disagreement between ASTM Method D1475-98 test results and the
supplier's or manufacturer's information, the test results will take
precedence unless, after consultation you demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the enforcement agency that the formulation data are
correct.
(d) Determine the organic HAP content of each coating. Calculate
the organic HAP content, kg (lb) of organic HAP emitted per liter (gal)
coating solids used, of each coating used during the compliance period
using Equation 2 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.004
Where:
Hc = Organic HAP content of the coating, kg organic HAP
emitted per liter (gal) coating solids used.
Dc = Density of coating, kg coating per liter (gal) coating,
determined according to paragraph (c) of this section.
Wc = Mass fraction of organic HAP in the coating, kg organic
HAP per kg coating, determined according to paragraph (a) of this
section.
Vs = Volume fraction of coating solids, liter (gal) coating
solids per liter (gal) coating, determined according to paragraph (b)
of this section.
(e) Compliance demonstration. The calculated organic HAP content
for each coating used during the initial compliance period must be less
than or equal to the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890; and
each thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning material used during
the initial compliance period must contain no organic HAP, determined
according to paragraph (a) of this section. You must keep all records
required by Sec. Sec. 63.3930 and 63.3931. As part of the notification
of compliance status required in Sec. 63.3910, you must identify the
coating operation(s) for which you used the compliant material option
and submit a statement that the coating operation(s) was (were) in
compliance with the emission limitations during the initial compliance
period because you used no coatings for which the organic HAP content
exceeded the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, and you used
no thinners and/or other additives, or cleaning materials that
contained organic HAP, determined according to the procedures in
paragraph (a) of this section.
Sec. 63.3942 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limitations?
(a) For each compliance period to demonstrate continuous
compliance, you must use no coating for which the organic HAP content
(determined using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.3941) exceeds the applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, and use no thinner and/or other
additive, or cleaning material that contains organic HAP, determined
according to Sec. 63.3941(a). A compliance period consists of 12
months. Each month, after the end of the initial compliance period
described in Sec. 63.3940, is the end of a compliance period
consisting of that month and the preceding 11 months. If you are
complying with a facility-specific emission limit under Sec.
63.3890(c), you must also perform the calculation using Equation 1 in
Sec. 63.3890(c)(2) on a monthly basis using the data from the previous
12 months of operation.
(b) If you choose to comply with the emission limitations by using
the compliant material option, the use of any coating, thinner and/or
other
[[Page 169]]
additive, or cleaning material that does not meet the criteria
specified in paragraph (a) of this section is a deviation from the
emission limitations that must be reported as specified in Sec. Sec.
63.3910(c)(6) and 63.3920(a)(5).
(c) As part of each semiannual compliance report required by Sec.
63.3920, you must identify the coating operation(s) for which you used
the compliant material option. If there were no deviations from the
applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, submit a statement that the
coating operation(s) was (were) in compliance with the emission
limitations during the reporting period because you used no coatings
for which the organic HAP content exceeded the applicable emission
limit in Sec. 63.3890, and you used no thinner and/or other additive,
or cleaning material that contained organic HAP, determined according
to Sec. 63.3941(a).
(d) You must maintain records as specified in Sec. Sec. 63.3930
and 63.3931.
Compliance Requirements for the Emission Rate Without Add-On Controls
Option
Sec. 63.3950 By what date must I conduct the initial compliance
demonstration?
You must complete the initial compliance demonstration for the
initial compliance period according to the requirements of Sec.
63.3951. The initial compliance period begins on the applicable
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.3883 and ends on the last day of
the 12th month following the compliance date. If the compliance date
occurs on any day other than the first day of a month, then the initial
compliance period extends through the end of that month plus the next
12 months. You must determine the mass of organic HAP emissions and
volume of coating solids used each month and then calculate an organic
HAP emission rate at the end of the initial compliance period. The
initial compliance demonstration includes the calculations according to
Sec. 63.3951 and supporting documentation showing that during the
initial compliance period the organic HAP emission rate was equal to or
less than the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890.
Sec. 63.3951 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limitations?
You may use the emission rate without add-on controls option for
any individual coating operation, for any group of coating operations
in the affected source, or for all the coating operations in the
affected source. You must use either the compliant material option or
the emission rate with add-on controls option for any coating operation
in the affected source for which you do not use this option. To
demonstrate initial compliance using the emission rate without add-on
controls option, the coating operation or group of coating operations
must meet the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, but is not
required to meet the operating limits or work practice standards in
Sec. Sec. 63.3892 and 63.3893, respectively. You must conduct a
separate initial compliance demonstration for each general use, magnet
wire, rubber-to-metal, and extreme performance fluoropolymer coating
operation unless you are demonstrating compliance with a predominant
activity or facility-specific emission limit as provided in Sec.
63.3890(c). If you are demonstrating compliance with a predominant
activity or facility-specific emission limit as provided in Sec.
63.3890(c), you must demonstrate that all coating operations included
in the predominant activity determination or calculation of the
facility-specific emission limit comply with that limit. You must meet
all the requirements of this section. When calculating the organic HAP
emission rate according to this section, do not include any coatings,
thinners and/or other additives, or cleaning materials used on coating
operations for which you use the compliant material option or the
emission rate with add-on controls option. You do not need to
redetermine the mass of organic HAP in coatings, thinners and/or other
additives, or cleaning materials that have been reclaimed on-site (or
reclaimed off-site if you have documentation showing that you received
back the exact same materials that were sent off-site) and reused in
the coating operation for which you use the emission rate without add-
on controls option. If you use coatings, thinners and/or other
additives, or cleaning materials that have been reclaimed on-site, the
amount of each used in a month may be reduced by the amount of each
that is reclaimed. That is, the amount used may be calculated as the
amount consumed to account for materials that are reclaimed.
(a) Determine the mass fraction of organic HAP for each material.
Determine the mass fraction of organic HAP for each coating, thinner
and/or other additive, and cleaning material used during each month
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.3941(a).
(b) Determine the volume fraction of coating solids. Determine the
volume fraction of coating solids (liter (gal) of coating solids per
liter (gal) of coating) for each coating used during each month
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.3941(b).
(c) Determine the density of each material. Determine the density
of each liquid coating, thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning
material used during each month from test results using ASTM Method
D1475-98, ``Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid Coatings, Inks,
and Related Products'' (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 you are including powder coatings in the compliance
determination, determine the density of powder coatings, using ASTM
Method D5965-02, ``Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of
Coating Powders'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14), or
information from the supplier. If there is disagreement between ASTM
Method D1475-98 or ASTM Method D5965-02 test results and other such
information sources, the test results will take precedence unless,
after consultation you demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
enforcement agency that the formulation data are correct. If you
purchase materials or monitor consumption by weight instead of volume,
you do not need to determine material density. Instead, you may use the
material weight in place of the combined terms for density and volume
in Equations 1A, 1B, 1C, and 2 of this section.
(d) Determine the volume of each material used. Determine the
volume (liters) of each coating, thinner and/or other additive, and
cleaning material used during each month by measurement or usage
records. If you purchase materials or monitor consumption by weight
instead of volume, you do not need to determine the volume of each
material used. Instead, you may use the material weight in place of the
combined terms for density and volume in Equations 1A, 1B, and 1C of
this section.
(e) Calculate the mass of organic HAP emissions. The mass of
organic HAP emissions is the combined mass of organic HAP contained in
all coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials
used during each month minus the organic HAP in certain waste
materials. Calculate the mass of organic HAP emissions using Equation 1
of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.005
Where:
He = Total mass of organic HAP emissions during the month,
kg.
[[Page 170]]
A = Total mass of organic HAP in the coatings used during the month,
kg, as calculated in Equation 1A of this section.
B = Total mass of organic HAP in the thinners and/or other additives
used during the month, kg, as calculated in Equation 1B of this
section.
C = Total mass of organic HAP in the cleaning materials used during the
month, kg, as calculated in Equation 1C of this section.
Rw = Total mass of organic HAP in waste materials sent or
designated for shipment to a hazardous waste TSDF for treatment or
disposal during the month, kg, determined according to paragraph (e)(4)
of this section. (You may assign a value of zero to R w if
you do not wish to use this allowance.)
(1) Calculate the kg organic HAP in the coatings used during the
month using Equation 1A of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.006
Where:
A = Total mass of organic HAP in the coatings used during the month,
kg.
Volc,i = Total volume of coating, i, used during the month,
liters.
Dc,i = Density of coating, i, kg coating per liter coating.
Wc,i = Mass fraction of organic HAP in coating, i, kg
organic HAP per kg coating. For reactive adhesives as defined in Sec.
63.3981, use the mass fraction of organic HAP that is emitted as
determined using the method in appendix A to subpart PPPP of this part.
m = Number of different coatings used during the month.
(2) Calculate the kg of organic HAP in the thinners and/or other
additives used during the month using Equation 1B of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.007
Where:
B = Total mass of organic HAP in the thinners and/or other additives
used during the month, kg.
Volt,j = Total volume of thinner and/or other additive, j,
used during the month, liters.
Dt,j = Density of thinner and/or other additive, j, kg per
liter.
Wt,j = Mass fraction of organic HAP in thinner and/or other
additive, j, kg organic HAP per kg thinner and/or other additive. For
reactive adhesives as defined in Sec. 63.3981, use the mass fraction
of organic HAP that is emitted as determined using the method in
appendix A to subpart PPPP of this part.
n = Number of different thinners and/or other additives used during the
month.
(3) Calculate the kg organic HAP in the cleaning materials used
during the month using Equation 1C of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.008
Where:
C = Total mass of organic HAP in the cleaning materials used during the
month, kg.
Vols,k = Total volume of cleaning material, k, used during
the month, liters.
Ds,k = Density of cleaning material, k, kg per liter.
Ws,k = Mass fraction of organic HAP in cleaning material, k,
kg organic HAP per kg material.
p = Number of different cleaning materials used during the month.
(4) If you choose to account for the mass of organic HAP contained
in waste materials sent or designated for shipment to a hazardous waste
TSDF in Equation 1 of this section, then you must determine the mass
according to paragraphs (e)(4)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) You may only include waste materials in the determination that
are generated by coating operations in the affected source for which
you use Equation 1 of this section and that will be treated or disposed
of by a facility that is regulated as a TSDF under 40 CFR part 262,
264, 265, or 266. The TSDF may be either off-site or on-site. You may
not include organic HAP contained in wastewater.
(ii) You must determine either the amount of the waste materials
sent to a TSDF during the month or the amount collected and stored
during the month and designated for future transport to a TSDF. Do not
include in your determination any waste materials sent to a TSDF during
a month if you have already included them in the amount collected and
stored during that month or a previous month.
(iii) Determine the total mass of organic HAP contained in the
waste materials specified in paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of this section.
(iv) You must document the methodology you use to determine the
amount of waste materials and the total mass of organic HAP they
contain, as required in Sec. 63.3930(h). If waste manifests include
this information, they may be used as part of the documentation of the
amount of waste materials and mass of organic HAP contained in them.
(f) Calculate the total volume of coating solids used. Determine
the total volume of coating solids used, liters, which is the combined
volume of coating solids for all the coatings used during each month,
using Equation 2 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.009
Where:
Vst = Total volume of coating solids used during the month,
liters.
Volc,i = Total volume of coating, i, used during the month,
liters.
Vs,i = Volume fraction of coating solids for coating, i,
liter solids per liter coating, determined according to Sec.
63.3941(b).
m = Number of coatings used during the month.
(g) Calculate the organic HAP emission rate. Calculate the organic
HAP emission rate for the compliance period, kg (lb) organic HAP
emitted per liter (gal) coating solids used, using Equation 3 of this
section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.010
Where:
Hyr = Average organic HAP emission rate for the compliance
period, kg organic HAP emitted per liter coating solids used.
He = Total mass of organic HAP emissions from all materials
used during month, y, kg, as calculated by Equation 1 of this section.
Vst = Total volume of coating solids used during month, y,
liters, as calculated by Equation 2 of this section.
y = Identifier for months.
n = Number of full or partial months in the compliance period (for the
initial compliance period, n equals 12 if the compliance date falls on
the first day of a month; otherwise n equals 13; for all following
compliance periods, n equals 12).
(h) Compliance demonstration. The organic HAP emission rate for the
initial compliance period calculated using Equation 3 of this section
must be less than or equal to the applicable emission limit for each
subcategory in Sec. 63.3890 or the predominant activity or facility-
specific emission limit allowed in
[[Page 171]]
Sec. 63.3890(c). You must keep all records as required by Sec. Sec.
63.3930 and 63.3931. As part of the notification of compliance status
required by Sec. 63.3910, you must identify the coating operation(s)
for which you used the emission rate without add-on controls option and
submit a statement that the coating operation(s) was (were) in
compliance with the emission limitations during the initial compliance
period because the organic HAP emission rate was less than or equal to
the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, determined according to
the procedures in this section.
Sec. 63.3952 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limitations?
(a) To demonstrate continuous compliance, the organic HAP emission
rate for each compliance period, determined according to Sec.
63.3951(a) through (g), must be less than or equal to the applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.3890. A compliance period consists of 12
months. Each month after the end of the initial compliance period
described in Sec. 63.3950 is the end of a compliance period consisting
of that month and the preceding 11 months. You must perform the
calculations in Sec. 63.3951(a) through (g) on a monthly basis using
data from the previous 12 months of operation. If you are complying
with a facility-specific emission limit under Sec. 63.3890(c), you
must also perform the calculation using Equation 1 in Sec.
63.3890(c)(2) on a monthly basis using the data from the previous 12
months of operation.
(b) If the organic HAP emission rate for any 12-month compliance
period exceeded the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, this is
a deviation from the emission limitation for that compliance period and
must be reported as specified in Sec. Sec. 63.3910(c)(6) and
63.3920(a)(6).
(c) As part of each semiannual compliance report required by Sec.
63.3920, you must identify the coating operation(s) for which you used
the emission rate without add-on controls option. If there were no
deviations from the emission limitations, you must submit a statement
that the coating operation(s) was (were) in compliance with the
emission limitations during the reporting period because the organic
HAP emission rate for each compliance period was less than or equal to
the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, determined according to
Sec. 63.3951(a) through (g).
