[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 233 (Wednesday, December 4, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72330-72362]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-29074]
[[Page 72329]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 63
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Paper and
Other Web Coating; Final Rules
Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2002 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 72330]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[FRL-7385-5]
RIN 2060-AG58
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Paper
and Other Web Coating
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action finalizes national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for facilities that coat paper and
other web substrates and are major sources of hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) emissions. The standards implement section 112(d) of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) to protect public health and the environment by reducing
HAP emissions from new and existing facilities. The CAA requires these
sources to achieve the maximum degree of reduction in HAP emissions
that is achievable. The final standards will eliminate approximately 80
percent of nationwide HAP emissions from facilities that coat paper and
other web substrates.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 4, 2002. The incorporation by reference of
certain publications listed in today's final rule is approved by the
Director of the Federal Register as of December 4, 2002.
ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket No. A-99-09 contains supporting information
used in developing the standards for the paper and other web coating
source category. The docket is located at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Air & Radiation Docket & Information Center, Mail
Code 6102T, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Room B108, Washington, DC
20460, and may be inspected from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Paul Almodovar, Coating and
Consumer Products Group (C539-03), Emission Standards Division, U.S.
EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone number (919) 541-0283,
facsimile number (919) 541-5689, electronic mail (e-mail) address:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Docket. The docket is an organized and
complete file of all the information considered by the EPA in the
development of rulemaking. The docket is a dynamic file because
material is added throughout the rulemaking process. The docketing
system is intended to allow members of the public and industries
involved to readily identify and locate documents so that they can
effectively participate in the rulemaking process. Along with the
proposed and promulgated standards and their preambles, the contents of
the docket will serve as the record in the case of judicial review.
(See section 307(d)(7)(A) of the CAA.) The regulatory text and other
materials related to this rulemaking are available for review in the
docket or copies may be mailed on request from the Air and Radiation
Docket and Information Center by calling (202) 566-1742. A reasonable
fee may be charged for copying docket materials.
WorldWide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of today's final rule will also be available on the
WWW through the EPA's Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following
signature by the EPA Administrator, a copy of the rule will be posted
on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated
rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. If more
information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at
(919) 541-5384.
Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated
by this action include those listed on the following table. This table
is not intended to be exhaustive, but is just a guide to entities
likely to be regulated by these standards. It lists the types of
entities that may be regulated, but you should examine the
applicability criteria in Sec. Sec. 63.3290 and 63.3300 of the rule to
decide whether your facility is regulated by the standards. If you have
any questions about whether your facility is subject to the standards,
call the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
Categories and Entities Potentially Regulated by the Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS
Category Codes Examples of Potentially Regulated Entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paper and Other Web Coating..................... 322211 Those facilities with web coating operations b
322212 that coat substrate used in products including,
a 322221 but not limited to: corrugated and solid fiber
322222 boxes; folding paperboard boxes, including
a 322223 sanitary; flexible packaging (packing paper and
a 322224 plastics film, coated and laminated); pressure
322225 sensitive tape and labels, medical tape, duct
322226 tape, coated and laminated paper, not elsewhere
a 322299 classified (nec); plastics, foil, and coated
323111 paper bags; bags: uncoated paper and multiwall;
323116 die-cut paper and board; converted paper and
325992 paperboard products, nec (gift wrap, paper
326111 wallpaper, cigarette paper); commercial
326112 printing, gravure; manifold business forms;
a 326113 plastic aseptic packaging; unsupported plastics
32613 film and sheet; laminated plastics plate, sheet,
326192 and profile shapes; abrasive products; laminated
a 32791 aluminum (metal) foil and leaf, flexible
332999 packaging; photographic equipment and supplies;
339944 carbon paper and inked ribbons; linoleum,
asphalted-felt base, and other hard surface
floor coverings.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Facilities in these NAICS codes are expected to be primarily covered under the printing and publishing NESHAP.
b Web coating operations refer to the application of a continuous layer of coating material across the entire
width or any portion of the width of a web substrate, and any associated curing/drying equipment between an
unwind or feed station and a rewind or cutting station where the continuous web substrate is flexible enough
to be wound or unwound as rolls.
[[Page 72331]]
Judicial Review. Under section 307(b) of the CAA, judicial review
of the final rule is available only by filing a petition for review in
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
by February 3, 2003. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an
objection to the rule which was raised with reasonable specificity
during the period for public comment can be raised during judicial
review. Moreover, under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements
established by today's final action may not be challenged separately in
any civil or criminal proceeding we bring to enforce these
requirements.
Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as
follows:
I. What Are the Subject and Purpose of the Rule?
II. Does This Rule Apply to Me?
A. What Facilities Are Subject to the Rule?
B. What Is the Affected Source?
III. What Are the Emission Standards?
A. Emission Limits
B. Interaction with Other Regulations
IV. When Do I Show Initial Compliance with the Rule?
V. What Testing and Monitoring Must I Do?
A. Test Methods and Procedures
B. Monitoring Requirements
VI. What Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements
Must I Follow?
A. Initial Notification
B. Notification of Performance Tests
C. Notification of Compliance Status
D. Recordkeeping Requirements
E. Periodic Reports
VII. What Major Changes Have We Made to the Rule Since Proposal?
A. Applicability
B. New Source Emission Limit
C. Solvent Retained in the Web
D. Monitoring
VIII. What Are the Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts of
the Rule?
A. Emission Reductions
B. Secondary Environmental Impacts
C. Energy Impacts
D. Cost Impacts
E. Economic Impacts
IX. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
C. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
D. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
E. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, and Use
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
G. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1966 (SBREFA), 5
U.S.C. 601, et seq.
H. Paperwork Reduction Act
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act
I. What Are the Subject and Purpose of the Rule?
The CAA requires us to establish standards to control HAP emissions
from source categories identified under section 112(c) of the CAA. An
initial source category list was published in the Federal Register on
July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576). The source category list identifies
``Paper and Other Web Coating (Surface Coating)'' as a source category
because it contains major sources of HAP emissions. Under the CAA, a
major source is defined as ``* * * any stationary source or group of
stationary sources located within a contiguous area and under common
control that emits or has the potential to emit, considering controls,
in the aggregate, 10 tons per year (tpy) or more of any one HAP or 25
tpy or more of any combination of HAP.'' We have estimated that there
are over 400 existing paper and other web coating facilities with
approximately 203 estimated to be major sources of HAP emissions.
The purpose of the rule is to reduce emissions of HAP from paper
and other web coating major sources. The source category is for major
sources only. Area sources are not included in this source category
and, therefore, are not subject to the standards. We estimate that
annual baseline organic HAP emissions from this source category are
approximately 37,800 megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (42,000 tpy). The final
rule will eliminate approximately 31,300 Mg/yr (34,500 tpy) of these
organic HAP emissions (about an 80 percent reduction).
The organic HAP emitted from the paper and other web coating
process include toluene, methanol, methyl ethyl ketone, xylenes,
phenol, methylene chloride, ethylene glycol, glycol ethers, hexane,
methyl isobutyl ketone, cresols and cresylic acid, dimethylformamide,
vinyl acetate, formaldehyde, and ethyl benzene. These pollutants can
cause reversible or irreversible toxic effects following sufficient
exposure. The potential toxic effects include eye, nose, throat, and
skin irritation, and blood cell, heart, liver, kidney damage, and
possibly cancer.
The degree of adverse effects to human health from exposure to HAP
can range from mild to severe. The extent and degree to which the human
health effects may be experienced are dependent upon (1) the ambient
concentration observed in the area (as influenced by emission rates,
meteorological conditions, and terrain); (2) the frequency and duration
of exposures; (3) characteristics of exposed individuals (genetics,
age, preexisting health conditions, and lifestyle) which vary
significantly with the population; and (4) pollutant-specific
characteristics (toxicity, half-life in the environment,
bioaccumulation, and persistence).
II. Does the Rule Apply to Me?
A. What Facilities Are Subject to the Rule?
The paper and other web coating source category includes any
facility that is located at a major source and is engaged in the
coating of paper, plastic film, metallic foil, and other web surfaces.
Paper and other web coating may be simply referred to as ``web
coating'' since paper is one of several web substrates in the paper and
other web coating source category. The source category does not include
printing operations covered under the Printing and Publishing NESHAP
(40 CFR part 63, subpart KK) or web coating lines subject to the
Magnetic Tape Manufacturing NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart EE). The
source category does not include coil coating, i.e., the application of
a coating to the surface of any metal strip at least 0.15 millimeter
(0.006 inch) thick that is packaged in a roll or coil, which is being
regulated as a separate source category. However, we have identified
facilities that coat metal webs greater than 0.15 millimeter thick that
are coated for use in flexible packaging. These web coating lines are
part of the paper and other web coating source category and, therefore,
are not subject to the Coil Coating NESHAP. Fabric coating operations
are also being regulated as a separate source category, except for
fabric coating for use in pressure sensitive tape and abrasive
materials.
The rule applies to you if you own or operate any web coating lines
at a facility that is a major source of HAP emissions. This means that
the web coating lines at a major source would be subject to the
standards without regard to the relative proportion of HAP emissions
from the web coating lines to total HAP emissions at the source.
If your facility is a nonmajor (area) source, i.e., actual and
potential annual emissions are less than 10 tons of any single HAP and
less than 25 tons of all HAP combined, you would not be subject to the
rule.
If your facility is a major source, you would be required to meet
the emission limits for all the web coating lines at your facility. We
have defined a web to be a continuous substrate (e.g., paper, plastic
film, foil) that is capable of being rolled at any point during the
coating
[[Page 72332]]
process. We have defined a web coating line to be any number of work
stations, of which one or more applies a continuous layer of coating
material along the entire width of a continuous web substrate or any
portion of the width of the web substrate, and any associated curing/
drying equipment between an unwind (or feed) station and a rewind (or
cutting) station. As stated before, printing presses subject to the
Printing and Publishing NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart KK) are not web
coating lines.
B. What Is the Affected Source?
We define an affected source as a stationary source, group of
stationary sources, or part of a stationary source to which a specific
NESHAP applies. Within a source category, we select the specific
emission sources (emission points or groupings of emission points) that
will make up the affected source for that category. To select these
emission sources, we mainly consider the constituent HAP and quantity
emitted from individual or groups of emission points.
For the Paper and Other Web Coating NESHAP, the affected source is
the collection of all the web coating lines at a facility. As
previously stated, a web coating line is defined as any number of work
stations, of which one or more applies a continuous layer of coating
material across the entire width or any portion of the width of a web
substrate, and any associated curing/drying equipment between an unwind
or feed station and a rewind or cutting station.
Affiliated operations such as mixing or dissolving of coating
ingredients prior to application; coating mixing for viscosity
adjustment, color tint or additive blending, or pH adjustment; cleaning
of coating lines and coating line parts; handling and storage of
coatings and solvent; and conveyance and treatment of wastewater are
part of the paper and other web surface coating source category. The
final distinction between these affiliated operations and other
activities that go beyond the affiliated operations described above
will be resolved in the context of the Miscellaneous Organic Chemical
Manufacturing NESHAP or the Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing NESHAP,
both currently under development. Review of the industry survey data
reflected that only a small portion of the surveyed facilities reported
any data concerning affiliated operations, and only some of these
facilities reported that HAP emissions from affiliated operations were
controlled. For facilities that reported control of HAP emissions from
these sources, the data were not sufficiently detailed to determine if
the reported control represented the facility level of control or the
control for one unit operation of this type out of several in the
facility. For example, mixing may be performed in a mix room and at the
application station. It was not clear from the reported data if a
facility reporting capture and control of emissions from mixing
operations conducted all mixing at controlled application stations or
possibly just a single mix room was controlled. When these operations
occur inside a permanent total enclosure, emissions reductions can be
achieved at the overall control efficiency of the capture and control
system. We were not able to identify emissions reductions for
affiliated operations with the available data. Since we were not able
to identify emissions reductions for affiliated operations, we believe
it is not appropriate at this time to include them in the affected
source in the final rule.
The requirements of the future Miscellaneous Organic Chemical
Manufacturing NESHAP and the Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing NESHAP
will not apply to affiliated operations located at a facility subject
to the rule. Activities which go beyond the affiliated operations
described above may, however, be subject to the requirements of the
Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing NESHAP and the
Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing NESHAP. Language will be added to
both of these rules to clarify their applicability.
Coating lines and equipment that are not in the source category and
thus, not in the affected source, include those that perform both
coating and printing and are subject to the national emission standards
for the printing and publishing industry (40 CFR part 63, subpart KK);
metal coil coating operations, except for the coating of metal webs
greater than 0.15 millimeter thick that are used in flexible packaging;
and fabric coating operations, except for fabric coating for use in
pressure sensitive tape and abrasive materials.
Many industrial facilities perform both coating and printing
operations. Within the printing industry, the product and packaging
rotogravure and wide-web flexographic industry segment (that includes
the flexible packaging industry as a major subsector) does the most
coating, with material use distributed almost equally between inks and
other types of coatings. Printing operations are covered under the
NESHAP for the printing and publishing industry (40 CFR part 63,
subpart KK). The Printing and Publishing NESHAP also include an option
for facilities that perform both printing and coating to include
certain coating operations as affected sources subject to that rule.
Therefore, many facilities that could potentially be subject to the
Paper and Other Web Coating NESHAP may have coating lines already
subject to the Printing and Publishing NESHAP. Such web coating lines
included in compliance demonstrations under the Printing and Publishing
NESHAP are not subject to the Paper and Other Web Coating NESHAP. A
detailed discussion of the printing and publishing industry is included
in the background information document for that industry (Docket No. A-
92-42, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Printing and Publishing Industry--Background Information for Proposed
Standards (EPA-453/R-95-002a)).
III. What Are the Emission Standards?
A. Emission Limits
In the rule, we expressed the emission limit in three formats based
on whether HAP emissions are measured in terms of mass of organic HAP
applied, mass of coating material applied, or mass of coating solids
applied. You may choose to comply with any of these formats (referred
to as the ``emission limits''). The HAP emission limits are based on
emission capture and control technology that can reduce total organic
HAP emissions by 95 percent at existing affected sources and 98 percent
at new affected sources. The HAP emission limits reflect this level of
control by limiting organic HAP emissions to no more than 5 percent and
2 percent of the organic HAP applied each month at existing and new
affected sources, respectively; and by equivalently limiting emissions
based on the mass of the solids part of your coatings or the mass of
your total coating materials. We believe expressing emission limits in
this way is appropriately based on the maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) level of control and offers flexibility to reduce
emissions through the use of control technology, pollution prevention,
or a combination of the two.
The three HAP emission limits for existing affected sources are:
(1) Limit emissions to no more than 5 percent of the mass of organic
HAP applied each month (95 percent reduction); (2) limit the total mass
of organic HAP in your coating materials, or the total mass of organic
HAP emitted, to no more than 4 mass percent of the total mass of
coating materials applied to the web substrate each month; or (3) limit
the total mass of organic HAP in your
[[Page 72333]]
coatings, or the total mass of organic HAP emitted, to no more than 20
mass percent of the total mass of coating solids applied to web
substrates each month.
The three HAP emission limits for new affected sources are: (1)
Limit emissions to no more than 2 percent of the mass of organic HAP
applied each month (98 percent reduction); (2) limit the total mass of
organic HAP in your coating materials, or the total mass of organic HAP
emitted, to no more than 1.6 mass percent of the total mass of coating
material applied to the web substrate each month; or (3) limit the
total mass of organic HAP in your coatings, or the total mass of
organic HAP emitted, to no more than 8 mass percent of the total mass
of coating solids applied to web substrates each month.
Alternatively, the owners or operators of both existing and new
affected sources using a thermal oxidizer to control organic HAP
emissions may choose to operate the oxidizer such that an outlet HAP
concentration of no greater than 20 parts per million by volume (ppmv)
by compound on a dry basis is achieved. If 100 percent capture
efficiency is achieved and this outlet concentration is achieved on a
continuous basis, then the source will be deemed to be in compliance
with the emission limit. Our rationale for including this alternative
emission limit is included in section VII.B of this preamble.
If your facility is subject to today's rule, the General Provisions
(40 CFR part 63, subpart A) also apply to you. The General Provisions
codify procedures and criteria we use to carry out all part 63 NESHAP
promulgated under the CAA. The General Provisions contain
administrative procedures, preconstruction review procedures, and
procedures for conducting compliance-related activities such as
notifications, recordkeeping and reporting, performance testing, and
monitoring. The rule refers to individual sections of the General
Provisions that we believe will be of particular interest to you.
However, unless specifically overridden in Table 2 of the rule, all of
the General Provisions requirements apply to you.
B. Interaction With Other Regulations
You may be subject to both the Paper and Other Web Coating NESHAP
and other future or existing rules, such as new source performance
standards (NSPS) and State rules requiring reasonably available control
technology limits on volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions. You
must comply with all applicable rules. Duplicative recordkeeping and
reporting requirements and differences in emission limitations may be
resolved through your title V permit.
IV. When Do I Show Initial Compliance With the Rule?
Existing affected sources must comply with the rule no later than 3
years after December 4, 2002. The effective date is December 4, 2002.
New or reconstructed affected sources must comply upon start-up or
December 4, 2002, whichever is later. Details of the compliance
requirements can be found in the General Provisions, as outlined in
Table 1 of today's rule.
Before your initial compliance demonstration, you must choose which
of the three emission limit options you will use for your affected
source. In your initial compliance certification, you must notify the
Administrator of your choice and after that, you must monitor and
report compliance results accordingly. If you decide to change to other
emission limit options, you are also required to notify the
Administrator, as with other changes at the facility, as discussed in
section VI of this preamble.
V. What Testing and Monitoring Must I Do?
In addition to the specific testing and monitoring requirements
specified below for the affected source, the rule adopts the testing
requirements specified in Sec. 63.7 of 40 CFR part 63.
A. Test Methods and Procedures
You may comply with the standards by applying materials meeting the
organic HAP emission rate limits, by using capture and control
equipment to reduce organic HAP emissions by 95 percent at existing
affected sources and by 98 percent at new affected sources, or by using
a combination of low-organic-HAP materials and capture and control
equipment to meet the organic HAP emission rate limits.
If you demonstrate compliance based on the coating materials
applied on your web coating lines, you must determine the organic HAP
content of materials applied using either EPA Method 311 of appendix A
of 40 CFR part 63, an alternative method for determining the organic
HAP content (but only after obtaining EPA approval), or the volatile
organic content of the coating materials applied as the value for the
organic HAP content. The volatile organic content must be determined by
EPA Method 24 of appendix A of 40 CFR part 60 (or an approved
alternative method). If you are demonstrating compliance by applying
coating materials that meet the emission limit based on coating solids
applied, the coating solids content of the materials must be determined
using EPA Method 24.
