Misc. Coating Manufacturing Thursday December by rfj18871

VIEWS: 11 PAGES: 39

									                                                                                            Thursday,
                                                                                            December 11, 2003




                                                                                            Part III

                                                                                            Environmental
                                                                                            Protection Agency
                                                                                            40 CFR Part 63
                                                                                            National Emission Standards for
                                                                                            Hazardous Air Pollutants: Miscellaneous
                                                                                            Coating Manufacturing; Final Rule




VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00001   Fmt 4717   Sfmt 4717   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69164           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION                                Docket & Information Center (6102T),                     under the Federal Register listings at
      AGENCY                                                  1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., room                      http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. An
                                                              B108, Washington, DC 20460.                              electronic version of the public docket
      40 CFR Part 63                                          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.                     is available through EPA’s electronic
      [Docket ID No. OAR–2003–0178; FRL–7554–                 Randy McDonald, Organic Chemicals                        public docket and comment system,
      3]                                                      Group, Emission Standards Division                       EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets
                                                              (MD–C504–04), U.S. EPA, Research                         at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to view
      RIN 2060–AK59                                                                                                    public comments, access the index
                                                              Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone
                                                              number (919) 541–5402, electronic mail                   listing of the contents of the official
      National Emission Standards for
                                                              (e-mail) address                                         public docket, and to access those
      Hazardous Air Pollutants:
                                                              mcdonald.randy@epa.gov.                                  documents in the public docket that are
      Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing
                                                                                                                       available electronically. Portions of the
                                                              SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:     Regulated
      AGENCY:  Environmental Protection                                                                                docket materials are available
                                                              Entities. Categories and entities
      Agency (EPA).                                                                                                    electronically through Docket ID No.
                                                              potentially regulated by this action
      ACTION: Final rule.                                                                                              OAR–2003–0178. Once in the system,
                                                              include:
                                                                                                                       select ‘‘search,’’ then key in the
      SUMMARY: This action promulgates                                                                                 appropriate docket identification
                                                                                             Examples of regu-
      national emission standards for                          Category        NAICS*                                  number. You may still access publicly
                                                                                               lated entities
      hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for                                                                            available docket materials through the
      miscellaneous coating manufacturing                     Industry ....       3255     Manufacturers of            Docket ID No. A–96–04.
      facilities. The final rule establishes                                                coatings, including           Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition
      emission limits and work practice                                                     inks, paints, or ad-       to being available in the docket, an
      requirements for new and existing                                                     hesives.
                                                                                                                       electronic copy of the final rule will also
      miscellaneous coating manufacturing                       *North    American        Industry    Classification   be available on the WWW through the
      operations, including process vessels,                  System.                                                  Technology Transfer Network (TTN).
      storage tanks, wastewater, transfer                        This table is not intended to be                      Following signature, a copy of the rule
      operations, equipment leaks, and heat                   exhaustive, but rather provides a guide                  will be placed on the TTN’s policy and
      exchange systems, and implements                        for readers regarding entities likely to be              guidance page for newly proposed or
      section 112(d) of the Clean Air Act                     regulated by this action. To determine                   promulgated rules at http://
      (CAA) by requiring all major sources to                 whether your facility is regulated by this               www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN
      meet hazardous air pollutant (HAP)                      action, you should examine the                           provides information and technology
      emission standards reflecting                           applicability criteria in § 63.7985 of the               exchange in various areas of air
      application of the maximum achievable                   final rule. If you have any questions                    pollution control. If more information
      control technology (MACT). The HAP                      regarding the applicability of this action               regarding the TTN is needed, call the
      emitted from miscellaneous coating                      to a particular entity, consult the person               TTN HELP line at (919) 541–5384.
      manufacturing facilities include                        listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER                         Judicial Review. Under section
      toluene, xylene, glycol ethers, methyl                  INFORMATION CONTACT section.                             307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial review of
      ethyl ketone, and methyl isobutyl                          Docket. The EPA has established                       the final NESHAP is available only by
      ketone. Exposure to these substances                    official electronic public dockets for this              filing a petition for review in the U.S.
      has been demonstrated to cause adverse                  action under Docket ID No. OAR–2003–                     Court of Appeals for the District of
      health effects such as irritation of the                0178 and A–96–04. The official public                    Columbia Circuit by February 9, 2004.
      lung, eye, and mucous membranes,                        docket consists of the documents                         Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA,
      effects on the central nervous system,                  specifically referenced in this action,                  only an objection to a rule or procedure
      and cancer. We do not have the type of                  any public comments received, and                        raised with reasonable specificity
      current detailed data on each of the                    other information related to this action.                during the period for public comment
      facilities and the people living around                 Although a part of the official docket, a                can be raised during judicial review.
      the facilities covered by the final rule                public docket does not include                           Moreover, under CAA section 307(b)(2)
      for this source category that would be                  Confidential Business Information or                     of the CAA, the requirements
      necessary to conduct an analysis to                     other information whose disclosure is                    established by the final rule may not be
      determine the actual population                         restricted by statute. The official public               challenged separately in any civil or
      exposures to the HAP emitted from                       docket is the collection of materials that               criminal proceeding brought to enforce
      these facilities and the potential for                  is available for public viewing at the Air               these requirements.
      resultant health effects. Therefore, we                 and Radiation Docket in the EPA Docket                      Background Information Document.
      do not know the extent to which the                     Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room                          The EPA proposed the NESHAP for
      adverse health effects described above                  B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,                       miscellaneous coating manufacturing on
      occur in the populations surrounding                    Washington, DC. The EPA Docket                           April 4, 2002 (67 FR 16154), and
      these facilities. However, to the extent                Center Public Reading Room is open                       received 81 comment letters and
      the adverse effects do occur, and the                   from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday                      comments from 8 speakers at a public
      final rule reduces emissions, subsequent                through Friday, excluding legal                          hearing on the proposal. A background
      exposures will be reduced. The final                    holidays. The telephone number for the                   information document (BID) (‘‘National
      rule will reduce HAP emissions by                       Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and                      Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
      4,900 tons per year (tpy) for existing                  the telephone number for the Air and                     Pollutants (NESHAP) for the
      facilities that manufacture                             Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. A                    Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing
      miscellaneous coatings.                                 reasonable fee may be charged for                        Industry, Summary of Public Comments
      EFFECTIVE DATE: December 11, 2003.                      copying docket materials.                                and Responses,’’) containing EPA’s
      ADDRESSES: Docket ID. No. OAR–2003–                        Electronic Access. You may access                     responses to each public comment is
      0178 and A–96–04 are located at the                     this Federal Register document                           available in Docket ID No. OAR–2003–
      U.S. EPA, Office of Air & Radiation                     electronically through the EPA Internet                  0178.


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00002   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                       69165

        Outline. The information presented in                 HAP and to establish NESHAP for the                   to identify major sources of HAP by
      this preamble is organized as follows:                  listed source categories and                          manufacturing category. Following the
      I. Background                                           subcategories. Major sources of HAP are               publication of that listing, we published
         A. What is the source of authority for               those that are located within a                       a schedule for the promulgation of
            development of NESHAP?                            contiguous area and under common                      emission standards for each of the 174
         B. What criteria are used in the                     control and have the potential to emit                listed source categories. At the time the
            development of NESHAP?                            greater than 9.1 megagrams per year                   initial list was published, we recognized
         C. What is the history of the source                 (Mg/yr) (10 tpy) of any one HAP or 22.7               that we might have to revise the list
            category?                                         Mg/yr (25 tpy) of any combination of                  from time to time as better information
         D. What are the health effects associated            HAP.                                                  became available.
            with the pollutants emitted from                                                                           Based on information we collected in
            miscellaneous coating manufacturing?              B. What Criteria Are Used in the                      1995, we realized that several of the
         E. How did we develop the final rule?                Development of NESHAP?
      II. Summary of the Final Rule                                                                                 original source categories on the list had
         A. What are the affected sources and                    Section 112 of the CAA requires that               similar process equipment, emission
      emission points?                                        we establish NESHAP for the control of                characteristics and applicable control
         B. What are the emission limitations and             HAP from both new and existing major                  technologies. Additionally, many of
            work practice standards?                          sources. The CAA requires the NESHAP                  these source categories were on the
         C. What are the testing and initial                  to reflect the maximum degree of                      same schedule for promulgation, by
            compliance requirements?                          reduction in emissions of HAP that is                 November 15, 2000. Therefore, we
         D. What are the continuous compliance                achievable, taking into consideration the             decided to combine a number of source
            requirements?                                     cost of achieving the emissions                       categories from the original listing into
         E. What are the notification, recordkeeping,         reductions, any non-air quality health                one broad set of emission standards. On
            and reporting requirements?
                                                              and environmental impacts, and energy                 November 7, 1996, we published a
      III. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and
      Economic Impacts                                        requirements. This level of control is                Federal Register notice combining 21
         A. What are the air emission reduction               commonly referred to as the maximum                   source categories from the initial list of
            impacts?                                          achievable control technology or MACT.                174 into the Miscellaneous Organic
         B. What are the cost impacts?                           The MACT floor is the minimum                      Chemical Processes source category (61
         C. What are the economic impacts?                    control level allowed for NESHAP and                  FR 57602). One of the 21 source
         D. What are the non-air quality health and           is defined under section 112(d)(3) of the             categories was the manufacture of
            environmental impacts and energy                  CAA. In essence, the MACT floor                       paints, coatings, and adhesives.
            impacts?                                          ensures that all major sources achieve                   On November 18, 1999, we published
      IV. Summary of Responses to Major                       the level of control already achieved by              a Federal Register notice describing
      Comments                                                the better-controlled and lower-emitting
         A. What changes to applicability did the
                                                                                                                    changes to the source category list (64
            commenters suggest?
                                                              sources in each source category or                    FR 63035). At that time, we also
         B. How Did We Develop the Standards?                 subcategory. For new sources, the                     described our intent to group the source
         C. Standards for Process Vessels                     MACT floor cannot be less stringent                   categories into two new source
         D. Standards for Storage Tanks                       than the emission control that is                     categories instead of one. The two new
         E. Standards for Wastewater                          achieved in practice by the best-                     source categories are called the
         F. Standards for Equipment Leaks                     controlled similar source. The MACT                   miscellaneous organic chemical
         G. Standards for Transfer Operations                 standards for existing sources can be                 manufacturing source category and the
         H. Pollution Prevention                              less stringent than standards for new                 miscellaneous coating manufacturing
         I. Initial Compliance                                sources, but they cannot be less
         J. Ongoing Compliance
                                                                                                                    source category. We proposed the
         K. Recordkeeping and Reporting
                                                              stringent than the average emission                   NESHAP for both source categories on
         L. Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction                limitation achieved by the best-                      April 4, 2002 (67 FR 16154).
      V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews                performing 12 percent of existing                        Today’s action establishes final
         A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory                 sources for which the Administrator has               standards for miscellaneous coating
            Planning and Review                               emissions information (or the best-                   manufacturing (40 CFR part 63, subpart
         B. Paperwork Reduction Act                           performing five sources for which the                 HHHHH). Final standards for
         C. Regulatory Flexibility Act                        Administrator has or could reasonably                 miscellaneous organic chemical
         D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act                      obtain emissions information for                      manufacturing (40 CFR part 63, subpart
         E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism                 categories or subcategories with fewer                FFFF) will be published separately.
         F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
            and Coordination with Indian Tribal
                                                              than 30 sources).
                                                                 In developing MACT, we also                        D. What Are the Health Effects
            Governments                                                                                             Associated With the Pollutants Emitted
         G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of              consider control options that are more
                                                              stringent than the floor. In considering              From Miscellaneous Coating
            Children from Environmental Health and                                                                  Manufacturing?
            Safety Risks                                      whether to establish standards more
         H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that               stringent than the floor, we must                       The CAA was created, in part, ‘‘to
            Significantly Affect Energy Supply,               consider cost, non-air quality health and             protect and enhance the quality of the
            Distribution, or Use                              environmental impacts, and energy                     Nation’s air resources so as to promote
         I. National Technology Transfer                      requirements.                                         the public health and welfare and the
            Advancement Act                                                                                         productive capacity of the population’’
         J. Congressional Review Act                          C. What Is the History of the Source                  (see section 101(b) of the CAA). These
                                                              Category?                                             NESHAP will protect public health by
      I. Background
                                                                Section 112 of the CAA requires us to               reducing emissions of HAP from
      A. What Is the Source of Authority for                  establish rules for categories of emission            miscellaneous coating manufacturing
      Development of NESHAP?                                  sources that emit HAP. On July 16,                    facilities.
         Section 112 of the CAA requires us to                1992, we published an initial list of 174               Miscellaneous coating manufacturing
      list categories and subcategories of                    source categories to be regulated (57 FR              facilities emit an estimated 6,900 Mg/yr
      major sources and some area sources of                  31576). The listing was our best attempt              (7,600 tpy) of HAP. Approximately 30