(d) You must maintain records as specified in Sec. Sec. 63.3930
and 63.3931.
Compliance Requirements for the Emission Rate With Add-On Controls
Option
Sec. 63.3960 By what date must I conduct performance tests and other
initial compliance demonstrations?
(a) New and reconstructed affected sources. For a new or
reconstructed affected source, you must meet the requirements of
paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section.
(1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance
date specified in Sec. 63.3883. Except for solvent recovery systems
for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to
Sec. 63.3961(j), you must conduct a performance test of each capture
system and add-on control device according to Sec. Sec. 63.3964,
63.3965, and 63.3966 and establish the operating limits required by
Sec. 63.3892 no later than 180 days after the applicable compliance
date specified in Sec. 63.3883. For a solvent recovery system for
which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to Sec.
63.3961(j), you must initiate the first material balance no later than
the applicable compliance date specified in Sec. 63.3883. For magnet
wire coating operations you may, with approval, conduct a performance
test of one representative magnet wire coating machine for each group
of identical or very similar magnet wire coating machines.
(2) You must develop and begin implementing the work practice plan
required by Sec. 63.3893 no later than the compliance date specified
in Sec. 63.3883.
(3) You must complete the initial compliance demonstration for the
initial compliance period according to the requirements of Sec.
63.3961. The initial compliance period begins on the applicable
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.3883 and ends on the last day of
the 12th month following the compliance date. If the compliance date
occurs on any day other than the first day of a month, then the initial
compliance period extends through the end of that month plus the next
12 months. You must determine the mass of organic HAP emissions and
volume of coatings solids used each month and then calculate an organic
HAP emission rate at the end of the initial compliance period. The
initial compliance demonstration includes the results of emission
capture system and add-on control device performance tests conducted
according to Sec. Sec. 63.3964, 63.3965, and 63.3966; results of
liquid-liquid material balances conducted according to Sec.
63.3961(j); calculations according to Sec. 63.3961 and supporting
documentation showing that during the initial compliance period the
organic HAP emission rate was equal to or less than the applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.3890; the operating limits established
during the performance tests and the results of the continuous
parameter monitoring required by Sec. 63.3968; and documentation of
whether you developed and implemented the work practice plan required
by Sec. 63.3893.
(4) You do not need to comply with the operating limits for the
emission capture system and add-on control device required by Sec.
63.3892 until after you have completed the performance tests specified
in paragraph (a)(1) of this section. Instead, you must maintain a log
detailing the operation and maintenance of the emission capture system,
add-on control device, and continuous parameter monitors during the
period between the compliance date and the performance test. You must
begin complying with the operating limits for your affected source on
the date you complete the performance tests specified in paragraph
(a)(1) of this section. For magnet wire coating operations, you must
begin complying with the operating limits for all identical or very
similar magnet wire coating machines on the date you complete the
performance test of a representative magnet wire coating machine. 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. 63.3961(j).
(b) Existing affected sources. For an existing affected source, you
must meet the requirements of paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this
section.
(1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance
date specified in Sec. 63.3883. Except for magnet wire coating
operations and solvent recovery systems for which you conduct liquid-
liquid material balances according to Sec. 63.3961(j), you must
conduct a performance test of each capture system and add-on control
device according to the procedures in Sec. Sec. 63.3964, 63.3965, and
63.3966 and establish the operating limits required by Sec. 63.3892 no
later than the compliance date specified in Sec. 63.3883. For magnet
wire coating operations, you may, with approval, conduct a performance
test of a single magnet wire coating machine that represents identical
or very similar magnet wire coating machines. For a solvent recovery
system for which you
[[Page 172]]
conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to Sec. 63.3961(j),
you must initiate the first material balance no later than the
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.3883.
(2) You must develop and begin implementing the work practice plan
required by Sec. 63.3893 no later than the compliance date specified
in Sec. 63.3883.
(3) You must complete the initial compliance demonstration for the
initial compliance period according to the requirements of Sec.
63.3961. The initial compliance period begins on the applicable
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.3883 and ends on the last day of
the 12th month following the compliance date. If the compliance date
occurs on any day other than the first day of a month, then the initial
compliance period extends through the end of that month plus the next
12 months. You must determine the mass of organic HAP emissions and
volume of coatings solids used each month and then calculate an organic
HAP emission rate at the end of the initial compliance period. The
initial compliance demonstration includes the results of emission
capture system and add-on control device performance tests conducted
according to Sec. Sec. 63.3964, 63.3965, and 63.3966; results of
liquid-liquid material balances conducted according to Sec.
63.3961(j); calculations according to Sec. 63.3961 and supporting
documentation showing that during the initial compliance period the
organic HAP emission rate was equal to or less than the applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.3890; the operating limits established
during the performance tests and the results of the continuous
parameter monitoring required by Sec. 63.3968; and documentation of
whether you developed and implemented the work practice plan required
by Sec. 63.3893.
(c) You are not required to conduct an initial performance test to
determine capture efficiency or destruction efficiency of a capture
system or control device if you receive approval to use the results of
a performance test that has been previously conducted on that capture
system or control device. Any such previous tests must meet the
conditions described in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section.
(1) The previous test must have been conducted using the methods
and conditions specified in this subpart.
(2) Either no process or equipment changes have been made since the
previous test was performed or the owner or operator must be able to
demonstrate that the results of the performance test, reliably
demonstrate compliance despite process or equipment changes.
(3) Either the required operating parameters were established in
the previous test or sufficient data were collected in the previous
test to establish the required operating parameters.
Sec. 63.3961 How do I demonstrate initial compliance?
(a) You may use the emission rate with add-on controls option for
any coating operation, for any group of coating operations in the
affected source, or for all of the coating operations in the affected
source. You may include both controlled and uncontrolled coating
operations in a group for which you use this option. You must use
either the compliant material option or the emission rate without add-
on controls option for any coating operation in the affected source for
which you do not use the emission rate with add-on controls option. To
demonstrate initial compliance, the coating operation(s) for which you
use the emission rate with add-on controls option must meet the
applicable emission limitations in Sec. Sec. 63.3890, 63.3892, and
63.3893. You must conduct a separate initial compliance demonstration
for each general use, magnet wire, rubber-to-metal, and extreme
performance fluoropolymer coating operation, unless you are
demonstrating compliance with a predominant activity or facility-
specific emission limit as provided in Sec. 63.3890(c). If you are
demonstrating compliance with a predominant activity or facility-
specific emission limit as provided in Sec. 63.4490(c), you must
demonstrate that all coating operations included in the predominant
activity determination or calculation of the facility-specific emission
limit comply with that limit. You must meet all the requirements of
this section. When calculating the organic HAP emission rate according
to this section, do not include any coatings, thinners and/or other
additives, or cleaning materials used on coating operations for which
you use the compliant material option or the emission rate without add-
on controls option. You do not need to redetermine the mass of organic
HAP in coatings, thinners and/or other additives, or cleaning materials
that have been reclaimed onsite (or reclaimed off-site if you have
documentation showing that you received back the exact same materials
that were sent off-site) and reused in the coatings operation(s) for
which you use the emission rate with add-on controls option. If you use
coatings, thinners and/or other additives, or cleaning materials that
have been reclaimed on-site, the amount of each used in a month may be
reduced by the amount of each that is reclaimed. That is, the amount
used may be calculated as the amount consumed to account for materials
that are reclaimed.
(b) Compliance with operating limits. Except as provided in Sec.
63.3960(a)(4), and except for solvent recovery systems for which you
conduct liquid-liquid material balances according to the requirements
of paragraph (j) of this section, you must establish and demonstrate
continuous compliance during the initial compliance period with the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.3892, using the procedures
specified in Sec. Sec. 63.3967 and 63.3968.
(c) Compliance with work practice requirements. You must develop,
implement, and document your implementation of the work practice plan
required by Sec. 63.3893 during the initial compliance period, as
specified in Sec. 63.3930.
(d) Compliance with emission limits. You must follow the procedures
in paragraphs (e) through (n) of this section to demonstrate compliance
with the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890 for each affected
source in each subcategory.
(e) Determine the mass fraction of organic HAP, density, volume
used, and volume fraction of coating solids. Follow the procedures
specified in Sec. 63.3951(a) through (d) to determine the mass
fraction of organic HAP, density, and volume of each coating, thinner
and/or other additive, and cleaning material used during each month;
and the volume fraction of coating solids for each coating used during
each month.
(f) Calculate the total mass of organic HAP emissions before add-on
controls. Using Equation 1 of Sec. 63.3951, calculate the total mass
of organic HAP emissions before add-on controls from all coatings,
thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials used during
each month in the coating operation or group of coating operations for
which you use the emission rate with add-on controls option.
(g) Calculate the organic HAP emission reduction for each
controlled coating operation. Determine the mass of organic HAP
emissions reduced for each controlled coating operation during each
month. The emission reduction determination quantifies the total
organic HAP emissions that pass through the emission capture system and
are destroyed or removed by the add-on control device. Use the
procedures in paragraph (h) of this
[[Page 173]]
section to calculate the mass of organic HAP emission reduction for
each controlled coating operation using an emission capture system and
add-on control device other than a solvent recovery system for which
you conduct liquid-liquid material balances. For each controlled
coating operation using a solvent recovery system for which you conduct
a liquid-liquid material balance, use the procedures in paragraph (j)
of this section to calculate the organic HAP emission reduction.
(h) Calculate the organic HAP emission reduction for each
controlled coating operation not using liquid-liquid material balance.
Use Equation 1 of this section to calculate the organic HAP emission
reduction for each controlled coating operation using an emission
capture system and add-on control device other than a solvent recovery
system for which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances. The
calculation applies the emission capture system efficiency and add-on
control device efficiency to the mass of organic HAP contained in the
coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning materials that
are used in the coating operation served by the emission capture system
and add-on control device during each month. You must assume zero
efficiency for the emission capture system and add-on control device
for any period of time a deviation specified in Sec. 63.3963(c) or (d)
occurs in the controlled coating operation, including a deviation
during a period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction, 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 is 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.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.011
Where:
HC = Mass of organic HAP emission reduction for the
controlled coating operation during the month, kg.
AC = Total mass of organic HAP in the coatings used in the
controlled coating operation during the month, kg, as calculated in
Equation 1A of this section.
BC = Total mass of organic HAP in the thinners and/or other
additives used in the controlled coating operation during the month,
kg, as calculated in Equation 1B of this section.
CC = Total mass of organic HAP in the cleaning materials
used in the controlled coating operation during the month, kg, as
calculated in Equation 1C of this section.
RW = Total mass of organic HAP in waste materials sent or
designated for shipment to a hazardous waste TSDF for treatment or
disposal during the compliance period, kg, determined according to
Sec. 63.3951(e)(4). (You may assign a value of zero to RW
if you do not wish to use this allowance.)
HUNC = Total mass of organic HAP in the coatings, thinners
and/or other additives, and cleaning materials used during all
deviations specified in Sec. 63.3963(c) and (d) that occurred during
the month in the controlled coating operation, kg, as calculated in
Equation 1D of this section.
CE = Capture efficiency of the emission capture system vented to the
add-on control device, percent. Use the test methods and procedures
specified in Sec. Sec. 63.3964 and 63.3965 to measure and record
capture efficiency.
DRE = Organic HAP destruction or removal efficiency of the add-on
control device, percent. Use the test methods and procedures in
Sec. Sec. 63.3964 and 63.3966 to measure and record the organic HAP
destruction or removal efficiency.
(1) Calculate the mass of organic HAP in the coatings used in the
controlled coating operation, kg (lb), using Equation 1A of this
section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.012
Where:
AC = Total mass of organic HAP in the coatings used in the
controlled coating operation during the month, kg.
Volc,i = Total volume of coating, i, used during the month,
liters.
Dc,i = Density of coating, i, kg per liter.
Wc,i = Mass fraction of organic HAP in coating, i, kg per
kg. For reactive adhesives as defined in Sec. 63.3981, use the mass
fraction of organic HAP that is emitted as determined using the method
in appendix A to subpart PPPP of this part.
m = Number of different coatings used.
(2) Calculate the mass of organic HAP in the thinners and/or other
additives used in the controlled coating operation, kg (lb), using
Equation 1B of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.013
Where:
BC = Total mass of organic HAP in the thinners and/or other
additives used in the controlled coating operation during the month,
kg.
Volt,j = Total volume of thinner and/or other additive, j,
used during the month, liters.
Dt,j = Density of thinner and/or other additive, j, kg per
liter.
Wt,j = Mass fraction of organic HAP in thinner and/or other
additive, j, kg per kg. For reactive adhesives as defined in Sec.
63.3981, use the mass fraction of organic HAP that is
[[Page 174]]
emitted as determined using the method in appendix A to subpart PPPP of
this part.
n = Number of different thinners and/or other additives used.
(3) Calculate the mass of organic HAP in the cleaning materials
used in the controlled coating operation during the month, kg (lb),
using Equation 1C of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.014
Where:
CC = Total mass of organic HAP in the cleaning materials
used in the controlled coating operation during the month, kg.
Vols,k = Total volume of cleaning material, k, used during
the month, liters.
Ds,k = Density of cleaning material, k, kg per liter.
Ws,k = Mass fraction of organic HAP in cleaning material, k,
kg per kg.
p = Number of different cleaning materials used.
(4) Calculate the mass of organic HAP in the coatings, thinners
and/or other additives, and cleaning materials used in the controlled
coating operation during deviations specified in Sec. 63.3963(c) and
(d), using Equation 1D of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.015
Where:
HUNC = Total mass of organic HAP in the coatings, thinners
and/or other additives, and cleaning materials used during all
deviations specified in Sec. 63.3963(c) and (d) that occurred during
the month in the controlled coating operation, kg.
Volh = Total volume of coating, thinner and/or other
additive, or cleaning material, h, used in the controlled coating
operation during deviations, liters.
Dh = Density of coating, thinner and/or other additives, or
cleaning material, h, kg per liter.