You may rely on formulation data to determine the organic HAP
content, volatile matter content, or coating solids content as an
alternative to performing Method 311 or Method 24 testing.
To demonstrate compliance, you must calculate the average mass of
organic HAP in the coating materials applied on the web coating lines
and show that it is less than the organic HAP emission limits
specified.
If you use an emission capture and control system to comply with
the standards, you must demonstrate that the overall control efficiency
reduces total organic HAP emissions by at least 95 percent at existing
sources and 98 percent at new sources. Alternatively, you may use
capture and control equipment in combination with low-organic-HAP
materials and demonstrate you meet one of the other organic HAP
emission limits. To comply using this combined approach, you must
determine the overall control efficiency of the capture and control
equipment and the organic HAP content of the materials applied on the
web coating lines. If you choose to demonstrate compliance with the
emission limit based on coating solids applied, then you must also
determine the coating solids content of each coating material used on
the web coating lines. These values must be determined for each monthly
period.
To determine the capture system efficiency, you must either confirm
that your capture system is a permanent total enclosure using EPA
Method 204 of 40 CFR part 51, appendix M, in which case you may assume
100 percent capture; or use EPA Methods 204A through F to measure
capture efficiency. You may also use any capture efficiency protocol or
test method that satisfies either the data quality objectives or lower
confidence limit approach as described in appendix A of 40 CFR part 63,
subpart KK.
You must determine the emission destruction or removal efficiency
of a control device by conducting a performance test or using a
continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS). If you use a CEMS, you
must determine the inlet and outlet concentration to calculate the
control efficiency. The CEMS must comply with performance specification
8 or 9 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.
If you conduct a performance test, the destruction or removal
efficiency of a control device must be determined based on three runs,
each run lasting 1
[[Page 72334]]
hour. Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used for
selection of the sampling sites. Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G of 40
CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used to determine the gas volumetric
flow rate. Method 3, 3A, or 3B of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be
used for gas analysis to determine dry molecular weight. Method 4 of 40
CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used to determine stack moisture.
Method 25 or 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used to
determine organic volatile matter concentration, although the use of
Method 25A is limited as detailed in the rule. 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, may
be used if approved by the Administrator.
If you use a solvent recovery system to comply with the
requirements of the rule, you may alternatively determine the overall
control efficiency using a liquid-liquid material balance. If you
demonstrate compliance by using the material balance, you must measure
the amount of all coating materials applied during each month to the
web coating lines 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 and calculate
the overall solvent recovery efficiency.
If you so choose, you may also take into account any amount of
organic HAP retained in the coated web or otherwise not emitted to the
atmosphere, as discussed in section VII.C of this preamble. The final
rule requires you to develop a testing protocol for determining the
mass of volatile matter retained or otherwise not emitted to the
atmosphere. This protocol would have to be submitted and approved as
part of your site-specific test plan.
The test methods we require, as discussed above, are existing EPA
methods that are familiar to the industry, readily available, and
appropriate to the device or the parameter being measured. The selected
tests are expected to establish whether the facility is complying with
the standards.
B. Monitoring Requirements
According to paragraph (a)(3) of section 114 of the CAA, monitoring
of stationary sources is required to determine the compliance status of
the sources, and whether compliance is continuous or intermittent. For
affected sources complying with the standards by using capture and
control systems, initial compliance is determined through an initial
performance test and ongoing compliance through continuous monitoring.
We specify the operating parameters that need to be monitored for
certain control devices used in the paper and other web coating
industry (thermal and catalytic oxidizers). You must set the values of
these parameters, which demonstrate compliance with the standards,
during your initial performance test. These values are your ``operating
limits.'' If future monitoring shows that capture and control equipment
is operating outside the range of values established during the initial
performance test, then you are deviating from the operating limits.
If you use a capture and control system to meet the standards, you
are required to develop and maintain a plan identifying the operating
limit and monitoring procedures for the capture system. You must
monitor in accordance with your plan.
If you use a thermal or catalytic oxidizer to comply with the
standards, you must monitor temperature using a continuous parameter
monitoring system. If you use a thermal oxidizer to comply with the
standards, you must establish the average combustion temperature
recorded during the performance test as the operating limit. If you use
a catalytic oxidizer to comply with the standards , you must establish
as the operating limits the average inlet gas temperature and
temperature rise across the catalyst bed recorded during the
performance test. Alternatively, you may establish as the operating
limits for a catalytic oxidizer the average gas temperature at the
inlet of the catalyst bed and the average catalyst activity level.
If you use a solvent recovery system to comply with the emission
limits, you must conduct monthly liquid-liquid material balances or
operate continuous emission monitors.
VI. What Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements Must I
Follow?
The rule requires you to comply with notification, recordkeeping,
and reporting requirements, generally as described in the General
Provisions (see Table 2 of the rule) and specifically as designed to
support demonstration of compliance with the rule. We believe that
these requirements are necessary and sufficient to ensure that you
comply with the requirements in the rule (40 CFR part 63 subpart JJJJ).
A. Initial Notification
If the NESHAP apply to you, you must send an initial notification
to the EPA Regional Office in the region where your facility is located
and to your State agency. If you have an existing affected source, you
must submit the initial notification no later than 1 year before the
compliance date, which is December 5, 2005. If you have a new or
reconstructed affected source, you must submit the notification no
later than 120 days after either the date of initial start-up or
December 4, 2002, whichever is later.
The initial notification notifies us and your State agency that you
have an existing affected source that is subject to the standards or
that you have constructed a new affected source. Thus, it allows you
and the Federal or State enforcement agency to plan for compliance
activities. The General Provisions specify the information you must
include in the initial notification and other reporting requirements
for both existing affected sources and new or reconstructed affected
sources.
B. Notification of Performance Tests
If the rule applies to you, you will have several options for
demonstrating compliance. If you demonstrate compliance by using a
capture and control system to reduce HAP emissions, you must conduct a
performance test as described in the rule. Prior to conducting the
performance test, you must notify us or the delegated State or local
agency at least 60 calendar days before the performance test is
scheduled to begin, as indicated in the General Provisions.
C. Notification of Compliance Status
You are required to send a notice of compliance status within 180
days after the compliance date as specified in the General Provisions.
This report must include your compliance certification, the results of
any performance tests and monitoring, and a description of how you will
demonstrate continuing compliance.
In conformance with 40 CFR 63.9(h), the notification of compliance
status must identify whether low-HAP materials, emission capture and
control systems, or a combination of low-HAP materials and capture and
control systems were used to comply with the standards. For capture and
control systems, it must also identify the operating limits established
during the performance test. Specific reporting requirements are
dependent upon how you choose to comply with the standards.
D. Recordkeeping Requirements
Records of the organic HAP, volatile organic content and solids
content of
[[Page 72335]]
each coating applied, and the amount of each coating applied on paper
and other web coating lines each month must be maintained to comply
with the standards based on organic HAP content or organic HAP
emissions on a mass basis.
If capture and control technology is used, you are required to keep
records of the equipment monitoring parameter measurements as specified
in the final rule. You must also develop a start-up, shutdown, and
malfunction plan. You would have to make the plan available for
inspection if the Administrator requests to see it. It must stay in
your records for the life of the affected source or until the source is
no longer required to meet the standards.
E. Periodic Reports
Each reporting year is divided into two semiannual reporting
periods. If no deviations occur during a semiannual reporting period,
you would submit a semiannual compliance report stating that the
affected source has been in compliance. A deviation is any instance in
which you fail to meet any requirement or obligation of the standards
or any term or condition adopted to meet the standards. The following
information would be required in semiannual compliance reports when
deviations occur:
[sbull] If you are complying by using add-on control devices,
report all deviations from the control device operating parameters.
[sbull] If you are complying by using solvent recovery systems and
liquid-liquid material balance, report material balance calculations
for all months when the material balances deviated from the emission
limit.
[sbull] If you are complying by using add-on controls or solvent
recovery systems with continuous emission monitors, report all
deviations from the operating parameter values established for the
capture system and all deviations from the emission limit.
[sbull] If you are complying by using low-HAP coating materials,
report all deviations from the emission limit.
[sbull] If you are complying by using a combination of capture and
control systems with low-HAP coating materials, report all deviations
from the emission limit and all deviations from operating parameters
described above.
You would also have to send us reports for each semiannual
reporting period in which the following occur:
[sbull] A change occurs at your facility or within your process
that might affect its compliance status.
[sbull] A change from what was reported in the initial notice
occurs at your facility or within your process.
[sbull] You decide to change to another emission limitation option.
[sbull] You had a startup, shutdown, or malfunction of an emission
control device during the semiannual period and the actions taken were
consistent with your startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan (SSMP).
VII. What Major Changes Have We Made to the Rule Since Proposal?
We requested comments from the public on the proposed rule in
general, as well as several specific areas. We received 28 comment
letters from industry representatives, industry trade groups, and
individuals. In response to these comments, we made several changes for
the final rule. Many of these changes are clarifications designed to
make our intentions clearer. However, some of the changes affect the
requirements specified in the proposed rule. The more significant
changes to the proposed rule are summarized in the following sections.
Our complete responses to public comments for the final rule are
contained in the document ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Source Category: Paper and Other Web
Coating, Summary of Public Comments and Responses on the Proposed
Rule'' (EPA-453/R-02-005).
A. Applicability
Several comments were received on the potential applicability
overlap between the proposed rule and other coating standards. The
affected source section has been revised to exclude web coating lines
subject to the Magnetic Tape Manufacturing NESHAP (40 CFR part 63,
subpart EE) and the Printing and Publishing NESHAP (40 CFR part 63,
subpart KK) from the requirements of the final rule (40 CFR part 63,
subpart JJJJ). The affected source section has also been revised to
exclude web coating lines that will be an affected source under the
NESHAP for metal coil surface coating operations currently under
development. The final rule has been revised to exclude web coating
lines that are engaged in the coating of both fabric and other webs on
the same fabric coating line and that will be an affected source under
the NESHAP for fabric and other textiles printing, coating, and dyeing
operations currently under development. Finally, the rule has been
revised to clarify that certain web coating lines engaged in fabric
coating for use in pressure sensitive tape and abrasive materials are
part of the Paper and Other Web Coating source category. While most of
these products are commonly produced using a paper web, product
applications that require higher performance or unique characteristics
may necessitate the use of a fabric web. The coating equipment, the
coating solutions, and the emissions are essentially the same whether
the coated web is fabric or paper. Therefore, we are regulating these
web coating processes under today's final rule.
B. New Source Emission Limit
We received a comment expressing doubt that new sources could
consistently achieve 98 percent control efficiency using an oxidizer.
The commenter stated that the data we used to develop the new source
emission limit were based on short-term performance tests. Over the
long term, according to the commenter, oxidizer performance can vary
due to coating process variabilities. The commenter requested that we
adopt the existing source control efficiency requirement of 95 percent
for new sources. While the commenter did not explain what was meant by
``coating process variabilities,'' we assumed that this was a reference
to fluctuating organic HAP inlet concentrations during periods of
reduced coating application. We recognize that oxidizer performance may
decrease when the inlet concentration decreases. While we believe the
98 percent organic HAP overall control efficiency for new sources is
achievable based on information provided by the paper and other web
coating industry, we added an alternative emission limit based on
outlet organic HAP concentration that should account for any variable
or low inlet concentrations. The MACT floor analysis for the rule
determined that the emission control of the best controlled source in
this category was 98 percent. Therefore, we have retained the 98
percent overall control of organic HAP emissions for new affected
sources. As stated in the preamble to the proposed rule (65 FR 55339),
although some facilities reported more than 98 percent overall control
of organic HAP emissions, this higher level of control may not be
achievable on a continuous basis under all normal operating conditions
applicable to new sources. In order to provide additional flexibility
and ensure consistency with other coating-related NESHAP in
development, we added an alternate emission limit based on outlet
organic HAP concentration. Owners or operators of both existing and new
affected sources using a thermal oxidizer to control organic HAP
emissions may choose to operate the oxidizer such that
[[Page 72336]]
an outlet organic HAP concentration of no greater than 20 ppmv is
achieved as long as 100 percent capture efficiency is achieved.
The 20 ppmv by compound organic HAP limit is based on previous EPA
studies of available oxidizer technology, cost, and energy use. The
dual requirement of meeting a minimum control efficiency value or a 20
ppmv by compound limit accounts for a fall-off of oxidizer efficiency
at lower inlet concentrations. For example, if an inlet concentration
is only 200 ppmv, even if an outlet concentration of 20 ppmv is
achieved, the control efficiency is only 90 percent. This is less than
the existing source limit of 95 percent and the new source limit of 98
percent. We recognize this problem for oxidizers with low inlet
concentrations and, consequently, have included the alternate 20 ppmv
by compound organic HAP emission limit.
Previous EPA studies have shown that new oxidizers can achieve the
20 ppmv by compound emission limit even when the inlet organic HAP
concentration is low. We believe that most existing oxidizers could
also reach the emission limit with moderate adjustments. The combustion
temperature and residence time used in the previous EPA studies to
achieve the 20 ppmv by compound emission limit (870 degrees Celsius
(1600 degrees Fahrenheit) and 0.75 second) are typical of the necessary
operating conditions. We believe these operating conditions are
achievable by both new and existing sources.
C. Solvent Retained in the Web
Numerous commenters provided information concerning volatile
materials that may be retained in the coated web even after the drying/
curing operation. Most of these commenters were concerned that a source
using solvent recovery and demonstrating compliance by means of a
liquid-liquid material balance would be at a disadvantage because the
compliance demonstration procedures in the proposed rule assumed that
all volatile materials in the coatings are emitted. Thus, the emissions
would be overestimated when volatile material is retained in the coated
web. The commenters requested that an ``as-emitted'' compliance option
be added to the final rule.
Volatile HAP may be retained in the web due to reactive coatings in
which the volatiles are consumed or changed in a chemical reaction
during the drying/curing operation, or where a portion of the volatiles
is physically retained within the coated web. Volatile HAP may also be
recovered from the web coating process and recycled, therefore, not
being emitted to the atmosphere. Under the proposed rule, sources using
solvent recovery devices and demonstrating compliance through the use
of a liquid-liquid material balance would have no means of accounting
for the volatile HAP retained in the coated web and not emitted to the
atmosphere. Even a small percentage of volatile HAP retained in the
coated web would restrict the ability of such a source to comply with
the emission limitations in the proposed rule.
In response to these comments, we have added paragraph (g) to Sec.
63.3360, the performance testing section of the final rule. This
paragraph allows a source to take into account the mass of volatile
matter retained in the coated web after curing or drying, or otherwise
not emitted to the atmosphere. It also requires the source to develop a
testing protocol for determining the mass of volatile matter retained
or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere. This protocol would have to
be submitted and approved as part of a site-specific test plan. This
added paragraph applies to any means of demonstrating compliance, not
just liquid-liquid material balances.
In conjunction with the new paragraph in Sec. 63.3360, we revised
Equations 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 14, and 15 of Sec. 63.3370 by adding a
term (Mvret) to account for volatile matter not emitted from
the coating operation. This term may be used to account for reactive
coatings, volatile matter chemically bound in the dried coating,
incomplete curing, or other situations. These modifications have the
same effect as the commenters' request for adding an ``as-emitted''
compliance option.
D. Monitoring
We received numerous comments indicating that the performance
specifications (PS) for parameter monitoring of control devices were
overly burdensome, particularly the temperature monitor requirements
for oxidizers. While we believe the requirements in the proposed rule
were appropriate, we have reviewed these requirements and made
modifications where continuous compliance assurance will not be
compromised. For example, the temperature monitor requirements for
oxidizers no longer require monthly inspection of the electrical
connections of the temperature monitoring system because we believe the
industry adequately performs such monitoring in the absence of specific
requirements as part of their routine maintenance. If you wish to
monitor an alternative parameter for an oxidizer, or choose to use a
control device other than an oxidizer, then you must apply for and
receive approval of an alternative monitoring method under Sec.
63.8(f) of the General Provisions. Through this procedure, you have the
option of selecting monitoring appropriate to your specific facility
that is the most efficient for your needs while still assuring that
continuous compliance is maintained.
A related change concerns control devices equipped with an
automatic system that shuts down the control device when the
temperature falls below the minimum set point. We received comments
requesting that hourly averages of temperature readings not be required
when such a system is installed. We agree that such a system is an
adequate monitor of control device performance and will assure
continuous compliance. The final rule specifies that you have the
option of using such a system after receiving approval under Sec.
63.8(f) of the General Provisions.
We clarified the minimum data availability requirements for
calculating a valid hourly value from continuous monitoring system
data, as well as for calculating values for the 3-hour averages derived
from the hourly values. These changes were in response to comments
indicating that the proposed rule did not clearly indicate what
constituted a valid set of data for an hourly reading.
As an alternative to measuring the inlet temperature and
temperature rise across the catalyst bed of a catalytic oxidizer to
demonstrate continuous compliance, the rule includes a provision that
allows you to monitor the temperature at the inlet to the catalyst bed
and the catalyst activity level.
The proposed rule did not take into account that some existing
facilities may already have CEMS in place. In order to allow such a
facility to use the CEMS for compliance purposes, a provision was added
to the final rule which allows the use of CEMS to monitor the organic
HAP concentration in an exhaust stream from an emission source that is
controlled by means other than solvent recovery. However, in order to
use the CEMS data for compliance purposes, the emission source must
also be operated within a permanent total enclosure.
VIII. What Are the Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts of the
Rule?
We developed model facilities to represent the paper and other web
coating industry based on the data we collected. We estimated
environmental, energy, and economic impacts based upon what these
modeled facilities must do to meet the rule. There are several options
for demonstrating compliance
[[Page 72337]]
with these standards, and each facility has flexibility to adopt the
compliance option which has the least economic impact for their
individual situation. Most of the existing major source facilities in
this industry apply solvent-based coatings and utilize thermal
oxidation to reduce HAP emissions. Therefore, in estimating the impacts
associated with the rule, we assumed that most facilities would install
a permanent total enclosure and either install a new thermal oxidizer
or upgrade the mechanical components of an existing one. If, instead, a
facility complies with the rule by applying coatings that meet the
emission limitation, the capital and operating costs and other impacts
would be lower than estimated. Hence, the estimates presented below may
overestimate the costs and other impacts as some facilities may comply
with the rule by applying low-HAP coatings.
A. Emission Reductions
For existing affected sources in the paper and other web coating
industry (approximately 203 major sources), the nationwide baseline
organic HAP emissions are estimated to be 35,000 Mg/yr (39,000 tpy). We
estimate that implementation of the final rule would reduce emissions
from existing major sources by approximately 29,000 Mg/yr (32,000 tpy),
or approximately 80 percent.