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00003   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69166           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      percent of the HAP emitted by                           coating manufacturing source category                 sources are using control devices or
      miscellaneous coating manufacturing                     are estimated to be 6,900 Mg/yr (7,600                other HAP emission reduction
      facilities is toluene, 30 percent is                    tpy).                                                 techniques to enable us to set a MACT
      xylene, and glycol ethers, methyl ethyl                                                                       floor based on such devices or
                                                              B. What Are the Emission Limitations
      ketone, and methyl isobutyl ketone                                                                            techniques. Therefore, the MACT floor
                                                              and Work Practice Standards?
      account for approximately 25 percent.                                                                         for process vessels with capacities less
      The final rule reduces total HAP                        Process Vessel Vents                                  than 0.94 m3 (250 gal) is no emissions
      emissions from miscellaneous coating                       For stationary process vessels with                reduction. We examined one regulatory
      manufacturing facilities by 64 percent.                 capacities greater than or equal to 0.94              alternative that would require the same
      As a result of controlling these HAP, the               cubic meters (m3) (250 gallons (gal)) at              75 percent emissions reduction as for
      final NESHAP will also reduce                           existing sources, the final rule requires             larger process vessels. We concluded
      emissions of volatile organic                           an overall reduction, adjusting for                   that the total impacts of this alternative,
      compounds (VOC). A summary of the                       capture and control efficiency based on               including cost, non-air quality health
      potential health effects caused by                      enclosure tests, as applicable, of at least           and environmental impacts, and energy
      exposure to these pollutants is                         75 percent by weight for HAP with a                   requirements, are unreasonable in light
      presented in the preamble to the                        vapor pressure greater than or equal to               of the HAP emission reductions
      proposed rule (67 FR 16154).                            0.6 kilopascals (kPa) (0.09 pounds per                achieved. Thus, we did not develop
                                                              square inch absolute (psia)), and at least            standards for process vessels with
      E. How Did We Develop the Final Rule?                                                                         capacities less than 250 gal.
                                                              a 60 percent reduction by weight for
         We proposed the NESHAP for the                       HAP with a vapor pressure less than 0.6               Storage Tanks
      Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing                     kPa (0.09 psia). The final rule also
      source category on April 4, 2002 (67 FR                                                                          The standards for storage tanks at
                                                              provides an emissions averaging                       existing sources require either organic
      16154) and provided an 85-day                           alternative for stationary process vessels
      comment period. We received public                                                                            HAP emissions reductions of 90 percent
                                                              at existing sources that are equipped                 by weight or more, or the use of floating
      comments on the proposed                                with a tightly-fitting vented cover. The
      miscellaneous coating manufacturing                                                                           roofs, or vapor balancing if the storage
                                                              overall mass reduction in HAP                         tanks have capacities greater than or
      NESHAP from 81 sources consisting of                    emissions for vessels in the averaging
      paint, ink, and adhesives manufacturers,                                                                      equal to 75 m3 (20,000 gal) and store
                                                              group must be equal to or greater than                material with an organic HAP vapor
      industry trade associations, a federal                  the reduction that would have resulted
      government agency, an environmental                                                                           pressure greater than or equal to 13.1
                                                              if each of the covered vessels were                   kPa (1.9 psia). The standards for storage
      group, and other interested parties. In                 vented to a control device that achieves
      addition, a public hearing was held, at                                                                       tanks at new sources require either
                                                              a 75 percent emissions reduction for                  organic HAP emissions reductions of at
      which 8 of 11 speakers provided                         HAP with a vapor pressure greater than
      testimony related to the proposed                                                                             least 80 percent by weight, the use of
                                                              or equal to 0.6 kPa (0.09 psia) or a 60               floating roofs, or vapor balancing if the
      miscellaneous coating manufacturing                     percent emissions reduction for HAP
      rule. A copy of each of the comment                                                                           storage tanks have capacities greater
                                                              with a vapor pressure less than 0.6 kPa               than or equal to 10,000 gal and store
      letters is available in Docket ID No.                   (0.09 psia). The final rule requires that
      OAR–2003–0178.                                                                                                material with an organic HAP vapor
                                                              portable process vessels at existing                  pressure greater than or equal to 0.02
         The final rule reflects full                         sources with capacities greater than or
      consideration of all the comments we                                                                          psia. The standards for new sources also
                                                              equal to 0.94 m3 (250 gal) be equipped                require either organic HAP emissions
      received on the proposed subpart                        with a cover. Stationary and portable
      HHHHH, as well as our reassessment of                                                                         reductions of at least 90 percent by
                                                              vessels at new sources must be                        weight, the use of floating roofs, or
      certain data in the rulemaking record. A                equipped with a tightly-fitting vented
      detailed response to all comments is                                                                          vapor balancing for storage tanks that
                                                              cover, and the vented organic HAP                     have capacities equal to or greater than
      included in the BID for the promulgated                 emissions must be reduced by at least
      standards (Docket ID No. OAR–2003–                                                                            75 m3 (20,000 gal) but less than 94 m3
                                                              95 percent by weight. Alternatively, for              (25,000 gal) and store material that has
      0178).                                                  stationary process vessels with                       an organic HAP vapor pressure greater
      II. Summary of the Final Rule                           capacities greater than or equal to 0.94              than or equal to 10.3 kPa (1.5 psia), and
                                                              m3 (250 gal) at existing and new sources              tanks with capacities greater than 94 m3
      A. What Are the Affected Sources and                    and portable process vessels with
      Emission Points?                                                                                              (25,000 gal) storing material that has an
                                                              capacities greater than or equal to 0.94              organic HAP vapor pressure greater than
         The affected source for the                          m3 (250 gal) at new sources, you may                  or equal to 0.7 kPa (0.1 psia). The final
      miscellaneous coating manufacturing                     install a tightly-fitting vented cover and            rule does not include standards for
      source category is the miscellaneous                    vent emissions to a condenser operated                storage tanks smaller than 20,000 gal at
      coating manufacturing operations at the                 at specified temperature limits to satisfy            existing sources or for storage tanks
      facility. These operations include                      the overall control requirement. Another              smaller than 10,000 gal at new sources
      storage tanks, process vessels,                         option for meeting the standards for                  because the MACT floor for these tanks
      equipment components, wastewater                        stationary process vessels at existing                was determined to be no emissions
      treatment and conveyance systems,                       sources is to use the vessels to produce              reduction.
      transfer operations, and ancillary                      coatings with less than 5 percent HAP
      sources such as heat exchange systems.                  by weight; no additional control of                   Wastewater
         The final standards for miscellaneous                process vessel vents is required when                    For existing sources, the final rule
      coating manufacturing cover vents from                  producing such coatings.                              requires that wastewater containing a
      process vessels, storage tanks,                            We did not specifically request                    total partially soluble and soluble HAP
      wastewater, transfer operations,                        information on process vessels with                   load of 750 pounds per year (lb/yr) and
      equipment leaks, and ancillary heat                     capacities less than 0.94 m3 (250 gal).               a concentration of 4,000 parts per
      exchange operations. Total baseline                     Thus, we do not have information                      million by weight (ppmw) or greater be
      HAP emissions for the miscellaneous                     indicating that a sufficient number of                treated as hazardous waste or in an


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00004   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                      69167

      enhanced biological treatment unit. The                 other process operations also apply to                agencies (State agencies and EPA
      final rule also allows for offsite                      cleaning operations.                                  Regional Offices) of the existence of
      treatment provided the affected sources                                                                       your affected source and puts them on
                                                              C. What Are the Testing and Initial
      that ship their wastewater to an offsite                                                                      notice for future compliance actions.
                                                              Compliance Requirements?
      facility for treatment as a hazardous                                                                         The precompliance report details
      waste note this fact along with the name                   To verify that the required reductions             compliance alternatives that require
      of the facility to which the wastewater                 have been achieved, you must either test              preapproval and is required 6 months
      is shipped in their notification of                     or use calculation methodologies,                     prior to the compliance date. The
      compliance status report. If the                        depending on the emission stream                      notification of compliance status
      wastewater is shipped offsite for                       characteristics, control device, and the              (NOCS) report, which is due 150 days
      treatment in an enhanced biological                     type of process vent. Initial compliance              after the compliance date of the
      treatment unit, the offsite facility must               demonstration provisions for stationary               NESHAP, is a comprehensive report that
      comply with the monitoring,                             process vessels at miscellaneous coating              describes the affected source and the
      recordkeeping, and reporting                            manufacturing sources reference the 40                strategy being used to comply. The final
      requirements in subpart HHHHH. For                      CFR part 63, subpart SS, closed vent                  rule also incorporates a number of
      new sources, the applicability triggers                 system and performance test provisions                provisions in subpart A of 40 CFR part
      for control are more stringent, affecting               and the capture efficiency Method 204                 63 (General Provisions), among them the
      all streams that contain partially soluble              in appendix M to 40 CFR part 51.                      startup, shutdown and malfunction
      and soluble HAP at a concentration                      Control devices handling greater than                 provisions.
      greater than or equal to 1,600 ppmw.                    9.1 Mg/yr (10 tpy) of HAP must be
                                                              tested, while engineering assessments                 III. Summary of Environmental,
      Transfer Operations                                     are allowed for control devices with                  Energy, and Economic Impacts
         Standards for transfer operations at                 lower loads and for condensers.                       A. What Are the Air Emission Reduction
      existing and new sources require 75                     Performance test provisions are based                 Impacts?
      percent control of HAP emissions from                   on worst case operating conditions for
      product loading to tank trucks and                      devices controlling process vents.                      We estimate nationwide baseline HAP
      railcars if the amount of material                         The initial compliance demonstration               emissions from the miscellaneous
      transferred contains at least 11.4 million              procedures reference 40 CFR part 63,                  coating manufacturing sources to be
      liters per year (l/yr) (3.0 million gal/yr)             subpart SS, for storage tanks complying               6,900 Mg/yr (7,600 tpy). We project that
      of HAP, and the material has a HAP                      using control devices and transfer                    the final rule will reduce HAP
      partial pressure greater than or equal to               operations, and 40 CFR part 63, subpart               emissions by about 4,400 Mg/yr (4,900
      10.3 kPa (1.5 psia). Acceptable control                 WW, for storage tanks complying using                 tpy). Because many of the HAP emitted
      strategies also include routing displaced               floating roofs.                                       by miscellaneous coating manufacturing
      vapors back to the process, or the use of                                                                     facilities are also VOC, the proposed
      condensers operated below specified                     D. What Are the Continuous                            NESHAP will also reduce VOC.
      temperature limits.                                     Compliance Requirements?                                Combustion of fuels to generate
                                                                 The final rule requires monitoring to              electricity and steam will increase
      Equipment Leaks                                         determine whether you are in                          secondary emissions of carbon
         The final rule requires compliance                   compliance with emission limits on an                 monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX),
      with leak detection and repair (LDAR)                   ongoing basis. This monitoring is done                and sulfur dioxide (SO2) by about 25
      programs for equipment leaks. Existing                  either by continuously measuring HAP                  Mg/yr (27 tpy). These impacts were
      sources must comply with the sensory-                   emissions reductions or by continuously               estimated assuming electricity is
      based LDAR provisions of 40 CFR part                    measuring a site-specific operational                 generated in coal-fired power plants and
      63, subpart R, the NESHAP for Gas                       parameter, the value of which you                     steam is produced in natural gas-fired
      Distribution Facilities. Alternatively,                 would establish during the initial                    industrial boilers.
      existing sources may comply with the                    compliance demonstration. These
      LDAR program in 40 CFR part 63,                                                                               B. What Are the Cost Impacts?
                                                              parameters are required to be monitored
      subpart TT, or subpart UU (the National                 at 15-minute intervals throughout the                   The cost impacts include the capital
      Emission Standards for Equipment                        operation of the control device. For                  cost to install control devices and
      Leaks—Control Level 1 and Control                       control devices that do not control more              monitoring equipment, and include the
      Level 2, respectively) because these                    than 1 tpy of HAP emissions, only a                   annual costs involved in operating
      alternatives are equivalent to or more                  daily verification of the operating                   control devices and monitoring
      stringent than the sensory-based LDAR                   parameter is required, as is provided in              equipment, implementing work
      program. New sources must comply                        40 CFR part 63, subpart GGG. To                       practices, and conducting performance
      with either the subpart TT or subpart                   demonstrate compliance with work                      tests. The annual cost impacts also
      UU LDAR provisions. For heat exchange                   practice standards, such as the                       include the cost savings generated by
      systems at existing and new sources, the                requirement to maintain floating roofs,               reducing the loss of product or solvent
      final rule requires a leak detection                    inspection of equipment serves as the                 in the form of emissions. The total
      program, consistent with the program in                 monitoring demonstration.                             capital costs for existing sources are
      40 CFR 63.104 (the Hazardous Organic                                                                          estimated to be $57 million, and the
      NESHAP (HON)).                                          E. What Are the Notification,                         total annualized costs for existing
         Cleaning operations are considered                   Recordkeeping, and Reporting                          sources are estimated to be $16 million.
      part of the miscellaneous coating                       Requirements?                                         Total capital costs for new sources are
      manufacturing operations at existing                      The final rule requires recordkeeping               estimated to be $1.3 million per new
      and new sources. Therefore, cleaning                    and initial and semiannual reporting.                 facility and total annualized costs are
      fluids are considered to be process                     The initial notification is required                  estimated to be $.25 million per new
      fluids, and the requirements for process                within 120 days of the effective date of              facility. Three new facilities were
      vessels, storage tanks, equipment leaks,                the NESHAP. That report, which is very                estimated in the first 3 years after
      and wastewater systems that apply to                    brief, serves to alert appropriate                    promulgation of this rule.


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00005   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69168           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

         We estimate that in the first 3 years                demand (i.e., for electricity generation              source under another subpart of 40 CFR
      after the effective date of 40 CFR part                 and steam production) to increase by an               part 63 should apply to end-users
      63, subpart HHHHH, that the annual                      estimated 32,000 gigajoules per year                  subject to subparts MMMM, IIII (auto
      cost burden will average $3,500/yr per                  (30.0 billion British thermal units per               surface), and PPPP (plastic parts and
      respondent for recordkeeping and                        year (Btu/yr).                                        products) because affiliated operations
      reporting requirements for an estimated                                                                       are part of the affected sources under
      129 sources. Most of these costs are for                IV. Summary of Responses to Major                     those rules. One commenter requested
      new and reconstructed sources that                      Comments                                              clarification that the exemption in
      must be in compliance upon startup;                     A. What Changes to Applicability Did                  § 63.7985(a)(4) is not limited only to
      other costs are for existing sources to                 the Commenters Suggest?                               operations that are required to
      prepare initial notifications and plans.                                                                      implement controls under other
                                                                 Comment: A number of commenters
      In the fourth year after the effective                                                                        standards.
                                                              opposed regulation of activities such as                 Two commenters requested
      date, existing facilities must begin to
                                                              mixing additives and other ingredients,               exemptions for affiliated operations at
      monitor and record operating
                                                              thinning, and adjusting tint by facilities            facilities subject to any of the surface
      parameters to comply with operating
                                                              that are the end-users of coatings and                coating NESHAP. According to the
      limits and prepare compliance reports.
      These activities will significantly                     are subject to any of the surface coating             commenters, the exemption is necessary
      increase the nationwide annual burden.                  NESHAP; several of the commenters                     because we obtained no information on
         We expect that the actual compliance                 described these activities as ‘‘affiliated            end-users while developing subpart
      cost impacts of the NESHAP will be less                 operations,’’ and they concurred with                 HHHHH, some of the regulated
      than described above because of the                     the definition and draft preamble                     community would not have an
      potential to use common control                         language for the Paper and Other Web                  opportunity to comment on the proposal
      devices, upgrade existing control                       Coating (POWC) NESHAP that were                       because some of the surface coating
      devices, implement emissions                            discussed during POWC stakeholder                     rules will not be published until after
      averaging, or comply with the preset                    meetings on May 22 and June 26, 2002.1                subpart HHHHH is finalized, and we
      temperature limits for condensers.                      For example, several of the commenters                considered emissions from affiliated
      Because the effect of such practices is                 requested specific exemptions for                     operations in some surface coating
      highly site-specific and data were                      affiliated operations at facilities subject           source categories to be insignificant
      unavailable to estimate how often the                   to surface coating rules in subpart GG                when we were developing the surface
      lower cost compliance practices could                   (National Emission Standards for                      coating NESHAP. To exclude end users
      be utilized, we could not quantify the                  Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework                    in general, one commenter
      amount by which actual compliance                       Facilities), subpart KK of 40 CFR part 63             recommended more clearly defining
      costs will be reduced.                                  (NESHAP for the Printing and                          ‘‘coatings manufacturing’’ with a
                                                              Publishing Industry), and/or subpart JJJJ             definition similar to that for ‘‘batch
      C. What Are the Economic Impacts?                       of 40 CFR part 63 (NESHAP: Paper and                  process’’ in subpart GGG of 40 CFR part
         The economic impact analysis shows                   Other Web Coating). Another                           63, using a more narrow listing of
      that the expected price increase for                    commenter requested an exemption for                  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
      affected output would be 0.3 percent as                 the onsite formulation and mixing of                  and North American Industrial
      a result of the NESHAP for                              specialty, ablative coatings that are                 Classification System (NAICS) codes,
      miscellaneous coating manufacturers.                    applied to space vehicles at a National               and adding specific exemptions for
      The expected change in production of                    Aeronautics and Space Administration                  temporary activities such as mixing
      affected output is a reduction of 0.1                   (NASA) site and are exempt from                       prior to painting a tank or structure at
      percent as a result of the final rule. One              control under subpart GG of 40 CFR part               a major source.
      plant closure is expected out of the 127                63. Two commenters requested specific                    Response: The final rule does not
      facilities affected by the final rule. It               language in either the preamble or final              apply to activities conducted by end
      should be noted that the baseline                       rule to clarify that operations at                    users of coating products in preparation
      economic conditions of the facility                     facilities subject to subpart DDDD of 40              for application. As noted by some of the
      predicted to close affect the closure                   CFR part 63 (the plywood and                          commenters, we have decided to
      estimate provided by the economic                       composite wood products NESHAP) are                   exempt affiliated operations at POWC
      model, and that the facility predicted to               not subject to subpart HHHHH of 40                    facilities from subpart HHHHH. In the
      close appears to have low profitability                 CFR part 63. Another commenter also                   preamble to the final POWC surface
      levels currently. Therefore, no adverse                 suggested extending the provision to all              coating MACT rule (67 FR 72330,
      impact is expected to occur for those                   equipment associated with a process for               December 4, 2002), we define affiliated
      industries that produce output affected                 which another 40 CFR part 63 standard                 operations at POWC facilities and
      by the NESHAP, such as paints, inks,                    has been promulgated. One commenter                   indicate that they are part of the POWC
      and adhesives.                                          stated that end users, particularly those             source category, but they are not part of
                                                              at facilities subject to subpart MMMM of              the POWC affected source for a variety
      D. What Are the Non-Air Quality Health                                                                        of reasons. We also examined other
                                                              40 CFR part 63 (NESHAP: Surface
      and Environmental Impacts and Energy                                                                          surface coating rules, and determined
                                                              Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts
      Impacts?                                                                                                      that the exemption for affiliated
                                                              and Products), should be exempt
         We do not expect wastewater, solid                   because subpart MMMM already                          operations should also be applied to
      waste, or hazardous waste to be                         addresses emissions associated with the               sources that are subject to the printing
      generated from controlling HAP                          use of diluents at such facilities.                   and publishing rule (subpart KK), the
      emissions from miscellaneous coating                    Another commenter noted that the                      aerospace manufacturing rule (subpart
      manufacturing facilities. Thus, we                      exemption in § 63.7985(a)(4) of                       GG), the metal coil coating rule (subpart
      expect no non-air quality health impacts                operations that are part of an affected               SSSS of 40 CFR part 63), and the
      from controlling HAP emissions from                                                                           miscellaneous metal parts and products
      miscellaneous coating manufacturing                       1 The final POWC NESHAP was published on            rule (subpart MMMM). These five rules
      facilities. We expect the overall energy                December 4, 2002 (67 FR 72330).                       lack requirements for affiliated