Wh = Mass fraction of organic HAP in coating, thinner and/or
other additives, or cleaning material, h, kg organic HAP per kg
coating. For reactive adhesives as defined in Sec. 63.3981, use the
mass fraction of organic HAP that is emitted as determined using the
method in appendix A to subpart PPPP of this part.
q = Number of different coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and
cleaning materials used.
(i) [Reserved]
(j) Calculate the organic HAP emission reduction for each
controlled coating operation using liquid-liquid material balances. For
each controlled coating operation using a solvent recovery system for
which you conduct liquid-liquid material balances, calculate the
organic HAP emission reduction by applying the volatile organic matter
collection and recovery efficiency to the mass of organic HAP contained
in the coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning
materials that are used in the coating operation controlled by the
solvent recovery system during each month. Perform a liquid-liquid
material balance for each month as specified in paragraphs (j)(1)
through (6) of this section. Calculate the mass of organic HAP emission
reduction by the solvent recovery system as specified in paragraph
(j)(7) of this section.
(1) For each solvent recovery system, install, calibrate, maintain,
and operate according to the manufacturer's specifications, a device
that indicates the cumulative amount of volatile organic matter
recovered by the solvent recovery system each month. The device must be
initially certified by the manufacturer to be accurate to within +/-
2.0 percent of the mass of volatile organic matter recovered.
(2) For each solvent recovery system, determine the mass of
volatile organic matter recovered for the month, based on measurement
with the device required in paragraph (j)(1) of this section.
(3) Determine the mass fraction of volatile organic matter for each
coating, thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning material used in
the coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system during
the month, kg volatile organic matter per kg coating. You may determine
the volatile organic matter mass fraction using Method 24 of 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A, or an EPA approved alternative method, or you may
use information provided by the manufacturer or supplier of the
coating. In the event of any inconsistency between information provided
by the manufacturer or supplier and the results of Method 24 of 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A, or an approved alternative method, the test method
results will take precedence unless, after consultation you demonstrate
to the satisfaction of the enforcement agency that the formulation data
are correct.
(4) Determine the density of each coating, thinner and/or other
additive, and cleaning material used in the coating operation
controlled by the solvent recovery system during the month, kg per
liter, according to Sec. 63.3951(c).
(5) Measure the volume of each coating, thinner and/or other
additive, and cleaning material used in the coating operation
controlled by the solvent recovery system during the month, liters.
(6) Each month, calculate the solvent recovery system's volatile
organic matter collection and recovery efficiency, using Equation 2 of
this section:
[[Page 175]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.016
Where:
RV = Volatile organic matter collection and recovery
efficiency of the solvent recovery system during the month, percent.
MVR = Mass of volatile organic matter recovered by the
solvent recovery system during the month, kg.
Voli = Volume of coating, i, used in the coating operation
controlled by the solvent recovery system during the month, liters.
Di = Density of coating, i, kg per liter.
WVc,i = Mass fraction of volatile organic matter for
coating, i, kg volatile organic matter per kg coating. For reactive
adhesives as defined in Sec. 63.3981, use the mass fraction of organic
HAP that is emitted as determined using the method in appendix A to
subpart PPPP of this part.
Volj = Volume of thinner and/or other additive, j, used in
the coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system during
the month, liters.
Dj = Density of thinner and/or other additive, j, kg per
liter.
WVt,j = Mass fraction of volatile organic matter for thinner
and/or other additive, j, kg volatile organic matter per kg thinner
and/or other additive. For reactive adhesives as defined in Sec.
63.3981, use the mass fraction of organic HAP that is emitted as
determined using the method in appendix A to subpart PPPP of this part.
Volk = Volume of cleaning material, k, used in the coating
operation controlled by the solvent recovery system during the month,
liters.
Dk = Density of cleaning material, k, kg per liter.
WVs,k = Mass fraction of volatile organic matter for
cleaning material, k, kg volatile organic matter per kg cleaning
material.
m = Number of different coatings used in the coating operation
controlled by the solvent recovery system during the month.
n = Number of different thinners and/or other additives used in the
coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system during the
month.
p = Number of different cleaning materials used in the coating
operation controlled by the solvent recovery system during the month.
(7) Calculate the mass of organic HAP emission reduction for the
coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system during the
month, using Equation 3 of this section and according to paragraphs
(j)(7)(i) through (iii) of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.017
Where:
HCSR = Mass of organic HAP emission reduction for the
coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system using a
liquid-liquid material balance during the month, kg.
ACSR = Total mass of organic HAP in the coatings used in the
coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system, kg,
calculated using Equation 3A of this section.
BCSR = Total mass of organic HAP in the thinners and/or
other additives used in the coating operation controlled by the solvent
recovery system, kg, calculated using Equation 3B of this section.
CCSR = Total mass of organic HAP in the cleaning materials
used in the coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery
system, kg, calculated using Equation 3C of this section.
RV = Volatile organic matter collection and recovery
efficiency of the solvent recovery system, percent, from Equation 2 of
this section.
(i) Calculate the mass of organic HAP in the coatings used in the
coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system, kg, using
Equation 3A of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.018
Where:
ACSR = Total mass of organic HAP in the coatings used in the
coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system during the
month, kg.
Volc,i = Total volume of coating, i, used during the month
in the coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system,
liters.
Dc,i = Density of coating, i, kg per liter.
Wc,i = Mass fraction of organic HAP in coating, i, kg
organic HAP per kg coating. For reactive adhesives as defined in Sec.
63.3981, use the mass fraction of organic HAP that is emitted as
determined using the method in appendix A to subpart PPPP of this part.
m = Number of different coatings used.
(ii) Calculate the mass of organic HAP in the thinners and/or other
additives used in the coating operation controlled by the solvent
recovery system, kg, using Equation 3B of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.019
[[Page 176]]
Where:
BCSR = Total mass of organic HAP in the thinners and/or
other additives used in the coating operation controlled by the solvent
recovery system during the month, kg.
Volt,j = Total volume of thinner and/or other additive, j,
used during the month in the coating operation controlled by the
solvent recovery system, liters.
Dt,j = Density of thinner and/or other additive, j, kg per
liter.
Wt,j = Mass fraction of organic HAP in thinner and/or other
additive, j, kg lb organic HAP per kg thinner and/or other additive.
For reactive adhesives as defined in Sec. 63.3981, use the mass
fraction of organic HAP that is emitted as determined using the method
in appendix A to subpart PPPP of this part.
n = Number of different thinners and/or other additives used.
(iii) Calculate the mass of organic HAP in the cleaning materials
used in the coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system
during the month, kg, using Equation 3C of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.020
Where:
CCSR = Total mass of organic HAP in the cleaning materials
used in the coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery system
during the month, kg.
Vols,k = Total volume of cleaning material, k, used during
the month in the coating operation controlled by the solvent recovery
system, liters.
Ds,k = Density of cleaning material, k, kg per liter.
Ws,k = Mass fraction of organic HAP in cleaning material, k,
kg organic HAP per kg cleaning material.
p = Number of different cleaning materials used.
(k) Calculate the total volume of coating solids used. Determine
the total volume of coating solids used, liters, which is the combined
volume of coating solids for all the coatings used during each month in
the coating operation or group of coating operations for which you use
the emission rate with add-on controls option, using Equation 2 of
Sec. 63.3951.
(l) Calculate the mass of organic HAP emissions for each month.
Determine the mass of organic HAP emissions, kg, during each month,
using Equation 4 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.021
where:
HHAP = Total mass of organic HAP emissions for the month,
kg.
He = Total mass of organic HAP emissions before add-on
controls from all the coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and
cleaning materials used during the month, kg, determined according to
paragraph (f) of this section.
HC,i = Total mass of organic HAP emission reduction for
controlled coating operation, i, not using a liquid-liquid material
balance, during the month, kg, from Equation 1 of this section.
HCSR,j = Total mass of organic HAP emission reduction for
coating operation, j, controlled by a solvent recovery system using a
liquid-liquid material balance, during the month, kg, from Equation 3
of this section.
q = Number of controlled coating operations not controlled by a solvent
recovery system using a liquid-liquid material balance.
r = Number of coating operations controlled by a solvent recovery
system using a liquid-liquid material balance.
(m) Calculate the organic HAP emission rate for the compliance
period. Determine the organic HAP emission rate for the compliance
period, kg (lb) of organic HAP emitted per liter (gal) coating solids
used, using Equation 5 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.022
Where:
Hannual = Organic HAP emission rate for the compliance
period, kg organic HAP emitted per liter coating solids used.
HHAP,y = Organic HAP emissions for month, y, kg, determined
according to Equation 4 of this section.
Vst,y = Total volume of coating solids used during month, y,
liters, from Equation 2 of Sec. 63.3951.
y = Identifier for months.
n = Number of full or partial months in the compliance period (for the
initial compliance period, n equals 12 if the compliance date falls on
the first day of a month; otherwise n equals 13; for all following
compliance periods, n equals 12).
(n) Compliance demonstration. The organic HAP emission rate for the
initial compliance period, calculated using Equation 5 of this section,
must be less than or equal to the applicable emission limit for each
subcategory in Sec. 63.3890 or the predominant activity or facility-
specific emission limit allowed in Sec. 63.3890(c). You must keep all
records as required by Sec. Sec. 63.3930 and 63.3931. As part of the
notification of compliance status required by Sec. 63.3910, you must
identify the coating operation(s) for which you used the emission rate
with add-on controls option and submit a statement that the coating
operation(s) was (were) in compliance with the emission limitations
during the initial compliance period because the organic HAP emission
rate was less than or equal to the applicable emission limit in Sec.
63.3890, and you achieved the operating limits required by Sec.
63.3892 and the work practice standards required by Sec. 63.3893.
Sec. 63.3962 [Reserved.]
Sec. 63.3963 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limitations?
(a) To demonstrate continuous compliance with the applicable
emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, the organic HAP emission rate for each
compliance period, determined according to the
[[Page 177]]
procedures in Sec. 63.3961, must be equal to or less than the
applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890. A compliance period
consists of 12 months. Each month after the end of the initial
compliance period described in Sec. 63.3960 is the end of a compliance
period consisting of that month and the preceding 11 months. You must
perform the calculations in Sec. 63.3961 on a monthly basis using data
from the previous 12 months of operation. If you are complying with a
facility-specific emission limit under Sec. 63.3890(c), you must also
perform the calculation using Equation 1 in Sec. 63.3890(c)(2) on a
monthly basis using the data from the previous 12 months of operation.
(b) If the organic HAP emission rate for any 12-month compliance
period exceeded the applicable emission limit in Sec. 63.3890, this is
a deviation from the emission limitation for that compliance period
that must be reported as specified in Sec. Sec. 63.3910(c)(6) and
63.3920(a)(7).
(c) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each operating
limit required by Sec. 63.3892 that applies to you, as specified in
Table 1 to this subpart, when the coating line is in operation.
(1) If an operating parameter is out of the allowed range specified
in Table 1 to this subpart, this is a deviation from the operating
limit that must be reported as specified in Sec. Sec. 63.3910(c)(6)
and 63.3920(a)(7).
(2) If an operating parameter deviates from the operating limit
specified in Table 1 to this subpart, then you must assume that the
emission capture system and add-on control device were achieving zero
efficiency during the time period of the deviation, 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 is approved
by the Administrator.
(d) You must meet the requirements for bypass lines in Sec.
63.3968(b) for controlled coating operations for which you do not
conduct liquid-liquid material balances. If any bypass line is opened
and emissions are diverted to the atmosphere when the coating operation
is running, this is a deviation that must be reported as specified in
Sec. Sec. 63.3910(c)(6) and 63.3920(a)(7). For the purposes of
completing the compliance calculations specified in Sec. Sec.
63.3961(h), you must treat the materials used during a deviation on a
controlled coating operation as if they were used on an uncontrolled
coating operation for the time period of the deviation as indicated in
Equation 1 of Sec. 63.3961.
(e) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with the work
practice standards in Sec. 63.3893. If you did not develop a work
practice plan, or you did not implement the plan, or you did not keep
the records required by Sec. 63.3930(k)(8), this is a deviation from
the work practice standards that must be reported as specified in
Sec. Sec. 63.3910(c)(6) and 63.3920(a)(7).
(f) As part of each semiannual compliance report required in Sec.
63.3920, you must identify the coating operation(s) for which you used
the emission rate with add-on controls option. If there were no
deviations from the emission limitations, submit a statement that you
were in compliance with the emission limitations during the reporting
period because the organic HAP emission rate for each compliance period
was less than or equal to the applicable emission limit in Sec.
63.3890, and you achieved the operating limits required by Sec.
63.3892 and the work practice standards required by Sec. 63.3893
during each compliance period.
(g) During periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction of the
emission capture system, add-on control device, or coating operation
that may affect emission capture or control device efficiency, you must
operate in accordance with the startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan
required by Sec. 63.3900(c).
(h) [Reserved]
(i) [Reserved]
(j) You must maintain records as specified in Sec. Sec. 63.3930
and 63.3931.
Sec. 63.3964 What are the general requirements for performance tests?
(a) You must conduct each performance test required by Sec.
63.3960 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).
(1) Representative coating operation operating conditions. You must
conduct the performance test under representative operating conditions
for the coating operation. Operations during periods of startup,
shutdown, or malfunction and during periods of nonoperation do not
constitute representative conditions. You must record the process
information that is necessary to document operating conditions during
the test and explain why the conditions represent normal operation.
(2) Representative emission capture system and add-on control
device operating conditions. You must conduct the performance test when
the emission capture system and add-on control device are operating at
a representative flow rate, and the add-on control device is operating
at a representative inlet concentration. You must record information
that is necessary to document emission capture system and add-on
control device operating conditions during the test and explain why the
conditions represent normal operation.
(b) You must conduct each performance test of an emission capture
system according to the requirements in Sec. 63.3965. You must conduct
each performance test of an add-on control device according to the
requirements in Sec. 63.3966.
Sec. 63.3965 How do I determine the emission capture system
efficiency?
You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to
determine capture efficiency as part of the performance test required
by Sec. 63.3960.