We have projected the growth of the paper and other web coating
industry and anticipate that 32 new affected sources (individual
facilities with one or more web coating lines) will be constructed over
the next 5 years. In the absence of this rule, these new sources would
be required to comply with the NSPS in 40 CFR part 60 for VOC. Because
nearly all the VOC used by the paper and other web coating industry are
also organic HAP, the NSPS would reduce organic HAP emissions as well
as VOC emissions. Based on the analysis performed to develop model
plants to assess the impacts of the proposed rule on the industry, it
was determined that the NSPS represents a 90 percent reduction of
organic HAP emissions. Therefore, this level of control was used to
estimate the baseline organic HAP emissions for new sources (i.e., the
level of emissions from new sources in the absence of this rule). We
estimated that nationwide organic HAP baseline emissions from new
sources will be about 2,800 Mg/yr (3,000 tpy). We estimate that
implementation of the final rule will reduce emissions from new
affected sources by about 2,300 Mg/yr (2,535 tpy), or approximately 80
percent.
B. Secondary Environmental Impacts
Secondary environmental impacts are considered to be any air,
water, or solid waste impacts, positive or negative, associated with
the implementation of the final standards. These impacts are exclusive
of the direct organic HAP air emissions reductions discussed in the
previous section.
We estimate that more than 99 percent of the organic HAP emissions
from paper and other web coating are VOC. Therefore, the capture and
control of organic HAP that are presently emitted will result in a
decrease in VOC emissions. Consequently, we estimate the current
nationwide VOC emissions from the paper and other web coating source
category to be at least 35,000 mg/yr (39,000 tpy), the nationwide
organic HAP estimate. The emission controls for organic HAP will reduce
non-HAP VOC emissions as well.
Emissions of VOC have been associated with a variety of health and
welfare impacts. The VOC emissions, together with nitrogen oxides, are
precursors to the formation of ground-level ozone, or smog. Exposure to
ambient ozone is responsible for a series of public health impacts,
such as alterations in lung capacity and aggravation of existing
respiratory disease. Ozone exposure can also damage forests and crops.
The use of newly installed or upgraded control devices to meet the
standards would result in greater electricity consumption. Increases in
emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and
carbon dioxide, as well as certain HAP, from electric utilities could
result. The operation of newly installed or upgraded control devices
would also require combustion of supplemental fuel, typically natural
gas, resulting in additional emissions of nitrogen oxides, carbon
monoxide, and carbon dioxide.
It is expected that some paper and other web coating facilities
will comply with the standards by substituting non-HAP materials for
organic HAP presently in use. In some cases, the non-HAP materials may
be VOC, however, in other cases, non-VOC materials (e.g., water) may be
used. Facilities converting to waterborne materials as a means or
partial means of compliance may have reduced Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act hazardous waste disposal if the status of the waste
material changes from hazardous to nonhazardous. An increase in
wastewater discharge may then occur if this waste material and
waterborne wash up materials are discharged to publicly owned treatment
works. However, we do not expect any significant increases in
wastewater discharge to result from the standards.
New and upgraded catalytic oxidizers will require catalysts.
Catalyst life is estimated to be more than 10 years. Spent catalysts
will represent a small amount of solid waste, and sometimes the spent
catalyst will be regenerated by the manufacturer for reuse. Activated
carbon used in solvent recovery systems is typically returned to the
manufacturer at the end of its useful life and converted to other
products. Little solid waste impact is expected from this.
C. Energy Impacts
The operation of new and upgraded control devices will require
additional energy. Capture of previously uncontrolled solvent-laden air
will require fan horsepower. Operation of oxidizers, particularly
thermal oxidizers, may require supplemental fuel (typically natural
gas) to increase the combustion temperature and improve destruction
efficiency.
The total additional electrical energy required to meet the
standards is estimated to be 313 million kilowatt-hours per year.
Additional fuel requirements total 3.7 billion British thermal units
per year. These fuel impacts are based on the use of thermal oxidizers
at all facilities, which is the control scenario expected to result in
the highest energy impacts.
D. Cost Impacts
The total nationwide capital and annualized costs (1998 dollars)
attributable to compliance with the standards have been estimated for
existing and new affected sources. Costs are based on the use of
permanent total enclosures, thermal oxidizers, and monitoring equipment
(i.e., CEMS for solvent recovery systems). The capital costs with other
methods of control (e.g., applying low-HAP coatings) are expected to be
significantly lower.
It is expected that any new facility using solvent-based coatings
will install control systems to comply with applicable State and
Federal regulations for reducing VOC emissions from this source
category (e.g., the standards of performance for new stationary sources
in 40 CFR part 60). The data we gathered on this industry indicate that
thermal oxidation is the most common control technology installed to
meet the requirements of these existing State and Federal regulations.
Thermal oxidation is capable of achieving a 98 percent reduction of HAP
emissions. Therefore, the additional costs to a new facility resulting
from the standards were estimated based on the costs of
[[Page 72338]]
constructing a permanent total enclosure to deliver all HAP emissions
to the existing thermal oxidizer.
Capital costs would be incurred by installing capture and control
systems at existing facilities presently without capture and control
systems, and upgrading capture and control systems at existing
facilities that do not meet the standards. Additionally, we estimated
the cost for the purchase of monitoring equipment needed as a capital
investment to meet the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements of the standards. Total nationwide capital costs are
estimated to be $222 million with the cost for existing sources and new
sources estimated to be $204 million and $18 million, respectively.
Total nationwide annualized costs of the standards have been
estimated at $69 million with the annualized cost for existing and new
sources estimated to be $64 million and $5 million, respectively. These
costs include capital recovery over a 10-year period, operating costs
for the newly installed and upgraded capture and control systems, and
costs for monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting. These are net costs
after taking into account the costs presently being incurred for the
baseline control level.
E. Economic Impacts
The economic impact analysis (EIA) shows that the expected price
increases for affected output would range from only 0.1 to 1.1 percent
as a result of the standards. The expected change in production of
affected output is a reduction of 0.1 to 1.1 percent as a result of the
standards. The economic impact analysis predicts three plant closures
among the facilities included in the analysis. Although any facility
closure is cause for concern, it should be noted that the baseline
economic condition of the facilities predicted to close affects the
closure estimate provided by the economic model. Facilities which are
already experiencing adverse economic conditions for reasons
unconnected to the final rule are more vulnerable to the impact of any
new costs than those that are not. The facilities predicted to close
appear to currently have low profitability levels. While the final rule
may adversely impact the three facilities predicted to close, we do not
predict an adverse economic impact to the industry as a whole.
IX. Administrative Requirements
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 review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order
defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to
result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligation of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is
therefore not subject to OMB review.
B. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. This rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it is based on technology performance and
not on an assessment of health or safety risks. Furthermore, the rule
has been determined not to be ``economically significant'' as defined
under Executive Order 12866.
C. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' 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. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does
not apply to the rule. Although section 6 of Executive Order 13132 does
not apply to the rule, EPA did consult with State and local officials
to enable them to provide timely input in the development of the rule.
D. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 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. No tribal
governments own or operate paper and other web coating lines. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to the rule.
E. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, and Use
The final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
[[Page 72339]]
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 informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
The EPA has determined that the 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 rule for any
year has been estimated to be about $69 million. Thus, today's rule is
not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In
addition, EPA has determined that the standards 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, today's rule is
not subject to the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA.
G. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1966 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601, et
seq.
The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a
regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with the final rule. For
purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small entities,
small entity is defined as: (1) A small business ranging from 500 to
750 employees, according to Small Business Administration size
standards established under the NAICS for the industries affected by
today's rule; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a
government of a city, county, town, school district or special district
with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization
that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and
operated and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on
small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. We have
determined that 50 of the 103 companies owning affected facilities are
small businesses. Although small businesses represent 49 percent of the
companies within the source category, they are expected to incur 25
percent of the total industry compliance costs of $64 million. There
are six small firms with compliance costs equal to or greater than 3
percent of their sales. In addition, there are four small firms with
cost-to-sales ratios between 1 and 3 percent.
We performed an EIA to estimate the changes in product price and
production quantities for the firms affected by the final rule. The
analysis shows that of the 54 facilities owned by affected small firms,
one would be expected to shut down rather than incur the cost of
compliance with the final rule. Although any facility closure is cause
for concern, it should be noted that the baseline economic condition of
the facility predicted to close affects the closure estimate provided
by the economic model. Facilities which are already experiencing
adverse economic conditions for reasons unconnected to the rule are
more vulnerable to the impact of any new costs than those that are not.
The facility predicted to close appears to have low profitability
levels currently. The EPA also notes that, while economies of scale
will require individual small firms to pay a somewhat higher proportion
of revenues than large firms for compliance, the burden on most small
firms is quite low nevertheless. The median compliance cost is well
below 1 percent of sales for both small and large firms affected by
these standards (0.16 and 0.03 percent of sales for small and large
firms, respectively).
In summary, while a few small firms may experience significant
impacts, there will not be a substantial number incurring such a
burden. For more information, consult the docket for this project.
H. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in the rule have been
submitted for approval to OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq. An Information Collection Request (ICR) document
has been prepared by EPA (ICR No. 1951.02) and a copy may be obtained
from Susan Auby by mail at the Collection Strategies Division (2822T),
U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, by e-
mail at [email protected], or by calling (202) 566-1672. A copy may
also be downloaded off the internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. The
information requirements are not effective until OMB approves them.
The information requirements are based on notification,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General
Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all
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 Agency policies set
forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
The annual monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting burden for this
collection (averaged over the first 3 years after the effective date of
the rule) for existing web coating facilities is estimated to be 38,708
labor hours at a total annual cost of $2,914,796. For new sources, the
annual burden for the same 3-year period is estimated to be 2,754 labor
hours at a total annual cost of $206,283. This estimate covers all
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting activities, including a one-
time submission of a SSMP with semiannual reports for any event when
the procedures in the plan were not followed; semiannual compliance
reports; notifications; and recordkeeping. The total annual capital/
startup cost component (including purchase of services component) for
[[Page 72340]]
existing sources over the 3-year period is estimated to be $2,015,800.
The annual operation and maintenance costs component for existing
sources is estimated to be $649,779. For new sources, the estimated
annual capital/startup cost component is $233,500 and the estimated
annual operation and maintenance cost component is $28,520. Burden
means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR, chapter 15. The OMB
control number for the information collection requirements in this rule
will be listed in an amendment to 40 CFR part 9 in a subsequent Federal
Register document after OMB approves the ICR.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
As noted in the proposed rule, 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: EPA Methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, 2G, 3, 3A,
3B, 4, 24, 25, 25A, 204, 204A through F, and 311; and PS 6, 8, and 9.
Consistent with the NTTAA, EPA conducted searches to identify VCS in
addition to these EPA methods/PS. No applicable VCS were identified for
EPA Methods 1A, 2A, 2D, 2F, 2G, 204, 204A through F, and 311, and PS 6,
8, and 9. The search and review results have been documented and are
placed in docket A-99-09 for the rule.
The VCS described below was identified as an acceptable alternative
to EPA test methods for the purposes of the rule.
The VCS ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses
[Part 10, Instruments and Apparatus],'' is cited in the rule for its
manual method for measuring the oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon
monoxide content of exhaust gas. This part of ASME PTC 19.10-1981-Part
10 is an acceptable alternative to Method 3B.
Six VCS are already incorporated by reference (IBR) in EPA Method
24: ASTM D1475-90, ASTM D2369-95, ASTM D3792-91, ASTM D4017-96a, ASTM
D4457-85 (Reapproved 1991), and ASTM D5403-93. Five VCS are IBR in EPA
Method 311: ASTM D1979-91, ASTM D3432-89, ASTM D4747-87, ASTM D4827-93,
and ASTM PS9-94.
In addition to the VCS EPA uses in the rule, the search for
emissions measurement procedures identified 14 other VCS. The EPA
determined that 11 of these 14 standards identified for measuring
emissions of the HAP or surrogates subject to emission standards in the
rule were impractical alternatives to EPA test methods for the purposes
of the rule. Therefore, EPA does not intend to adopt these standards
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.
The VCS ASTM D3154-00, ``Standard Method for Average Velocity in a
Duct (Pitot Tube Method),'' is impractical as an alternative to EPA
Methods 1, 2, 2C, 3, 3B, and 4 for the purposes of the final rule since
the standard appears to lack in quality control and quality assurance
requirements. Specifically, ASTM D3154-00 does not include the
following: (1) Proof that openings of standard pitot tube have not
plugged during the test; (2) if differential pressure gauges other than
inclined manometers (e.g., magnehelic gauges) are used, their
calibration must be checked after each test series; and (3) the
frequency and validity range for calibration of the temperature
sensors.
The VCS ASTM D3464-96 (2001), ``Standard Test Method Average
Velocity in a Duct Using a Thermal Anemometer,'' is impractical as an
alternative to EPA Method 2 for the purposes of the final rule
primarily because applicability specifications are not clearly defined,
e.g., range of gas composition, temperature limits. Also, the lack of
supporting quality assurance data for the calibration procedures and
specifications, and certain variability issues that are not adequately
addressed by the standard limit EPA's ability to make a definitive
comparison of the method in these areas.
The VCS ISO 10780:1994, ``Stationary Source Emissions-Measurement
of Velocity and Volume Flowrate of Gas Streams in Ducts,'' is
impractical as an alternative to EPA Method 2 in the final rule. The
standard recommends the use of an L-shaped pitot which historically has
not been recommended by EPA. The EPA specifies the S-type design which
has large openings that are less likely to plug up with dust.
The VCS CAN/CSA Z223.2-M86(1986), ``Method for the Continuous
Measurement of Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Sulphur
Dioxide, and Oxides of Nitrogen in Enclosed Combustion Flue Gas
Streams,'' is unacceptable as a substitute for EPA Method 3A since it
does not include quantitative specifications for measurement system
performance, most notably the calibration procedures and instrument
performance characteristics. The instrument performance characteristics
that are provided are nonmandatory and also do not provide the same
level of quality assurance as the EPA methods. For example, the zero
and span/calibration drift is only checked weekly, whereas the EPA
methods require drift checks after each run.
Two very similar standards, ASTM D5835-95, ``Standard Practice for
Sampling Stationary Source Emissions for Automated Determination of Gas
Concentration,'' and ISO 10396:1993, ``Stationary Source Emissions:
Sampling for the Automated Determination of Gas Concentrations,'' are
impractical alternatives to EPA Method 3A for the purposes of the final
rule because they lack in detail and quality assurance/quality control
requirements. Specifically, these two standards do not include the
following: (1) Sensitivity of the method; (2) acceptable levels of
analyzer calibration error; (3) acceptable levels of sampling system
bias; (4) zero drift and calibration drift limits, time span, and
required testing frequency; (5) a method to test the interference
response of the analyzer; (6) procedures to determine the minimum
sampling time per run and minimum measurement time; and (7)
specifications for data recorders in terms of resolution (all types)
and recording intervals (digital and analog recorders, only).
[[Page 72341]]
The VCS ISO 12039:2001, ``Stationary Source Emissions--
Determination of Carbon Monoxide, Carbon Dioxide, and Oxygen--Automated
Methods,'' is not acceptable as an alternative to EPA Method 3A. This
ISO standard is similar to EPA Method 3A, but is missing some key
features. In terms of sampling, the hardware required by ISO 12039:2001
does not include a 3-way calibration valve assembly or equivalent to
block the sample gas flow while calibration gases are introduced. In
its calibration procedures, ISO 12039:2001 only specifies a two-point
calibration while EPA Method 3A specifies a three-point calibration.
Also, ISO 12039:2001 does not specify performance criteria for
calibration error, calibration drift, or sampling system bias tests as
in the EPA method, although checks of these quality control features
are required by the ISO standard.
The VCS ISO 11890-1 (2000) part 1, ``Paints and Varnishes--
Determination of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Content-Difference
Method,'' is impractical as an alternative to EPA Method 24 because
measured nonvolatile matter content can vary with experimental factors
such as temperature, length of heating period, size of weighing dish,
and size of sample. The standard ISO 11890-1 allows for different dish
weights and sample sizes than the one size (58 millimeters in diameter
and sample size of 0.5 gram) of EPA Method 24. The standard ISO 11890-1
also allows for different oven temperatures and heating times depending
on the type of coating, whereas EPA Method 24 requires 60 minutes
heating at 110 degrees Celcius at all times. Because the EPA Method 24
test conditions and procedures ``define'' volatile matter, ISO 11890-1
is unacceptable as an alternative because of its different test
conditions.
The VCS ISO 11890-2 (2000) part 2, ``Paints and Varnishes--
Determination of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Content-Gas
Chromatographic Method,'' is impractical as an alternative to EPA
Method 24 because ISO 11890-2 only measures the VOC added to the
coating and would not measure any VOC generated from the curing of the
coating. The EPA Method 24 does measure ``cure'' VOC which can be
significant in some cases and, therefore, ISO 11890-2 is not an
acceptable alternative to this EPA method.
Two VCS, EN 12619:1999 ``Stationary Source Emissions--Determination
of the Mass Concentration of Total Gaseous Organic Carbon at Low
Concentrations in Flue Gases--Continuous Flame Ionization Detector
Method'' and ISO 14965:2000(E) ``Air Quality-Determination of Total
Nonmethane Organic Compounds--Cryogenic Preconcentration and Direct
Flame Ionization Method,'' are impractical alternatives to EPA Method
25 and 25A for the purposes of the final rule because the standards do
not apply to solvent process vapors in concentrations greater than 40
parts per million (ppm) (EN 12619) and 10 ppm carbon (ISO 14965).
Methods whose upper limits are this low are too limited to be useful in
measuring source emissions, which are expected to be much higher.
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.
Sections 63.3320 and 63.3360 of the final rule list the EPA testing
methods and PS included in the final rule. Under Sec. Sec. 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, PS,
or procedures.
J. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by
the SBREFA, 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 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 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
December 4, 2002.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: November 8, 2002.
Christine T. Whitman,
Administrator.
For reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63
of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C., 7401, et seq.
2. Part 63 is amended by revising Sec. 63.14(i). The revision
reads as follows:
Sec. 63.14 Incorporations by reference.
* * * * *
(i) The following material is available for purchase from at least
one of the following addresses: ASME International, Orders/Inquiries,
P.O. Box 2300, Fairfield, NJ 07007-2300; or Global Engineering
Documents, Sales Department, 15 Inverness Way East, Englewood, CO
80112: ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part
10, Instruments and Apparatus],'' IBR approved for Sec.
63.3360(e)(1)(iii), Sec. 63.4166(a)(3), and Sec. 63.5160(d)(1)(iii).
* * * * *
3. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart JJJJ to read as follows:
Subpart JJJJ--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Paper and Other Web Coating
Sec.