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00006   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                       69169

      operations, but affiliated operations                   the HAP content in a vessel for                       with the alternative standard when the
      were considered during the                              comparison with the 5 percent                         vessel was processing material that
      development of the rules and controls                   exemption level and for determining the               would ultimately contain less than 5
      were determined not to be warranted.                    HAP content in process vessel vents for               percent HAP by weight as final product.
      We have not extended this exemption to                  comparison to the 50 ppmv limit.                         To further eliminate confusion, we
      other surface coating rules (or certain                    Response: Under the proposed rule,                 clarified that the alternative applies
      other rules) that already include                       whenever the contents of a process                    only to process vessels. Storage tanks
      affiliated operations as part of the                    vessel contain less than 5 percent HAP                are not considered because their control
      affected source under the applicable                    by weight, the owner or operator would                requirements are determined based on
      subpart because operations that are part                be exempt from all requirements for the               the size of the tank and the HAP partial
      of another affected source are exempt                   process vessel and related equipment.                 pressure, not whether the tank is used
      from the final subpart HHHHH                            Under the final rule, this provision has              for an individual product. Transfer
      according to § 63.7985(a)(4). One                       been replaced with a provision that                   operations are not considered because
      commenter’s assumption that this                        provides for compliance with the                      their control requirements are
      exemption is not limited to those                       stationary process vessel standards at                determined based on the total annual
      operations within another affected                      existing sources when the vessel is                   quantity of coating that is loaded and its
      source that must implement controls is                  being used to manufacture a coating that              weighted average partial pressure.
      correct. Preparations for painting                      contains less than 5 percent HAP by                   Equipment leaks also are not considered
      equipment or structures at a facility are               weight. Our rationale for allowing the                because the need for control is
      not part of a manufacturing process and                 mass limit as an alternative standard is              determined by the number of hours a
      thus are not subject to subpart HHHHH.                  based on an estimated equivalent                      particular component is in organic HAP
         Comment: Several commenters                          reduction in HAP emissions as                         service within the affected source, not
      recommended clarifying the provision                    compared to complying with the                        the specific product being produced.
      in § 63.7985(c)(3) of the proposed rule                 process vessel standards. Although we                 Also, we did not exempt wastewater
      that would exempt all equipment                         did not collect specific data on coatings             streams from process vessels smaller
      associated with a process that has less                 content, we reviewed information that                 than 250 gal because we have no
      than 5 percent HAP in process vessels.                  we collected in the development of                    evidence that such vessels are cleaned
      One commenter noted that this                           standards for other coating                           by a different procedure than larger
      provision will not exempt all water-                    manufacturing source categories. Based                vessels or that the wastewater streams
      based coating manufacturing because                     on these data, we concluded that we                   from such cleaning operations are kept
      the actual HAP content in the process                   could achieve equivalent reductions in                separate.
      vessel varies during the process. To be                 HAP emissions if coating manufacturers
                                                                                                                       We did not allow in the final rule a
      useful, this commenter stated the                       reduce the HAP content of final
                                                                                                                    de minimis exemption of 0.1 or 1 weight
      determination must be based on the                      products to less than 5 percent by
                                                                                                                    percent HAP for trace constituents. This
      HAP content of the final product.                       weight. In order to achieve equivalent
                                                                                                                    exemption is not relevant to the 5
      According to another commenter, the                     reductions of 75 percent for process
                                                                                                                    weight percent HAP product alternative
      exemption should be based on                            vessels, the average HAP content of
                                                                                                                    standard. Further, we do not feel that an
      ‘‘organic’’ HAP, and sources should be                  coatings would have to be greater than
                                                                                                                    additional de minimis or trace
      allowed to determine this percentage                    20 percent. Other data collection efforts
                                                                                                                    constituent exemption for compliance
      based on material safety data sheets                    support the conclusion. For example,
                                                                                                                    with the remaining standards is
      (MSDS) or other available information                   the average HAP levels in all the
      as an alternative to chemical analysis.                 solventborne coatings reported in the                 necessary.
      One commenter suggested that the                        metal can and wood building products                     Comment: One commenter
      exemption would be less confusing if it                 source categories are 32 and 28 percent,              recommended establishing applicability
      were applied to individual vessels                      respectively. On a consumption-                       based on the affected source rather than
      rather than a ‘‘coating process’’ because               weighted basis, the HAP content of                    the major source so that small coating
      equipment is generally associated with                  coatings in the metal can source                      manufacturing operations co-located
      a specific process vessel and the                       category is 20 percent. Further, although             with large surface coating sources are
      definition of ‘‘process’’ is too broad. One             the HAP content of many water-based                   not subject to subpart HHHHH.
      commenter also stated that if a process                 coatings is less than 5 percent by                       Response: We have not made the
      vessel is not subject to control because                weight, we did not include an explicit                suggested change because the definition
      its capacity is less than 250 gallons or                exemption for waterborne coatings                     of a ‘‘major source’’ encompasses an
      the HAP emissions are less than 50 parts                because the HAP content of some                       entire plant site without being
      per million by volume (ppmv), then it                   waterborne coatings could be relatively               subdivided according to industrial
      is also reasonable that no other                        high as long as the HAP is soluble in                 classifications or activities. This
      requirements should apply to any of the                 water.                                                definition is contained in section
      equipment associated with that process                     In developing this alternative, we are             112(a)(1) of the CAA, which includes
      vessel (i.e., the storage tank, equipment               persuaded by one commenter’s                          ‘‘any stationary source or group of
      leak, and wastewater standards).                        suggestion to apply it to all vessels that            stationary sources located within a
         To minimize the compliance burden,                   are associated with the manufacturing of              contiguous area and under common
      one commenter requested exemptions                      the final product. Although another                   control that emits or has the potential to
      for impurities and trace constituents                   commenter suggested that identifying                  emit considering controls, in the
      present in quantities less than 0.1                     all process vessels in a manufacturing                aggregate, 10 tpy or more of any HAP or
      percent by weight for carcinogens and                   process would be confusing, we think                  25 tpy or more of any combination of
      less than 1.0 percent by weight for all                 that this alternative would actually                  HAP.’’
      other HAP, values which are consistent                  simplify compliance for most owners                      Comment: One commenter requested
      with the levels that must be provided on                and operators. As long as the process                 an exemption for processes with
      MSDS. The commenter stated that this                    vessel meets the definition in the final              uncontrolled emissions less than 10,000
      would reduce the burden of determining                  rule, an owner or operator could comply               lb/yr.


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00007   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69170           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

         Response: We have not incorporated                   downstream formulation operations are                 ‘‘stationary source’’ or in the regulatory
      the requested exemption because it is                   distinct from the preceding synthesis                 definition of ‘‘affected source’’ states or
      not supported by the available data.                    process(es), (perhaps because the                     implies that each emission point or
         Comment: One commenter requested                     synthesized product is isolated and                   volume of emissions must be subjected
      an exemption for waterborne coatings.                   some of it is sold or transferred offsite),           to control requirements in standards
         Response: We have not included an                    then the formulation operations are                   promulgated under CAA section 112.
      explicit exemption for waterborne                       subject to subpart HHHHH, and the                        Further, even under the commenter’s
      coatings because the HAP content of a                   synthesis operations are subject to                   interpretation of ‘‘stationary source,’’
      waterborne coating could be relatively                  subpart FFFF. In the event that                       the Agency would still have discretion
      high as long as the HAP is soluble in                   equipment used for manufacturing                      in regulating individual emission
      water. However, a source can                            products in processes that are subject to             sources. Section 112(d)(1) of the CAA
      reformulate coatings to contain less than               subpart FFFF is also used for coating                 allows the Administrator to * * *
      5 percent HAP as a means of meeting                     manufacturing operations that are                     distinguish among classes, types, and
      the process vessel vent emission limits                 subject to subpart HHHHH, then the                    sizes of sources within a category or
      and work practice standards for existing                primary use of the equipment                          subcategory in establishing such
      sources.                                                determines applicability.                             standards * * *.’’ We interpret this
         Comment: One commenter requested                                                                           provision for the miscellaneous coating
      an exemption for low vapor pressure                     B. How Did We Develop the Standards?                  manufacturing NESHAP, as we have for
      HAP.                                                       Comment: According to one                          previous rules, as allowing emission
         Response: We did not provide an                      commenter, the lack of standards for all              limitations to be established for
      exemption for low vapor pressure HAP                    HAP is unlawful. The commenter cited                  subcategories of sources based on size or
      materials because we could not justify a                hydrogen chloride (HCl), hydrogen                     volume of materials processed at the
      no emissions reduction MACT floor for                   fluoride, chlorine, potassium                         affected source. Under the discretion
      these materials based on our                            compounds, and maleic and phthalic                    allowed by the CAA for the Agency to
      information. We did not collect                         anhydrides as examples of HAP that are                consider sizes of sources, we made the
      information that could be used to                       not regulated. Another commenter                      determination that certain small-
      support the concept that process vessels                recommended listing the HAP that are                  capacity and low-use operations (e.g.,
      containing only low vapor pressure                      subject to the final rule, or cross-                  smaller storage tanks) can be analyzed
      materials would not be controlled to the                referencing Table 2 in subpart F of the               separately for purposes of identifying
      same levels as those containing higher                  HON.                                                  the MACT floor and determining
      vapor pressure materials. Further, we                      Response: The standards in subpart                 whether beyond-the-floor requirements
      reviewed HAP storage tank throughput                    HHHHH apply to all HAP that are used                  are reasonable. In addition, our MACT
      at facilities that reported control of                  in coating manufacturing. Of the six                  floor determinations for certain
      process vessels, and noted that lower                   compounds cited by the first                          categories (e.g., stationary process
      vapor pressure HAP, such as glycol                      commenter, only HCl and phthalic                      vessels), which are set according to
      ethers and ethylene glycol, were also                   anhydride are listed in our database. All             section 112(d)(3) of the CAA, reflect the
      used at these facilities. However, for the              process vessels larger than 250 gallons               performance levels of the best-
      final rule, we have written the standard                that emit any HAP, including the six                  performing sources for which we had
      for stationary process vessels at existing              cited by the first commenter, must be                 information, including vapor pressure
      sources to require 75 percent reduction                 controlled. We did not list the HAP in                thresholds or cutoffs below which the
      only for HAP with a vapor pressure                      the final rule because the rule applies to            best-performing sources do not reduce
      greater than or equal to 0.6 kPa. We                    all HAP listed in the Clean Air Act.                  emissions.
      made this change based on a revised                        Comment: One commenter stated that                    In general, our MACT floor
      analysis that showed the total impacts                  the thresholds in the proposed subpart                determinations have focused on the
      of the regulatory alternative are                       HHHHH unlawfully exempt emission                      best-performing sources in each source
      unreasonable for HAP with vapor                         points from control. According to the                 category, and they consider add-on
      pressures less than 0.6 kPa. Thus, these                commenter, all emission points must be                control technologies as well as other
      HAP must be controlled to the MACT                      controlled.                                           practices that reduce emissions. As part
      floor level of 60 percent.                                 Response: We disagree that every                   of our information collection effort, we
         Comment: Three commenters                            emission point at a major source must                 requested information on emission
      requested clarification of how to                       be required to reduce emissions. First,               reduction measures. We generally did
      determine whether 40 CFR part 63,                       section 112(a) of the CAA defines                     not receive information indicating that,
      subpart FFFF, or 40 CFR part 63,                        ‘‘stationary source’’ (through reference              for the emission points covered by 40
      subpart HHHHH, applies to their                         to section 111(a)) as: * * * any                      CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH, sources
      operations. One commenter noted that                    building, structure, facility, or                     are currently reducing emissions
      the proposed definition of ‘‘coating                    installation which emits or may emit                  through measures other than control
      manufacturing’’ is expansive and would                  any air pollutant * * * .’’ (42 U.S.C.                technologies (e.g., by fuel switching or
      unnecessarily subject facilities to both                7412(a)(3) and 7411(a)(3)). The General               raw materials or process changes) in
      subparts.                                               Provisions for the MACT program                       sufficient numbers to support a MACT
         Response: If the product being                       define the term ‘‘affected source’’ as                floor based on such measures.
      manufactured is a coating, and the                      * * * the collection of equipment,                    Accordingly, our standards include a
      manufacturing steps involve blending,                   activities, or both within a single                   performance level that represents the
      mixing, diluting, and related                           contiguous area and under common                      level achieved by the best control
      formulation operations, without an                      control that is included in a section                 technology, and a threshold or cutoff
      intended reaction, then the process is                  112(c) source category or subcategory                 that represents the lowest emission
      subject to subpart HHHHH. If a reaction                 for which a section 112(d) standard or                potential that is controlled by the best
      as well as various other operations are                 other relevant standard is established                12 percent of sources. Because the
      involved, then the process typically is                 pursuant to section 112 * * *.’’ (40 CFR              miscellaneous coating manufacturing
      subject to subpart FFFF. However, if the                63.2). Nothing in the definition of                   source category is broad in terms of the