(a) Assuming 100 percent capture efficiency. You may assume the
capture system efficiency is 100 percent if both of the conditions in
paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section are met:
(1) The capture system meets the criteria in Method 204 of appendix
M to 40 CFR part 51 for a PTE and directs all the exhaust gases from
the enclosure to an add-on control device.
(2) All coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and cleaning
materials used in the coating operation are applied within the capture
system; coating solvent flash-off, curing, and drying occurs within the
capture system; and the removal or evaporation of cleaning materials
from the surfaces they are applied to occurs within the capture system.
For example, this criterion is not met if parts enter the open shop
environment when being moved between a spray booth and a curing oven.
(b) Measuring capture efficiency. If the capture system does not
meet both of the criteria in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section,
then you must use one of the three protocols described in paragraphs
(c), (d), and (e) of this section to measure capture efficiency. The
capture efficiency measurements use TVH capture efficiency as a
surrogate for organic HAP capture efficiency. For the protocols in
paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, the capture efficiency
measurement must consist of three test runs. Each test run must be at
least 3 hours duration or the length of a production run, whichever is
longer, up to 8 hours. For the purposes of this test, a production run
means the time required for a single part to go from the beginning to
the end of the production, which includes
[[Page 178]]
surface preparation activities and drying and curing time.
(c) Liquid-to-uncaptured-gas protocol using a temporary total
enclosure or building enclosure. The liquid-to-uncaptured-gas protocol
compares the mass of liquid TVH in materials used in the coating
operation to the mass of TVH emissions not captured by the emission
capture system. Use a temporary total enclosure or a building enclosure
and the procedures in paragraphs (c)(1) through (6) of this section to
measure emission capture system efficiency using the liquid-to-
uncaptured-gas protocol.
(1) Either use a building enclosure or construct an enclosure
around the coating operation where coatings, thinners and/or other
additives, and cleaning materials are applied, and all areas where
emissions from these applied coatings and materials subsequently occur,
such as flash-off, curing, and drying areas. The areas of the coating
operation where capture devices collect emissions for routing to an
add-on control device, such as the entrance and exit areas of an oven
or spray booth, must also be inside the enclosure. The enclosure must
meet the applicable definition of a temporary total enclosure or
building enclosure in Method 204 of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51.
(2) Use Method 204A or 204F of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 to
determine the mass fraction of TVH liquid input from each coating,
thinner and/or other additive, and cleaning material used in the
coating operation during each capture efficiency test run. To make the
determination, substitute TVH for each occurrence of the term VOC in
the methods.
(3) Use Equation 1 of this section to calculate the total mass of
TVH liquid input from all the coatings, thinners and/or other
additives, and cleaning materials used in the coating operation during
each capture efficiency test run:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.023
Where:
TVHused = Mass of liquid TVH in materials used in the
coating operation during the capture efficiency test run, kg.
TVHi = Mass fraction of TVH in coating, thinner and/or other
additive, or cleaning material, i, that is used in the coating
operation during the capture efficiency test run, kg TVH per kg
material.
Voli = Total volume of coating, thinner and/or other
additive, or cleaning material, i, used in the coating operation during
the capture efficiency test run, liters.
Di = Density of coating, thinner and/or other additive, or
cleaning material, i, kg material per liter material.
n = Number of different coatings, thinners and/or other additives, and
cleaning materials used in the coating operation during the capture
efficiency test run.
(4) Use Method 204D or 204E of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 to
measure the total mass, kg, of TVH emissions that are not captured by
the emission capture system. They are measured as they exit the
temporary total enclosure or building enclosure during each capture
efficiency test run. To make the measurement, substitute TVH for each
occurrence of the term VOC in the methods.
(i) Use Method 204D of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 if the
enclosure is a temporary total enclosure.
(ii) Use Method 204E of appendix M to 40 CFR 51 if the enclosure is
a building enclosure. During the capture efficiency measurement, all
organic compound emitting operations inside the building enclosure,
other than the coating operation for which capture efficiency is being
determined, must be shut down, but all fans and blowers must be
operating normally.
(5) For each capture efficiency test run, determine the percent
capture efficiency of the emission capture system using Equation 2 of
this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.024
Where:
CE = Capture efficiency of the emission capture system vented to the
add-on control device, percent.
TVHused = Total mass of TVH liquid input used in the coating
operation during the capture efficiency test run, kg.
TVHuncaptured = Total mass of TVH that is not captured by
the emission capture system and that exits from the temporary total
enclosure or building enclosure during the capture efficiency test run,
kg.
(6) Determine the capture efficiency of the emission capture system
as the average of the capture efficiencies measured in the three test
runs.
(d) Gas-to-gas protocol using a temporary total enclosure or a
building enclosure. The gas-to-gas protocol compares the mass of TVH
emissions captured by the emission capture system to the mass of TVH
emissions not captured. Use a temporary total enclosure or a building
enclosure and the procedures in paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of this
section to measure emission capture system efficiency using the gas-to-
gas protocol.
(1) Either use a building enclosure or construct an enclosure
around the coating operation where coatings, thinners and/or other
additives, and cleaning materials are applied, and all areas where
emissions from these applied coatings and materials subsequently occur,
such as flash-off, curing, and drying areas. The areas of the coating
operation where capture devices collect emissions generated by the
coating operation for routing to an add-on control device, such as the
entrance and exit areas of an oven or a spray booth, must also be
inside the enclosure. The enclosure must meet the applicable definition
of a temporary total enclosure or building enclosure in Method 204 of
appendix M to 40 CFR part 51.
(2) Use Method 204B or 204C of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 to
measure the total mass, kg, of TVH emissions captured by the emission
[[Page 179]]
capture system during each capture efficiency test run as measured at
the inlet to the add-on control device. To make the measurement,
substitute TVH for each occurrence of the term VOC in the methods.
(i) The sampling points for the Method 204B or 204C measurement
must be upstream from the add-on control device and must represent
total emissions routed from the capture system and entering the add-on
control device.
(ii) If multiple emission streams from the capture system enter the
add-on control device without a single common duct, then the emissions
entering the add-on control device must be simultaneously measured in
each duct and the total emissions entering the add-on control device
must be determined.
(3) Use Method 204D or 204E of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 to
measure the total mass, kg, of TVH emissions that are not captured by
the emission capture system; they are measured as they exit the
temporary total enclosure or building enclosure during each capture
efficiency test run. To make the measurement, substitute TVH for each
occurrence of the term VOC in the methods.
(i) Use Method 204D of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 if the
enclosure is a temporary total enclosure.
(ii) Use Method 204E of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 if the
enclosure is a building enclosure. During the capture efficiency
measurement, all organic compound emitting operations inside the
building enclosure, other than the coating operation for which capture
efficiency is being determined, must be shut down, but all fans and
blowers must be operating normally.
(4) For each capture efficiency test run, determine the percent
capture efficiency of the emission capture system using Equation 3 of
this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.025
Where:
CE = Capture efficiency of the emission capture system vented to the
add-on control device, percent.
TVHcaptured = Total mass of TVH captured by the emission
capture system as measured at the inlet to the add-on control device
during the emission capture efficiency test run, kg.
TVHuncaptured = Total mass of TVH that is not captured by
the emission capture system and that exits from the temporary total
enclosure or building enclosure during the capture efficiency test run,
kg.
(5) Determine the capture efficiency of the emission capture system
as the average of the capture efficiencies measured in the three test
runs.
(e) Alternative capture efficiency protocol. As an alternative to
the procedures specified in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section and
subject to the approval of the Administrator, you may determine capture
efficiency using any other capture efficiency protocol and test methods
that satisfy the criteria of either the DQO or LCL approach as
described in appendix A to subpart KK of this part.
Sec. 63.3966 How do I determine the add-on control device emission
destruction or removal efficiency?
You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to
determine the add-on control device emission destruction or removal
efficiency as part of the performance test required by Sec. 63.3960.
You must conduct three test runs as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3) and
each test run must last at least 1 hour. If the source is a magnet wire
coating machine, you may use the procedures in section 3.0 of appendix
A to this subpart as an alternative.
(a) For all types of add-on control devices, use the test methods
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section.
(1) Use Method 1 or 1A of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60, as
appropriate, to select sampling sites and velocity traverse points.
(2) Use Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G of appendix A to 40 CFR
part 60, as appropriate, to measure gas volumetric flow rate.
(3) Use Method 3, 3A, or 3B of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60, as
appropriate, for gas analysis to determine dry molecular weight.
(4) Use Method 4 of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60, to determine
stack gas moisture.
(5) Methods for determining gas volumetric flow rate, dry molecular
weight, and stack gas moisture must be performed, as applicable, during
each test run.
(b) Measure total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon at the
inlet and outlet of the add-on control device simultaneously, using
either Method 25 or 25A of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60.
(1) Use Method 25 if the add-on control device is an oxidizer and
you expect the total gaseous organic concentration as carbon to be more
than 50 parts per million (ppm) at the control device outlet.
(2) Use Method 25A if the add-on control device is an oxidizer and
you expect the total gaseous organic concentration as carbon to be 50
ppm or less at the control device outlet.
(3) Use Method 25A if the add-on control device is not an oxidizer.
(c) If two or more add-on control devices are used for the same
emission stream, then you must measure emissions at the outlet to the
atmosphere of each device. For example, if one add-on control device is
a concentrator with an outlet to the atmosphere for the high-volume
dilute stream that has been treated by the concentrator, and a second
add-on control device is an oxidizer with an outlet to the atmosphere
for the low-volume concentrated stream that is treated with the
oxidizer, you must measure emissions at the outlet of the oxidizer and
the high volume dilute stream outlet of the concentrator.
(d) For each test run, determine the total gaseous organic
emissions mass flow rates for the inlet and the outlet of the add-on
control device, using Equation 1 of this section. If there is more than
one inlet or outlet to the add-on control device, you must calculate
the total gaseous organic mass flow rate using Equation 1 of this
section for each inlet and each outlet and then total all of the inlet
emissions and total all of the outlet emissions:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.026
[[Page 180]]
Where:
Mf = Total gaseous organic emissions mass flow rate, kg per
hour (h).
Cc = Concentration of organic compounds as carbon in the
vent gas, as determined by Method 25 or Method 25A, parts per million
by volume (ppmv), dry basis.
Qsd = Volumetric flow rate of gases entering or exiting the
add-on control device, as determined by Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or
2G, dry standard cubic meters/hour (dscm/h).
0.0416 = Conversion factor for molar volume, kg-moles per cubic meter
(mmHg).
(e) For each test run, determine the add-on control device organic
emissions destruction or removal efficiency, using Equation 2 of this
section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.027
Where:
DRE = Organic emissions destruction or removal efficiency of the add-on
control device, percent.
Mfi = Total gaseous organic emissions mass flow rate at the
inlet(s) to the add-on control device, using Equation 1 of this
section, kg/h.
Mfo = Total gaseous organic emissions mass flow rate at the
outlet(s) of the add-on control device, using Equation 1 of this
section, kg/h.
(f) Determine the emission destruction or removal efficiency of the
add-on control device as the average of the efficiencies determined in
the three test runs and calculated in Equation 2 of this section.
Sec. 63.3967 How do I establish the emission capture system and add-
on control device operating limits during the performance test?
During the performance test required by Sec. 63.3960 and described
in Sec. Sec. 63.3964, 63.3965, and 63.3966, you must establish the
operating limits required by Sec. 63.3892 according to this section,
unless you have received approval for alternative monitoring and
operating limits under Sec. 63.8(f) as specified in Sec. 63.3892.
(a) Thermal oxidizers. If your add-on control device is a thermal
oxidizer, establish the operating limits according to paragraphs (a)(1)
and (2) of this section.
(1) During the performance test, you must monitor and record the
combustion temperature at least once every 15 minutes during each of
the three test runs. You must monitor the temperature in the firebox of
the thermal oxidizer or immediately downstream of the firebox before
any substantial heat exchange occurs.
(2) Use the data collected during the performance test to calculate
and record the average combustion temperature maintained during the
performance test. This average combustion temperature is the minimum
operating limit for your thermal oxidizer.
(b) Catalytic oxidizers. If your add-on control device is a
catalytic oxidizer, establish the operating limits according to either
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) or paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) of this section.
If the source is a magnet wire coating machine, you may use the
procedures in section 3.0 of appendix A to this subpart as an
alternative.
(1) During the performance test, you must monitor and record the
temperature just before the catalyst bed and the temperature difference
across the catalyst bed at least once every 15 minutes during each of
the three test runs.
(2) Use the data collected during the performance test to calculate
and record the average temperature just before the catalyst bed and the
average temperature difference across the catalyst bed maintained
during the performance test. These are the minimum operating limits for
your catalytic oxidizer.
(3) You must monitor the temperature at the inlet to the catalyst
bed and implement a site-specific inspection and maintenance plan for
your catalytic oxidizer as specified in paragraph (b)(4) of this
section. During the performance test, you must monitor and record the
temperature just before the catalyst bed at least once every 15 minutes
during each of the three test runs. Use the data collected during the
performance test to calculate and record the average temperature just
before the catalyst bed during the performance test. This is the
minimum operating limit for your catalytic oxidizer.
(4) You must develop and implement an inspection and maintenance
plan for your catalytic oxidizer(s) for which you elect to monitor
according to paragraph (b)(3) of this section. The plan must address,
at a minimum, the elements specified in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through
(iii) of this section.
(i) Annual sampling and analysis of the catalyst activity (i.e.,
conversion efficiency) following the manufacturer's or catalyst
supplier's recommended procedures. If problems are found during the
catalyst activity test, you must replace the catalyst bed or take other
corrective action consistent with the manufacturer's recommendations.
(ii) Monthly external inspection of the catalytic oxidizer system,
including the burner assembly and fuel supply lines for problems and,
as necessary, adjust the equipment to assure proper air-to-fuel
mixtures.