What This Subpart Covers
63.3280 What is in this subpart?
63.3290 Does this subpart apply to me?
63.3300 Which of my emission sources are affected by this subpart?
63.3310 What definitions are used in this subpart?
Emission Standards and Compliance Dates
63.3320 What emission standards must I meet?
63.3321 What operating limits must I meet?
63.3330 When must I comply?
General Requirements for Compliance With the Emission Standards and for
Monitoring and Performance Tests
63.3340 What general requirements must I meet to comply with the
standards?
63.3350 If I use a control device to comply with the emission
standards what monitoring must I do?
63.3360 What performance tests must I conduct?
Requirements for Showing Compliance
63.3370 How do I demonstrate compliance with the emission standards?
[[Page 72342]]
Notifications, Reports, and Records
63.3400 What notifications and reports must I submit?
63.3410 What records must I keep?
Delegation of Authority
63.3420 What authorities may be delegated to the States?
Tables to Subpart JJJJ of Part 63
Table 1 to Subpart JJJJ of Part 63. Operating Limits if Using Add-On
Control Devices and Capture System
Table 2 to Subpart JJJJ of Part 63. Applicability of 40 CFR Part 63
General Provisions to Subpart JJJJ
What This Subpart Covers
63.3280 What is in this subpart?
This subpart describes the actions you must take to reduce
emissions of organic hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from paper and
other web coating operations. This subpart establishes emission
standards for web coating lines and specifies what you must do to
comply if you own or operate a facility with web coating lines that is
a major source of HAP. Certain requirements apply to all who are
subject to this subpart; others depend on the means you use to comply
with an emission standard.
Sec. 63.3290 Does this subpart apply to me?
The provisions of this subpart apply to each new and existing
facility that is a major source of HAP, as defined in Sec. 63.2, at
which web coating lines are operated.
Sec. 63.3300 Which of my emission sources are affected by this
subpart?
The affected source subject to this subpart is the collection of
all web coating lines at your facility. This includes web coating lines
engaged in the coating of metal webs that are used in flexible
packaging, and web coating lines engaged in the coating of fabric
substrates for use in pressure sensitive tape and abrasive materials.
Web coating lines specified in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this
section are not part of the affected source of this subpart.
(a) Any web coating line that is stand-alone coating equipment
under subpart KK of this part (national emission standards for the
printing and publishing industry) which the owner or operator includes
in the affected source under subpart KK.
(b) Any web coating line that is a product and packaging
rotogravure or wide-web flexographic press under subpart KK of this
part (national emission standards for the printing and publishing
industry) which is included in the affected source under subpart KK.
(c) Web coating in lithography, screenprinting, letterpress, and
narrow-web flexographic printing processes.
(d) Any web coating line subject to subpart EE of this part
(national emission standards for magnetic tape manufacturing
operations).
(e) Any web coating line that will be subject to the national
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for surface
coating of metal coil currently under development.
(f) Any web coating line that will be subject to the NESHAP for the
printing, coating, and dyeing of fabric and other textiles currently
under development. This would include any web coating line that coats
both a paper or other web substrate and a fabric or other textile
substrate, except for a fabric substrate used for pressure sensitive
tape and abrasive materials.
(g) Any web coating line that is defined as research or laboratory
equipment in Sec. 63.3310.
Sec. 63.3310 What definitions are used in this subpart?
All terms used in this subpart that are not defined in this section
have the meaning given to them in the Clean Air Act (CAA) and in
subpart A of this part.
Always-controlled work station means a work station associated with
a dryer from which the exhaust is delivered to a control device with no
provision for the dryer exhaust to bypass the control device unless
there is an interlock to interrupt and prevent continued coating during
a bypass. Sampling lines for analyzers, relief valves needed for safety
purposes, and periodic cycling of exhaust dampers to ensure safe
operation are not considered bypass lines.
Applied means, for the purposes of this subpart, the amount of
organic HAP, coating material, or coating solids (as appropriate for
the emission standards in Sec. 63.3320(b)) used by the affected source
during the compliance period.
As-applied means the condition of a coating at the time of
application to a substrate, including any added solvent.
As-purchased means the condition of a coating as delivered to the
user.
Capture efficiency means the fraction of all organic HAP emissions
generated by a process that is delivered to a control device, expressed
as a percentage.
Capture system means a hood, enclosed room, or other means of
collecting organic HAP emissions into a closed-vent system that
exhausts to a control device.
Car-seal means a seal that is placed on a device that is used to
change the position of a valve or damper (e.g., from open to closed) in
such a way that the position of the valve or damper cannot be changed
without breaking the seal.
Coating material(s) means all inks, varnishes, adhesives, primers,
solvents, reducers, and other coating materials applied to a substrate
via a web coating line. Materials used to form a substrate are not
considered coating materials.
Control device means a device such as a solvent recovery device or
oxidizer which reduces the organic HAP in an exhaust gas by recovery or
by destruction.
Control device efficiency means the ratio of organic HAP emissions
recovered or destroyed by a control device to the total organic HAP
emissions that are introduced into the control device, expressed as a
percentage.
Day means a 24-consecutive-hour period.
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 limitation
(including any 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 limitation (including any operating
limit) or work practice standard in this subpart during start-up,
shutdown, or malfunction, regardless of whether or not such failure is
permitted by this subpart.
Existing affected source means any affected source the construction
or reconstruction of which is commenced on or before September 13,
2000, and has not undergone reconstruction as defined in Sec. 63.2.
Fabric means any woven, knitted, plaited, braided, felted, or non-
woven material made of filaments, fibers, or yarns including thread.
This term includes material made of fiberglass, natural fibers,
synthetic fibers, or composite materials.
Facility means all contiguous or adjoining property that is under
common ownership or control, including properties that are separated
only by a road or other public right-of-way.
Flexible packaging means any package or part of a package the shape
of which can be readily changed. Flexible packaging includes, but is
not limited to, bags, pouches, labels, liners
[[Page 72343]]
and wraps utilizing paper, plastic, film, aluminum foil, metalized or
coated paper or film, or any combination of these materials.
Formulation data means data on the organic HAP mass fraction,
volatile matter mass fraction, or coating solids mass fraction of a
material that is generated by the manufacturer or means other than a
test method specified in this subpart or an approved alternative
method.
HAP means hazardous air pollutants.
HAP applied means the organic HAP content of all coating materials
applied to a substrate by a web coating line at an affected source.
Intermittently-controlled work station means a work station
associated with a dryer with provisions for the dryer exhaust to be
delivered to or diverted from a control device through a bypass line,
depending on the position of a valve or damper. Sampling lines for
analyzers, relief valves needed for safety purposes, and periodic
cycling of exhaust dampers to ensure safe operation are not considered
bypass lines.
Metal coil means a continuous metal strip that is at least 0.15
millimeter (0.006 inch) thick which is packaged in a roll or coil prior
to coating. After coating, it may or may not be rewound into a roll or
coil. Metal coil does not include metal webs that are coated for use in
flexible packaging.
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.
Never-controlled work station means a work station that is not
equipped with provisions by which any emissions, including those in the
exhaust from any associated dryer, may be delivered to a control
device.
New affected source means any affected source the construction or
reconstruction of which is commenced after September 13, 2000.
Overall organic HAP control efficiency means the total efficiency
of a capture and control system.
Pressure sensitive tape means a flexible backing material with a
pressure-sensitive adhesive coating on one or both sides of the
backing. Examples include, but are not limited to, duct/duct insulation
tape and medical tape.
Research or laboratory equipment means any equipment for which the
primary purpose is to conduct research and development into new
processes and products where such equipment is operated under the close
supervision of technically trained personnel and is not engaged in the
manufacture of products for commercial sale in commerce except in a de
minimis manner.
Rewind or cutting station means a unit from which substrate is
collected at the outlet of a web coating line.
Uncontrolled coating line means a coating line consisting of only
never-controlled work stations.
Unwind or feed station means a unit from which substrate is fed to
a web coating line.
Web means a continuous substrate (e.g., paper, film, foil) which is
flexible enough to be wound or unwound as rolls.
Web coating line means any number of work stations, of which one or
more applies a continuous layer of coating material across the entire
width or any portion of the width of a web substrate, and any
associated curing/drying equipment between an unwind or feed station
and a rewind or cutting station.
Work station means a unit on a web coating line where coating
material is deposited onto a web substrate.
Emission Standards and Compliance Dates
Sec. 63.3320 What emission standards must I meet?
(a) If you own or operate any affected source that is subject to
the requirements of this subpart, you must comply with these
requirements on and after the compliance dates as specified in Sec.
63.3330.
(b) You must limit organic HAP emissions to the level specified in
paragraph (b)(1), (2), (3), or (4) of this section.
(1) No more than 5 percent of the organic HAP applied for each
month (95 percent reduction) at existing affected sources, and no more
than 2 percent of the organic HAP applied for each month (98 percent
reduction) at new affected sources; or
(2) No more than 4 percent of the mass of coating materials applied
for each month at existing affected sources, and no more than 1.6
percent of the mass of coating materials applied for each month at new
affected sources; or
(3) No more than 20 percent of the mass of coating solids applied
for each month at existing affected sources, and no more than 8 percent
of the coating solids applied for each month at new affected sources.
(4) If you use an oxidizer to control organic HAP emissions,
operate the oxidizer such that an outlet organic HAP concentration of
no greater than 20 parts per million by volume (ppmv) by compound on a
dry basis is achieved and the efficiency of the capture system is 100
percent.
(c) You must demonstrate compliance with this subpart by following
the procedures in Sec. 63.3370.
Sec. 63.3321 What operating limits must I meet?
(a) For any web coating line or group of web coating lines for
which you use add-on control devices, unless you use a solvent recovery
system and conduct a liquid-liquid material balance, you must meet the
operating limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart or according to
paragraph (b) of this section. These operating limits apply to emission
capture systems and control devices, and you must establish the
operating limits during the performance test according to the
requirements in Sec. 63.3360(e)(3). You must meet the operating limits
at all times after you establish them.
(b) 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. 63.3330 When must I comply?
(a) If you own or operate an existing affected source subject to
the provisions of this subpart, you must comply by the compliance date.
The compliance date for existing affected sources in this subpart is
December 5, 2005. You must complete any performance test required in
Sec. 63.3360 within the time limits specified in Sec. 63.7(a)(2).
(b) If you own or operate a new affected source subject to the
provisions of this subpart, your compliance date is immediately upon
start-up of the new affected source or by December 4, 2002, whichever
is later. You must complete any performance test required in Sec.
63.3360 within the time limits specified in Sec. 63.7(a)(2).
(c) If you own or operate a reconstructed affected source subject
to the provisions of this subpart, your compliance date is immediately
upon startup of the affected source or by December 4, 2002, whichever
is later. Existing affected sources which have undergone reconstruction
as defined in Sec. 63.2 are subject to the requirements for new
affected sources. The costs associated with the purchase and
installation of air pollution control equipment are not considered in
determining whether the existing affected source has been
reconstructed. Additionally, the costs of retrofitting and replacing of
equipment that is installed specifically to comply with this subpart
are not considered reconstruction costs. You must
[[Page 72344]]
complete any performance test required in Sec. 63.3360 within the time
limits specified in Sec. 63.7(a)(2).
General Requirements for Compliance With the Emission Standards and for
Monitoring and Performance Tests
Sec. 63.3340 What general requirements must I meet to comply with the
standards?
Table 2 to this subpart specifies the provisions of subpart A of
this part that apply if you are subject to this subpart, such as
startup, shutdown, and malfunction plans (SSMP) in Sec. 63.6(e)(3) for
affected sources using a control device to comply with the emission
standards.
Sec. 63.3350 If I use a control device to comply with the emission
standards, what monitoring must I do?
(a) A summary of monitoring you must do follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you operate a web coating
line, and have the following: Then you must:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Intermittently-controlled Record parameters related to possible
work stations. exhaust flow bypass of control device
and to coating use (Sec. 63.3350(c)).
(2) Solvent recovery unit.... Operate continuous emission monitoring
system and perform quarterly audits or
determine volatile matter recovered and
conduct a liquid-liquid material balance
(Sec. 63.3350(d)).
(3) Control Device........... Operate continuous parameter monitoring
system (Sec. 63.3350(e)).
(4) Capture system........... Monitor capture system operating
parameter (Sec. 63.3350(f)).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Following the date on which the initial performance test of a
control device is completed to demonstrate continuing compliance with
the standards, you must monitor and inspect each capture system and
each control device used to comply with Sec. 63.3320. You must install
and operate the monitoring equipment as specified in paragraphs (c) and
(f) of this section.
(c) Bypass and coating use monitoring. If you own or operate web
coating lines with intermittently-controlled work stations, you must
monitor bypasses of the control device and the mass of each coating
material applied at the work station during any such bypass. If using a
control device for complying with the requirements of this subpart, you
must demonstrate that any coating material applied on a never-
controlled work station or an intermittently-controlled work station
operated in bypass mode is allowed in your compliance demonstration
according to Sec. 63.3370(n) and (o). The bypass monitoring must be
conducted using at least one of the procedures in paragraphs (c)(1)
through (4) of this section for each work station and associated dryer.
(1) Flow control position indicator. Install, calibrate, maintain,
and operate according to the manufacturer's specifications a flow
control position indicator that provides a record indicating whether
the exhaust stream from the dryer was directed to the control device or
was diverted from the control device. The time and flow control
position must be recorded at least once per hour as well as every time
the flow direction is changed. A flow control position indicator must
be installed at the entrance to any bypass line that could divert the
exhaust stream away from the control device to the atmosphere.
(2) 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. A visual inspection of the seal or closure mechanism
must be performed at least once every month to ensure that the valve or
damper is maintained in the closed position, and the exhaust stream is
not diverted through the bypass line.
(3) Valve closure continuous monitoring. Ensure that any bypass
line valve or damper is in the closed position through continuous
monitoring of valve position when the emission source is in operation
and is using a control device for compliance with the requirements of
this subpart. The monitoring system must be inspected at least once
every month to verify that the monitor will indicate valve position.
(4) Automatic shutdown system. Use an automatic shutdown system in
which the web coating line is stopped when flow is diverted away from
the control device to any bypass line when the control device is in
operation. The automatic system must be inspected at least once every
month to verify that it will detect diversions of flow and would shut
down operations in the event of such a diversion.
(d) Solvent recovery unit. If you own or operate a solvent recovery
unit to comply with Sec. 63.3320, you must meet the requirements in
either paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this section depending on how control
efficiency is determined.
(1) Continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS). If you are
demonstrating compliance with the emission standards in Sec. 63.3320
through continuous emission monitoring of a control device, you must
install, calibrate, operate, and maintain the CEMS according to
paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Measure the total organic volatile matter mass flow rate at
both the control device inlet and the outlet such that the reduction
efficiency can be determined. Each continuous emission monitor must
comply with performance specification 6, 8, or 9 of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix B, as appropriate.
(ii) You must follow the quality assurance procedures in procedure
1, appendix F of 40 CFR part 60. In conducting the quarterly audits of
the monitors as required by procedure 1, appendix F, you must use
compounds representative of the gaseous emission stream being
controlled.
(iii) You must have valid data from at least 90 percent of the
hours during which the process is operated.
(2) Liquid-liquid material balance. If you are demonstrating
compliance with the emission standards in Sec. 63.3320 through liquid-
liquid material balance, you must install, calibrate, maintain, and
operate according to the manufacturer's specifications a device that
indicates the cumulative amount of volatile matter recovered by the
solvent recovery device on a monthly basis. The device must be
certified by the manufacturer to be accurate to within +/-2.0 percent
by mass.
(e) Continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS). If you are using
a control device to comply with the emission standards in Sec.
63.3320, you must install, operate, and maintain each CPMS specified in
paragraphs (e)(9) and (10) and (f) of this section according to the
requirements in paragraphs (e)(1) through (8) of this section. You must
install, operate, and maintain each CPMS specified in paragraph (c) of
this section according to paragraphs (e)(5) through (7) of this
section.
[[Page 72345]]
(1) Each 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 to have a valid hour
of data.
(2) You must have valid data from at least 90 percent of the hours
during which the process operated.
(3) You must determine the hourly average of all recorded readings
according to paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) To calculate a valid hourly value, you must have at least three
of four equally spaced data values from that hour from a continuous
monitoring system (CMS) that is not out-of-control.
(ii) Provided all of the readings recorded in accordance with
paragraph (e)(3) of this section clearly demonstrate continuous
compliance with the standard that applies to you, then you are not
required to determine the hourly average of all recorded readings.
(4) You must determine the rolling 3-hour average of all recorded
readings for each operating period. To calculate the average for each
3-hour averaging period, you must have at least two of three of the
hourly averages for that period using only average values that are
based on valid data (i.e., not from out-of-control periods).
(5) You must record the results of each inspection, calibration,
and validation check of the CPMS.
(6) At all times, you must maintain the monitoring system in proper
working order including, but not limited to, maintaining necessary
parts for routine repairs of the monitoring equipment.
(7) Except for monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, or
required quality assurance or control activities (including calibration
checks or required zero and span adjustments), you must conduct all
monitoring at all times that the unit is operating. Data recorded
during monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, out-of-control
periods, or required quality assurance or control activities shall not
be used for purposes of calculating the emissions concentrations and
percent reductions specified in Sec. 63.3370. You must use all the
valid data collected during all other periods in assessing compliance
of the control device and associated control system. A monitoring
malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not reasonably preventable
failure of the monitoring system to provide valid data. Monitoring
failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or careless
operation are not malfunctions.
(8) Any averaging period for which you do not have valid monitoring
data and such data are required constitutes a deviation, and you must
notify the Administrator in accordance with Sec. 63.3400(c).
(9) Oxidizer. If you are using an oxidizer to comply with the
emission standards, you must comply with paragraphs (e)(9)(i) through
(iii) of this section.
(i) Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate temperature
monitoring equipment according to the manufacturer's specifications.
The calibration of the chart recorder, data logger, or temperature
indicator must be verified every 3 months or the chart recorder, data
logger, or temperature indicator must be replaced. You must replace the
equipment whether you choose not to perform the calibration or the
equipment cannot be calibrated properly.
(ii) For an oxidizer other than a catalytic oxidizer, install,
calibrate, operate, and maintain a temperature monitoring device
equipped with a continuous recorder. The device must have an accuracy
of +/-1 percent of the temperature being monitored in degrees Celsius,
or +/-1[deg] Celsius, whichever is greater. The thermocouple or
temperature sensor must be installed in the combustion chamber at a
location in the combustion zone.
(iii) For a catalytic oxidizer, install, calibrate, operate, and
maintain a temperature monitoring device equipped with a continuous
recorder. The device must be capable of monitoring temperature with an
accuracy of +/-1 percent of the temperature being monitored in degrees
Celsius or +/- 1 degree Celsius, whichever is greater. The thermocouple
or temperature sensor must be installed in the vent stream at the
nearest feasible point to the inlet and outlet of the catalyst bed.