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00008   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                       69171

      numbers and types of processing                         of controlled vessels (i.e., 60 percent               most vessels are cleaned by hand, but
      operations that are covered, one                        versus 80 percent control, respectively),             even vessels that have automatic wash
      challenge was to develop a format by                    the commenter stated the mean is                      systems must be opened for inspections
      which all sources could be compared to                  appropriate for several reasons: (1)                  after cleaning.
      each other to establish the best-                       There are sufficient data points to use                  Response: We did not adjust the
      performing sources. The performance                     the mean, (2) 60 percent represents a                 MACT floors for portable or stationary
      level generally is of the format that can               real-world technology, (3) EPA claimed                vessels. For portable vessels, the MACT
      be applied to different types of control                in MACT floor memoranda that the                      floor is to equip each vessel larger than
      technology and processes and is                         mean is a better measure of the central               250 gal with a cover. Our data show that
      generally consistent with existing State                tendency of the data, (4) EPA indicated               less than 6 percent of portable vessels
      and local rules. Thus, different types of               during the stakeholder process that the               are equipped with add-on control
      control technology and emission levels                  mean would be used as it is                           devices, but over 90 percent are
      resulting from existing rules are                       representative of the industry and                    equipped with covers. We did not
      captured in our MACT floor analysis.                    consistent with Congress’ intent under                receive information regarding any other
      The cutoff allows owners and operators                  the CAA, and (5) EPA guidelines for                   emission reduction techniques besides
      that have reduced their emissions below                 MACT determinations under CAA                         the use of covers or add-on control
      a certain level using one or more                       section 112(j) state that the MACT floor              devices for portable vessels in responses
      methods, including process changes to                   should be based on the mean unless                    to our ICR request for such information.
      reduce or eliminate pollution at the                    there is a large discrepancy between the              Thus, we do not have information
      source, to comply without additional                    emission reductions achieved by                       indicating that a sufficient percentage of
      control. Both performance levels and                    available control options (which the                  sources to set a floor are using any
      cutoffs have been set to account for                    commenter indicated is not the case                   emission reduction techniques other
      variations in emission stream                           here because control efficiencies are                 than covers, and we cannot support a
      characteristics so that the standards can               uniformly distributed between 2 and 99                floor determination based on the use of
      be applied consistently across the                      percent). Numerous other commenters                   any other techniques.
      source category. This approach is                       simply stated that the MACT floor has                    Our database includes information for
      consistent with the language of CAA                     been adequately characterized, and                    4,628 stationary process vessels larger
      section 112(d)(3) that requires us to set               should not be revised                                 than 250 gal. Six percent of all
      the MACT floor based on the best-                          Nearly all of the commenters objected              stationary process vessels corresponds
      performing 12 percent of existing                       to the apparent requirement for 100
                                                                                                                    to a total of 278 vessels. A total of 368
      sources.                                                percent capture of emissions for the new
                                                                                                                    vessels are equipped with some type of
                                                              and existing source MACT floors for
      C. Standards for Process Vessels                                                                              add-on device, or about 8 percent. The
                                                              stationary process vessels, and they
         Comment: One commenter is not                                                                              average control of the best-performing
                                                              stated the floor control levels should
      convinced that the existing source                                                                            12 percent (60 percent reduction)
                                                              specify only the efficiency of the control
      MACT floor for portable vessels should                                                                        represents a technically feasible level of
                                                              device. They expressed particular
      be only a cover because some portable                                                                         control and, therefore, we disagree with
                                                              concern with a statement in the
      vessels have a cover plus add-on control                                                                      the assertion that the floor should be no
                                                              preamble to the proposed rule that
      devices, and the actual performance of                                                                        control. The average control efficiency
                                                              indicated covers must be sealed and
      a covered vessel varies depending on                    gasketed. The commenters noted that                   was determined for 368 vessels,
      the type of cover and other factors such                100 percent capture is not feasible (and,             including 278 controlled vessels and
      as the HAP content and vapor pressure                   therefore, not achieved in practice                   factoring in no control for the remaining
      of the material being processed.                        except possibly if using chemical                     187 top records.
      Similarly, the commenter also objected                  reaction type vessels and closed solids                  The commenters also contended that
      to the existing source MACT floor for                   charging systems) because covers often                reported efficiencies do not consider
      stationary process vessels, claiming that               must include an opening for an agitator               capture efficiency. Of the 378 vessels
      it does not reflect the actual                          shaft, and vessels must be opened                     that are controlled, over 278 (6 percent
      performance of the best performers, and                 periodically to take samples, add                     of the stationary process vessels)
      that we have not accounted for various                  material, and perform inspections. They               reported either direct ventilation to
      factors that affect the performance.                    also noted that this requirement                      control devices, reported closed vent
         Other commenters indicated that the                  contradicts our position in stakeholder               systems to control devices, or reported
      existing source MACT floor is too                       meetings and background memoranda,                    operating essentially 100 percent
      stringent, or at the very least the control             and they concluded that the information               capture (routing building exhausts to an
      level should not be increased from 60                   collection request (ICR) data do not                  incinerator a capture system) and
      percent to 80 percent. For example, one                 support a capture component to the                    control. Therefore, we concluded that it
      commenter is not convinced that 6                       floor (i.e., only information about the               is appropriate to set the existing source
      percent, or the average of the best                     control efficiency was requested). Even               MACT floor for stationary process
      performing 12 percent, are controlled                   if actual capture efficiencies are                    vessels larger than 250 gal on an overall
      because many of the controls are                        allowed, they noted that the proposed                 control efficiency based on the reported
      applied only to vessels with specific                   overall capture plus control efficiency of            efficiencies.
      characteristics rather than facility-wide.              95 percent for process vessels at new                    The new source MACT floors for
      Another commenter questioned the                        sources would be virtually impossible to              portable and stationary process vessels
      validity of averaging uncontrolled                      achieve because it effectively requires               larger than 250 gal are based on the best-
      sources with controlled sources in                      nearly 100 percent capture.                           performing source. For both portable
      developing the MACT floor, and                             Numerous commenters objected to the                and stationary process vessels, the best-
      concluded that the floor should be no                   requirement that emissions from                       performing source covers the vessels
      control. In response to a solicitation for              cleaning are subject to control, at least             and vents emissions through a closed-
      comment regarding the setting of the                    if the vessel does not have an automatic              vent system to a thermal incinerator
      floor based on the mean or the median                   wash system. One commenter noted that                 with an overall control efficiency of 95


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00009   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69172           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      percent. Thus, the MACT floors are                         Finally, we have not required control              emission stream characteristics to be
      based on these conditions.                              of cleaning that is accomplished                      unrealistic. Related to their concerns
         We recognize that basing MACT floors                 manually. However, emissions resulting                that 100 percent capture is infeasible,
      for stationary and portable vessels on                  from automatic wash systems are                       they noted that local exhaust ventilation
      capture and control does not overtly                    required to be considered and                         systems usually convey large volumes of
      consider fuel, materials, process, or                   controlled. Similarly, control is required            air to minimize worker exposure, reduce
      similar changes that could result in                    for emissions resulting from flushing of              the risk of fires, and contain dust. As a
      lower overall mass emissions. However,                  lines or other equipment with solvent at              result of the high air flow rates, they
      based on the information we have, we                    the end of a batch because these are                  noted that the HAP concentration is
      cannot accurately quantify a level of                   closed operations.                                    much lower than the 40,000 ppmv in
      mass emissions that could result from                      Comment: Most of the commenters                    our impacts analysis. Based on stack test
      such emission reduction techniques as a                 stated that the standard for stationary               data, one commenter stated that actual
      MACT floor and that could be achieved                   process vessels at existing sources                   concentrations are less than 1,200
      by all coating manufacturers given the                  should be set at the MACT floor.                      ppmv. Another commenter indicated
      variability in processing operations, the               According to the commenters, the cost                 the concentrations are in the hundreds
      scale of processing operations, and                     of the regulatory alternative is                      of ppmv. The commenters noted that for
      products manufactured.                                  unreasonable because our analysis                     toluene, the surrogate HAP used in our
         We did not specifically request                      overstated the uncontrolled emissions,                analysis, 40,000 ppmv is within the
      information for portable or stationary                  used unrealistic model plant and                      flammable range, which poses safety
      process vessels with capacities less than               emission stream characteristics, and                  concerns and would necessitate the use
      250 gal, and we do not have any such                    understated the costs.                                of expensive fire/explosion prevention
                                                                 The commenters disputed our                        equipment and inerting systems. One
      information. We set a MACT floor of no
                                                              estimate of uncontrolled emissions for a              commenter stated that xylene should be
      emissions reductions because we do not
                                                              number of reasons. Their primary                      used as the surrogate HAP because it is
      have information indicating that a
                                                              argument is that using the Emission                   now four times more prevalent than
      sufficient percentage of sources are
                                                              Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP)                  toluene. The commenters noted that the
      using emission reduction techniques or
                                                              equations would give a more accurate                  model included emissions only from
      add-on controls to enable us to set a                   estimate of the HAP emissions than the
      MACT floor.                                                                                                   filling, but emissions also result from
                                                              AP–42 VOC emission factor. They noted                 other process steps such as mixing, gas
         The MACT floor for stationary process                that EPA has identified the EIIP                      sweep, heat-up, holding, emptying, and
      vessels at existing sources is based on                 equations as the preferred method,                    cleaning. They also disagreed with the
      overall control. Thus, the final rule                   companies use them as the basis for title             assumption that a control device needs
      specifies that these process vessels must               V permits, States prefer them for                     to be sized to handle emissions from
      either be equipped with tightly-fitting                 permitting and compliance                             only 5 vessels at a time. For example,
      vented covers and closed vent systems                   demonstrations, and EPA specifies the                 one commenter indicated that many
      meeting the requirements of subpart SS                  use of similar equations in 40 CFR part               facilities have dozens of process vessels
      of 40 CFR part 63. We have decided to                   63, subpart GGG. Conversely, they noted               being filled simultaneously (as much as
      exempt some emissions releases that                     that the AP–42 VOC emission factor is                 50 to 75 percent of all vessels onsite).
      result from safety and hygiene practices                inappropriate because, typically, half or             Another commenter noted that each
      because it is unlikely that these vents                 less of the VOC is HAP; the factor is                 vessel would have to have its own
      would reach the 50 ppmv concentration                   meant to estimate emissions from the                  condenser because a common header
      level defined to be a process vessel vent.              entire process, not just stationary                   poses safety and product quality risks.
      The exemption also will relieve owners                  process vessels; and the industry has                 One commenter objected to the
      and operators from the burden of                        shifted to less volatile solvents in recent           assumption that condensers can be used
      demonstrating that they meet the                        years. One commenter provided data                    to control all process vessels because
      concentration level. Specifically, the                  showing that the EIIP methodology,                    water cooled condensers will not be
      definition of process vessel vent                       calibrated with stack testing, results in             effective for the low concentration (and
      excludes flexible elephant trunk                        emissions equal to about 0.2 to 0.6                   high flow) streams in the industry, and
      systems that draw ambient air (i.e,                     percent of HAP throughput. Another                    condensers are meant to operate for long
      systems that are not ducted, piped, or                  commenter also noted that our baseline                periods of time under steady-state
      otherwise connected to the unit                         emissions estimate exceeds facility-wide              conditions, not intermittently during
      operations) away from operators that                    Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) emissions               filling steps.
      could be exposed to fumes when vessels                  (which also include non-HAP, fugitives,                  According to this commenter, our cost
      are opened. As an alternative, capture                  emissions from portable vessels, and                  analysis included a number of errors
      efficiency must be considered in the                    emissions from other processes) by                    and deficiencies. For example, the
      overall control efficiency determination                factors between 3 and 36. The                         analysis did not include the cost to
      if vessels are not equipped with tightly-               commenter also does not believe that 5                replace existing vessels with chemical
      fitting vented covers and closed vent                   facilities generate half of the emissions             reaction type tanks and raw material
      systems. Opening of covers for addition                 in the source category. For example, the              addition equipment, which would be
      of materials, sampling, etc., is included               commenter contacted the facility in our               needed to even approach 100 percent
      as part of the capture efficiency                       database with the highest estimated                   capture. If cleaning emissions must be
      demonstration. For new sources, the                     emissions and determined that only 2                  controlled, the commenter indicated
      final rule requires the use of tightly-                 percent of the solvent throughput is                  that a cost for automatic wash systems
      fitting vented covers to controls;                      attributable to the manufacture of inks               must be included. Fire and safety
      determining capture is not an option                    and coatings; the remainder is                        instrumentation and systems would be
      because, as the commenters noted,                       associated with the distribution of paint             needed since the model operates with
      achieving 95 percent overall control                    thinners and paint reducers.                          toluene in the flammable range.
      would require nearly 100 percent                           The commenters considered many of                     Even if condensers are assumed to be
      capture.                                                the model plant parameters and                        applicable for all process vessels (which