(iii) Annual internal inspection of the catalyst bed to check for
channeling, abrasion, and settling. If problems are found during the
annual internal inspection of the catalyst, you must replace the
catalyst bed or take other corrective action consistent with the
manufacturer's recommendations. If the catalyst bed is replaced and is
not of like or better kind and quality as the old catalyst then you
must conduct a new performance test to determine destruction efficiency
according to Sec. 63.3966. If a catalyst bed is replaced and the
replacement catalyst is of like or better kind and quality as the old
catalyst, then a new performance test to determine destruction
efficiency is not required and you may continue to use the previously
established operating limits for that catalytic oxidizer.
(c) Regenerative carbon adsorbers. If your add-on control device is
a regenerative carbon adsorber, establish the operating limits
according to paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) You must monitor and record the total regeneration desorbing
gas (e.g., steam or nitrogen) mass flow for each regeneration cycle,
and the carbon bed temperature after each carbon bed regeneration and
cooling cycle for the regeneration cycle either immediately preceding
or immediately following the performance test.
(2) The operating limits for your regenerative carbon adsorber are
the minimum total desorbing gas mass flow recorded during the
regeneration cycle and the maximum carbon bed temperature recorded
after the cooling cycle.
(d) Condensers. If your add-on control device is a condenser,
establish the operating limits according to paragraphs (d)(1) and (2)
of this section.
[[Page 181]]
(1) During the performance test, you must monitor and record the
condenser outlet (product side) gas temperature at least once every 15
minutes during each of the three test runs.
(2) Use the data collected during the performance test to calculate
and record the average condenser outlet (product side) gas temperature
maintained during the performance test. This average condenser outlet
gas temperature is the maximum operating limit for your condenser.
(e) Concentrators. If your add-on control device includes a
concentrator, you must establish operating limits for the concentrator
according to paragraphs (e)(1) through (4) of this section.
(1) During the performance test, you must monitor and record the
desorption concentrate stream gas temperature at least once every 15
minutes during each of the three runs of the performance test.
(2) Use the data collected during the performance test to calculate
and record the average temperature. This is the minimum operating limit
for the desorption concentrate gas stream temperature.
(3) During the performance test, you must monitor and record the
pressure drop of the dilute stream across the concentrator at least
once every 15 minutes during each of the three runs of the performance
test.
(4) Use the data collected during the performance test to calculate
and record the average pressure drop. This is the minimum operating
limit for the dilute stream across the concentrator.
(f) Emission capture systems. For each capture device that is not
part of a PTE that meets the criteria of Sec. 63.3965(a), establish an
operating limit for either the gas volumetric flow rate or duct static
pressure, as specified in paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this section.
The operating limit for a PTE is specified in Table 1 to this subpart.
If the source is a magnet wire coating machine, you may use the
procedures in section 2.0 of appendix A to this subpart as an
alternative.
(1) During the capture efficiency determination required by Sec.
63.3960 and described in Sec. Sec. 63.3964 and 63.3965, you must
monitor and record either the gas volumetric flow rate or the duct
static pressure for each separate capture device in your emission
capture system at least once every 15 minutes during each of the three
test runs at a point in the duct between the capture device and the
add-on control device inlet.
(2) Calculate and record the average gas volumetric flow rate or
duct static pressure for the three test runs for each capture device.
This average gas volumetric flow rate or duct static pressure is the
minimum operating limit for that specific capture device.
Sec. 63.3968 What are the requirements for continuous parameter
monitoring system installation, operation, and maintenance?
(a) General. You must install, operate, and maintain each CPMS
specified in paragraphs (c), (e), (f), and (g) of this section
according to paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this section. You must
install, operate, and maintain each CPMS specified in paragraphs (b)
and (d) of this section according to paragraphs (a)(3) through (5) of
this section.
(1) The CPMS must complete a minimum of one cycle of operation for
each successive 15-minute period. You must have a minimum of four
equally spaced successive cycles of CPMS operation in 1 hour.
(2) You must determine the average of all recorded readings for
each successive 3-hour period of the emission capture system and add-on
control device operation.
(3) You must record the results of each inspection, calibration,
and validation check of the CPMS.
(4) You must maintain the CPMS at all times and have available
necessary parts for routine repairs of the monitoring equipment.
(5) You must operate the CPMS and collect emission capture system
and add-on control device parameter data at all times that a controlled
coating operation is operating, except during monitoring malfunctions,
associated repairs, and required quality assurance or control
activities (including, if applicable, calibration checks and required
zero and span adjustments).
(6) You must not use emission capture system or add-on control
device parameter data recorded during monitoring malfunctions,
associated repairs, out-of-control periods, or required quality
assurance or control activities when calculating data averages. You
must use all the data collected during all other periods in calculating
the data averages for determining compliance with the emission capture
system and add-on control device operating limits.
(7) A monitoring malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not
reasonably preventable failure of the CPMS to provide valid data.
Monitoring failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or
careless operation are not malfunctions. Any period for which the
monitoring system is out-of-control and data are not available for
required calculations is a deviation from the monitoring requirements.
(b) Capture system bypass line. You must meet the requirements of
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section for each emission capture
system that contains bypass lines that could divert emissions away from
the add-on control device to the atmosphere.
(1) You must monitor or secure the valve or closure mechanism
controlling the bypass line in a nondiverting position in such a way
that the valve or closure mechanism cannot be opened without creating a
record that the valve was opened. The method used to monitor or secure
the valve or closure mechanism must meet one of the requirements
specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (v) of this section.
(i) Flow control position indicator. Install, calibrate, maintain,
and operate according to the manufacturer's specifications a flow
control position indicator that takes a reading at least once every 15
minutes and provides a record indicating whether the emissions are
directed to the add-on control device or diverted from the add-on
control device. The time of occurrence and flow control position must
be recorded, as well as every time the flow direction is changed. The
flow control position indicator must be installed at the entrance to
any bypass line that could divert the emissions away from the add-on
control device to the atmosphere.
(ii) Car-seal or lock-and-key valve closures. Secure any bypass
line valve in the closed position with a car-seal or a lock-and-key
type configuration. You must visually inspect the seal or closure
mechanism at least once every month to ensure that the valve is
maintained in the closed position, and the emissions are not diverted
away from the add-on control device to the atmosphere.
(iii) Valve closure monitoring. Ensure that any bypass line valve
is in the closed (nondiverting) position through monitoring of valve
position at least once every 15 minutes. You must inspect the
monitoring system at least once every month to verify that the monitor
will indicate valve position.
(iv) Automatic shutdown system. Use an automatic shutdown system in
which the coating operation is stopped when flow is diverted by the
bypass line away from the add-on control device to the atmosphere when
the coating operation is running. You must inspect the automatic
shutdown system at least once every month to verify that it will detect
diversions of flow and shut down the coating operation.
(v) Flow direction indicator. Install, calibrate, maintain, and
operate according to the manufacturer's specifications a flow direction
indicator that takes a reading at least once every
[[Page 182]]
15 minutes and provides a record indicating whether the emissions are
directed to the add-on control device or diverted from the add-on
control device. Each time the flow direction changes, the next reading
of the time of occurrence and flow direction must be recorded. The flow
direction indicator must be installed in each bypass line or air makeup
supply line that could divert the emissions away from the add-on
control device to the atmosphere.
(2) If any bypass line is opened, you must include a description of
why the bypass line was opened and the length of time it remained open
in the semiannual compliance reports required in Sec. 63.3920.
(c) Thermal oxidizers and catalytic oxidizers. If you are using a
thermal oxidizer or catalytic oxidizer as an add-on control device
(including those used with concentrators or with carbon adsorbers to
treat desorbed concentrate streams), you must comply with the
requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section:
(1) For a thermal oxidizer, install a gas temperature monitor in
the firebox of the thermal oxidizer or in the duct immediately
downstream of the firebox before any substantial heat exchange occurs.
(2) For a catalytic oxidizer, install gas temperature monitors
upstream and/or downstream of the catalyst bed as required in Sec.
63.3967(b).
(3) For all thermal oxidizers and catalytic oxidizers, you must
meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (c)(3)(i) through (v) of
this section for each gas temperature monitoring device.
(i) Locate the temperature sensor in a position that provides a
representative temperature.
(ii) Use a temperature sensor with a measurement sensitivity of 5
degrees Fahrenheit or 1.0 percent of the temperature value, whichever
is larger.
(iii) Before using the sensor for the first time or when relocating
or replacing the sensor, perform a validation check by comparing the
sensor output to a calibrated temperature measurement device or by
comparing the sensor output to a simulated temperature.
(iv) Conduct an accuracy audit every quarter and after every
deviation. Accuracy audit methods include comparisons of sensor output
to redundant temperature sensors, to calibrated temperature measurement
devices, or to temperature simulation devices.
(v) Conduct a visual inspection of each sensor every quarter if
redundant temperature sensors are not used.
(d) Regenerative carbon adsorbers. If you are using a regenerative
carbon adsorber as an add-on control device, you must monitor the total
regeneration desorbing gas (e.g., steam or nitrogen) mass flow for each
regeneration cycle, the carbon bed temperature after each regeneration
and cooling cycle, and comply with paragraphs (a)(3) through (5) and
(d)(1) through (3) of this section.
(1) The regeneration desorbing gas mass flow monitor must be an
integrating device having a measurement sensitivity of plus or minus 10
percent capable of recording the total regeneration desorbing gas mass
flow for each regeneration cycle.
(2) The carbon bed temperature monitor must be capable of recording
the temperature within 15 minutes of completing any carbon bed cooling
cycle.
(3) For all regenerative carbon adsorbers, you must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) through (v) of this section for
each temperature monitoring device.
(e) Condensers. If you are using a condenser, you must monitor the
condenser outlet (product side) gas temperature and comply with
paragraphs (a) and (e)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) The temperature monitor must provide a gas temperature record
at least once every 15 minutes.
(2) For all condensers, you must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (c)(3)(i) through (v) of this section for each temperature
monitoring device.
(f) Concentrators. If you are using a concentrator, such as a
zeolite wheel or rotary carbon bed concentrator, you must comply with
the requirements in paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) You must install a temperature monitor in the desorption gas
stream. The temperature monitor must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (a) and (c)(3) of this section.
(2) You must install a device to monitor pressure drop across the
zeolite wheel or rotary carbon bed. The pressure monitoring device must
meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (g)(2) of this section.
(g) Emission capture systems. The capture system monitoring system
must comply with the applicable requirements in paragraphs (g)(1) and
(2) of this section. If the source is a magnet wire coating machine,
you may use the procedures in section 2.0 of appendix A to this subpart
as an alternative.
(1) For each flow measurement device, you must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (g)(1)(i) through (vii) of this
section.
(i) Locate a flow sensor in a position that provides a
representative flow measurement in the duct from each capture device in
the emission capture system to the add-on control device.
(ii) Use a flow sensor with an accuracy of at least 10 percent of
the flow.
(iii) Perform an initial sensor calibration in accordance with the
manufacturer's requirements.
(iv) Perform a validation check before initial use or upon
relocation or replacement of a sensor. Validation checks include
comparison of sensor values with electronic signal simulations or via
relative accuracy testing.
(v) Conduct an accuracy audit every quarter and after every
deviation. Accuracy audit methods include comparisons of sensor values
with electronic signal simulations or via relative accuracy testing.
(vi) Perform leak checks monthly.
(vii) Perform visual inspections of the sensor system quarterly if
there is no redundant sensor.
(2) For each pressure drop measurement device, you must comply with
the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (g)(2)(i) through (vii) of this
section.
(i) Locate the pressure sensor(s) in or as close to a position that
provides a representative measurement of the pressure drop across each
opening you are monitoring.
(ii) Use a pressure sensor with an accuracy of at least 0.5 inches
of water column or 5 percent of the measured value, whichever is
larger.
(iii) Perform an initial calibration of the sensor according to the
manufacturer's requirements.
(iv) Conduct a validation check before initial operation or upon
relocation or replacement of a sensor. Validation checks include
comparison of sensor values to calibrated pressure measurement devices
or to pressure simulation using calibrated pressure sources.
(v) Conduct accuracy audits every quarter and after every
deviation. Accuracy audits include comparison of sensor values to
calibrated pressure measurement devices or to pressure simulation using
calibrated pressure sources.
(vi) Perform monthly leak checks on pressure connections. A
pressure of at least 1.0 inches of water column to the connection must
yield a stable sensor result for at least 15 seconds.
(vii) Perform a visual inspection of the sensor at least monthly if
there is no redundant sensor.
[[Page 183]]
Other Requirements and Information
Sec. 63.3980 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
(a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by us, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), or a delegated authority such as
your State, local, or tribal agency. If the Administrator has delegated
authority to your State, local, or tribal agency, then that agency (as
well as the EPA) has the authority to implement and enforce this
subpart. You should contact your EPA Regional Office to find out if
implementation and enforcement of this subpart is delegated to your
State, local, or tribal agency.
(b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this
subpart to a State, local, or tribal agency under subpart E of this
part, the authorities contained in paragraph (c) of this section are
retained by the Administrator and are not transferred to the State,
local, or tribal agency.
(c) The authorities that will not be delegated to State, local, or
tribal agencies are listed in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this
section:
(1) Approval of alternatives to the requirements in Sec. 63.3881
through 3883 and Sec. 63.3890 through 3893.
(2) Approval of major alternatives to test methods under Sec.
63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
(3) Approval of major alternatives to monitoring under Sec.
63.8(f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
(4) Approval of major alternatives to recordkeeping and reporting
under Sec. 63.10(f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
Sec. 63.3981 What definitions apply to this subpart?
Terms used in this subpart are defined in the CAA, in 40 CFR 63.2,
and in this section as follows:
Additive means a material that is added to a coating after purchase
from a supplier (e.g., catalysts, activators, accelerators).
Add-on control means an air pollution control device, such as a
thermal oxidizer or carbon adsorber, that reduces pollution in an air
stream by destruction or removal before discharge to the atmosphere.
Adhesive, adhesive coating means any chemical substance that is
applied for the purpose of bonding two surfaces together. Products used
on humans and animals, adhesive tape, contact paper, or any other
product with an adhesive incorporated onto or in an inert substrate
shall not be considered adhesives under this subpart.