Calculate the temperature rise across the catalyst.
(10) Other types of control devices. If you use a control device
other than an oxidizer or wish to monitor an alternative parameter and
comply with a different operating limit, you must apply to the
Administrator for approval of an alternative monitoring method under
Sec. 63.8(f).
(f) Capture system monitoring. If you are complying with the
emission standards in Sec. 63.3320 through the use of a capture system
and control device for one or more web coating lines, you must develop
a site-specific monitoring plan containing the information specified in
paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this section for these capture systems.
You must monitor the capture system in accordance with paragraph (f)(3)
of this section. You must make the monitoring plan available for
inspection by the permitting authority upon request.
(1) The monitoring plan must:
(i) Identify the operating parameter to be monitored to ensure that
the capture efficiency determined during the initial compliance test is
maintained; and
(ii) Explain why this parameter is appropriate for demonstrating
ongoing compliance; and
(iii) Identify the specific monitoring procedures.
(2) The monitoring plan must specify the operating parameter value
or range of values that demonstrate compliance with the emission
standards in Sec. 63.3320. The specified operating parameter value or
range of values must represent the conditions present when the capture
system is being properly operated and maintained.
(3) You must conduct all capture system monitoring in accordance
with the plan.
(4) Any deviation from the operating parameter value or range of
values which are monitored according to the plan will be considered a
deviation from the operating limit.
(5) You must review and update the capture system monitoring plan
at least annually.
Sec. 63.3360 What performance tests must I conduct?
(a) The performance test methods you must conduct are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you control organic HAP on any
individual web coating line or any You must:
group of web coating lines by:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Limiting organic HAP or Determine the organic HAP or
volatile matter content of volatile matter and coating solids
coatings. content of coating materials
according to procedures in Sec.
63.3360(c) and (d). If applicable,
determine the mass of volatile
matter retained in the coated web
or otherwise not emitted to the
atmosphere according to Sec.
63.3360(g).
[[Page 72346]]
(2) Using a capture and control Conduct a performance test for each
system. capture and control system to
determine: the destruction or
removal efficiency of each control
device other than solvent recovery
according to Sec. 63.3360(e), and
the capture efficiency of each
capture system according to Sec.
63.3360(f). If applicable,
determine the mass of volatile
matter retained in the coated web
or otherwise not emitted to the
atmosphere according to Sec.
63.3360(g).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) If you are using a control device to comply with the emission
standards in Sec. 63.3320, you are not required to conduct a
performance test to demonstrate compliance if one or more of the
criteria in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section are met.
(1) The control device is equipped with continuous emission
monitors for determining inlet and outlet total organic volatile matter
concentration and capture efficiency has been determined in accordance
with the requirements of this subpart such that an overall organic HAP
control efficiency can be calculated, and the continuous emission
monitors are used to demonstrate continuous compliance in accordance
with Sec. 63.3350; or
(2) You have met the requirements of Sec. 63.7(h) (for waiver of
performance testing; or
(3) The control device is a solvent recovery system and you comply
by means of a monthly liquid-liquid material balance.
(c) Organic HAP content. If you determine compliance with the
emission standards in Sec. 63.3320 by means other than determining the
overall organic HAP control efficiency of a control device, you must
determine the organic HAP mass fraction of each coating material ``as-
purchased'' by following one of the procedures in paragraphs (c)(1)
through (3) of this section, and determine the organic HAP mass
fraction of each coating material ``as-applied'' by following the
procedures in paragraph (c)(4) of this section. If the organic HAP
content values are not determined using the procedures in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (3) of this section, the owner or operator must submit
an alternative test method for determining their values for approval by
the Administrator in accordance with Sec. 63.7(f). The recovery
efficiency of the test method must be determined for all of the target
organic HAP and a correction factor, if necessary, must be determined
and applied.
(1) Method 311. You may test the coating material in accordance
with Method 311 of appendix A of this part. The Method 311
determination may be performed by the manufacturer of the coating
material and the results provided to the owner or operator. The organic
HAP content must be calculated according to the criteria and procedures
in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Include each organic HAP determined to be present at greater
than or equal to 0.1 mass percent for Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA)-defined carcinogens as specified in 29 CFR
1910.1200(d)(4) and greater than or equal to 1.0 mass percent for other
organic HAP compounds.
(ii) Express the mass fraction of each organic HAP you include
according to paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section as a value truncated
to four places after the decimal point (for example, 0.3791).
(iii) Calculate the total mass fraction of organic HAP in the
tested material by summing the counted individual organic HAP mass
fractions and truncating the result to three places after the decimal
point (for example, 0.763).
(2) Method 24. For coatings, determine the volatile organic content
as mass fraction of nonaqueous volatile matter and use it as a
substitute for organic HAP using Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A. The Method 24 determination may be performed by the manufacturer of
the coating and the results provided to you.
(3) Formulation data. You may use formulation data to determine the
organic HAP mass fraction of a coating material. Formulation data may
be provided to the owner or operator by the manufacturer of the
material. In the event of an inconsistency between Method 311 (appendix
A of 40 CFR part 63) test data and a facility's formulation data, and
the Method 311 test value is higher, the Method 311 data will govern.
Formulation data may be used provided that the information represents
all organic HAP present at a level equal to or greater than 0.1 percent
for OSHA-defined carcinogens as specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(d)(4) and
equal to or greater than 1.0 percent for other organic HAP compounds in
any raw material used.
(4) As-applied organic HAP mass fraction. If the as-purchased
coating material is applied to the web without any solvent or other
material added, then the as-applied organic HAP mass fraction is equal
to the as-purchased organic HAP mass fraction. Otherwise, the as-
applied organic HAP mass fraction must be calculated using Equation 1a
of Sec. 63.3370.
(d) Volatile organic and coating solids content. If you determine
compliance with the emission standards in Sec. 63.3320 by means other
than determining the overall organic HAP control efficiency of a
control device and you choose to use the volatile organic content as a
surrogate for the organic HAP content of coatings, you must determine
the as-purchased volatile organic content and coating solids content of
each coating material applied by following the procedures in paragraph
(d)(1) or (2) of this section, and the as-applied volatile organic
content and coating solids content of each coating material by
following the procedures in paragraph (d)(3) of this section.
(1) Method 24. You may determine the volatile organic and coating
solids mass fraction of each coating applied using Method 24 (40 CFR
part 60, appendix A.) The Method 24 determination may be performed by
the manufacturer of the material and the results provided to you. If
these values cannot be determined using Method 24, you must submit an
alternative technique for determining their values for approval by the
Administrator.
(2) Formulation data. You may determine the volatile organic
content and coating solids content of a coating material based on
formulation data and may rely on volatile organic content data provided
by the manufacturer of the material. In the event of any inconsistency
between the formulation data and the results of Method 24 of 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A, and the Method 24 results are higher, the results
of Method 24 will govern.
(3) As-applied volatile organic content and coating solids content.
If the as-purchased coating material is applied to the web without any
solvent or other material added, then the as-applied volatile organic
content is equal to the as-purchased volatile content and the as-
applied coating solids content is equal to the as-purchased coating
solids content. Otherwise, the as-applied volatile organic content must
be
[[Page 72347]]
calculated using Equation 1b of Sec. 63.3370 and the as-applied
coating solids content must be calculated using Equation 2 of Sec.
63.3370.
(e) Control device efficiency. If you are using an add-on control
device other than solvent recovery, such as an oxidizer, to comply with
the emission standards in Sec. 63.3320, you must conduct a performance
test to establish the destruction or removal efficiency of the control
device according to the methods and procedures in paragraphs (e)(1) and
(2) of this section. During the performance test, you must establish
the operating limits required by Sec. 63.3321 according to paragraph
(e)(3) of this section.
(1) An initial performance test to establish the destruction or
removal efficiency of the control device must be conducted such that
control device inlet and outlet testing is conducted simultaneously,
and the data are reduced in accordance with the test methods and
procedures in paragraphs (e)(1)(i) through (ix) of this section. You
must conduct three test runs as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3), and each
test run must last at least 1 hour.
(i) Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used for
sample and velocity traverses to determine sampling locations.
(ii) Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A,
must be used to determine gas volumetric flow rate.
(iii) Method 3, 3A, or 3B of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be
used for gas analysis to determine dry molecular weight. You may also
use as an alternative to Method 3B the manual method for measuring the
oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide content of exhaust gas in
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part 10,
Instruments and Apparatus],'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14).
(iv) Method 4 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used to
determine stack gas moisture.
(v) The gas volumetric flow rate, dry molecular weight, and stack
gas moisture must be determined during each test run specified in
paragraph (f)(1)(vii) of this section.
(vi) Method 25 or 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used
to determine total gaseous non-methane organic matter concentration.
Use the same test method for both the inlet and outlet measurements
which must be conducted simultaneously. You must submit notice of the
intended test method to the Administrator for approval along with
notification of the performance test required under Sec. 63.7(b). You
must use Method 25A if any of the conditions described in paragraphs
(e)(1)(vi)(A) through (D) of this section apply to the control device.
(A) The control device is not an oxidizer.
(B) The control device is an oxidizer but an exhaust gas volatile
organic matter concentration of 50 ppmv or less is required to comply
with the emission standards in Sec. 63.3320; or
(C) The control device is an oxidizer but the volatile organic
matter concentration at the inlet to the control system and the
required level of control are such that they result in exhaust gas
volatile organic matter concentrations of 50 ppmv or less; or
(D) The control device is an oxidizer but because of the high
efficiency of the control device the anticipated volatile organic
matter concentration at the control device exhaust is 50 ppmv or less,
regardless of inlet concentration.
(vii) Except as provided in Sec. 63.7(e)(3), each performance test
must consist of three separate runs with each run conducted for at
least 1 hour under the conditions that exist when the affected source
is operating under normal operating conditions. For the purpose of
determining volatile organic compound concentrations and mass flow
rates, the average of the results of all the runs will apply.
(viii) Volatile organic matter mass flow rates must be determined
for each run specified in paragraph (e)(1)(vii) of this section using
Equation 1 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.025
Where:
Mf = Total organic volatile matter mass flow rate, kilograms
(kg)/hour (h).
Qsd = Volumetric flow rate of gases entering or exiting the
control device, as determined according to Sec. 63.3360(e)(1)(ii), dry
standard cubic meters (dscm)/h.
Cc = Concentration of organic compounds as carbon, ppmv.
12.0 = Molecular weight of carbon.
0.0416 = Conversion factor for molar volume, kg-moles per cubic meter
(mol/m\3\) (@ 293 Kelvin (K) and 760 millimeters of mercury (mmHg)).
(ix) For each run, emission control device destruction or removal
efficiency must be determined using Equation 2 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.026
Where:
E = Organic volatile matter control efficiency of the control device,
percent.
Mfi = Organic volatile matter mass flow rate at the inlet to
the control device, kg/h.
Mfo = Organic volatile matter mass flow rate at the outlet
of the control device, kg/h.
(x) The control device destruction or removal efficiency is
determined as the average of the efficiencies determined in the test
runs and calculated in Equation 2 of this section.
(2) You must record such process information as may be necessary to
determine the conditions in existence at the time of the performance
test. Operations during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction
will not constitute representative conditions for the purpose of a
performance test.
(3) Operating limits. If you are using one or more add-on control
device other than a solvent recovery system for which you conduct a
liquid-liquid material balance to comply with the emission standards in
Sec. 63.3320, you must establish the applicable operating limits
required by Sec. 63.3321. These operating limits apply to each add-on
emission control device, and you must establish the operating limits
during the performance test required by paragraph (e) of this section
according to the requirements in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(i) Thermal oxidizer. If your add-on control device is a thermal
oxidizer, establish the operating limits according to paragraphs
(e)(3)(i)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) 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.
(B) 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.
(ii) Catalytic oxidizer. If your add-on control device is a
catalytic oxidizer, establish the operating limits according to
paragraphs (e)(3)(ii)(A) and (B) or paragraphs (e)(3)(ii)(C) and (D) of
this section.
(A) During the performance test, you must monitor and record the
temperature just before the catalyst bed and the temperature difference
across
[[Page 72348]]
the catalyst bed at least once every 15 minutes during each of the
three test runs.
(B) 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.
(C) As an alternative to monitoring the temperature difference
across the catalyst bed, you may monitor the temperature at the inlet
to the catalyst bed and implement a site-specific inspection and
maintenance plan for your catalytic oxidizer as specified in paragraph
(e)(3)(ii)(D) 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.
(D) You must develop and implement an inspection and maintenance
plan for your catalytic oxidizer(s) for which you elect to monitor
according to paragraph (e)(3)(ii)(C) of this section. The plan must
address, at a minimum, the elements specified in paragraphs
(e)(3)(ii)(D)(1) through (3) of this section.
(1) Annual sampling and analysis of the catalyst activity (i.e.,
conversion efficiency) following the manufacturer's or catalyst
supplier's recommended procedures,
(2) Monthly inspection of the oxidizer system including the burner
assembly and fuel supply lines for problems, and
(3) Annual internal and monthly external visual inspection of the
catalyst bed to check for channeling, abrasion, and settling. If
problems are found, you must take corrective action consistent with the
manufacturer's recommendations and conduct a new performance test to
determine destruction efficiency in accordance with this section.
(f) Capture efficiency. If you demonstrate compliance by meeting
the requirements of Sec. 63.3370(e), (f), (g), (h), (i)(2), (k),
(n)(2) or (3), or (p), you must determine capture efficiency using the
procedures in paragraph (f)(1), (2), or (3) of this section, as
applicable.
(1) You may assume your capture efficiency equals 100 percent if
your capture system is a permanent total enclosure (PTE). You must
confirm that your capture system is a PTE by demonstrating that it
meets the requirements of section 6 of EPA Method 204 of 40 CFR part
51, appendix M, and that all exhaust gases from the enclosure are
delivered to a control device.
(2) You may determine capture efficiency according to the protocols
for testing with temporary total enclosures that are specified in
Methods 204 and 204A through F of 40 CFR part 51, appendix M. You may
exclude never-controlled work stations from such capture efficiency
determinations.
(3) You may use any capture efficiency protocol and test methods
that satisfy the criteria of either the Data Quality Objective or the
Lower Confidence Limit approach as described in appendix A of subpart
KK of this part. You may exclude never-controlled work stations from
such capture efficiency determinations.
(g) Volatile matter retained in the coated web or otherwise not
emitted to the atmosphere. You may choose to take into account the mass
of volatile matter retained in the coated web after curing or drying or
otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere when determining compliance
with the emission standards in Sec. 63.3320. If you choose this
option, you must develop a testing protocol to determine the mass of
volatile matter retained in the coated web or otherwise not emitted to
the atmosphere and submit this protocol to the Administrator for
approval. You must submit this protocol with your site-specific test
plan under Sec. 63.7(f). If you intend to take into account the mass
of volatile matter retained in the coated web after curing or drying or
otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere and demonstrate compliance
according to Sec. 63.3370(c)(3), (c)(4), (c)(5), or (d), then the test
protocol you submit must determine the mass of organic HAP retained in
the coated web or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere. Otherwise,
compliance must be shown using the volatile organic matter content as a
surrogate for the HAP content of the coatings.
(h) Control devices in series. If you use multiple control devices
in series to comply with the emission standards in Sec. 63.3320, the
performance test must include, at a minimum, the inlet to the first
control device in the series, the outlet of the last control device in
the series, and all intermediate streams (e.g., gaseous exhaust to the
atmosphere or a liquid stream from a recovery device) that are not
subsequently treated by any of the control devices in the series.
Requirements for Showing Compliance
Sec. 63.3370 How do I demonstrate compliance with the emission
standards?
(a) A summary of how you must demonstrate compliance follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you choose to demonstrate Then you must
compliance by: demonstrate that: To accomplish this:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Use of ``as-purchased'' (i) Each coating Follow the
compliant coating materials. material used at an procedures set out
existing affected in Sec.
source does not 63.3370(b).
exceed 0.04 kg
organic HAP per kg
coating material,
and each coating
material used at a
new affected source
does not exceed
0.016 kg organic
HAP per kg coating
material as-
purchased; or.
(ii) Each coating Follow the
material used at an procedures set out
existing affected in Sec.
source does not 63.3370(b).
exceed 0.2 kg
organic HAP per kg
coating solids, and
each coating
material used at a
new affected source
does not exceed
0.08 kg organic HAP
per kg coating
solids as-purchased.
(2) Use of ``as-applied'' (i) Each coating Follow the
compliant coating materials. material used at an procedures set out
existing affected in Sec.
source does not 63.3370(c)(1). Use
exceed 0.04 kg either Equation 1a
organic HAP per kg or b of Sec.
coating material, 63.3370 to
and each coating determine
material used at a compliance with
new affected source Sec.
does not exceed 63.3320(b)(2) in
0.016 kg organic accordance with
HAP per kg coating Sec.
material as- 63.3370(c)(5)(i).
applied; or.
[[Page 72349]]
(ii) Each coating Follow the
material used at an procedures set out
existing affected in Sec.
source does not 63.3370(c)(2). Use
exceed 0.2 kg Equations 2 and 3
organic HAP per kg of Sec. 63.3370
coating solids, and to determine
each coating compliance with
material used at a Sec.
new affected source 63.3320(b)(3) in
does not exceed accordance with
0.08 kg organic HAP Sec.
per kg coating 63.3370(c)(5)(i).
solids as-applied;
or.
(iii) Monthly Follow the
average of all procedures set out
coating materials in Sec.
used at an existing 63.3370(c)(3). Use
affected source Equation 4 of Sec.
does not exceed 63.3370 to
0.04 kg organic HAP determine
per kg coating compliance with
material, and Sec.
monthly average of 63.3320(b)(2) in
all coating accordance with
materials used at a Sec.
new affected source 63.3370(c)(5)(ii).
does not exceed
0.016 kg organic
HAP per kg coating
material as-applied
on a monthly
average basis; or.
(iv) Monthly average Follow the
of all coating procedures set out
materials used at in Sec.
an existing 63.3370(c)(4). Use
affected source Equation 5 of Sec.
does not exceed 0.2 63.3370 to
kg organic HAP per determine
kg coating solids, compliance with
and monthly average Sec.
of all coating 63.3320(b)(3) in
materials used at a accordance with
new affected source Sec.
does not exceed 63.3370(c)(5)(ii).
0.08 kg organic HAP
per kg coating
solids as-applied
on a monthly
average basis.
(3) Tracking total monthly Total monthly Follow the
organic HAP applied. organic HAP applied procedures set out
does not exceed the in Sec.
calculated limit 63.3370(d). Show
based on emission that total monthly
limitations. HAP applied
(Equation 6 of Sec.