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00010   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                       69173

      the commenter opposed), the                             characterizing the level of emissions for             material addition equipment, baghouses
      commenter noted the following                           nationwide impacts. And, although one                 or fire control system costs. We also
      concerns with the analysis: (1) Solvent                 commenter indicated that the EIIP                     excluded chemical reaction tanks and
      recovery is not feasible because the                    methodology would result in HAP                       raw material feed equipment because
      condensed solvent is contaminated with                  emissions between 0.2 and 0.6 percent                 they would not be needed when high air
      condensed water vapor (and must be                      of HAP throughput for his facilities, this            flow rates and a capture system are used
      disposed of as hazardous waste); (2) the                commenter also calculated a loss of 1.3               to collect and route emissions from the
      amount of coolant piping and valves per                 percent for one facility due to more                  existing tanks to a thermal incinerator.
      condenser is underestimated; (3)                        conservative assumptions associated                      The commenter apparently generated
      baghouses will be needed upstream of                    with that facility’s operations. While our            an industry-wide cost effectiveness
      the condenser to remove particulate if                  1 percent factor may be conservative, it              estimate for thermal oxidizers from
      solid materials are added to the process                was a reasonable value for the impacts                average flow and concentration value
      vessel; (4) two-stage rather than single                analysis. The commenters noted that the               ranges. The commenter did not provide
      stage condensers will be required to                    AP–42 VOC emission factor is                          enough information to methodically
      operate at the model operating                          inappropriate because, typically, half or             step through the procedure to arrive at
      temperature of 32°F; (5) the refrigeration              less than half of the VOC is HAP;                     the resulting value of $16,138/Mg. In
      unit needs to be large enough to service                however, because the factor is based on               fact, it was not clear whether the
      75 percent of the facility’s condensers;                HAP throughput, only the portion of                   commenter selected ranges of
      and (6) costs are needed for foundations                solvent that is HAP is considered, and                concentrations and flowrates
      and supports, electrical components,                    therefore, basing the emissions on HAP                corresponding to 36 stack test data
      instrumentation, insulation, site                       throughput appropriately limits the                   points and then calculated cost
      preparation, and buildings.                             estimates to HAP, not VOC. Regarding                  effectiveness values from the midpoints
         The commenter also stated the                        the comment that our baseline                         of these ranges or whether the
      analysis understates the incremental                    emissions estimate exceeds facility-wide              commenter calculated the cost
      cost effectiveness relative to the floor                TRI emissions, we note that one                       effectiveness of 36 stack test data points
      because it used uncontrolled emissions                  commenter indicated that baseline HAP                 and developed an arithmetic average.
      rather than baseline emissions; the                     emissions total 6.3 million pounds for                We note that the table supplied by the
      condenser count is incorrect for more                   all 127 facilities in the database, as                commenter identifying concentration
      than 30 facilities; the costs for covers                compared to our estimate of 13.5                      and flowrate ranges indicates that
      were not included for the vessels that do               million pounds, roughly a factor of two.              flowrates and concentrations were
      not currently have them; the results                    Because of the uncertainty associated                 considered to be independent of each
      reported in $/Mg are actually in $/ton;                 with estimation methods, and varying                  other and produced a counterintuitive
      and the saturation toluene concentration                operational practices from site to site,              result that flowrate and concentrations
      is 37,370 ppmv, not 40,000 ppmv. Based                  these estimates are reasonable.                       would be directly proportional, as
      on a sensitivity analysis that                                                                                opposed to inversely proportional. For
      incorporates some of these suggested                       Regarding assumptions made in our                  example, the low flow rate range
      changes and looks at a range of emission                cost analysis of the regulatory                       midpoint values were listed as 300
      stream flows, HAP concentrations, and                   alternative for stationary process                    cubic feet per minute (cfm) and 50
      control devices, the commenter                          vessels, we note that the low overall                 ppmv, while the high flowrate range
      estimated that costs are at least 5 to 20               control efficiency (75 percent) enables               midpoints were listed as 7,500 cfm and
      times higher than our estimate. The                     numerous control scenarios for                        1,750 ppmv. We would expect that as
      commenter noted that these estimates                    achieving compliance, including those                 flowrates increased, concentrations
      are conservatively low because they do                  scenarios where air flows are increased               would decrease, and we concluded that
      not include costs for chemical reaction                 to enable proper capture of emissions                 an analysis resulting from the use of
      tanks, raw material addition equipment,                 from opening in vessels. While we did                 these ranges would likely not represent
      and fire safety equipment; they also do                 not cost out this alternative for                     the actual emission stream
      not consider the impact of using a less                 presentation of impacts, it would likely              characteristics. Further, we estimated
      volatile surrogate HAP on emission                      be a scenario employed by owners and                  the cost effectiveness of incinerator
      reductions. Even without changing the                   operators. As discussed previously, the               controls for these 5 ranges and obtained
      elements in the analysis, the commenter                 two predominant types of control                      values ranging from $290,000/Mg for the
      stated that we should consider the                      devices are condensers and thermal                    300 cfm, 50 ppmv concentration stream
      average facility cost effectiveness value               incinerators. Therefore, to further                   to $400/Mg for the stream with 7,500
      rather than the nationwide value                        examine the cost effectiveness of the                 cfm and 1,750 ppmv, indicating a wide
      because a majority of the facilities in the             regulatory alternative, we evaluated the              range of cost effectiveness.
      analysis have incremental costs above                   cost effectiveness of applying a capture                 We reasoned that a more
      $3,500/Mg; typically, these facilities are              and control system using thermal                      representative evaluation would be
      small or produce predominately water-                   incineration. We started with the                     based on a selected model emission
      based coatings.                                         analyses generated by one commenter,                  stream. This model stream was based on
         Response: We agree that the EIIP                     which are based on EPA’s COST–AIR                     a common value resulting from the
      guidance is appropriate for use in                      control cost spreadsheets for                         histogram presented by the commenter;
      estimating emissions from coating                       regenerative thermal oxidizers and                    we selected as model emission stream
      manufacturing process sources. We did                   included the commenter’s estimated                    characteristics a flowrate of 5,000
      not use EIIP models because we did not                  installation costs for ductwork, auxiliary            standard cubic feet per minute (scfm)
      have the level of detail required to                    equipment, vapor collection systems                   waste gas and a concentration of 500
      conduct emission estimates from the                     and lids for tanks. The commenter also                ppmv. Our analysis indicated that the
      facilities in our database. We considered               noted that cost calculations did not                  cost effectiveness value for this model
      the 1 to 2 percent solvent throughput                   include chemical reaction type tanks to               stream would be $2,200/Mg, assuming
      values contained in the Chapter 5 AP–                   approach 100 percent capture,                         only 75 percent reduction of potential
      42 documentation to be adequate in                      automatic cleaning systems, raw                       HAP emission was achieved. Based on


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00011   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69174           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      this result, we concluded that an                       for the MACT floor alternative; our costs             following HAP: Toluene, xylene,
      evaluation of capture and control                       did not specifically assume that the                  cumene, phenol, and ethylene glycol.
      systems using thermal incineration                      condenser system rendering an outlet                  These compounds represent a range of
      would result in reasonable costs.                       gas temperature of 36°F would require                 vapor pressures for common HAP in the
         Our original analysis that was the                   a precooler; however, our conservative                industry. We found that the incremental
      basis for selecting the 75 percent                      approach to estimating condenser costs                cost impacts of going above the MACT
      regulatory alternative based on                         based on a minimum surface area would                 floor are unreasonable for HAP with
      condenser control is still valid and the                account for the precooler costs, since                vapor pressures less than that of
      total impacts, considering the emission                 the calculated surface area of the model              cumene. Therefore, we revised the
      reduction achieved as well as cost, non-                condenser system was lower than the                   regulatory alternative and standard for
      air quality health and environmental                    minimum size for which costs are                      stationary process vessels at existing
      impacts, and energy requirements, are                   available. Given all the cost elements,               sources to include a HAP vapor pressure
      reasonable. Thus, we continue to base                   we note that the significant factor in                threshold of 0.6 kPa at 25°C. Emissions
      the standard for stationary process                     annualized cost differences between the               of HAP with vapor pressures above the
      vessels at existing sources on the                      two alternatives is the recovery credit,              threshold must be controlled to the
      regulatory alternative. However, the                    which for the regulatory alternative was              regulatory alternative level of 75
      commenter has pointed out valid                         $37,063 while the recovery credit for the             percent, whereas HAP with lower vapor
      concerns regarding our assumptions.                     MACT floor alternative was $29,650.                   pressures must be controlled to the
      Upon review, we agree that we                           When subtracted from the total annual                 MACT floor level of 60 percent. About
      mistakenly overestimated reductions                     cost, the annualized cost for the                     1 percent of the total HAP throughput
      from the regulatory alternative by                      regulatory alternative was $8,038, while              in the industry consists of HAP with
      approximately 15 percent from the                       the annualized cost for the MACT floor                vapor pressures below the threshold;
      uncontrolled levels. Therefore, our                     alternative was $13,766. Because cost                 thus, we did not revise the incremental
      estimated total reductions for the                      effectiveness is expressed as total                   impacts for the regulatory alternative.
      regulatory alternative should be on the                 annualized cost divided by emissions                     Note that we could not do a similar
      order of 4,400 Mg/yr, not 5,000 Mg/yr.                  reductions, recovery credit factors in not            analysis for thermal incinerators
      The revised incremental HAP reduction                   only by lowering the total cost of the                because the efficiency of incinerators is
      achieved by the regulatory alternative is               option, but increases the denominator in              generally assumed at 98 percent, and
      about 1,000 Mg/yr, and it reduces costs                 the cost effectiveness term. The                      the analysis becomes dependent on
      by an estimated $130/Mg of HAP                          incremental difference between the two                assumptions made about incremental
      controlled. The incremental electricity                 models, and also between the                          costs of capture efficiency. Instead, we
      consumption to operate the refrigeration                nationwide impacts that were                          assumed that the incremental analysis
      unit for the condensers is about 1.7                    essentially extrapolated from these two               based on condenser control alone could
      million kilowatt hours per year (kWh/                   models, is negative. Further, the effect              also be used to justify the regulatory
      yr), and the fuel energy to generate the                of the recovery credit essentially drives             alternative.
      electricity is about 16 billion Btu/yr.                                                                          We examined the feasibility of a
                                                              this decision, and is valid for our
      Total CO, NOX, and SO2 emissions from                                                                         regulatory alternative for portable
                                                              analysis. We assumed that each vessel
      combustion of the additional fuel to                                                                          process vessels with capacities greater
                                                              would be equipped with a condenser
      generate the electricity is 14 Mg/yr.                                                                         than or equal to 250 gal at existing
                                                              and the condensed material could be
      There would be no wastewater, solid                                                                           sources that would require the same 75
                                                              returned directly to the vessel without
      waste, or other non-air quality health or                                                                     percent overall control as the regulatory
                                                              further refinement; we do not agree that              alternative for stationary process vessels
      environmental impacts.
         Regarding concerns expressed by the                  cross contamination would be a                        with capacities greater than or equal to
      commenter on the system design                          problem under this scenario; further,                 250 gal at existing sources. Using the
      requirements, such as the required size                 moisture generated from condensation                  same condenser cost analysis, we
      of the refrigeration units, the amount of               of humid air does not appear to be a                  concluded that the total impacts of this
      piping and valves per condenser, and                    concern currently as indicated by the                 option are unreasonable in light of the
      various installation cost elements, we                  predominance of air systems and lack of               emissions reductions achieved. The
      recognize that these costs could be                     nitrogen blanketing systems on storage                incremental HAP reduction achieved by
      higher, depending on the site specific                  tanks.                                                this beyond-the-floor option is
      situation. In general, the costs would                     The commenters suggested that our                  approximately 400 Mg/yr, and the
      increase for the MACT floor condenser                   cost analysis would have yielded                      incremental cost was estimated to be
      system as well as the regulatory                        different conclusions had we designed                 approximately $21,000/Mg of HAP
      alternative condenser system. The basis                 the model condensation systems for                    controlled. In addition, electricity
      for selecting the 75 percent regulatory                 xylene, rather than toluene. We agree                 consumption to operate refrigeration
      alternative is that the incremental cost                that cost effectiveness of implementing               units would increase from zero at the
      between the MACT floor of 60 percent                    the model condensation systems largely                MACT floor to nearly 2.0 million kwh/
      and the regulatory alternative is                       depends on emission potential, which                  yr. Fuel consumption (coal) to generate
      reasonable when considered in light of                  in turn varies according to the volatility            the electricity would increase by more
      the non-air quality health and                          of the HAP materials. Therefore, we                   than 19.0 billion Btu/yr; collectively,
      environmental impacts and energy                        decided to expand the commenter’s                     CO, NOx, and SO2 emissions would
      requirements. In our original analysis                  issue and determine the HAP materials                 increase by about 16.5 Mg/yr; and there
      based on condensation of toluene, the                   for which incremental costs for the 75                would be no wastewater, solid waste, or
      difference in total annual cost of the two              percent regulatory alternative are                    other non-air quality health or
      model systems, one rendering an exit                    reasonable. We conducted an additional                environmental impacts.
      gas temperature of 36°F and one                         analysis on a model set of emission                      We also evaluated a regulatory
      rendering an exit gas temperature of                    events consisting of identical processing             alternative for portable and stationary
      50°F, was about the same, $45,100 for                   steps, but processing a different HAP.                process vessels smaller than 250 gal at
      the regulatory alternative, and $43,417                 For the analysis we evaluated the                     existing sources that would require the


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00012   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                       69175

      same 75 percent overall control as the                  processes being run; and it should be                 sources’ controls and our consideration
      regulatory alternative for stationary                   available for use at anytime, not just                of whether sources are reducing
      process vessels larger than 250 gal at                  when demonstrating initial compliance.                emissions by other means besides
      existing sources. We do not know the                       Response: The final rule includes an               controls.
      number of such vessels or their size                    emissions averaging option for                           Regarding tank capacity cutoffs, we
      distribution. Therefore, we conducted                   stationary process vessels at existing                considered two subcategories of storage
      the analysis for a model 250 gal vessel                 sources that may address the                          tanks in our floor analysis: tanks with
      with a tightly-fitting vented cover at                  commenter’s concerns. To demonstrate                  capacities less than 10,000 gal and
      baseline that is used in the production                 initial compliance with the emissions                 storage tanks with capacities greater
      of a coating that is manufactured using                 averaging option, an owner or operator                than or equal to 10,000 gal. We did not
      toluene. As for the other analyses, we                  must estimate three sets of emissions for             specifically request information for
      assumed the vessel is controlled using                  each vessel in the averaging group. First,            storage tanks with capacities less than
      a condenser to meet the regulatory                      the owner or operator must determine                  10,000 gal, and we did not receive any
      alternative, and the condenser can be                   the uncontrolled emissions. Procedures                information about such smaller tanks.
      served by the same refrigeration unit as                for estimating uncontrolled emissions                 However, since the costs relative to the
      for the stationary process vessels. We                  are specified in § 63.1257(d)(2), except              amount of control achieved tend to
      concluded that the total impacts of this                that for purging events the final subpart             increase as the size of the storage tank
      alternative are unreasonable in light of                HHHHH specifies a procedure for                       decreases, we consider it highly
      the emission reduction achieved. The                    estimating the specific partial pressure              unlikely that the industry is reducing
      incremental HAP reduction achieved by                   of each HAP rather than allowing an                   emissions from tanks with capacities
      this beyond-the-floor alternative is 0.07               assumption of saturation or 25 percent                smaller than 10,000 gal when they are
      Mg/yr, and the incremental cost is over                 of saturation. Second, the owner or                   not reducing emissions from tanks with
      $25,000/Mg of HAP controlled. If the                    operator must estimate emissions from                 larger capacities. Thus, we concluded
      vessel at baseline does not have a                      each vessel in the averaging group as if              that the existing source and new source
      tightly-fitting vented cover, the baseline              it were controlled in accordance with                 MACT floors for storage tanks with
      emissions would be greater by an                        the percent reduction standard (i.e., 60              capacities less than 10,000 are no
      unknown amount, but the total costs                     percent or 75 percent reductions                      emissions reduction. We did not set
      would still be unreasonable. We also                    depending on the vapor pressure of the                beyond-the-floor standards for these
      assumed that there would be no                          HAP in the emission stream). Third, the               smaller tanks because the total impacts
      additional electricity or energy impacts                owner or operator must determine the                  to reduce emissions from storage tanks
      because they are based on sized                         actual emissions, which may range from                smaller than 20,000 gal were found to be
      refrigeration systems, and addition of                  uncontrolled for some vessels to control              unreasonable, and impacts for smaller
      one or more vessels smaller than 250 gal                levels significantly higher than those                tanks would be even less favorable.
                                                              determined in the previous step. The                     With respect to storage tanks with
      would not require additional
                                                              owner or operator must include these                  capacities greater than or equal to
      refrigeration capacity. Also, there would
                                                              data and calculations in the                          10,000 gal, fewer than 6 percent of the
      be no wastewater, solid waste, or other
                                                              precompliance report along with                       storage tanks in our database use
      non-air quality health or environmental
                                                              rationale for why the sum of the actual               controls or reduce emissions by any
      impacts.
                                                              emissions on a quarterly basis will be                other means. Thus, we concluded that
         Comment: One commenter requested                     less than the sum of the emissions if 60              the existing source MACT floor for all
      flexibility in the control requirements                 percent or 75 percent, as applicable,                 storage tanks with capacities greater
      for process vessels. The commenter                      were achieved for each individual                     than or equal to 10,000 gal is no
      noted that the proposed standard was                    vessel. To demonstrate ongoing                        emissions reduction.
      tailored to the use of condensers on                    compliance, the owner or operator must                   In setting the MACT floor for existing
      every process vessel, but it is not suited              track the number of batches produced,                 sources, we considered whether some
      for the use of other control technologies               calculate the quarterly actual emissions              facilities may implement emission
      or varying control levels among process                 and emissions under the regular percent               reduction measures to reduce emissions
      vessels. The commenter also urged us to                 reduction standard for each vessel, and               from storage tanks, instead of using
      provide flexible averaging provisions                   sum the two sets of quarterly emissions.              control technologies. Internal and
      that would allow different levels of                    Compliance is demonstrated if the sum                 external floating roofs are used to
      control on different vessels while                      of the actual emissions is lower than the             minimize emissions in many other
      achieving overall control equivalent to                 sum of emissions under the regular                    industries, and vapor balancing when
      that achieved by requiring the same                     percent reduction standard.                           filling the tank is another common
      control efficiency for each vessel.                                                                           technique in other industries. However,
      Furthermore, the commenter stated the                   D. Standards for Storage Tanks                        we did not obtain any information in
      proposed emissions averaging                              Comment: One commenter stated the                   the responses to the ICR or from other
      provisions are not useful because most                  MACT floor for storage tanks was                      resources that such measures are being
      vessels are not larger than 10,000                      determined incorrectly because we did                 used in the miscellaneous coating
      gallons; too few emission points are                    not consider the actual performance of                manufacturing industry. Another factor
      allowed in the average; it is too complex               scrubber controls. The commenter also                 that can affect the emissions level is the
      and burdensome; submitting a plan in                    stated that the standard must be revised              color of the tank, but we have no
      the precompliance report 18 months                      because tank capacity and HAP partial                 information to suggest that any facilities
      before the compliance date is infeasible                pressure cutoffs are illegal.                         are not already using the most favorable
      because facilities would not have                         Response: None of the storage tanks                 color scheme. Also, we have no
      determined how to comply by that date,                  containing organic HAP at the surveyed                information that any other measures are
      and the requirement to obtain approval                  facilities was controlled with a scrubber.            being used to reduce emissions.
      prior to making changes is cumbersome                   Therefore, the MACT floors for both                   Therefore, because we lack information
      and restricts operations; it does not                   existing and new sources are based on                 indicating that a sufficient number of
      account for changes in the mix of                       the actual reported performance of                    storage tanks employ measures other