Assembled on-road vehicle coating means any coating operation in
which coating is applied to the surface of some component or surface of
a fully assembled motor vehicle or trailer intended for on-road use
including, but not limited to, components or surfaces on automobiles
and light-duty trucks that have been repaired after a collision or
otherwise repainted, fleet delivery trucks, and motor homes and other
recreational vehicles (including camping trailers and fifth wheels).
Assembled on-road vehicle coating includes the concurrent coating of
parts of the assembled on-road vehicle that are painted off-vehicle to
protect systems, equipment, or to allow full coverage. Assembled on-
road vehicle coating does not include surface coating operations that
meet the applicability criteria of the automobiles and light-duty
trucks NESHAP. Assembled on-road vehicle coating also does not include
the use of adhesives, sealants, and caulks used in assembling on-road
vehicles.
Capture device means a hood, enclosure, room, floor sweep, or other
means of containing or collecting emissions and directing those
emissions into an add-on air pollution control device.
Capture efficiency or capture system efficiency means the portion
(expressed as a percentage) of the pollutants from an emission source
that is delivered to an add-on control device.
Capture system means one or more capture devices intended to
collect emissions generated by a coating operation in the use of
coatings or cleaning materials, both at the point of application and at
subsequent points where emissions from the coatings and cleaning
materials occur, such as flashoff, drying, or curing. As used in this
subpart, multiple capture devices that collect emissions generated by a
coating operation are considered a single capture system.
Cleaning material means a solvent used to remove contaminants and
other materials, such as dirt, grease, oil, and dried or wet coating
(e.g., depainting or paint stripping), from a substrate before or after
coating application or from equipment associated with a coating
operation, such as spray booths, spray guns, racks, tanks, and hangers.
Thus, it includes any cleaning material used on substrates or equipment
or both.
Coating means a material applied to a substrate for decorative,
protective, or functional purposes. Such materials include, but are not
limited to, paints, sealants, liquid plastic coatings, caulks, inks,
adhesives, and maskants. Decorative, protective, or functional
materials that consist only of protective oils for metal, acids, bases,
or any combination of these substances, or paper film or plastic film
which may be pre-coated with an adhesive by the film manufacturer, are
not considered coatings for the purposes of this subpart. A liquid
plastic coating means a coating made from fine particle-size polyvinyl
chloride (PVC) in solution (also referred to as a plastisol).
Coating operation means equipment used to apply cleaning materials
to a substrate to prepare it for coating application (surface
preparation) or to remove dried coating; to apply coating to a
substrate (coating application) and to dry or cure the coating after
application; or to clean coating operation equipment (equipment
cleaning). A single coating operation may include any combination of
these types of equipment, but always includes at least the point at
which a given quantity of coating or cleaning material is applied to a
given part and all subsequent points in the affected source where
organic HAP are emitted from the specific quantity of coating or
cleaning material on the specific part. There may be multiple coating
operations in an affected source. Coating application with handheld,
non-refillable aerosol containers, touch-up markers, or marking pens is
not a coating operation for the purposes of this subpart.
Coatings solids means the nonvolatile portion of the coating that
makes up the dry film.
Continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) means the total
equipment that may be required to meet the data acquisition and
availability requirements of this subpart, used to sample, condition
(if applicable), analyze, and provide a record of coating operation, or
capture system, or add-on control device parameters.
Controlled coating operation means a coating operation from which
some or all of the organic HAP emissions are routed through an emission
capture system and add-on control device.
Deviation means any instance in which an affected source subject to
this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source:
(1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by
this subpart including but not limited to, any emission limit or
operating limit or work practice standard;
(2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to
obtain such a permit; or
(3) Fails to meet any emission limit, or operating limit, or
work practice standard in this subpart during startup, shutdown, or
[[Page 184]]
malfunction, regardless of whether or not such failure is permitted
by this subpart.
Emission limitation means the aggregate of all requirements
associated with a compliance option including emission limit, operating
limit, work practice standard, etc.
Enclosure means a structure that surrounds a source of emissions
and captures and directs the emissions to an add-on control device.
Exempt compound means a specific compound that is not considered a
VOC due to negligible photochemical reactivity. The exempt compounds
are listed in 40 CFR 51.100(s).
Extreme performance fluoropolymer coating means coatings that are
formulated systems based on fluoropolymer resins which often contain
bonding matrix polymers dissolved in non-aqueous solvents as well as
other ingredients. Extreme performance fluoropolymer coatings are
typically used when one or more critical performance criteria are
required including, but not limited to a nonstick low-energy surface,
dry film lubrication, high resistance to chemical attack, extremely
wide operating temperature, high electrical insulating properties, or
that the surface comply with government (e.g., USDA, FDA) or third
party specifications for health, safety, reliability, or performance.
Once applied to a substrate, extreme performance fluoropolymer coatings
undergo a curing process that typically requires high temperatures, a
chemical reaction, or other specialized technology.
Facility maintenance means the routine repair or renovation
(including the surface coating) of the tools, equipment, machinery, and
structures that comprise the infrastructure of the affected facility
and that are necessary for the facility to function in its intended
capacity.
General use coating means any material that meets the definition of
coating but does not meet the definition of high performance coating,
rubber-to-metal coating, magnet wire coating, or extreme performance
fluoropolymer coating as defined in this section.
High performance architectural coating means any coating applied to
architectural subsections which is required to meet the specifications
of Architectural Aluminum Manufacturer's Association's publication
number AAMA 605.2-2000.
High performance coating means any coating that meets the
definition of high performance architectural coating or high
temperature coating in this section.
High temperature coating means any coating applied to a substrate
which during normal use must withstand temperatures of at least 538
degrees Celsius (1000 degrees Fahrenheit).
Hobby shop means any surface coating operation, located at an
affected source, that is used exclusively for personal, noncommercial
purposes by the affected source's employees or assigned personnel.
Magnet wire coatings, commonly referred to as magnet wire enamels,
are applied to a continuous strand of wire which will be used to make
turns (windings) in electrical devices such as coils, transformers, or
motors. Magnet wire coatings provide high dielectric strength and turn-
to-turn conductor insulation. This allows the turns of an electrical
device to be placed in close proximity to one another which leads to
increased coil effectiveness and electrical efficiency.
Magnet wire coating machine means equipment which applies and cures
magnet wire coatings.
Manufacturer's formulation data means data on a material (such as a
coating) that are supplied by the material manufacturer based on
knowledge of the ingredients used to manufacture that material, rather
than based on testing of the material with the test methods specified
in Sec. 63.3941. Manufacturer's formulation data may include, but are
not limited to, information on density, organic HAP content, volatile
organic matter content, and coating solids content.
Mass fraction of organic HAP means the ratio of the mass of organic
HAP to the mass of a material in which it is contained, expressed as kg
of organic HAP per kg of material.
Month means a calendar month or a pre-specified period of 28 days
to 35 days to allow for flexibility in recordkeeping when data are
based on a business accounting period.
Non-HAP coating means, for the purposes of this subpart, a coating
that contains no more than 0.1 percent by mass of any individual
organic HAP that is an OSHA-defined carcinogen as specified in 29 CFR
1910.1200(d)(4) and no more than 1.0 percent by mass for any other
individual HAP.
Organic HAP content means the mass of organic HAP emitted per
volume of coating solids used for a coating calculated using Equation 2
of Sec. 63.3941. The organic HAP content is determined for the coating
in the condition it is in when received from its manufacturer or
supplier and does not account for any alteration after receipt. For
reactive adhesives in which some of the HAP react to form solids and
are not emitted to the atmosphere, organic HAP content is the mass of
organic HAP that is emitted, rather than the organic HAP content of the
coating as it is received.
Permanent total enclosure (PTE) means a permanently installed
enclosure that meets the criteria of Method 204 of appendix M, 40 CFR
part 51, for a PTE and that directs all the exhaust gases from the
enclosure to an add-on control device.
Personal watercraft means a vessel (boat) which uses an inboard
motor powering a water jet pump as its primary source of motive power
and which is designed to be operated by a person or persons sitting,
standing, or kneeling on the vessel, rather than in the conventional
manner of sitting or standing inside the vessel.
Protective oil means an organic material that is applied to metal
for the purpose of providing lubrication or protection from corrosion
without forming a solid film. This definition of protective oil
includes, but is not limited to, lubricating oils, evaporative oils
(including those that evaporate completely), and extrusion oils.
Protective oils used on miscellaneous metal parts and products include
magnet wire lubricants and soft temporary protective coatings that are
removed prior to installation or further assembly of a part or
component.
Reactive adhesive means adhesive systems composed, in part, of
volatile monomers that react during the adhesive curing reaction, and,
as a result, do not evolve from the film during use. These volatile
components instead become integral parts of the adhesive through
chemical reaction. At least 70 percent of the liquid components of the
system, excluding water, react during the process.
Research or laboratory facility means a facility whose primary
purpose is for research and development of new processes and products,
that is conducted under the close supervision of technically trained
personnel, and is not engaged in the manufacture of final or
intermediate products for commercial purposes, except in a de minimis
manner.
Responsible official means responsible official as defined in 40
CFR 70.2.
Rubber-to-metal coatings are coatings that contain heat-activated
polymer systems in either solvent or water that, when applied to metal
substrates, dry to a non-tacky surface and react chemically with the
rubber and metal during a vulcanization process.
Startup, initial means the first time equipment is brought online
in a facility.
Surface preparation means use of a cleaning material on a portion
of or all
[[Page 185]]
of a substrate. This includes use of a cleaning material to remove
dried coating, which is sometimes called depainting.
Temporary total enclosure means an enclosure constructed for the
purpose of measuring the capture efficiency of pollutants emitted from
a given source as defined in Method 204 of appendix M, 40 CFR part 51.
Thinner means an organic solvent that is added to a coating after
the coating is received from the supplier.
Total volatile hydrocarbon (TVH) means the total amount of
nonaqueous volatile organic matter determined according to Methods 204
and 204A through 204F of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 and substituting
the term TVH each place in the methods where the term VOC is used. The
TVH includes both VOC and non-VOC.
Uncontrolled coating operation means a coating operation from which
none of the organic HAP emissions are routed through an emission
capture system and add-on control device.
Volatile organic compound (VOC) means any compound defined as VOC
in 40 CFR 51.100(s).
Volume fraction of coating solids means the ratio of the volume of
coating solids (also known as the volume of nonvolatiles) to the volume
of a coating in which it is contained; liters (gal) of coating solids
per liter (gal) of coating.
Wastewater means water that is generated in a coating operation and
is collected, stored, or treated prior to being discarded or
discharged.
Tables to Subpart MMMM of Part 63
If you are required to comply with operating limits by Sec.
63.3892(c), you must comply with the applicable operating limits in the
following table:
Table 1 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63.--Operating Limits if Using the
Emission Rate With Add-On Controls Option
------------------------------------------------------------------------
And you must
demonstrate
For the following device . . You must meet the continuous
. following operating compliance with the
limit . . . operating limit by .
. .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Thermal oxidizer......... a. The average i. Collecting the
combustion combustion
temperature in any temperature data
3-hour period must according to Sec.
not fall below the 63.3968(c);
combustion ii. Reducing the
temperature limit data to 3-hour
established block averages; and
according to Sec. iii. Maintaining the
63.3967(a). 3-hour average
combustion
temperature at or
above the
temperature limit.
2. Catalytic oxidizer....... a. The average i. Collecting the
temperature temperature data
measured just according to Sec.
before the catalyst 63.3968(c);
bed in any 3-hour ii. Reducing the
period must not data to 3-hour
fall below the block averages; and
limit established iii. Maintaining the
according to Sec. 3-hour average
63.3967(b) (for temperature before
magnet wire coating (or for magnet wire
machines, coating machines
temperature can be after) the catalyst
monitored before or bed at or above the
after the catalyst temperature limit.
bed); and either
b. Ensure that the i. Collecting the
average temperature temperature data
difference across according to Sec.
the catalyst bed in 63.3968(c);
any 3-hour period ii. Reducing the
does not fall below data to 3-hour
the temperature block averages; and
difference limit iii. Maintaining the
established 3-hour average
according to Sec. temperature
63.3967(b) (2); or difference at or
above the
temperature
difference limit.
c. Develop and i. Maintaining and
implement an up-to-date
inspection and inspection and
maintenance plan maintenance plan,
according to Sec. records of annual
63.3967(b)(4) or catalyst activity
for magnet wire checks, records of
coating machines monthly inspections
according to of the oxidizer
section 3.0 of system, and records
appendix A to this of the annual
subpart. internal
inspections of the
catalyst bed. If a
problem is
discovered during a
monthly or annual
inspection required
by Sec.
63.3967(b)(4) or
for magnet wire
coating machines by
section 3.0 of
appendix A to this
subpart, you must
take corrective
action as soon as
practicable
consistent with the
manufacturer's
recommendations.
3. Regenerative carbon a. The total i. Measuring the
adsorber. regeneration total regeneration
desorbing gas desorbing gas
(e.g., steam or (e.g., steam or
nitrogen) mass flow nitrogen) mass flow
for each carbon bed for each
regeneration cycle regeneration cycle
must not fall below according to Sec.
the total 63.3968(d); and
regeneration ii. Maintaining the
desorbing gas mass total regeneration
flow limit desorbing gas mass
established flow at or above
according to Sec. the mass flow
63.3967(c); and limit.
b. The temperature i. Measuring the
of the carbon bed, temperature of the
after completing carbon bed after
each regeneration completing each
and any cooling regeneration and
cycle, must not any cooling cycle
exceed the carbon according to Sec.
bed temperature 63.3968(d); and
limit established ii. Operating the
according to Sec. carbon beds such
63.3967(c). that each carbon
bed is not returned
to service until
completing each
regeneration and
any cooling cycle
until the recorded
temperature of the
carbon bed is at or
below the
temperature limit.
4. Condenser................ a. The average i. Collecting the
condenser outlet condenser outlet
(product side) gas (product side) gas
temperature in any temperature
3-hour period must according to Sec.
not exceed the 63.3968(e);
temperature limit ii. Reducing the
established data to 3-hour
according to Sec. block averages; and
63.3967(d). iii. Maintaining the
3-hour average gas
temperature at the
outlet at or below
the temperature
limit.