63.3370) is less
than the calculated
equivalent
allowable organic
HAP (Equation 13a
or b of Sec.
63.3370).
(4) Use of a capture system (i) Overall organic Follow the
and control device. HAP control procedures set out
efficiency is equal in Sec.
to 95 percent at an 63.3370(e) to
existing affected determine
source and 98 compliance with
percent at a new Sec.
affected source on 63.3320(b)(1)
a monthly basis; or according to Sec.
oxidizer outlet 63.3370(i) if using
organic HAP a solvent recovery
concentration is no device, or Sec.
greater than 20 63.3370(j) if using
ppmv by compound a control device
and capture and CPMS, or Sec.
efficiency is 100 63.3370(k) if using
percent; or an oxidizer.
operating
parameters are
continuously
monitored; or.
(ii) Overall organic Follow the
HAP emission rate procedures set out
does not exceed 0.2 in Sec.
kg organic HAP per 63.3370(f) to
kg coating solids determine
for an existing compliance with
affected source or Sec.
0.08 kg organic HAP 63.3320(b)(3)
per kg coating according to Sec.
solids for a new 63.3370(i) if using
affected source on a solvent recovery
a monthly average device, or Sec.
as-applied basis;. 63.3370(k) if using
an oxidizer.
(iii) Overall Follow the
organic HAP procedures set out
emission rate does in Sec.
not exceed 0.04 kg 63.3370(g) to
organic HAP per kg determine
coating material compliance with
for an existing Sec.
affected source or 63.3320(b)(2)
0.016 kg organic according to Sec.
HAP per kg coating 63.3370(i) if using
material for a new a solvent recovery
affected source on device, or Sec.
a monthly average 63.3370(k) if using
as-applied basis; an oxidizer.
or.
(iv) Overall organic Follow the
HAP emission rate procedures set out
does not exceed the in Sec.
calculated limit 63.3370(h). Show
based on emission that the monthly
limitations. organic HAP
emission rate is
less than the
calculated
equivalent
allowable organic
HAP emission rate
(Equation 13a or b
of Sec. 63.3370).
Calculate the
monthly organic HAP
emission rate
according to Sec.
63.3370(i) if using
a solvent recovery
device, or Sec.
63.3370(k) if using
an oxidizer.
(5) Use of multiple capture (i) Overall organic Follow the
and/or control devices. HAP control procedures set out
efficiency is equal in Sec.
to 95 percent at an 63.3370(e) to
existing affected determine
source and 98 compliance with
percent at a new Sec.
affected source on 63.3320(b)(1)
a monthly basis; or. according to Sec.
63.3370(e)(1) or
(2).
(ii) Average Follow the
equivalent organic procedures set out
HAP emission rate in Sec.
does not exceed 0.2 63.3370(f) to
kg organic HAP per determine
kg coating solids compliance with
for an existing Sec.
affected source or 63.3320(b)(3)
0.08 kg organic HAP according to Sec.
per kg coating 63.3370(n).
solids for a new
affected source on
a monthly average
as-applied basis;
or.
(iii) Average Follow the
equivalent organic procedures set out
HAP emission rate in Sec.
does not exceed 63.3370(g) to
0.04 kg organic HAP determine
per kg coating compliance with
material for an Sec.
existing affected 63.3320(b)(2)
source or 0.016 kg according to Sec.
organic HAP per kg 63.3370(n).
coating material
for a new affected
source on a monthly
average as-applied
basis; or.
[[Page 72350]]
(iv) Average Follow the
equivalent organic procedures set out
HAP emission rate in Sec.
does not exceed the 63.3370(h). Show
calculated limit that the monthly
based on emission organic HAP
limitations. emission rate is
less than the
calculated
equivalent
allowable organic
HAP emission rate
(Equation 13a or b
of Sec. 63.3370)
according to Sec.
63.3370(n).
(6) Use of a combination of (i) Average Follow the
compliant coatings and equivalent organic procedures set out
control devices. HAP emission rate in Sec.
does not exceed 0.2 63.3370(f) to
kg organic HAP per determine
kg coating solids compliance with
for an existing Sec.
affected source or 63.3320(b)(3)
0.08 kg organic HAP according to Sec.
per kg coating 63.3370(n).
solids for a new
affected source on
a monthly average
as-applied basis;
or.
(ii) Average Follow the
equivalent organic procedures set out
HAP emission rate in Sec.
does not exceed 63.3370(g) to
0.04 kg organic HAP determine
per kg coating compliance with
material for an Sec.
existing affected 63.3320(b)(2)
source or 0.016 kg according to Sec.
organic HAP per kg 63.3370(n).
coating material
for a new affected
source on a monthly
average as-applied
basis; or.
(iii) Average Follow the
equivalent organic procedures set out
HAP emission rate in Sec.
does not exceed the 63.3370(h). Show
calculated limit that the monthly
based on emission organic HAP
limitations. emission rate is
less than the
calculated
equivalent
allowable organic
HAP emission rate
(Equation 13a or b
of Sec. 63.3370)
according to Sec.
63.3370(n).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) As-purchased ``compliant'' coating materials.
(1) If you comply by using coating materials that individually meet
the emission standards in Sec. 63.3320(b)(2) or (3), you must
demonstrate that each coating material applied during the month at an
existing affected source contains no more than 0.04 mass fraction
organic HAP or 0.2 kg organic HAP per kg coating solids, and that each
coating material applied during the month at a new affected source
contains no more than 0.016 mass fraction organic HAP or 0.08 kg
organic HAP per kg coating solids on an as-purchased basis as
determined in accordance with Sec. 63.3360(c).
(2) You are in compliance with emission standards in Sec.
63.3320(b)(2) and (3) if each coating material applied at an existing
affected source is applied as-purchased and contains no more than 0.04
kg organic HAP per kg coating material or 0.2 kg organic HAP per kg
coating solids, and each coating material applied at a new affected
source is applied as-purchased and contains no more than 0.016 kg
organic HAP per kg coating material or 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg
coating solids.
(c) As-applied ``compliant'' coating materials. If you comply by
using coating materials that meet the emission standards in Sec.
63.3320(b)(2) or (3) as-applied, you must demonstrate compliance by
following one of the procedures in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of
this section. Compliance is determined in accordance with paragraph
(c)(5) of this section.
(1) Each coating material as-applied meets the mass fraction of
coating material standard (Sec. 63.3320(b)(2)). You must demonstrate
that each coating material applied at an existing affected source
during the month contains no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg
coating material applied, and each coating material applied at a new
affected source contains no more than 0.016 kg organic HAP per kg
coating material applied as determined in accordance with paragraphs
(c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section. You must calculate the as-applied
organic HAP content of as-purchased coating materials which are
reduced, thinned, or diluted prior to application.
(i) Determine the organic HAP content or volatile organic content
of each coating material applied on an as-purchased basis in accordance
with Sec. 63.3360(c).
(ii) Calculate the as-applied organic HAP content of each coating
material using Equation 1a of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.027
Where:
Cahi = Monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP content of
coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Chi = Organic HAP content of coating material, i, as-
purchased, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
q = number of different materials added to the coating material.
Chij = Organic HAP content of material, j, added to as-
purchased coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mij = Mass of material, j, added to as-purchased coating
material, i, in a month, kg.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
or calculate the as-applied volatile organic content of each coating
material using Equation 1b of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.028
Where:
Cavi = Monthly average, as-applied, volatile organic content
of coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Cvi = Volatile organic content of coating material, i,
expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
q = Number of different materials added to the coating material.
Cvij = Volatile organic content of material, j, added to as-
purchased coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
[[Page 72351]]
Mij = Mass of material, j, added to as-purchased coating
material, i, in a month, kg.
(2) Each coating material as-applied meets the mass fraction of
coating solids standard (Sec. 63.3320(b)(3)). You must demonstrate
that each coating material applied at an existing affected source
contains no more than 0.20 kg of organic HAP per kg of coating solids
applied and each coating material applied at a new affected source
contains no more than 0.08 kg of organic HAP per kg of coating solids
applied. You must demonstrate compliance in accordance with paragraphs
(c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) Determine the as-applied coating solids content of each coating
material following the procedure in Sec. 63.3360(d). You must
calculate the as-applied coating solids content of coating materials
which are reduced, thinned, or diluted prior to application, using
Equation 2 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.029
Where:
Csi = Coating solids content of coating material, i,
expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
q = Number of different materials added to the coating material.
Csij = Coating solids content of material, j, added to as-
purchased coating material, i, expressed as a mass-fraction, kg/kg.
Mij = Mass of material, j, added to as-purchased coating
material, i, in a month, kg.
(ii) Calculate the as-applied organic HAP to coating solids ratio
using Equation 3 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.030
Where:
Hsi = As-applied, organic HAP to coating solids ratio of
coating material, i.
Cahi = Monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP content of
coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Casi = Monthly average, as-applied, coating solids content
of coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
(3) Monthly average organic HAP content of all coating materials
as-applied is less than the mass percent limit (Sec. 63.3320(b)(2)).
Demonstrate that the monthly average as-applied organic HAP content of
all coating materials applied at an existing affected source is less
than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg of coating material applied, and all
coating materials applied at a new affected source are less than 0.016
kg organic HAP per kg of coating material applied, as determined by
Equation 4 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.031
Where:
HL = Monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP content of all
coating materials applied, expressed as kg organic HAP per kg of
coating material applied, kg/kg.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
Chi = Organic HAP content of coating material, i, as-
purchased, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
q = Number of different materials added to the coating material.
Chij = Organic HAP content of material, j, added to as-
purchased coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mij = Mass of material, j, added to as-purchased coating
material, i, in a month, kg.
Mvret = Mass of volatile matter retained in the coated web
after curing or drying, or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere, kg.
The value of this term will be zero in all cases except where you
choose to take into account the volatile matter retained in the coated
web or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere for the compliance
demonstration procedures in Sec. 63.3370.
(4) Monthly average organic HAP content of all coating materials
as-applied is less than the mass fraction of coating solids limit
(Sec. 63.3320(b)(3)). Demonstrate that the monthly average as-applied
organic HAP content on the basis of coating solids applied of all
coating materials applied at an existing affected source is less than
0.20 kg organic HAP per kg coating solids applied, and all coating
materials applied at a new affected source are less than 0.08 kg
organic HAP per kg coating solids applied, as determined by Equation 5
of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.032
Where:
Hs = Monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP to coating
solids ratio, kg organic HAP/kg coating solids applied.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
[[Page 72352]]
Chi = Organic HAP content of coating material, i, as-
purchased, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
q = Number of different materials added to the coating material.
Chij = Organic HAP content of material, j, added to as-
purchased coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mij = Mass of material, j, added to as-purchased coating
material, i, in a month, kg.
Mvret = Mass of volatile matter retained in the coated web
after curing or drying, or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere, kg.
The value of this term will be zero in all cases except where you
choose to take into account the volatile matter retained in the coated
web or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere for the compliance
demonstration procedures in Sec. 63.3370.
Csi = Coating solids content of coating material, i,
expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Csij = Coating solids content of material, j, added to as-
purchased coating material, i, expressed as a mass-fraction, kg/kg.
(5) The affected source is in compliance with emission standards in
Sec. 63.3320(b)(2) or (3) if:
(i) The organic HAP content of each coating material as-applied at
an existing affected source is no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg
coating material or 0.2 kg organic HAP per kg coating solids, and the
organic HAP content of each coating material as-applied at a new
affected source contains no more than 0.016 kg organic HAP per kg
coating material or 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg coating solids; or
(ii) The monthly average organic HAP content of all as-applied
coating materials at an existing affected source are no more than 0.04
kg organic HAP per kg coating material or 0.2 kg organic HAP per kg
coating solids, and the monthly average organic HAP content of all as-
applied coating materials at a new affected source is no more than
0.016 kg organic HAP per kg coating material or 0.08 kg organic HAP per
kg coating solids.
(d) Monthly allowable organic HAP applied. Demonstrate that the
total monthly organic HAP applied as determined by Equation 6 of this
section is less than the calculated equivalent allowable organic HAP as
determined by Equation 13a or b in paragraph (l) of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.033
Where:
Hm = Total monthly organic HAP applied, kg.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
Chi = Organic HAP content of coating material, i, as-
purchased, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
q = Number of different materials added to the coating material.
Chij = Organic HAP content of material, j, added to as-
purchased coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mij = Mass of material, j, added to as-purchased coating
material, i, in a month, kg.
Mvret = Mass of volatile matter retained in the coated web
after curing or drying, or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere, kg.
The value of this term will be zero in all cases except where you
choose to take into account the volatile matter retained in the coated
web or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere for the compliance
demonstration procedures in Sec. 63.3370.
(e) Capture and control to reduce emissions to no more than
allowable limit (Sec. 63.3320(b)(1)). Operate a capture system and
control device and demonstrate an overall organic HAP control
efficiency of at least 95 percent at an existing affected source and at
least 98 percent at a new affected source for each month, or operate a
capture system and oxidizer so that an outlet organic HAP concentration
of no greater than 20 ppmv by compound on a dry basis is achieved as
long as the capture efficiency is 100 percent as detailed in Sec.
63.3320(b)(4). Unless one of the cases described in paragraph (e)(1),
(2), or (3) of this section applies to the affected source, you must
either demonstrate compliance in accordance with the procedure in
paragraph (i) of this section when emissions from the affected source
are controlled by a solvent recovery device, or the procedure in
paragraph (k) of this section when emissions are controlled by an
oxidizer or demonstrate compliance for a web coating line by operating
each capture system and each control device and continuous parameter
monitoring according to the procedures in paragraph (j) of this
section.
(1) If the affected source has only always-controlled work stations
and operates more than one capture system or more than one control
device, you must demonstrate compliance in accordance with the
provisions of either paragraph (n) or (p) of this section.
(2) If the affected source operates one or more never-controlled
work stations or one or more intermittently-controlled work stations,
you must demonstrate compliance in accordance with the provisions of
paragraph (n) of this section.
(3) An alternative method of demonstrating compliance with Sec.
63.3320(b)(1) is the installation of a PTE around the web coating line
that achieves 100 percent capture efficiency and ventilation of all
organic HAP emissions from the total enclosure to an oxidizer with an
outlet organic HAP concentration of no greater than 20 ppmv by compound
on a dry basis. If this method is selected, you must demonstrate
compliance by following the procedures in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (ii)
of this section. Compliance is determined according to paragraph
(e)(3)(iii) of this section.
(i) Demonstrate that a total enclosure is installed. An enclosure
that meets the requirements in Sec. 63.3360(f)(1) will be considered a
total enclosure.
(ii) Determine the organic HAP concentration at the outlet of your
total enclosure using the procedures in paragraph (e)(3)(ii)(A) or (B)
of this section.
(A) Determine the control device efficiency using Equation 2 of
Sec. 63.3360 and the applicable test methods and procedures specified
in Sec. 63.3360(e).
(B) Use a CEMS to determine the organic HAP emission rate according
to paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (x) of this section.
(iii) You are in compliance if the installation of a total
enclosure is demonstrated and the organic HAP concentration at the
outlet of the incinerator is demonstrated to be no
[[Page 72353]]
greater than 20 ppmv by compound on a dry basis.
(f) Capture and control to achieve mass fraction of coating solids
applied limit (Sec. 63.3320(b)(3)). Operate a capture system and
control device and limit the organic HAP emission rate from an existing
affected source to no more than 0.20 kg organic HAP emitted per kg
coating solids applied, and from a new affected source to no more than
0.08 kg organic HAP emitted per kg coating solids applied as determined
on a monthly average as-applied basis. If the affected source operates
more than one capture system, more than one control device, one or more
never-controlled work stations, or one or more intermittently-
controlled work stations, then you must demonstrate compliance in
accordance with the provisions of paragraph (n) of this section.
Otherwise, you must demonstrate compliance following the procedure in
paragraph (i) of this section when emissions from the affected source
are controlled by a solvent recovery device or the procedure in
paragraph (k) of this section when emissions are controlled by an
oxidizer.
(g) Capture and control to achieve mass fraction limit (Sec.
63.3320(b)(2)). Operate a capture system and control device and limit
the organic HAP emission rate to no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP
emitted per kg coating material applied at an existing affected source,
and no more than 0.016 kg organic HAP emitted per kg coating material
applied at a new affected source as determined on a monthly average as-
applied basis. If the affected source operates more than one capture
system, more than one control device, one or more never-controlled work
stations, or one or more intermittently-controlled work stations, then
you must demonstrate compliance in accordance with the provisions of
paragraph (n) of this section. Otherwise, you must demonstrate
compliance following the procedure in paragraph (i) of this section
when emissions from the affected source are controlled by a solvent
recovery device or the procedure in paragraph (k) of this section when
emissions are controlled by an oxidizer.
(h) Capture and control to achieve allowable emission rate. Operate
a capture system and control device and limit the monthly organic HAP
emissions to less than the allowable emissions as calculated in
accordance with paragraph (l) of this section. If the affected source
operates more than one capture system, more than one control device,
one or more never-controlled work stations, or one or more
intermittently-controlled work stations, then you must demonstrate
compliance in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (n) of this
section. Otherwise, the owner or operator must demonstrate compliance
following the procedure in paragraph (i) of this section when emissions
from the affected source are controlled by a solvent recovery device or
the procedure in paragraph (k) of this section when emissions are
controlled by an oxidizer.
(i) Solvent recovery device compliance demonstration. If you use a
solvent recovery device to control emissions, you must show compliance
by following the procedures in either paragraph (i)(1) or (2) of this
section:
(1) Liquid-liquid material balance. Perform a monthly liquid-liquid
material balance as specified in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) through (v) of
this section and use the applicable equations in paragraphs (i)(1)(vi)
through (ix) of this section to convert the data to units of the
selected compliance option in paragraphs (e) through (h) of this
section. Compliance is determined in accordance with paragraph
(i)(1)(x) of this section.
(i) Determine the mass of each coating material applied on the web
coating line or group of web coating lines controlled by a common
solvent recovery device during the month.
(ii) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP
emission rate based on coating solids applied, organic HAP emission
rate based on coating material applied, or emission of less than the
calculated allowable organic HAP, determine the organic HAP content of
each coating material as-applied during the month following the
procedure in Sec. 63.3360(c).
(iii) Determine the volatile organic content of each coating
material as-applied during the month following the procedure in Sec.
63.3360(d).
(iv) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP
emission rate based on coating solids applied or emission of less than
the calculated allowable organic HAP, determine the coating solids
content of each coating material applied during the month following the
procedure in Sec. 63.3360(d).
(v) Determine and monitor the amount of volatile organic matter
recovered for the month according to the procedures in Sec.