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00013   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69176           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      than control technologies to reduce HAP                 storage tanks with capacities greater                 of all wastewater streams. One
      emissions to set a floor, we were unable                than or equal to 20,000 gal that store                commenter indicated that we have
      to set a MACT floor based on emission                   material with a HAP partial pressure                  obtained accurate information on 30
      reduction measures.                                     greater than or equal to 1.5 psia and 90              wastewater streams, and all of the data
         We examined two regulatory                           percent control of emissions from                     must be used in setting the floor,
      alternatives for storage tanks with                     storage tanks with capacities greater                 including data for streams that contain
      capacities greater than or equal to                     than or equal to 25,000 gal that store                less than 1,000 ppmw of HAP and
      10,000 gal at existing sources, both of                 material with a HAP partial pressure                  streams that contain only inorganic
      which would require the use of either a                 greater than or equal to 0.1 psia.                    HAP. Further, the commenter stated that
      floating roof or venting to a control                   However, another facility reduces                     flow is needed as well as concentration
      device that reduces emissions by 90                     emissions by 80 percent from storage                  to determine the best performers. Flow
      percent. The first alternative would                    tanks with capacities of 10,000 gal that              is needed to convert concentrations to
      apply to storage tanks with capacities                  store material with a HAP vapor                       mass loadings, and it, or total volume,
      greater than or equal to 20,000 gal that                pressure of 0.02 psia. Upon further                   has been used to determine applicability
      store material with a HAP partial                       consideration since proposal, we                      in past rules and is the determining
      pressure greater than or equal to 1.9                   determined that we cannot exclude                     factor in disposal costs. According to
      psia. The second alternative uses a size                these tanks from the floor analysis                   the commenter, our assumptions that
      cutoff of 10,000 gal with the same HAP                  simply because the HAP vapor pressure                 coating manufacturing facilities are only
      partial pressure cutoff. We set the                     is extremely low. Thus, the revised new               small quantity generators, and only the
      standard at the level of the first                      source MACT floor for storage tanks                   concentration drives the cost of
      regulatory alternative because,                         consists of venting through a closed-                 disposal, are incorrect. The commenter
      considering the level of emission                       vent system to a control device that                  noted that our database includes
      reduction achieved, the total impacts of                reduces HAP emissions by at least 80                  wastewater streams that have higher
      that alternative were determined to be                  percent for storage tanks with a capacity             flows than the five top-performing
      reasonable, whereas the total impacts of                greater than or equal to 10,000 gal that              streams that we used to set the MACT
      the second alternative were determined                  store material with a HAP partial                     floor, but these streams are not sent
      to be unreasonable. Specifically, the                   pressure greater than or equal to 0.02                offsite for treatment because the cost to
      first regulatory alternative reduces HAP                psia; the new source floor also consists              do so would be prohibitive. In addition,
      emissions by 2.5 Mg/yr at an                            of venting emissions through a closed-                if our assumption that concentration
      incremental cost of $2,700 to $4,900 per                vent system to a control device that                  drives the cost of disposal were true, the
      Mg of HAP controlled, depending on the                  reduces HAP emissions by at least 90                  commenter stated that other streams in
      characteristics of the tank. In addition,               percent for storage tanks with either                 the database with concentrations similar
      because this option can be achieved by                  capacities greater than or equal to                   to those of the top 5 streams would also
      using floating roofs, there are no non-air              20,000 gal that store material with a                 be treated offsite, but they are actually
      quality health or environmental                         HAP partial pressure greater than or                  treated onsite, sent to a publicly-owned
      impacts, including wastewater impacts                   equal to 0.1 psia or capacities greater               treatment works (POTW), or sent offsite
      and solid waste impacts, and no energy                  than or equal to 25,000 gal that store                for solidification. Taking all of these
      impacts. The second alternative reduces                 material with a HAP partial pressure                  factors into account, the commenter
      emissions by 7.5 Mg/yr at an                            greater than or equal to 1.5 psia. Each               concluded the floor should be no
      incremental cost of at least $17,000 per                of these new source standards reflects,               control.
      Mg of HAP controlled, depending on the                  or is equivalent to, the performance of
      characteristics of the tank. The second                 the best-controlled source because the                   The commenter also provided
      regulatory alternative also has no non-                 control levels for existing tanks increase            additional comments in the event that
      air quality health or environmental                     with both increasing tank capacity and                we maintain that a floor exists and
      impacts, including wastewater impacts                   increasing HAP partial pressure.                      develop a standard, despite their
      and solid waste impacts, and no energy                     The revised emission limits for                    objections noted above. First, the
      impacts for tanks that can be controlled                storage tanks at new sources are based                commenter stated that applicability
      with floating roofs. However, horizontal                on the MACT floor because the MACT                    thresholds must be based on the mean
      tanks (all of which in our database are                 floor is more stringent than the second               rather than the median because our
      smaller than 20,000 gal) must be                        regulatory alternative for existing                   hierarchy is to use the mean first when
      controlled with an add-on control                       sources, which we determined to have                  it results in a standard that matches real
      device such as a condenser. The                         unreasonable impacts.                                 world technology. Second, if the
      incremental electricity consumption to                                                                        standard still requires management and
                                                              E. Standards for Wastewater                           treatment procedures like those in the
      run the condensers and fuel energy
      consumption to generate electricity                       Comment: Four commenters                            HON, the commenter requested an
      would be 31,000 kwh/yr and 300                          disagreed with our determination that                 exemption from the steam stripping
      million Btu/yr, respectively. Total CO,                 the MACT floor for wastewater is HON-                 requirement for streams containing
      NOX, and SO2 emissions from                             equivalent management and treatment                   soluble HAP because steam stripping is
      combustion of additional fuel to                        procedures for wastewater that contains               inefficient and expensive for such
      generate the electricity would be about                 more than 4,000 ppmw of HAP listed in                 streams; the commenter also stated that
      0.26 Mg/yr. There would be no                           Table 9 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart G.                 enclosed sewers are unnecessary for
      wastewater, solid waste, or other non-air               One commenter stated that the floor                   such streams. Third, two commenters
      quality health and environmental                        should be recalculated to be based on                 requested that offsite RCRA waste
      impacts.                                                the actual performance of the best                    treatment facilities not be required to
         The new source MACT floor for                        sources, not simply set at the median                 certify that they will meet the
      storage tanks is based on the control                   concentration of controlled streams.                  requirements for wastewater in the final
      achieved by the best-performing source.                 According to one commenter, the floor                 rule because such facilities are already
      The proposed floor consisted of 90                      should be no control because no add-on                stringently controlled. One commenter
      percent control of emissions from                       control is used by more than 6 percent                was concerned that RCRA facilities may


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00014   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                        69177

      decline to accept wastewater if they are                4,000 ppmw and a load greater than or                 facilities, the final rule also allows
      unnecessarily burdened with                             equal to 750 lb/yr. We estimate that a                onsite or offsite treatment in an
      compliance requirements under the                       standard based on the MACT floor will                 enhanced biological treatment unit as an
      final rule. The commenter noted that a                  reduce HAP emissions by 12.9 Mg/yr                    effectively equivalent alternative for
      similar change was made recently to the                 (14.2 tpy) at a cost of $306,000 per year.            soluble HAP. This alternative also may
      NESHAP for Publicly Owned Treatment                        The revised new source MACT floor                  prove to be less costly than treatment as
      Works (POTW) in response to litigation.                 is based on the requirements for the best             a hazardous waste for high-volume
         Response: The miscellaneous coating                  performing stream, which is a stream                  wastewater streams. Finally, we agree
      manufacturing database contains ten                     that contains 1,600 ppmw and 12 lb/yr                 with the comment that Resource
      streams from nine facilities. The 30                    of partially soluble and soluble HAP.                 Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
      streams cited by one commenter was a                    Since this load is negligible, the new                facilities do not need to certify that they
      preliminary draft value that was                        source MACT floor consists of treatment               are meeting the requirements of subpart
      subsequently changed because it was                     as a hazardous waste for wastewater                   HHHHH; therefore, the final rule
      incorrect.                                              streams that contain partially soluble                requires affected sources that ship their
         After consideration of the comments,                 and soluble HAP at a concentration                    wastewater to an offsite facility for
      we decided to make two changes to the                   greater than or equal to 1,600 ppmw at                treatment as a hazardous waste to note
      MACT floor analysis. First, to simplify                 any load.                                             this fact along with the name of the
      the analysis, we have focused on only                      In setting the MACT floor, we                      facility to which the wastewater is
      the actual management and treatment                     considered whether some facilities may                shipped in their notification of
      techniques used for the top performing                  implement emission reduction measures                 compliance status report.
      five streams rather than calling them                   other than control technologies to
      HON-equivalent. All five of these                       reduce HAP emissions from wastewater.                 F. Standards for Equipment Leaks
      streams are collected and shipped                       We requested information on emission                     Comment: One commenter objected to
      offsite for destruction by combustion at                reduction measures in our CAA section                 our determination that the MACT floor
      a RCRA hazardous waste treatment                        114 information collection request.                   is a LDAR program. According to the
      facility. Second, we have decided that                  Several facilities reported that they have            commenter, the actual performance of
      specifying only a concentration cutoff                  implemented changes in the type or                    the best sources was not determined,
      for determining which streams are                       quantity of cleaning solution used, or in             and the selected program was simply
      subject to control is insufficient.                     the method of cleaning. However, we do                borrowed from another rulemaking. If
      Specifying only the concentration                       not know how effective these changes                  we make a determination of the floor
      means even very small streams would                     were in reducing HAP emissions, and                   based on the actual performance of
      be subject to control as long as the                    we have no information to conclude that               relevant sources, the commenter noted
      concentration of HAP listed on Table 9                  similar measures could be implemented                 that we must provide the public an
      of the HON (i.e., partially soluble and                 by the facilities that reported HAP in                opportunity to comment on it, or the
      soluble HAP in the final rule) is greater               their wastewater. Further, some HAP in                rule would be unlawful, and arbitrary
      than or equal to 4,000 ppmw, but this                   the wastewater is HAP that is used in                 and capricious.
      is inconsistent with the statutory                      coatings products, and this HAP cannot                   Response: The proposed floor was
      requirement to base the floor on the                    be reduced without impacting the                      based on actual performance, but this
      average of the top five streams. We                     coating products produced. Therefore,                 concept takes a different form for
      considered specifying either load or                    we were unable to set a MACT floor                    equipment leak controls than for
      flow rate in addition to the                            based on emission reduction measures                  controls on other types of emission
      concentration, and we decided that load                 other than treatment.                                 points because equipment leaks are
      is the best choice. For the top five                       We examined one regulatory                         essentially malfunctions, which are not
      streams, the load tracks better with the                alternative beyond the floor for existing             predictable. However, a program of
      concentration (i.e., ranking the                        sources that would require treatment as               inspections and repair will ensure that
      controlled streams by increasing load is                a hazardous waste for wastewater                      any leaks that do occur are identified
      the same as ranking by increasing                       containing partially soluble and soluble              and fixed. We rate the performance of
      concentration).                                         HAP at a concentration greater than or                different LDAR programs based on the
         Of the top five streams, the median                  equal to 1,000 ppmw and a load greater                type of leak detection method, leak
      stream has a HAP concentration of 4,000                 than or equal to 100 lb/yr. We                        definition, and leak frequency.
      ppmw and a HAP load of 750 lb/yr. We                    concluded that the total impacts of this              Specifically, performance is higher for
      continue to use the median rather than                  alternative are unreasonable because the              instrument-based programs (i.e., using
      the mean because the median better                      incremental cost would be about                       portable organic vapor analyzers and
      represents the central tendency of the                  $280,000/Mg; it would increase                        EPA Method 21 of Appendix A to 40
      data. The top five streams (as well as the              electricity consumption by 640 kwh/yr;                CFR part 60) than sensory programs,
      other five streams in the database) are                 increase fuel consumption by 182                      lower leak definitions, and increased
      skewed towards low concentrations;                      million Btu/yr; and increase CO, NOX,                 inspection frequency.
      three of the five have relatively similar               and SO2 emissions by 0.02 Mg/yr. There                   Based on the ICR responses from
      low concentrations, but the other two                   would be no wastewater or solid waste                 coating manufacturers, more than 12
      streams have concentrations ten or more                 impacts. Therefore, the standard for                  percent of the facilities are
      times higher. A mean would be closer                    wastewater in the final rule is based on              implementing some type of LDAR
      to the midpoint of the range, but it                    the revised MACT floor.                               program. One facility reported using an
      would not represent the bulk of the                        In addition, analyses for the HON and              organic vapor analyzer (OVA), a 10,000
      data. Therefore, the revised existing                   other projects concluded that enhanced                ppmv leak definition, and various
      source MACT floor for wastewater                        biotreatment for soluble HAP                          monitoring frequencies for the different
      consists of treatment as a hazardous                    compounds could achieve reductions as                 types of components; this program
      waste for all streams with partially                    high as 99 percent. Because wastewater                appears to be similar to the
      soluble and soluble HAP at a                            containing soluble HAP is generated at                requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart
      concentration greater than or equal to                  miscellaneous coating manufacturing                   TT (National Emission Standards for