5. Concentrators, including a. The average gas i. Collecting the
zeolite wheels and rotary temperature of the temperature data
carbon adsorbers. desorption according to
concentrate stream 63.3968(f);
in any 3-hour ii. Reducing the
period must not data to 3-hour
fall below the block averages; and
limit established iii. Maintaining the
according to Sec. 3-hour average
63.3967(e); and temperature at or
above the
temperature limit.
[[Page 186]]
b. The average i. Collecting the
pressure drop of pressure drop data
the dilute stream according to
across the 63.3968(f);
concentrator in any ii. Reducing the
3-hour period must pressure drop data
not fall below the to 3-hour block
limit established averages; and
according to Sec. iii. Maintaining the
63.3967(e). 3-hour average
pressure drop at or
above the pressure
drop limit.
6. Emission capture system a. The direction of i. Collecting the
that is a PTE according to the air flow at all direction of air
Sec. 63.3965(a). times must be into flow, and either
the enclosure; and the facial velocity
either of air through all
natural draft
openings according
to Sec.
63.3968(b)(1) or
the pressure drop
across the
enclosure according
to Sec.
63.3968(g)(2); and
ii. Maintaining the
facial velocity of
air flow through
all natural draft
openings or the
pressure drop at or
above the facial
velocity limit or
pressure drop
limit, and
maintaining the
direction of air
flow into the
enclosure at all
times.
b. The average i. See items 6.a.i
facial velocity of and 6.a.ii.
air through all
natural draft
openings in the
enclosure must be
at least 200 feet
per minutes; or
c. The pressure drop i. See items 6.a.i
across the and 6.a.ii.
enclosure must be
at least 0.007 inch
H2O, as established
in Method 204 of
appendix M to 40
CFR part 51.
7. Emission capture system a. The average gas i. Collecting the
that is not a PTE according volumetric flow gas volumetric flow
to Sec. 63.3965(a). rate or duct static rate or duct static
pressure in each pressure for each
duct between a capture device
capture device and according to Sec.
add-on control 63.3968(g);
device inlet in any ii. Reducing the
3-hour period must data to 3-hour
not fall below the block averages; and
average volumetric iii. Maintaining the
flow rate or duct 3-hour average gas
static pressure volumetric flow
limit established rate or duct static
for that capture pressure for each
device according to capture device at
Sec. 63.3967(f). or above the gas
volumetric flow
rate or duct static
pressure limited.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements
according to the following table:
Table 2 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63.--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart MMMM of Part 63
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Subject Applicable to subpart MMMM Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(a)(1)-(14)............. General Applicability. Yes........................
Sec. 63.1(b)(1)-(3).............. Initial Applicability Yes........................ Applicability to
Determination. subpart MMMM is also
specified in Sec.
63.3881.
Sec. 63.1(c)(1).................. Applicability After Yes........................
Standard Established.
Sec. 63.1(c)(2)-(3).............. Applicability of No......................... Area sources are not
Permit Program for subject to subpart
Area Sources. MMMM.
Sec. 63.1(c)(4)-(5).............. Extensions and Yes........................
Notifications.
Sec. 63.1(e)..................... Applicability of Yes........................
Permit Program Before
Relevant Standard is
Set.
Sec. 63.2........................ Definitions........... Yes........................ Additional definitions
are specified in Sec.
63.3981.
Sec. 63.1(a)-(c)................. Units and Yes........................
Abbreviations.
Sec. 63.4(a)(1)-(5).............. Prohibited Activities. Yes........................
Sec. 63.4(b)-(c)................. Circumvention/ Yes........................
Severability.
Sec. 63.5(a)..................... Construction/ Yes........................
Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.5(b)(1)-(6).............. Requirements for Yes........................
Existing Newly
Constructed, and
Reconstructed Sources.
Sec. 63.5(d)..................... Application for Yes........................
Approval of
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--Applica
bility.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(7).............. Compliance Dates for Yes........................ Section 63.3883
New and Reconstructed specifies the
Sources. compliance dates.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(5).............. Compliance Dates for Yes........................ Section 63.3883
Existing Sources. specifies the
compliance dates.
[[Page 187]]
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)-(2).............. Operation and Yes........................
Maintenance.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3).................. Startup, Shutdown, and Yes........................ Only sources using an
Malfunction Plan. add-on control device
to comply with the
standard must
complete startup,
shutdown, and
malfunction plans.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1).................. Compliance Except Yes........................ Applies only to
During Startup, sources using an add-
Shutdown, and on control device to
Malfunction. comply with the
standard.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)-(3).............. Methods for Yes........................
Determining
Compliance..
Sec. 63.6(g)(1)-(3).............. Use of an Alternative Yes........................
Standard.
Sec. 63.6(h)..................... Compliance With No......................... Subpart MMMM does not
Opacity/Visible establish opacity
Emission Standards. standards and does
not require
continuous opacity
monitoring systems
(COMS).
Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(16)............. Extension of Yes........................
Compliance.
Sec. 63.6(j)..................... Presidential Yes........................
Compliance Exemption.
Sec. 63.7(a)(1).................. Performance Test Yes........................ Applies to all
Requirements--Applica affected sources.
bility. Additional
requirements for
performance testing
are specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.3964,
63.3965, and 63.3966.
Sec. 63.7(a)(2).................. Performance Test Yes........................ Applies only to
Requirements--Dates. performance tests for
capture system and
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standard.
Section 63.3960
specifies the
schedule for
performance test
requirements that are
earlier than those
specified in Sec.
63.7(a)(2).
Sec. 63.7(a)(3).................. Performance Tests Yes........................
Required By the
Administrator.
Sec. 63.7(b)-(e)................. Performance Test Yes........................ Applies only to
Requirements--Notific performance tests for
ation, Quality capture system and
Assurance, Facilities add-on control device
Necessary for Safe efficiency at sources
Testing, Conditions using these to comply
During Test. with the standard.
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
Recordkeeping, add-on control device
Reporting, Waiver of efficiency at sources
Test. using these to comply
with the standard.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)-(3).............. Monitoring Yes........................ Applies only to
Requirements--Applica monitoring of capture
bility. system and add-on
control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standard.
Additional
requirements for
monitoring are
specified in Sec.
63.3968.
Sec. 63.8(a)(4).................. Additional Monitoring No......................... Subpart MMMM does not
Requirements. have monitoring
requirements for
flares.
Sec. 63.8(b)..................... Conduct of Monitoring. Yes........................
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)-(3).............. Continuous Monitoring Yes........................ Applies only to
Systems (CMS) monitoring of capture
Operation and system and add-on
Maintenance. control device
efficiency at sources
using these to comply
with the standard.
Additional
requirements for CMS
operations and
maintenance are
specified in Sec.
63.3968.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4).................. CMS................... No......................... Sec. 63.3968
specifies 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 MMMM does not
have opacity or
visible emission
standards.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6).................. CMS Requirements...... No......................... Section 63.3968
specifies 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.
[[Page 188]]
Sec. 63.8(c)(8).................. CMS Out-of-Control No......................... Sec. 63.3920
Periods and Reporting. requires reporting of
CMS out-of-control
periods.
Sec. 63.8(d)-(e)................. Quality Control No......................... Subpart MMMM does not
Program and CMS require the use of
Performance continuous emissions
Evaluation. monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5).............. Use of an Alternative Yes........................
Monitoring Method.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6).................. Alternative to No......................... Subpart MMMM does not
Relative Accuracy require the use of
Test. continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.8(g)(1)-(5).............. Data Reduction........ No......................... Sections 63.3967 and
63.3968 specify
monitoring data
reduction.
Sec. 63.9(a)-(d)................. Notification Yes........................
Requirements.
Sec. 63.9(e)..................... Notification of Yes........................ Applies only to
Performance Test. capture system and
add-on control device
performance tests at
sources using these
to comply with the
standard.
Sec. 63.9(f)..................... Notification of No......................... Subpart MMMM does not
Visible Emissions/ have opacity or
Opacity Test. visible emissions
standards.
Sec. 63.9(g)(1)-(3).............. Additional No......................... Subpart MMMM does not
Notifications When require the use of
Using CMS. continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.9(h)..................... Notification of Yes........................ Section 63.3910
Compliance Status. specifies the dates
for submitting the
notification of
compliance status.
Sec. 63.9(i)..................... Adjustment of Yes........................
Submittal Deadlines.
Sec. 63.9(j)..................... Change in Previous Yes........................
Information.
Sec. 63.10(a).................... Recordkeeping/ Yes........................
Reporting--Applicabil
ity and General
Information.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)................. General Recordkeeping Yes........................ Additional
Requirements. requirements are
specified in Sec.
Sec. 63.3930 and
63.3931.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2) (i)-(v)......... Recordkeeping Relevant Yes........................ Requirements for
to Startup, Shutdown, startup, shutdown,
and Malfunction and malfunction
Periods and CMS. records only apply to
add-on control
devices used to
comply with the
standard.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2) (vi)-(xi)....... ...................... Yes........................
Sec. 63.10(b)(2) (xii)........... Records............... Yes........................
Sec. 63.10(b)(2) (xiii).......... ...................... No......................... Subpart MMMM does not
require the use of
continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2) (xiv)........... ...................... Yes........................
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)................. Recordkeeping Yes........................
Requirements for
Applicability
Determinations.
Sec. 63.10(c) (1)-(6)............ Additional Yes........................
Recordkeeping
Requirements for
Sources with CMS.
Sec. 63.10(c) (7)-(8)............ ...................... No......................... The same records are
required in Sec.
63.3920(a)(7).
Sec. 63.10(c) (9)-(15)........... ...................... Yes........................
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)................. General Reporting Yes........................ Additional
Requirements. requirements are
specified in Sec.
63.3920.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)................. Report of Performance Yes........................ Additional
Test Results. requirements are
specified in Sec.
63.3920(b).
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)................. Reporting Opacity or No......................... Subpart MMMM 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, and Yes........................ Applies only to add-on
Malfunction Reports. control devices at
sources using these
to comply with the
standard.
Sec. 63.10(e) (1)-(2)............ Additional CMS Reports No......................... Subpart MMMM does not
require the use of
continuous emissions
monitoring systems.
Sec. 63.10(e) (3)................ Excess Emissions/CMS No......................... Section 63.3920 (b)
Performance Reports. specifies the
contents of periodic
compliance reports.
Sec. 63.10(e) (4)................ COMS Data Reports..... No......................... Subpart MMMMM does not
specify requirements
for opacity or COMS.
Sec. 63.10(f).................... Recordkeeping/ Yes........................
Reporting Waiver.
Sec. 63.11....................... Control Device No......................... Subpart MMMM does not
Requirements/Flares. specify use of flares
for compliance.
Sec. 63.12....................... State Authority and Yes........................
Delegations.
[[Page 189]]
Sec. 63.13....................... Addresses............. Yes........................
Sec. 63.14....................... Incorporation by Yes........................
Reference.
Sec. 63.15....................... Availability of Yes........................
Information/
Confidentiality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You may use the mass fraction values in the following table for
solvent blends for which you do not have test data or manufacturer's
formulation data and which match either the solvent blend name or the
chemical abstract series (CAS) number. If a solvent blend matches both
the name and CAS number for an entry, that entry's organic HAP mass
fraction must be used for that solvent blend. Otherwise, use the
organic HAP mass fraction for the entry matching either the solvent
blend name or CAS number, or use the organic HAP mass fraction from
table 4 to this subpart if neither the name or CAS number match.
Table 3 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63.--Default Organic HAP Mass Fraction for Solvents and Solvent Blends
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average
Solvent/solvent blend CAS. No. organic HAP Typical organic HAP, percent by
mass fraction mass
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Toluene.................................... 108-88-3 1.0 Toluene.
2. Xylene(s).................................. 1330-20-7 1.0 Xylenes, ethylbenzene.
3. Hexane..................................... 110-54-3 0.5 n-hexane.
4. n-Hexane................................... 110-54-3 1.0 n-hexane.
5. Ethylbenzene............................... 100-41-4 1.0 Ethylbenzene.
6. Aliphatic 140.............................. .............. 0 None.
7. Aromatic 100............................... .............. 0.02 1% xylene, 1% cumene.
8. Aromatic 150............................... .............. 0.09 Naphthalene.
9. Aromatic naphtha........................... 64742-95-6 0.02 1% xylene, 1% cumene.
10. Aromatic solvent.......................... 64742-94-5 0.1 Naphthalene.
11. Exempt mineral spirits.................... 8032-32-4 0 None.
12. Ligroines (VM & P)........................ 8032-32-4 0 None.
13. Lactol spirits............................ 64742-89-6 0.15 Toluene.
14. Low aromatic white spirit................. 64742-82-1 0 None.
15. Mineral spirits........................... 64742-88-7 0.01 Xylenes.
16. Hydrotreated naphtha...................... 64742-48-9 0 None.
17. Hydrotreated light distillate............. 64742-47-8 0.001 Toluene.
18. Stoddard solvent.......................... 8052-41-3 0.01 Xylenes.
19. Super high-flash naphtha.................. 64742-95-6 0.05 Xylenes.
20. Varsol[reg] solvent....................... 8052-49-3 0.01 0.5% xylenes, 0.5% ethylbenzene.
21. VM & P naphtha............................ 64742-89-8 0.06 3% toluene, 3% xylene.
22. Petroleum distillate mixture.............. 68477-31-6 0.08 4% naphthalene, 4% biphenyl.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You may use the mass fraction values in the following table for
solvent blends for which you do not have test data or manufacturer's
formulation data.
Table 4 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63.--Default Organic HAP Mass Fraction
for Petroleum Solvent Groups a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Typical organic
Solvent type organic HAP HAP, percent by
mass fraction mass
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliphatic b 0.03 1% Xylene, 1%
Toluene, and 1%
Ethylbenzene.