63.3350(d).
(vi) Recovery efficiency. Calculate the volatile organic matter
collection and recovery efficiency using Equation 7 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.034
Where:
Rv = Organic volatile matter collection and recovery
efficiency, percent.
Mvr = Mass of volatile matter recovered in a month, kg.
Mvret = Mass of volatile matter retained in the coated web
after curing or drying, or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere, kg.
The value of this term will be zero in all cases except where you
choose to take into account the volatile matter retained in the coated
web or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere for the compliance
demonstration procedures in Sec. 63.3370.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
Cvi = Volatile organic content of coating material, i,
expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
q = Number of different materials added to the coating material.
Cvij = Volatile organic content of material, j, added to as-
purchased coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mij = Mass of material, j, added to as-purchased coating
material, i, in a month, kg.
(vii) Organic HAP emitted. Calculate the organic HAP emitted during
the month using Equation 8 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.035
[[Page 72354]]
Where:
He = Total monthly organic HAP emitted, kg.
Rv = Organic volatile matter collection and recovery
efficiency, percent.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
Chi = Organic HAP content of coating material, i, as-
purchased, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
q = Number of different materials added to the coating material.
Chij = Organic HAP content of material, j, added to as-
purchased coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mij = Mass of material, j, added to as-purchased coating
material, i, in a month, kg.
Mvret = Mass of volatile matter retained in the coated web
after curing or drying, or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere, kg.
The value of this term will be zero in all cases except where you
choose to take into account the volatile matter retained in the coated
web or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere for the compliance
demonstration procedures in Sec. 63.3370.
(viii) Organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied.
Calculate the organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied
using Equation 9 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.036
Where:
L = Mass organic HAP emitted per mass of coating solids applied, kg/kg.
He = Total monthly organic HAP emitted, kg.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
Csi = Coating solids content of coating material, i,
expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
q = Number of different materials added to the coating material.
Csij = Coating solids content of material, j, added to as-
purchased coating material, i, expressed as a mass-fraction, kg/kg.
Mij = Mass of material, j, added to as-purchased coating
material, i, in a month, kg.
(ix) Organic HAP emission rate based on coating materials applied.
Calculate the organic HAP emission rate based on coating material
applied using Equation 10 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.037
Where:
S = Mass organic HAP emitted per mass of material applied, kg/kg.
He = Total monthly organic HAP emitted, kg.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
q = Number of different materials added to the coating material.
Mij = Mass of material, j, added to as-purchased coating
material, i, in a month, kg.
(x) You are in compliance with the emission standards in Sec.
63.3320(b) if:
(A) The volatile organic matter collection and recovery efficiency
is 95 percent or greater at an existing affected source and 98 percent
or greater at a new affected source; or
(B) The organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied
is no more than 0.20 kg organic HAP per kg coating solids applied at an
existing affected source and no more than 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg
coating solids applied at a new affected source; or
(C) The organic HAP emission rate based on coating material applied
is no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg coating material applied at
an existing affected source and no more than 0.016 kg organic HAP per
kg coating material applied at a new affected source; or
(D) The organic HAP emitted during the month is less than the
calculated allowable organic HAP as determined using paragraph (l) of
this section.
(2) Continuous emission monitoring of capture system and control
device performance. Demonstrate initial compliance through a
performance test on capture efficiency and continuing compliance
through continuous emission monitors and continuous monitoring of
capture system operating parameters following the procedures in
paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (vii) of this section. Use the applicable
equations specified in paragraphs (i)(2)(viii) through (x) of this
section to convert the monitoring and other data into units of the
selected compliance option in paragraphs (e) through (h) of this
section. Compliance is determined in accordance with paragraph
(i)(2)(xi) of this section.
(i) Control device efficiency. Continuously monitor the gas stream
entering and exiting the control device to determine the total organic
volatile matter mass flow rate (e.g., by determining the concentration
of the vent gas in grams per cubic meter and the volumetric flow rate
in cubic meters per second such that the total organic volatile matter
mass flow rate in grams per second can be calculated) such that the
control device efficiency of the control device can be calculated for
each month using Equation 2 of Sec. 63.3360.
(ii) Capture efficiency monitoring. Whenever a web coating line is
operated, continuously monitor the operating parameters established in
accordance with Sec. 63.3350(f) to ensure capture efficiency.
(iii) Determine the percent capture efficiency in accordance with
Sec. 63.3360(f).
(iv) Control efficiency. Calculate the overall organic HAP control
efficiency achieved for each month using Equation 11 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.038
Where:
R = Overall organic HAP control efficiency, percent.
E = Organic volatile matter control efficiency of the control device,
percent.
CE = Organic volatile matter capture efficiency of the capture system,
percent.
(v) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP
emission rate based on coating solids applied, organic HAP emission
rate based on coating materials applied, or emission of less than the
calculated allowable organic HAP, determine the mass of each coating
material applied on the web coating line or group of web coating lines
controlled by a common control device during the month.
(vi) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP
emission rate based on coating solids applied, organic HAP emission
rate based on coating material applied, or emission of less than the
calculated allowable organic HAP, determine the organic HAP content of
each coating material as-applied during the month following the
procedure in Sec. 63.3360(c).
(vii) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP
emission rate based on coating solids applied or emission of less than
the calculated allowable organic HAP, determine the coating solids
content of each coating material as-applied during the month following
the procedure in Sec. 63.3360(d).
(viii) Organic HAP emitted. Calculate the organic HAP emitted
during the month for each month using Equation 12 of this section:
[[Page 72355]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.039
Where:
He = Total monthly organic HAP emitted, kg.
R = Overall organic HAP control efficiency, percent.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
Cahi = Monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP content of
coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
Mvret = Mass of volatile matter retained in the coated web
after curing or drying, or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere, kg.
The value of this term will be zero in all cases except where you
choose to take into account the volatile matter retained in the coated
web or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere for the compliance
demonstration procedures in this section.
(ix) Organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied.
Calculate the organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied
using Equation 9 of this section.
(x) Organic HAP emission rate based on coating materials applied.
Calculate the organic HAP emission rate based on coating material
applied using Equation 10 of this section.
(xi) Compare actual performance to the performance required by
compliance option. The affected source is in compliance with the
emission standards in Sec. 63.3320(b) for each month if the capture
system is operated such that the average capture system operating
parameter is greater than or less than (as appropriate) the operating
parameter value established in accordance with Sec. 63.3350(f); and
(A) The organic volatile matter collection and recovery efficiency
is 95 percent or greater at an existing affected source and 98 percent
or greater at a new affected source; or
(B) The organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied
is no more than 0.20 kg organic HAP per kg coating solids applied at an
existing affected source and no more than 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg
coating solids applied at a new affected source; or
(C) The organic HAP emission rate based on coating material applied
is no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg coating material applied at
an existing affected source and no more than 0.016 kg organic HAP per
kg coating material applied at a new affected source; or
(D) The organic HAP emitted during the month is less than the
calculated allowable organic HAP as determined using paragraph (l) of
this section.
(j) Capture and control system compliance demonstration procedures
using a CPMS. If you use an add-on control device, you must demonstrate
initial compliance for each capture system and each control device
through performance tests and demonstrate continuing compliance through
continuous monitoring of capture system and control device operating
parameters as specified in paragraphs (j)(1) through (3) of this
section. Compliance is determined in accordance with paragraph (j)(4)
of this section.
(1) Determine the control device destruction or removal efficiency
using the applicable test methods and procedures in Sec. 63.3360(e).
(2) Determine the emission capture efficiency in accordance with
Sec. 63.3360(f).
(3) Whenever a web coating line is operated, continuously monitor
the operating parameters established according to Sec. 63.3350(e) and
(f).
(4) You are in compliance with the emission standards in Sec.
63.3320(b) if the control device is operated such that the average
operating parameter value is greater than or less than (as appropriate)
the operating parameter value established in accordance with Sec.
63.3360(e) for each 3-hour period, and the capture system operating
parameter is operated at an average value greater than or less than (as
appropriate) the operating parameter value established in accordance
with Sec. 63.3350(f); and
(i) The overall organic HAP control efficiency is 95 percent or
greater at an existing affected source and 98 percent or greater at a
new affected source; or
(ii) The organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied
is no more than 0.20 kg organic HAP per kg coating solids applied at an
existing affected source and no more than 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg
coating solids applied at a new affected source; or
(iii) The organic HAP emission rate based on coating material
applied is no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg coating material
applied at an existing affected source and no more than 0.016 kg
organic HAP per kg coating material applied at a new affected source;
or
(iv) The organic HAP emitted during the month is less than the
calculated allowable organic HAP as determined using paragraph (l) of
this section.
(k) Oxidizer compliance demonstration procedures. If you use an
oxidizer to control emissions, you must show compliance by following
the procedures in paragraph (k)(1) of this section. Use the applicable
equations specified in paragraph (k)(2) of this section to convert the
monitoring and other data into units of the selected compliance option
in paragraph (e) through (h) of this section. Compliance is determined
in accordance with paragraph (k)(3) of this section.
(1) Demonstrate initial compliance through performance tests of
capture efficiency and control device efficiency and continuing
compliance through continuous monitoring of capture system and control
device operating parameters as specified in paragraphs (k)(1)(i)
through (vi) of this section:
(i) Determine the oxidizer destruction efficiency using the
procedure in Sec. 63.3360(e).
(ii) Determine the capture system capture efficiency in accordance
with Sec. 63.3360(f).
(iii) Capture and control efficiency monitoring. Whenever a web
coating line is operated, continuously monitor the operating parameters
established in accordance with Sec. 63.3350(e) and (f) to ensure
capture and control efficiency.
(iv) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP
emission rate based on coating solids applied, organic HAP emission
rate based on coating materials applied, or emission of less than the
calculated allowable organic HAP, determine the mass of each coating
material applied on the web coating line or group of web coating lines
controlled by a common oxidizer during the month.
(v) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP
emission rate based on coating solids applied, organic HAP emission
rate based on coating material applied, or emission of less than the
calculated allowable organic HAP, determine the organic HAP content of
each coating material as-applied during the month following the
procedure in Sec. 63.3360(c).
(vi) If demonstrating compliance on the basis of organic HAP
emission rate based on coating solids applied or emission of less than
the calculated allowable organic HAP, determine the coating solids
content of each coating
[[Page 72356]]
material applied during the month following the procedure in Sec.
63.3360(d).
(2) Convert the information obtained under paragraph (p)(1) of this
section into the units of the selected compliance option using the
calculation procedures specified in paragraphs (k)(2)(i) through (iv)
of this section.
(i) Control efficiency. Calculate the overall organic HAP control
efficiency achieved using Equation 11 of this section.
(ii) Organic HAP emitted. Calculate the organic HAP emitted during
the month using Equation 12 of this section.
(iii) Organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied.
Calculate the organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied
for each month using Equation 9 of this section.
(iv) Organic HAP based on coating materials applied. Calculate the
organic HAP emission rate based on coating material applied using
Equation 10 of this section.
(3) You are in compliance with the emission standards in Sec.
63.3320(b) if the oxidizer is operated such that the average operating
parameter value is greater than the operating parameter value
established in accordance with Sec. 63.3360(e) for each 3-hour period,
and the capture system operating parameter is operated at an average
value greater than or less than (as appropriate) the operating
parameter value established in accordance with Sec. 63.3350(f); and
(i) The overall organic HAP control efficiency is 95 percent or
greater at an existing affected source and 98 percent or greater at a
new affected source; or
(ii) The organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied
is no more than 0.20 kg organic HAP per kg coating solids applied at an
existing affected source and no more than 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg
coating solids applied at a new affected source; or
(iii) The organic HAP emission rate based on coating material
applied is no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg coating material
applied at an existing affected source and no more than 0.016 kg
organic HAP per kg coating material applied at a new affected source;
or
(iv) The organic HAP emitted during the month is less than the
calculated allowable organic HAP as determined using paragraph (l) of
this section.
(l) Monthly allowable organic HAP emissions. This paragraph
provides the procedures and calculations for determining monthly
allowable organic HAP emissions for use in demonstrating compliance in
accordance with paragraph (d), (h), (i)(1)(x)(D), (i)(2)(xi)(D), or
(k)(3)(iv) of this section. You will need to determine the amount of
coating material applied at greater than or equal to 20 mass percent
coating solids and the amount of coating material applied at less than
20 mass percent coating solids. The allowable organic HAP limit is then
calculated based on coating material applied at greater than or equal
to 20 mass percent coating solids complying with 0.2 kg organic HAP per
kg coating solids at an existing affected source or 0.08 kg organic HAP
per kg coating solids at a new affected source, and coating material
applied at less than 20 mass percent coating solids complying with 4
mass percent organic HAP at an existing affected source and 1.6 mass-
percent organic HAP at a new affected source as follows:
(1) Determine the as-purchased mass of each coating material
applied each month.
(2) Determine the as-purchased coating solids content of each
coating material applied each month in accordance with Sec.
63.3360(d)(1).
(3) Determine the as-purchased mass fraction of each coating
material which was applied at 20 mass percent or greater coating solids
content on an as-applied basis.
(4) Determine the total mass of each solvent, diluent, thinner, or
reducer added to coating materials which were applied at less than 20
mass percent coating solids content on an as-applied basis each month.
(5) Calculate the monthly allowable organic HAP emissions using
Equation 13a of this section for an existing affected source:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.040
Where:
Ha = Monthly allowable organic HAP emissions, kg.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
Mi = mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
Gi = Mass fraction of each coating material, i, which was
applied at 20 mass percent or greater coating solids content, on an as-
applied basis, kg/kg.
Csi = Coating solids content of coating material, i,
expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
q = Number of different materials added to the coating material.
MLj = Mass of non-coating-solids-containing coating
material, j, added to coating-solids-containing coating materials which
were applied at less than 20 mass percent coating solids content, on an
as-applied basis, in a month, kg.
or Equation 13b of this section for a new affected source:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.041
Where:
Ha = Monthly allowable organic HAP emissions, kg.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
Mi = Mass of as-purchased coating material, i, applied in a
month, kg.
Gi = Mass fraction of each coating material, i, which was
applied at 20 mass percent or greater coating solids content, on an as-
applied basis, kg/kg.
Csi = Coating solids content of coating material, i,
expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
q = Number of different materials added to the coating material.
MLj = Mass of non-coating-solids-containing coating
material, j, added to coating-solids-containing coating materials which
were applied at less than 20 mass percent
[[Page 72357]]
coating solids content, on an as-applied basis, in a month, kg.
(m) [Reserved]
(n) Combinations of capture and control. If you operate more than
one capture system, more than one control device, one or more never-
controlled work stations, or one or more intermittently-controlled work
stations, you must calculate organic HAP emissions according to the
procedures in paragraphs (n)(1) through (4) of this section, and use
the calculation procedures specified in paragraph (n)(5) of this
section to convert the monitoring and other data into units of the
selected control option in paragraphs (e) through (h) of this section.
Use the procedures specified in paragraph (n)(6) of this section to
demonstrate compliance.
(1) Solvent recovery system using liquid-liquid material balance
compliance demonstration. If you choose to comply by means of a liquid-
liquid material balance for each solvent recovery system used to
control one or more web coating lines, you must determine the organic
HAP emissions for those web coating lines controlled by that solvent
recovery system either:
(i) In accordance with paragraphs (i)(1)(i) through (iii) and (v)
through (vii) of this section, if the web coating lines controlled by
that solvent recovery system have only always-controlled work stations;
or
(ii) In accordance with paragraphs (i)(1)(ii), (iii), (v), and (vi)
and (o) of this section, if the web coating lines controlled by that
solvent recovery system have one or more never-controlled or
intermittently-controlled work stations.
(2) Solvent recovery system using performance test compliance
demonstration and CEMS. To demonstrate compliance through an initial
test of capture efficiency, continuous monitoring of a capture system
operating parameter, and a CEMS on each solvent recovery system used to
control one or more web coating lines, you must:
(i) For each capture system delivering emissions to that solvent
recovery system, monitor the operating parameter established in
accordance with Sec. 63.3350(f) to ensure capture system efficiency;
and
(ii) Determine the organic HAP emissions for those web coating
lines served by each capture system delivering emissions to that
solvent recovery system either:
(A) In accordance with paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (iii), (v),
(vi), and (viii) of this section, if the web coating lines served by
that capture and control system have only always-controlled work
stations; or
(B) In accordance with paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (iii), (vi),
and (o) of this section, if the web coating lines served by that
capture and control system have one or more never-controlled or
intermittently-controlled work stations.
(3) Oxidizer. To demonstrate compliance through performance tests
of capture efficiency and control device efficiency, continuous
monitoring of capture system, and CPMS for control device operating
parameters for each oxidizer used to control emissions from one or more
web coating lines, you must:
(i) Monitor the operating parameter in accordance with Sec.
63.3350(e) to ensure control device efficiency; and
(ii) For each capture system delivering emissions to that oxidizer,
monitor the operating parameter established in accordance with Sec.
63.3350(f) to ensure capture efficiency; and
(iii) Determine the organic HAP emissions for those web coating
lines served by each capture system delivering emissions to that
oxidizer either:
(A) In accordance with paragraphs (k)(1)(i) through (vi) of this
section, if the web coating lines served by that capture and control
system have only always-controlled work stations; or
(B) In accordance with paragraphs (k)(1)(i) through (iii), (v), and
(o) of this section, if the web coating lines served by that capture
and control system have one or more never-controlled or intermittently-
controlled work stations.
(4) Uncontrolled coating lines. If you own or operate one or more
uncontrolled web coating lines, you must determine the organic HAP
applied on those web coating lines using Equation 6 of this section.
The organic HAP emitted from an uncontrolled web coating line is equal
to the organic HAP applied on that web coating line.
(5) Convert the information obtained under paragraphs (n)(1)
through (4) of this section into the units of the selected compliance
option using the calculation procedures specified in paragraphs
(n)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Organic HAP emitted. Calculate the organic HAP emissions for
the affected source for the month by summing all organic HAP emissions
calculated according to paragraphs (n)(1), (2)(ii), (3)(iii), and (4)
of this section.
(ii) Coating solids applied. If demonstrating compliance on the
basis of organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied or
emission of less than the calculated allowable organic HAP, the owner
or operator must determine the coating solids content of each coating
material applied during the month following the procedure in Sec.
63.3360(d).
(iii) Organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied.
Calculate the organic HAP emission rate based on coating solids applied
for each month using Equation 9 of this section.
(iv) Organic HAP based on materials applied. Calculate the organic
HAP emission rate based on material applied using Equation 10 of this
section.