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00015   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69178           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      Equipment Leaks—Control Level 1) and                    coatings processes generally use less                 a second step, we used the data from the
      40 CFR part 60, subpart VV (Standards                   volatile HAP, operate at lower                        three-facility screening study to
      of Performance for Equipment Leaks of                   temperatures and pressures, and all                   calculate average emission factors. Our
      VOC in the Synthetic Organic                            operation is in the liquid phase. The                 analysis resulted in average emission
      Chemicals Manufacturing Industry). The                  commenters considered coatings                        factors of 0.000412 kg/hr-source for
      others reported using a sensory-                        process conditions to be similar to those             valves, 0.0042 kg/hr-source for pumps,
      program, with most of them conducting                   for gasoline distribution facilities,                 and 0.000015 kg/hr-source for
      inspections monthly. No facilities are                  which they noted are required to                      connectors. When we applied these
      capturing all of their equipment leak                   comply with a sensory-based LDAR                      emission factors to our model plant that
      emissions and venting them through a                    program. To support their position that               was the basis for the cost analysis, we
      closed-vent system to a control device.                 leak frequencies and emission rates for               found that the uncontrolled HAP
      Thus, the MACT floor for existing                       coatings manufacturing processes are                  emissions are 0.70 tpy, versus the 4.03
      sources was determined to be a sensory-                 low, one commenter provided                           tpy that was used in the original
      based LDAR program with monthly                         monitoring data for 13 facilities in the              analysis. For comparison, if we had
      inspections of all components. The new                  industry, including bagging sample data               used the commenter’s calculated
      source MACT floor was determined to                     for a few of the pumps, valves, and                   emission factors, we would have
      be an LDAR program based on 40 CFR                      connectors at one facility.                           estimated 0.66 tpy HAP, a slightly lower
      part 63, subpart TT, consistent with the                   Response: We reviewed the leak data                value but well within the same order of
      program implemented by the best-                        submitted by the commenter for 13                     magnitude as the factor we developed.
      performing source.                                      facilities, including three facilities from           In either case, we note that the revised
         Comment: One commenter objected to                   which data was recently collected by a                estimate is only about 20 percent of the
      the standard being based on an LDAR                     fugitive emissions contractor. The three-             previous uncontrolled estimate.
      program because it is a work practice                   facility study was well documented and                   We revised our impacts calculation by
      standard rather than an emission limit.                 conducted by the same contractor and                  conservatively assuming that the
      According to the commenter, the CAA                     using the same monitoring instrument                  relative reductions achieved by the
      requires us to set an emission limit                    that was calibrated on methane. Data                  MACT floor sensory LDAR program and
      rather than a work practice standard                    from the remaining ten facilities was not             the regulatory alternative (40 CFR part
      unless it is not feasible to prescribe or               as well documented and in some cases,                 63, subpart UU program) would be the
      enforce an emission limit, and the                      the monitoring data appear to have been               same as assumed in prior analyses. For
      commenter found no evidence or                          based on various instruments and that                 the model facilities, our previous
      analysis in the record suggesting that it               were calibrated on compounds other                    analysis assumed a 29 percent reduction
      infeasible to do so.                                    than methane. While these data may                    from uncontrolled baseline for the
         Response: We determined that an                      have been adequate for the individual                 MACT floor and a 62 percent reduction
      LDAR program is the most reasonable                     facility purposes, we did not consider                for the subpart UU regulatory
      option for control of leaking                           them in our analysis because we felt                  alternative. We multiplied the
      components. Unlike other emission                       these data were not consistently                      previously estimated nationwide
      sources, leaking components are not                     obtained. The commenter also                          reductions of implementing the MACT
      deliberate emission sources but rather                  conducted a bagging study at one of the               floor and the regulatory alternative by
      result from mechanical limitations                      three plants for which screening data                 the ratio of model facility revised
      associated with process piping and                      was collected. Using the results of the               uncontrolled emission over the earlier
      machinery. A well-managed facility                      bagging study, the commenter                          estimate of uncontrolled emissions, or
      follows a preventive maintenance                        calculated emission factors that are                  0.7/4.03, to obtain revised emissions
      program to minimize leaks but in all                    0.00054 kilograms per hour (kg/hr)-                   reductions. We assumed that the capital
      practicality cannot guarantee that no                   source for valves, 0.0025 kg/hr-source                and total annual cost estimates would
      leaks will occur. Therefore, an emission                for pumps, and 0.0000422 kg/hr-source                 be unchanged from the previous
      standard for equipment leaks would be                   for connectors. In developing the                     analysis. The incremental cost
      difficult to enforce or prescribe. In order             emission factors, the commenter                       effectiveness of going beyond the floor
      to develop such an option, all processes                essentially took an arithmetic average of             using this analysis was estimated to be
      and equipment containing process                        the VOC emission rates for all                        $15,800, and there are essentially no
      piping that could potentially leak would                components in the bagging study.                      energy impacts or non-air quality health
      require complete capture and control.                      After reviewing the information, we                and environmental impacts associated
      While the practice of enclosing                         decided to recalculate the emission                   with the regulatory alternative.
      components and venting to control is                    factors according to the method                       Therefore, we cannot justify going
      allowed as an alternative to LDAR, it is                documented in both American                           beyond the floor in the final rule.
      not practiced except in limited cases.                  Petroleum Institute (API) and EPA
         Comment: Many commenters stated                      publications (‘‘Development of Fugitive               G. Standards for Transfer Operations
      the standard should be based on the                     Emission Factors for Petroleum                           Comment: One commenter stated we
      MACT floor (i.e., a sensory-based LDAR                  Marketing Terminals,’’ Publication                    must set a MACT floor for transfer
      program). According to the commenters,                  Number 4588, March 1993, Prepared by                  operations at existing sources.
      we assumed leak frequencies and leak                    Radian Corporation for API; and                       According to the commenter, not setting
      rates that are too high and costs that are              ‘‘Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission                a MACT floor because no State
      too low; changing these assumptions                     Estimates,’’ EPA Publication EPA–453/                 regulations apply to transfer operations
      will show the regulatory alternative (i.e.,             R–95–017, November 1995). Using the                   is unlawful.
      an LDAR program requiring monitoring                    bagging study and the corresponding                      Response: In setting the MACT floor
      using Method 21) is not cost effective.                 screening data, we developed emission                 for existing sources, we considered the
      According to the commenters, the                        rate equations for pumps, valves, and                 available information. We did not
      SOCMI average factors are not                           connectors that relate the VOC emission               specifically request information for
      representative of the coatings                          rate (in kg/hr) to the average screening              transfer operations in our CAA section
      manufacturing industry because                          value (in ppmv) for each component. As                114 information request. Based on


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00016   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                      69179

      follow-up conversations with                            equipment such as a precooler,                        scenarios evaluated by the commenter
      representatives from five facilities with               ductwork, a fan, and pump for collected               would be subject to control under the
      high solvent throughput rates that                      solvent; and (6) conduct the analysis                 standard. However, we provide the
      potentially are the most likely to control              over a range of coating throughput rates              following discussion of the analysis in
      emissions from transfer operations, we                  to bracket the actual operations in the               the event that a facility may expand
      determined that these facilities are not                industry. Taking these changes into                   production beyond the rates used in the
      controlling their emissions from transfer               account, the commenter estimated a cost               commenter’s analysis, or the quantity of
      operations. We also examined State                      of more than $30,000/Mg for bulk                      HAP in their product is higher than the
      regulations and determined that they                    loading tank trucks at rates between 1.8              average value that we used.
      apply only to throughput rates above                    million gal/yr and 7.3 million gal/yr.                   In our analysis, we assumed the
      those at coating manufacturing facilities,              Another commenter stated that the                     emission stream is saturated because
      and they apply only to loading of tank                  standard should be no control.                        emissions occur only as a result of vapor
      trucks and railcars, which is less                         Response: It appears that the first                displacement, and the vent from the
      common than filling of smaller                          commenter thinks we used the results of               tank truck or rail car can be hard-piped
      containers at coating manufacturing                     the impacts analysis for one facility as              to a control device. Because our analysis
      facilities. There are no other known                    the basis for our decision to set the                 assumes that the control is a condenser
      means by which sources may be                           existing and new source standards at a                with coolant supplied from the same
      reducing emissions from transfer                        level beyond the floor. This is not                   refrigeration unit that we assumed
      operations. Therefore, we concluded                     correct. We actually conducted two                    would be used with condensers for
      that the MACT floor for transfer                        analyses. The first was a sensitivity                 process vessel emissions, we did not
      operations at existing sources is no                    analysis, comparable to that suggested                include the cost of a separate
      emissions reductions. Because we lack                   by the commenter, to determine the                    refrigeration unit in this analysis. We
      information indicating that any source                  characteristics of emission streams for               also included a smaller maintenance
      is implementing or required to                          which the total impacts associated with               labor factor than would be used for a
      implement any measures to reduce HAP                    a regulatory alternative that reduces                 separate refrigerated condenser system.
      emissions from transfer operations, we                  emissions by 75 percent (the same level               These assumptions mean the costs for
      concluded that the new source MACT                      as the standard for stationary process                overhead, taxes, and capital recovery are
      floor also is no emissions reductions.                  vessels at existing sources) was                      lower in our analysis than the
                                                              reasonable. The second analysis                       commenter’s.
         Comment: One commenter opposed                       involved estimating the impacts for
      the beyond-the-floor standard for                                                                                Although we agree that adding costs
                                                              existing facilities that met the
      existing and new sources. This                                                                                for a precooler, ductwork, and a pump
                                                              characteristics from the first analysis.
      commenter also claimed that we have                        Based on the results of our sensitivity            would be reasonable, we note that the
      not demonstrated that emissions from                    analysis, we concluded that the total                 overall cost of the auxiliary equipment
      transfer operations warrant regulation                  impacts are reasonable in light of the                in our analysis equals more than 50
      because the facility on which impacts                   emissions reductions achieved if the                  percent of the cost for all auxiliary
      were estimated is not representative of                 coating products that are bulk loaded                 equipment in the commenter’s analysis,
      the industry. The commenter contacted                   contain at least 3.0 million gal/yr of                even though we have a much smaller
      that facility and learned they primarily                HAP with a partial pressure of at least               condenser. Furthermore, based on the
      repackage and distribute paint stripper,                1.5 psia. The incremental HAP                         commenter’s data, it appears that we
      thinners, and spray gun cleaning                        reduction achieved to meet the                        overestimated the cost of the condenser
      solvent. According to the commenter,                    regulatory alternative for a model                    and waste solvent storage tank, which
      we generally overestimated emissions                    facility with these characteristics was               offsets our lack of costs for other
      from transfer operations because we                     estimated to be 10.8 Mg/yr, and the                   auxiliary equipment.
      assumed that the industry transfers pure                incremental cost was estimated to be                     We assumed a fill rate of 30 gal/min,
      solvents or mixtures with high vapor                    $3,200/Mg of HAP removed. These                       which we consider to be consistent with
      pressures when in fact the industry                     estimates assume the emissions are                    the commenter’s suggested rate of 25
      transfers primarily materials with low                  controlled using a condenser, and that                gal/min. This rate also defines the gas
      vapor pressures, including waterborne                   the refrigeration unit used in the process            flow into the condenser in our analysis
      products. Furthermore, the commenter                    vessels analysis can be replaced by one               because the system can be hard-piped,
      stated that the regulatory alternative                  with a slightly larger capacity to                    and there is no need to include
      cannot be justified based on cost                       accommodate all of the condensers. The                supplemental dilution air at a rate 25
      because the impacts are based on                        incremental electricity consumption to                times the flow of the displaced volume.
      incorrect assumptions. For example, the                 operate the enlarged refrigeration unit is            As the commenter noted, we assumed
      commenter suggested the following                       3,200 kwh/yr, and the incremental fuel                the coating product consists only of
      changes: (1) Use the AP–42 saturation                   energy consumption to generate the                    HAP solvent and solids. This was done
      factor of 0.6 for submerged loading in                  electricity is 31 million Btu per year.               to simplify the analysis. Also, products
      dedicated vapor balance service instead                 Total CO, NOx, and SO 2 emissions from                that contain little HAP or less volatile
      of the assumption that displaced vapors                 combustion of the additional fuel is 0.03             HAP are not likely to meet the
      are saturated; (2) use a tank truck filling             Mg/yr. The condensed HAP would be a                   thresholds that we set. Finally, we note
      rate of 25 gal/min instead of 150 gallons               hazardous waste. There would be no                    that our analysis likely overestimates
      per minute (gal/min); (3) use                           wastewater or other non-air quality                   the actual costs because we assumed a
      characteristics of toluene (or better yet,              health or environmental impacts.                      waste disposal unit cost four times
      xylene) instead of an arbitrary HAP with                   At the maximum product loading                     higher than the cost the commenter
      a molecular weight of 80 and a vapor                    volume cited by the commenter, we                     considers to be realistic. Therefore, we
      pressure of 3.93 psia; (4) use a gas flow               estimate the HAP or solvent throughput                maintain that for transfer operations
      rate of 100 scfm instead of less than 4                 would be about 2.0 million gal/yr (i.e.,              meeting the specified flow rate and
      scfm; (5) include capital costs for a                   based on an average 1.75 lb HAP/gal                   partial pressure levels in the regulatory
      refrigeration unit and auxiliary                        coating); thus, none of the bulk loading              alternative, the incremental cost to