Aromatic c 0.06 4% Xylene, 1%
Toluene, and 1%
Ethylbenzene.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Use this table only if the solvent blend does not match any of the
solvent blends in Table 3 to this subpart by either solvent blend name
or CAS number and you only know whether the blend is aliphatic or
aromatic.
b Mineral Spirits 135, Mineral Spirits 150 EC, Naphtha, Mixed
Hydrocarbon, Aliphatic Hydrocarbon, Aliphatic Naphtha, Naphthol
Spirits, Petroleum Spirits, Petroleum Oil, Petroleum Naphtha, Solvent
Naphtha, Solvent Blend.
c Medium-flash Naphtha, High-flash Naphtha, Aromatic Naphtha, Light
Aromatic Naphtha, Light Aromatic Hydrocarbons, Aromatic Hydrocarbons,
Light Aromatic Solvent.
[[Page 190]]
Appendix A to Subpart MMMM of Part 63--Alternative Capture Efficiency
and Destruction Efficiency Measurement and Monitoring Procedures for
Magnet Wire Coating Operations
1.0 Introduction.
1.1 These alternative procedures for capture efficiency and
destruction efficiency measurement and monitoring are intended
principally for newer magnet wire coating machines where the control
device is internal and integral to the oven so that it is difficult
or infeasible to make gas measurements at the inlet to the control
device.
1.2 In newer gas fired magnet wire ovens with thermal control
(no catalyst), the burner tube serves as the control device (thermal
oxidizer) for the process. The combustion of solvents in the burner
tube is the principal source of heat for the oven.
1.3 In newer magnet wire ovens with a catalyst there is either a
burner tube (gas fired ovens) or a tube filled with electric heating
elements (electric heated oven) before the catalyst. A large portion
of the solvent is often oxidized before reaching the catalyst. The
combustion of solvents in the tube and across the catalyst is the
principal source of heat for the oven. The internal catalyst in
these ovens cannot be accessed without disassembly of the oven. This
disassembly includes removal of the oven insulation. Oven reassembly
often requires the installation of new oven insulation.
1.4 Some older magnet wire ovens have external afterburners. A
significant portion of the solvent is oxidized within these ovens as
well.
1.5 The alternative procedure for destruction efficiency
determines the organic carbon content of the volatiles entering the
control device based on the quantity of coating used, the carbon
content of the volatile portion of the coating and the efficiency of
the capture system. The organic carbon content of the control device
outlet (oven exhaust for ovens without an external afterburner) is
determined using Method 25 or 25A.
1.6 When it is difficult or infeasible to make gas measurements
at the inlet to the control device, measuring capture efficiency
with a gas-to-gas protocol (see Sec. 63.3965(d)) which relies on
direct measurement of the captured gas stream will also be difficult
or infeasible. In these situations, capture efficiency measurement
is more appropriately done with a procedure which does not rely on
direct measurement of the captured gas stream.
1.7 Magnet wire ovens are relatively small compared to many
other coating ovens. The exhaust rate from an oven is low and varies
as the coating use rate and solvent loading rate change from job to
job. The air balance in magnet wire ovens is critical to product
quality. Magnet wire ovens must be operated under negative pressure
to avoid smoke and odor in the workplace, and the exhaust rate must
be sufficient to prevent over heating within the oven.
1.8 The liquid and gas measurements needed to determine capture
efficiency and control device efficiency using these alternative
procedures may be made simultaneously.
1.9 Magnet wire facilities may have many (e.g., 20 to 70 or
more) individual coating lines each with its own capture and control
system. With approval, representative capture efficiency and control
device efficiency testing of one magnet wire coating machine out of
a group of identical or very similar magnet wire coating machines
may be performed rather than testing every individual magnet wire
coating machine. The operating parameters must be established for
each tested magnet wire coating machine during each capture
efficiency test and each control device efficiency test. The
operating parameters established for each tested magnet wire coating
machine also serve as the operating parameters for untested or very
similar magnet wire coating machines represented by a tested magnet
wire coating machine.
2.0 Capture Efficiency.
2.1 If the capture system is a permanent total enclosure as
described in Sec. 63.3965(a), then its capture efficiency may be
assumed to be 100 percent.
2.2 If the capture system is not a permanent total enclosure,
then capture efficiency must be determined using the liquid-to-
uncaptured-gas protocol using a temporary total enclosure or
building enclosure in Sec. 63.3965(c), or an alternative capture
efficiency protocol (see Sec. 63.3965(e)) which does not rely on
direct measurement of the captured gas stream.
2.3 As an alternative to establishing and monitoring the capture
efficiency operating parameters in Sec. 63.3967(f), the monitoring
described in either section 2.4 or 2.5, and the monitoring described
in sections 2.6 and 2.7 may be used for magnet wire coating
machines.
2.4 Each magnet wire oven must be equipped with an interlock
mechanism which will stop or prohibit the application of coating
either when any exhaust fan for that oven is not operating or when
the oven experiences an over limit temperature condition.
2.5 Each magnet wire oven must be equipped with an alarm which
will be activated either when any oven exhaust fan is not operating
or when the oven experiences an over limit temperature condition.
2.6 If the interlock in 2.4 or the alarm in 2.5 is monitoring
for over limit temperature conditions, then the temperature(s) that
will trigger the interlock or the alarm must be included in the
start-up, shutdown and malfunction plan and the interlock or alarm
must be set to be activated when the oven reaches that temperature.
2.7 Once every 6 months, each magnet wire oven must be checked
using a smoke stick or equivalent approach to confirm that the oven
is operating at negative pressure compared to the surrounding
atmosphere.
3.0 Control Device Efficiency.
3.1 Determine the weight fraction carbon content of the volatile
portion of each coating, thinner, additive, or cleaning material
used during each test run using either the procedure in section 3.2
or 3.3.
3.2 Following the procedures in Method 204F, distill a sample of
each coating, thinner, additive, or cleaning material used during
each test run to separate the volatile portion. Determine the weight
fraction carbon content of each distillate using ASTM Method D5291-
02, ``Standard Test Methods for Instrumental Determination of
Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in Petroleum Products and
Lubricants'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14).
3.3 Analyze each coating, thinner, additive or cleaning material
used during each test run using Method 311. For each volatile
compound detected in the gas chromatographic analysis of each
coating, thinner, additive, or cleaning material calculate the
weight fraction of that whole compound in the coating, thinner,
additive, or cleaning material. For each volatile compound detected
in the gas chromatographic analysis of each coating, thinner,
additive, or cleaning material calculate the weight fraction of the
carbon in that compound in the coating, thinner, additive, or
cleaning material. Calculate the weight fraction carbon content of
each coating, thinner, additive, or cleaning material as the ratio
of the sum of the carbon weight fractions divided by the sum of the
whole compound weight fractions.
3.4 Determine the mass fraction of total volatile hydrocarbon
(TVHi) in each coating, thinner, additive, or cleaning
material, i, used during each test run using Method 24. The mass
fraction of total volatile hydrocarbon equals the weight fraction
volatile matter (Wv in Method 24) minus the weight
fraction water (Ww in Method 24), if any, present in the
coating. The ASTM Method D6053-00, ``Standard Test Method for
Determination of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Content of
Electrical Insulating Varnishes'' (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 63.14), may be used as an alternative to Method 24 for magnet
wire enamels. The specimen size for testing magnet wire enamels with
ASTM Method D6053-00 must be 2.0 +/- 0.1 grams.
3.5 Determine the volume (VOLi) or mass
(MASSi) of each coating, thinner, additive, or cleaning
material, i, used during each test run.
3.6 Calculate the total volatile hydrocarbon input
(TVHCinlet) to the control device during each test run,
as carbon, using Equation 1:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.028
[[Page 191]]
where:
TVHi = Mass fraction of TVH in coating, thinner,
additive, or cleaning material, i, used in the coating operation
during the test run.
VOLi = Volume of coating, thinner, additive, or cleaning
material, i, used in the coating operation during the test run,
liters.
Di = Density of coating, thinner, additive, or cleaning
material, i, used in the coating operation during the test run, kg
per liter.
CDi = Weight fraction carbon content of the distillate
from coating, thinner, additive, or cleaning material, i, used in
the coating operation during the test run, percent.
n = Number of coating, thinner, additive, and cleaning materials
used in the coating operation during the test run.
3.7 If the mass, MASSi, of each coating, solvent,
additive, or cleaning material, i, used during the test run is
measured directly then MASSi can be substituted for
VOLi x Di in Equation 1 in section 3.6.
3.8 Determine the TVHC output (TVHCoutlet) from the
control device, as carbon, during each test run using the methods in
Sec. 63.3966(a) and the procedure for determining Mfo in
Sec. 63.3966(d). TVHCoutlet equals Mfo times
the length of the test run in hours.
3.9 Determine the control device efficiency (DRE) for each test
run using Equation 2:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA04.029
3.10 The efficiency of the control device is the average of the
three individual test run values determined in section 3.9.
3.11 As an alternative to establishing and monitoring the
destruction efficiency operating parameters for catalytic oxidizers
in Sec. 63.3967(b), the monitoring described in sections 3.12 and
3.13 may be used for magnet wire coating machines equipped with
catalytic oxidizers.
3.12 During the performance test, you must monitor and record
the temperature either just before or just after the catalyst bed at
least once every 15 minutes during each of the three test runs. Use
the data collected during the performance test to calculate and
record the average temperature either just before or just after the
catalyst bed during the performance test. This is the minimum
operating limit for your catalytic oxidizer and for the catalytic
oxidizers in identical or very similar magnet wire coating machines
represented by the tested magnet wire coating machine.
3.13 You must develop and implement an inspection and
maintenance plan for your catalytic oxidizer(s). The plan must
address, at a minimum, the elements specified in sections 3.14 and
3.15, and the elements specified in either (a) section 3.16 or (b)
sections 3.17 and 3.18.
3.14 You must conduct a monthly external inspection of each
catalytic oxidizer system, including the burner assembly and fuel
supply lines for problems and, as necessary, adjust the equipment to
assure proper air-to-fuel mixtures.
3.15 You must conduct an annual internal inspection of each
accessible catalyst bed to check for channeling, abrasion, and
settling. If problems are found, you must replace the catalyst bed
or take corrective action consistent with the manufacturer's
recommendations. This provision does not apply to internal catalysts
which cannot be accessed without disassembling the magnet wire oven.
3.16 You must take a sample of each catalyst bed and perform an
analysis of the catalyst activity (i.e., conversion efficiency)
following the manufacturer's or catalyst supplier's recommended
procedures. This sampling and analysis must be done within the time
period shown in Table 1 below of the most recent of the last
catalyst activity test or the last catalyst replacement. For
example, if the warranty for the catalyst is 3 years and the
catalyst was more recently replaced then the sampling and analysis
must be done within the earlier of 26,280 operating hours or 5
calendar years of the last catalyst replacement. If the warranty for
the catalyst is 3 years and the catalyst was more recently tested
then the sampling and analysis must be done within the earlier of
13,140 operating hours or 3 calendar years of the last catalyst
activity test. If problems are found during the catalyst activity
test, you must replace the catalyst bed or take corrective action
consistent with the manufacturer's recommendations.
Table 1.--Catalyst Monitoring Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the catalyst
Then the time was more recently
between catalyst tested, then the
If the catalyst was last (more replacement and time between
recently) replaced and the the next catalyst catalyst activity
warranty period is . . . activity test tests cannot
cannot exceed the exceed the earlier
earlier of . . . of . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 year.......................... 8,760 operating 8,760 operating
hours or 5 hours or 3
calendar years. calendar years.
2 years......................... 15,520 operating 8,760 operating
hours or 5 hours or 3
calendar years. calendar years.
3 years......................... 26,280 operating 13,100 operating
hours or 5 hours or 3
calendar years. calendar years.
4 years......................... 35,040 operating 17,520 operating
hours or 5 hours or 3
calendar years. calendar years.
5 or more years................. 43,800 operating 21,900 operating
hours or 5 hours or 3
calendar years. calendar years.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.17 During the performance test, you must determine the average
concentration of organic compounds as carbon in the magnet wire oven
exhaust stack gases (Cc in Equation 1 in Sec.
63.3966(d)) and the destruction efficiency of the catalytic
oxidizer, and calculate the operating limit for oven exhaust stack
gas concentration as follows. You must identify the highest organic
HAP content coating used on this magnet wire coating machine or any
identical or very similar magnet wire coating machines to which the
same destruction efficiency test results will be applied. Calculate
the percent emission reduction necessary to meet the magnet wire
coating emission limit when using this coating. Calculate the
average concentration of organic compounds as carbon in the magnet
wire oven exhaust stack gases that would be equivalent to exactly
meeting the magnet wire coating emissions limit when using the
highest organic HAP content coating. The maximum operating limit for
oven exhaust stack gas concentration equals 90 percent of this
calculated concentration.
3.18 For each magnet wire coating machine equipped with a
catalytic oxidizer you must perform an annual 10 minute test of the
oven exhaust stack gases using EPA Method 25A. This test must be
performed under steady state operating conditions similar to those
at which the last destruction efficiency test for equipment of that
type (either the specific magnet wire coating machine or an
identical or very similar magnet wire coating machine) was
conducted. If the average exhaust stack gas concentration during the
annual test of a magnet wire coating machine equipped with a
catalytic oxidizer is greater than the operating limit established
in section 3.17 then that is a deviation from the operating limit
for that catalytic oxidizer. If problems are found during the annual
10-minute test of the oven exhaust stack gases, you must replace the
catalyst bed or take other corrective action consistent with the
manufacturer's recommendations.
3.19 If a catalyst bed is replaced and the replacement catalyst
is not of like or better kind and quality as the old catalyst, then
you
[[Page 192]]
must conduct a new performance test to determine destruction
efficiency according to Sec. 63.3966 and establish new operating
limits for that catalytic oxidizer unless destruction efficiency
test results and operating limits for an identical or very similar
unit (including consideration of the replacement catalyst) are
available and approved for use for the catalytic oxidizer with the
replacement catalyst.
3.20 If a catalyst bed is replaced and the replacement catalyst
is of like or better kind and quality as the old catalyst, then a
new performance test to determine destruction efficiency is not
required and you may continue to use the previously established
operating limits for that catalytic oxidizer.
[FR Doc. 03-21917 Filed 12-31-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P