(6) Compliance. The affected source is in compliance with the
emission standards in Sec. 63.3320(b) for the month if all operating
parameters required to be monitored under paragraphs (n)(1) through (3)
of this section were maintained at the values established under
Sec. Sec. 63.3350 and 63.3360; and
(i) The total mass of organic HAP emitted by the affected source
based on coating solids applied is no more than 0.20 kg organic HAP per
kg coating solids applied at an existing affected source and no more
than 0.08 kg organic HAP per kg coating solids applied at a new
affected source; or
(ii) The total mass of organic HAP emitted by the affected source
based on material applied is no more than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg
material applied at an existing affected source and no more than 0.016
kg organic HAP per kg material applied at a new affected source; or
(iii) The total mass of organic HAP emitted by the affected source
during the month is less than the calculated allowable organic HAP as
determined using paragraph (l) of this section; or
(iv) The total mass of organic HAP emitted by the affected source
was not more than 5 percent of the total mass of organic HAP applied
for the month at an existing affected source and no more than 2 percent
of the total mass of organic HAP applied for the month at a new
affected source. The total mass of organic HAP applied by the affected
source in the month must be determined using Equation 6 of this
section.
(o) Intermittently-controlled and never-controlled work stations.
If you have been expressly referenced to this paragraph by paragraphs
(n)(1)(ii), (n)(2)(ii)(B), or (n)(3)(iii)(B) of this section for
calculation procedures to determine organic HAP emissions for your
intermittently-controlled and never-controlled work stations, you must:
(1) Determine the sum of the mass of all coating materials as-
applied on intermittently-controlled work stations operating in bypass
mode and the mass of all coating materials as-applied on
[[Page 72358]]
never-controlled work stations during the month.
(2) Determine the sum of the mass of all coating materials as-
applied on intermittently-controlled work stations operating in a
controlled mode and the mass of all coating materials applied on
always-controlled work stations during the month.
(3) Liquid-liquid material balance compliance demonstration. For
each web coating line or group of web coating lines for which you use
the provisions of paragraph (n)(1)(ii) of this section, you must
calculate the organic HAP emitted during the month using Equation 14 of
this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.042
Where:
He = Total monthly organic HAP emitted, kg.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
Mci = Sum of the mass of coating material, i, as-applied on
intermittently-controlled work stations operating in controlled mode
and the mass of coating material, i, as-applied on always-controlled
work stations, in a month, kg.
Cahi = Monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP content of
coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Rv = Organic volatile matter collection and recovery
efficiency, percent.
MBi = Sum of the mass of coating material, i, as-applied on
intermittently-controlled work stations operating in bypass mode and
the mass of coating material, i, as-applied on never-controlled work
stations, in a month, kg.
Cahi = Monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP content of
coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mvret = Mass of volatile matter retained in the coated web
after curing or drying, or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere, kg.
The value of this term will be zero in all cases except where you
choose to take into account the volatile matter retained in the coated
web or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere for the compliance
demonstration procedures in this section.
(4) Performance test to determine capture efficiency and control
device efficiency. For each web coating line or group of web coating
lines for which you use the provisions of paragraph (n)(2)(ii)(B) or
(n)(3)(iii)(B) of this section, you must calculate the organic HAP
emitted during the month using Equation 15 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04DE02.043
Where:
He = Total monthly organic HAP emitted, kg.
p = Number of different coating materials applied in a month.
Mci = Sum of the mass of coating material, i, as-applied on
intermittently-controlled work stations operating in controlled mode
and the mass of coating material, i, as-applied on always-controlled
work stations, in a month, kg.
Cahi = Monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP content of
coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
R = Overall organic HAP control efficiency, percent.
MBi = Sum of the mass of coating material, i, as-applied on
intermittently-controlled work stations operating in bypass mode and
the mass of coating material, i, as-applied on never-controlled work
stations, in a month, kg.
Cahi = Monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP content of
coating material, i, expressed as a mass fraction, kg/kg.
Mvret = Mass of volatile matter retained in the coated web
after curing or drying, or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere, kg.
The value of this term will be zero in all cases except where you
choose to take into account the volatile matter retained in the coated
web or otherwise not emitted to the atmosphere for the compliance
demonstration procedures in this section.
(p) Always-controlled work stations with more than one capture and
control system. If you operate more than one capture system or more
than one control device and only have always-controlled work stations,
then you are in compliance with the emission standards in Sec.
63.3320(b)(1) for the month if for each web coating line or group of
web coating lines controlled by a common control device:
(1) The volatile matter collection and recovery efficiency as
determined by paragraphs (i)(1)(i), (iii), (v), and (vi) of this
section is at least 95 percent at an existing affected source and at
least 98 percent at a new affected source; or
(2) The overall organic HAP control efficiency as determined by
paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section for each web coating
line or group of web coating lines served by that control device and a
common capture system is at least 95 percent at an existing affected
source and at least 98 percent at a new affected source; or
(3) The overall organic HAP control efficiency as determined by
paragraphs (k)(1)(i) through (iii) and (k)(2)(i) of this section for
each web coating line or group of web coating lines served by that
control device and a common capture system is at least 95 percent at an
existing affected source and at least 98 percent at a new affected
source.
Notifications, Reports, and Records
Sec. 63.3400 What notifications and reports must I submit?
(a) Each owner or operator of an affected source subject to this
subpart must submit the reports specified in paragraphs (b) through (g)
of this section to the Administrator:
(b) You must submit an initial notification as required by Sec.
63.9(b).
(1) Initial notification for existing affected sources must be
submitted no later than 1 year before the compliance date specified in
Sec. 63.3330(a).
[[Page 72359]]
(2) Initial notification for new and reconstructed affected sources
must be submitted as required by Sec. 63.9(b).
(3) For the purpose of this subpart, a title V or part 70 permit
application may be used in lieu of the initial notification required
under Sec. 63.9(b), provided the same information is contained in the
permit application as required by Sec. 63.9(b) and the State to which
the permit application has been submitted has an approved operating
permit program under part 70 of this chapter and has received
delegation of authority from the EPA to implement and enforce this
subpart.
(4) If you are using a permit application in lieu of an initial
notification in accordance with paragraph (b)(3) of this section, the
permit application must be submitted by the same due date specified for
the initial notification.
(c) You must submit a semiannual compliance report according to
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) Compliance report dates.
(i) The first compliance report must cover the period beginning on
the compliance date that is specified for your affected source in Sec.
63.3330 and ending on June 30 or December 31, whichever date is the
first date following the end of the calendar half immediately following
the compliance date that is specified for your affected source in Sec.
63.3330.
(ii) The first compliance report must be postmarked or delivered no
later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date follows the end of the
calendar half immediately following the compliance date that is
specified for your affected source in Sec. 63.3330.
(iii) Each subsequent compliance report must cover the semiannual
reporting period from January 1 through June 30 or the semiannual
reporting period from July 1 through December 31.
(iv) Each subsequent 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.
(v) For each affected source that is subject to permitting
regulations pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, and the
permitting authority has established dates for submitting semiannual
reports pursuant to Sec. 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or Sec.
71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), you may submit the first and subsequent compliance
reports according to the dates the permitting authority has established
instead of according to the dates in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iv)
of this section.
(2) The compliance report must contain the information in
paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section:
(i) Company name and address.
(ii) Statement by a responsible official with that official's name,
title, and signature certifying the accuracy of the content of the
report.
(iii) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the
reporting period.
(iv) If there are no deviations from any emission limitations
(emission limit or operating limit) that apply to you, a statement that
there were no deviations from the emission limitations during the
reporting period, and that no CMS was inoperative, inactive,
malfunctioning, out-of-control, repaired, or adjusted.
(v) For each deviation from an emission limitation (emission limit
or operating limit) that applies to you and that occurs at an affected
source where you are not using a CEMS to comply with the emission
limitations in this subpart, the compliance report must contain the
information in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section, and:
(A) The total operating time of each affected source during the
reporting period.
(B) Information on the number, duration, and cause of deviations
(including unknown cause), if applicable, and the corrective action
taken.
(C) Information on the number, duration, and cause for CPMS
downtime incidents, if applicable, other than downtime associated with
zero and span and other calibration checks.
(vi) For each deviation from an emission limit occurring at an
affected source where you are using a CEMS to comply with the emission
limit in this subpart, you must include the information in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i) through (iii) and (vi)(A) through (J) of this section.
(A) The date and time that each malfunction started and stopped.
(B) The date and time that each CEMS and CPMS, if applicable, was
inoperative except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks.
(C) The date and time that each CEMS and CPMS, if applicable, was
out-of-control, including the information in Sec. 63.8(c)(8).
(D) The date and time that each deviation started and stopped, and
whether each deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown,
or malfunction or during another period.
(E) A summary of the total duration (in hours) of each deviation
during the reporting period and the total duration of each deviation as
a percent of the total source operating time during that reporting
period.
(F) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during the
reporting period into those that are due to startup, shutdown, control
equipment problems, process problems, other known causes, and other
unknown causes.
(G) A summary of the total duration (in hours) of CEMS and CPMS
downtime during the reporting period and the total duration of CEMS and
CPMS downtime as a percent of the total source operating time during
that reporting period.
(H) A breakdown of the total duration of CEMS and CPMS downtime
during the reporting period into periods that are due to monitoring
equipment malfunctions, nonmonitoring equipment malfunctions, quality
assurance/quality control calibrations, other known causes, and other
unknown causes.
(I) The date of the latest CEMS and CPMS certification or audit.
(J) A description of any changes in CEMS, CPMS, or controls since
the last reporting period.
(d) You must submit a Notification of Performance Tests as
specified in Sec. Sec. 63.7 and 63.9(e) if you are complying with the
emission standard using a control device and you are required to
conduct a performance test of the control device. This notification and
the site-specific test plan required under Sec. 63.7(c)(2) must
identify the operating parameters to be monitored to ensure that the
capture efficiency of the capture system and the control efficiency of
the control device determined during the performance test are
maintained. Unless EPA objects to the parameter or requests changes,
you may consider the parameter approved.
(e) You must submit a Notification of Compliance Status as
specified in Sec. 63.9(h).
(f) You must submit performance test reports as specified in Sec.
63.10(d)(2) if you are using a control device to comply with the
emission standard and you have not obtained a waiver from the
performance test requirement or you are not exempted from this
requirement by Sec. 63.3360(b). The performance test reports must be
submitted as part of the notification of compliance status required in
Sec. 63.3400(e).
(g) You must submit startup, shutdown, and malfunction reports as
specified in Sec. 63.10(d)(5), except that the provisions in subpart A
of this part pertaining to startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions do not
apply unless a control device is used to comply with this subpart.
(1) If actions taken by an owner or operator during a startup,
shutdown, or malfunction of an affected source
[[Page 72360]]
(including actions taken to correct a malfunction) are not consistent
with the procedures specified in the affected source's SSMP required by
Sec. 63.6(e)(3), the owner or operator must state such information in
the report. The startup, shutdown, or malfunction report must consist
of a letter containing the name, title, and signature of the
responsible official who is certifying its accuracy and must be
submitted to the Administrator.
(2) Separate startup, shutdown, and malfunction reports are not
required if the information is included in the report specified in
paragraph (c)(2)(vi) of this section.
Sec. 63.3410 What records must I keep?
(a) Each owner or operator of an affected source subject to this
subpart must maintain the records specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and
(2) of this section on a monthly basis in accordance with the
requirements of Sec. 63.10(b)(1):
(1) Records specified in Sec. 63.10(b)(2) of all measurements
needed to demonstrate compliance with this standard, including:
(i) Continuous emission monitor data in accordance with the
requirements of Sec. 63.3350(d);
(ii) Control device and capture system operating parameter data in
accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.3350(c), (e), and (f);
(iii) Organic HAP content data for the purpose of demonstrating
compliance in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.3360(c);
(iv) Volatile matter and coating solids content data for the
purpose of demonstrating compliance in accordance with the requirements
of Sec. 63.3360(d);
(v) Overall control efficiency determination using capture
efficiency and control device destruction or removal efficiency test
results in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.3360(e) and
(f); and
(vi) Material usage, organic HAP usage, volatile matter usage, and
coating solids usage and compliance demonstrations using these data in
accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.3370(b), (c), and (d).
(2) Records specified in Sec. 63.10(c) for each CMS operated by
the owner or operator in accordance with the requirements of Sec.
63.3350(b).
(b) Each owner or operator of an affected source subject to this
subpart must maintain records of all liquid-liquid material balances
performed in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.3370. The
records must be maintained in accordance with the requirements of Sec.
63.10(b).
Delegation of Authority
Sec. 63.3420 What authorities may be delegated to the States?
(a) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority to a
State under 40 CFR part 63, subpart E, the authorities contained in
paragraph (b) of this section must be retained by the Administrator and
not transferred to a State.
(b) Authority which will not be delegated to States: Sec.
63.3360(c), approval of alternate test method for organic HAP content
determination; Sec. 63.3360(d), approval of alternate test method for
volatile matter determination.
If you are required to comply with operating limits by Sec.
63.3321, you must comply with the applicable operating limits in the
following table:
Tables to Subpart JJJJ of Part 63
Table 1 to Subpart JJJJ of Part 63.--Operating Limits if Using Add-On
Control Devices and Capture System
------------------------------------------------------------------------
And you must
You must meet the demonstrate
For the following device: following operating continuous
limit: compliance with
operating limits 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 63.3350(e)(9);
combustion ii. Reducing the
temperature limit data to 3-hour
established block averages; and
according to Sec. iii. Maintain the 3-
63.3360(e)(3)(i). hour average
combustion
temperature at or
above the
temperature limit.
2. Catalytic oxidizer....... a. The average i. Collecting the
temperature at the catalyst bed inlet
inlet to the temperature data
catalyst bed in any according to Sec.
3-hour period must 63.3350(e)(9);
not fall below the ii. Reducing the
combustion data to 3-hour
temperature limit block averages; and
established iii. Maintain the 3-
according to Sec. hour average
63.3360(e)(3)(ii). catalyst bed inlet
temperature at or
above the
temperature limit.
b. The temperature i. Collecting the
rise across the catalyst bed inlet
catalyst bed must and outlet
not fall below the temperature data
limit established according to Sec.
according to Sec. 63.3350(e)(9);
63.3360(e)(3)(ii). ii. Reducing the
data to 3-hour
block averages; and
iii. Maintain the 3-
hour average
temperature rise
across the catalyst
bed at or above the
limit.
3. Emission capture system.. Submit monitoring Conduct monitoring
plan to the according to the
Administrator that plan (Sec.
identifies 63.3350(f)(3)).
operating
parameters to be
monitored according
to Sec.
63.3350(f).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements
according to the following table:
Table 2 to Subpart JJJJ of Part 63.--Applicability of 40 CFR Part 63
General Provisions to Subpart JJJJ
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to
General provisions reference subpart JJJJ Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(a)(1)-(4)....... Yes.
[[Page 72361]]
Sec. 63.1(a)(5)........... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.1(a)(6)-(8)....... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(a)(9)........... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.1(a)(10)-(14)..... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(b)(1)........... No.................. Subpart JJJJ
specifies
applicability.
Sec. 63.1(b)(2)-(3)....... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(c)(1)........... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(c)(2)........... No.................. Area sources are not
subject to emission
standards of
subpart JJJJ.
Sec. 63.1(c)(3)........... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.1(c)(4)........... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(c)(5)........... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(d).............. No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.1(e).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.1(e)(4)........... No.
Sec. 63.2................. Yes................. Additional
definitions in
subpart JJJJ.
Sec. 63.3(a)-(c).......... Yes.
Sec. 63.4(a)(1)-(3)....... Yes.
Sec. 63.4(a)(4)........... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.4(a)(5)........... Yes.
Sec. 63.4(b)-(c).......... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(a)(1)-(2)....... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(b)(1)........... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(b)(2)........... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.5(b)(3)-(6)....... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(c).............. No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.5(d).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.5(e).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.5(f).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.6(a).............. Yes................. Applies only when
capture and control
system is used to
comply with the
standard.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(5)....... No..................
Sec. 63.6(b)(6)........... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.6(b)(7)........... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(2)....... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(c)(3)-(4)....... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.6(c)(5)........... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(d).............. No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.6(e).............. Yes................. Provisions
pertaining to SSMP,
and CMS do not
apply unless an add-
on control system
is used to comply
with the emission
limitations.
Sec. 63.6(f).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.6(g).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.6(h).............. No.................. Subpart JJJJ does
not require
continuous opacity
monitoring systems
(COMS).
Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(14)...... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(i)(15).......... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.6(i)(16).......... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(j).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.7................. Yes.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)-(2)....... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(a)(3)........... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.8(a)(4)........... No.
Sec. 63.8(b).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)-(3)....... Yes................. Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(i)
& (ii) only apply
if you use capture
and control systems
and are required to
have a start-up,
shutdown, and
malfunction plan.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)........... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(c)(5)........... No.................. Subpart JJJJ does
not require COMS.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6)-(c)(8).... Yes................. Provisions for COMS
are not applicable.
Sec. 63.8(d)-(f).......... Yes................. Sec. 63.8(f)(6)
only applies if you
use CEMS.
Sec. 63.8(g).............. Yes................. Only applies if you
use CEMS.
Sec. 63.9(a).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.9(b)(1)........... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(b)(2)........... Yes................. Except Sec.
63.3400(b)(1)
requires submittal
of initial
notification for
existing affected
sources no later
than 1 year before
compliance date.
Sec. 63.9(b)(3)-(5)....... Yes.
[[Page 72362]]
Sec. 63.9(c)-(e).......... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(f).............. No.................. Subpart JJJJ does
not require opacity
and visible
emissions
observations.
Sec. 63.9(g).............. Yes................. Provisions for COMS
are not applicable.
Sec. 63.9(h)(1)-(3)....... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(h)(4)........... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.9(h)(5)-(6)....... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(i).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.9(j).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.10(a)............. Yes.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)-(3)...... Yes................. Sec.
63.10(b)(2)(i)
through (v) only
apply if you use a
capture and control
system.
Sec. 63.10(c)(1).......... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(c)(2)-(4)...... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.10(c)(5)-(8)...... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(c)(9).......... No.................. Reserved.
Sec. 63.10(c)(10)-(15).... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)-(2)...... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(d)(3).......... No.................. Subpart JJJJ does
not require opacity
and visible
emissions
observations.
Sec. 63.10(d)(4)-(5)...... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(e)(1)-(2)...... Yes................. Provisions for COMS
are not applicable.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)-(4)...... No.
Sec. 63.10(f)............. Yes.
Sec. 63.11................ No.
Sec. 63.12................ Yes.
Sec. 63.13................ Yes.
Sec. 63.14................ Yes................. Subpart JJJJ
includes provisions
for alternative
ASME test methods
that are
incorporated by
reference.
Sec. 63.15................ Yes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 02-29074 Filed 12-3-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P