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00017   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69180           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      control emissions (relative to the floor of             meet the surface coating MACT will                    compliance to be demonstrated by
      no emissions reduction) is reasonable.                  reduce HAP content of coatings by                     documenting operation at a suitable
        In our second analysis, we searched                   265,000 tpy, which also translates into               outlet temperature, but the commenter
      the database for any facilities with HAP                the same reduction in HAP throughput                  recommended modifying the option to
      throughput and partial pressure that                    for the manufacturing processes.                      consider the combined effect of covers
      meet the cutoffs established for the                    Assuming 0.5 to 1.0 percent of the                    and other vessel sealing devices as well
      regulatory alternative. We identified                   throughput is emitted during                          as the efficiency of the condenser.
      only one facility that potentially met the              manufacturing means this reduction in                    Response: Without additional details
      criteria. The estimated impacts for this                throughput has already achieved a                     regarding operation of the equipment,
      facility are comparable to those for the                significant fraction of the expected                  characteristics of the gas stream(s), and
      model facility. Assuming the                            reductions under subpart HHHHH.                       modifications to the testing protocol
      commenter is correct that most of the                   Other changes that have reduced                       that have already been attempted, we
      reported throughput at this facility is                 emissions include the shift to using low              cannot provide constructive suggestions
      not associated with coating                             vapor pressure solvents, making                       for modifying the sampling methods.
      manufacturing, then the impacts of the                  coatings exclusively in one vessel, and               However, we note that performance
      standard may be lower than we                           the production of smaller batch sizes                 testing is only one of three options for
      estimated.                                              with shorter lead times. Finally, the                 demonstrating initial compliance for
      H. Pollution Prevention                                 commenters noted that the industry has                condensers. As the commenter
                                                              undertaken various voluntary efforts to               indicated, a second option is to
         Comment: One commenter stated that                   reduce emissions including the paint                  demonstrate that the condenser operates
      the exemption for equipment that                        industry’s Coatings Care program, ACC’s               below a specified temperature, where
      contain less than 5 percent HAP is not                  Responsible Care program, EPA’s                       the required level is based on the HAP
      a viable pollution prevention                           National Environmental Track program,                 partial pressure of the gas stream
      alternative. Several commenters                         and various State and local programs.
      consider the lack of a viable pollution                                                                       entering the condenser. The third option
                                                                Response: We do not agree that                      is to determine the percent reduction
      prevention alternative to be a serious                  facilities can demonstrate that any of the
      shortcoming in the rule as proposed,                                                                          based on calculations of the
                                                              suggested alternatives are comparable to              uncontrolled and controlled emissions
      and they suggested several options for                  the specified emission standards. A
      consideration. First, numerous                                                                                using the equations specified in
                                                              percent reduction in the HAP content of               § 63.1257(d).
      commenters favored an option that                       products may not necessarily yield an
      allows manufacturers to take credit for                 equivalent percent reduction in                       J. Ongoing Compliance
      reductions achieved by voluntarily                      emissions. A format such as a
      choosing to manufacture lower HAP                                                                                Comment: According to one
                                                              demonstration in reduction of HAP                     commenter, the monitoring provisions
      coatings or making other changes in                     content at coatings manufacturers is not
      production technology. Second, two                                                                            are arbitrary and capricious because
                                                              easily linked to overall HAP usage upon
      commenters suggested exempting any                                                                            they exempt sources with the greatest
                                                              application.
      compliance coating manufacturing from                                                                         emissions (i.e., those that fall outside of
      subpart HHHHH if the facility certifies                 I. Initial Compliance                                 the MACT floor due to size have the
      that the coatings are manufactured to                      Comment: One commenter has                         loosest monitoring).
      meet the surface coating rules. Third,                  encountered difficulty in applying                       Response: We disagree with the
      one commenter suggested that we                         existing EPA stack sampling methods to                commenter’s assertions. The final rule,
      consider allowing delayed                               determine condenser inlet                             like the proposed rule, requires
      implementation of subpart HHHHH or                      concentrations of VOC and HAP for use                 monitoring of all control devices. In
      provide an opt-out provision for                        in demonstrating the control efficiency               some cases, to minimize the burden on
      facilities whose emissions drop below                   of the condenser. The commenter                       small operations (e.g., small control
      major source thresholds; this would                     manufactures adhesives and sealants in                devices controlling process vessel
      minimize the impact of the ‘‘once-in,                   closed vessels to which solvent is                    vents), the final rule has different
      always-in’’ policy. Fourth, if none of the              introduced through closed piping                      monitoring requirements for lower-
      preceding options is acceptable, one                    systems, and solids are introduced via                emitting sources; however, these
      commenter requested that the                            closed screw conveyors. Nitrogen is                   sources are not sources with the greatest
      stringency of the standards be reduced                  used to purge the conveyors and vessels,              HAP emissions as asserted by the
      because the industry has already                        and the exhaust gas is vented to a                    commenter.
      achieved reductions as great as or                      chilled water condenser. The                             Comment: One commenter considered
      greater than those expected by the                      commenter noted that the vapor space                  the proposed quality assurance/quality
      proposed standards. Many commenters                     in the process vessels is typically                   control (QA/QC) requirements for
      cited numerous changes in the industry                  saturated with solvent vapor, which                   continuous parameter monitors to be
      over the past few years that have                       quickly overwhelms the sampling                       unduly burdensome and stated that they
      reduced emissions from coating                          equipment. The commenter noted that                   contravene existing EPA standards and
      manufacturing and have not been                         the sampling equipment also artificially              test methods. The commenter
      accounted for in setting the standards.                 increases the emissions by drawing off                recommended that sources be required
      For example, the shift in production to                 vapor from the precondenser headspace                 to develop preventive maintenance
      waterborne, UV cure, and high solids                    that would not otherwise represent                    programs that are based on
      coatings, some of which has been driven                 emissions. Furthermore, the commenter                 manufacturer’s recommendations and
      by other regulatory requirements,                       stated that the method and volume of                  actual operating/maintenance history of
      contribute to reducing emissions from                   nitrogen inerting dramatically affects                the instruments. Another commenter
      coating manufacturing as well as from                   the sampling effectiveness without                    recommended adding a provision that
      coating application. One commenter                      actually altering total emissions.                    allows sources to request approval,
      estimated that the shift to                             Therefore, the commenter supported the                using the precompliance report, of
      manufacturing compliant coatings to                     proposed option that would allow                      alternatives to the QA/QC procedures


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00018   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                        69181

      specified in § 63.8035 of the proposed                  should not be unduly burdensome.                      position that sources’ compliance with
      rule.                                                   Having this information will help the                 SSMP requirements in lieu of applicable
        Response: The final rule references                   regulatory authorities and the public                 emission standards is permissible only
      the QA/QC requirements for continuous                   better understand what is being                       where violations of emission limitations
      parameter monitoring systems (CPMS)                     regulated, especially since a source’s                are unavoidable. As stated in the
      in 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS. We                       initial notification may be submitted                 preamble to the final amendments to the
      deleted the proposed requirements for                   before its title V permit is issued or                General Provisions, ‘‘we believe that we
      the same reasons we decided not to                      renewed.                                              have discretion to make reasonable
      implement similar proposed QA/QC                          Comment: Three commenters                           distinctions concerning those particular
      requirements in subpart SS (67 FR                       requested that the notification of                    activities to which the emission
      46260, July 12, 2002). Specifically, we                 compliance status report be due no                    limitations in a MACT standard apply
      are currently developing performance                    earlier than 150 days or 180 days after               * * *. However, we note that the
      specifications for CPMS to be followed                  the compliance date, as in other rules                general duty to minimize emissions is
      by owners and operators of all sources                  and the General Provisions. According                 intended to be a legally enforceable duty
      subject to standards under 40 CFR part                  to the commenters, facilities will need               which applies when the emission
      63, which includes subpart HHHHH.                       the full 3 years (if not longer) after the            limitations in a MACT standard do not
      Also, subpart SS currently specifies                    promulgation date to respond to actions               apply, thereby limiting exceedances of
      requirements for CPMS, and the                          taken by their customers and to evaluate              generally applicable emission
      requirements of subpart SS are                          their own compliance options,                         limitations to those instances where
      referenced by the final rule. Even                      particularly to determine whether they                they cannot be reasonably avoided.’’ We
      though they may not be as specific as                   can make changes such that they are no                further explained that the general duty
      those proposed, we decided it would be                  longer major sources.                                 to minimize emissions requires that
      premature to promulgate performance                       Response: We accept the argument                    owners or operators review their SSMP
      specifications for subpart HHHHH when                   that some facilities may need the full 3              on an ongoing basis and make
      the performance specifications that                     years after the effective date to bring               appropriate improvements to ensure
      would ultimately be promulgated for all                 controls online or to make product                    that excess emissions are avoided.
      40 CFR part 63 may be significantly                     formulation changes to meet new
                                                                                                                       Comment: Two commenters
      different. Until those performance                      customer requirements in response to
                                                                                                                    recommended that ‘‘startup’’ be defined
      specifications are ready, we consider the               the surface coating MACT rules.
                                                                                                                    as in the Amino and Phenolic Resins
      requirements in subpart SS to be the                    Therefore, we have decided to change
                                                                                                                    NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart
      best choice because they are consistent                 the due date for the notification of
                                                                                                                    OOO). According to the commenters,
      with other rules applied to source                      compliance status report. In the final
                                                                                                                    the proposed definition more accurately
      categories containing similar control                   rule, the report is due no later than 150
                                                                                                                    defines a ‘‘new process.’’
      and monitoring equipment as in this                     days after the compliance date, as in
                                                              many other rules.                                        Response: We clarified the definition
      source category. Further, references to
      these standard standards streamline                                                                           of ‘‘startup’’ for the final rule. However,
                                                              L. Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction                  we did not use the definition from the
      compliance requirements for facilities
      with operations in numerous source                         Comment: According to one                          Amino and Phenolic Resins final rule
      categories. The procedures in subpart                   commenter, the startup, shutdown, and                 because we do not consider the
      SS require monitoring equipment to be                   malfunction (SSM) provisions are                      language regarding flexible operation
      installed, calibrated, maintained, and                  unlawful because they allow sources to                units and continuous processes to be
      operated according to manufacturer’s                    avoid enforcement actions merely by                   appropriate for the miscellaneous
      specifications or other written                         complying with their startup, shutdown,               coatings manufacturing source category.
      procedures that provide adequate                        and malfunction plan (SSMP), but the                  For the final rule, we removed the term
      assurance that the equipment would                      CAA requires compliance continuously                  ‘‘family of coatings,’’ and we removed
      reasonably be expected to monitor                       except for unavoidable deviations                     the list of actions that are not startup so
      accurately. These provisions are                        during SSM.                                           that the definition focuses only on items
      consistent with the commenters’                            Response: We recently adopted final                that are startup. In addition, since it is
      suggestions.                                            amendments to the General Provisions                  possible that actions taken to bring
                                                              which address the concerns raised by                  equipment back online after it has been
      K. Recordkeeping and Reporting                          the commenter (68 FR 32586, May 30,                   configured and used to produce a
        Comment: According to one                             2003). The final amendments clarify                   different product, we also decided to
      commenter, the initial notification                     that § 63.6(e)(1)(i) establishes a general            specify that the first time equipment is
      requirements are unnecessary because                    duty to minimize emissions. During a                  put into operation at the start of a
      facilities in the miscellaneous coating                 period of SSM, that general duty                      campaign, even if the same product has
      source category have already submitted                  requires an owner or operator to reduce               been produced in the past, is startup if
      an initial notification under CAA                       emissions to the greatest extent                      the actions taken differ from routine
      section 112(j). Another commenter                       consistent with safety and good air                   operation.
      considers the notification to be                        pollution control practices. However,                    Comment: One commenter
      unnecessary because it is already                       ‘‘during an SSM event, the general duty               recommended that we clearly apply the
      required under title V.                                 to minimize emissions does not require                SSMP to the emission control
        Response: The requirement to submit                   an owner or operator to achieve the                   equipment rather than to individual
      an initial notification is part of the                  levels required by the applicable MACT                process vessels on a batch to batch
      General Provisions, which apply to all                  standard at other times, or to make                   basis. According to the commenter,
      NESHAP. If the required information is                  further efforts to reduce emissions if                tracking the startup and shutdown of
      already in the sources’ title V permit                  such levels have been successfully                    individual process vessels would
      applications, the requirement for                       achieved.’’ As discussed in the                       require thousands of records, it would
      sources to copy this information into                   preamble to the final amendments, we                  be nearly impossible to insure that all
      their one-time initial notifications                    disagree with the commenter’s legal                   information is collected properly, and


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00019   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69182           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      the tracking adds no environmental                      otherwise be met. Furthermore,                        environment, public health or safety, or
      value.                                                  although a deviation may occur for a                  State, local, or tribal governments or
         Response: Startup and shutdown do                    day during which an SSM event also                    communities;
      apply to control equipment because the                  occurs, the recordkeeping and reporting                 (2) create a serious inconsistency or
      definitions specify that they apply to                  requirements associated with the                      otherwise interfere with an action taken
      ‘‘equipment required or used to comply                  deviation differ from the recordkeeping               or planned by another agency;
      with this subpart.’’ Similarly, the                     and reporting requirements for the SSM                  (3) materially alter the budgetary
      definition of ‘‘malfunction’’ in § 63.2                 event; thus, there is no redundancy.                  impact of entitlement, grants, user fees,
      specifies that it applies to control                    Information about all periods during                  or loan programs or the rights and
      equipment. However, startup,                            which an emission limit, operating                    obligations of recipients thereof; or
      shutdown, and malfunction also apply                    limit, or work practice standard is not                 (4) raise novel legal or policy issues
      to the processing equipment. We                         met and the reasons for noncompliance                 arising out of legal mandates, the
      disagree with the commenter’s                           is important. Thus, we have not                       President’s priorities, or the principles
      characterization that applying startup,                 changed the intent of the requirements                set forth in the Executive Order.
      shutdown, and malfunction to process                    for the final rule.                                     Pursuant to the terms of Executive
      vessels will result in the need to                         Comment: One commenter considers                   Order 12866, OMB has notified EPA
      generate thousands of records because                   the proposed requirement for immediate                that it considers this a ‘‘significant
      startup only applies to new sources,                    reporting of actions taken that are                   regulatory action’’ within the meaning
      new equipment, and possibly the start                   inconsistent with the SSMP to be overly               of the Executive Order. The EPA has
      of campaigns; and malfunctions, by                      burdensome. According to the                          submitted this action to OMB for
      definition, are infrequent failures of                  commenter, reporting these events with                review. Changes made in response to
      equipment. In addition, the definition of               other SSM events on a semi-annual                     OMB suggestions or recommendations
      shutdown has been changed to specify                    basis in the compliance report is                     will be documented in the public
      that shutdown applies to the cessation                  sufficient, and the commenter noted                   record.
      of operation of process vessels only if                 that this approach has been used in 40                B. Paperwork Reduction Act
      the steps taken to cease operation differ               CFR part 63, subpart JJJ (Polymers and
      from routine procedures for removing                                                                            The information collection
                                                              Resins) and subpart PPP (Polyether
      the vessel or equipment from service.                                                                         requirements in the final rule have been
                                                              Polyols).
      This change also makes the definition of                                                                      submitted for approval to OMB under
                                                                 Response: We agree that immediate
      shutdown consistent with the revised                                                                          the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
                                                              notifications are not necessary. The
      definition of startup.                                                                                        3501 et seq. The information
                                                              industries covered by this source
         Comment: Several commenters                                                                                requirements are not enforceable until
                                                              category generally have extensive upset/
      recommended excluding periods of                                                                              OMB approves them. The ICR number is
                                                              SSM reporting requirements under the
      SSM from the definition of ‘‘deviation’’                                                                      2115.01.
                                                              Comprehensive Environmental
      and reporting deviations separately from                                                                        The information requirements are
                                                              Response, Compensation, and Liability
      reporting of SSM events. One                                                                                  based on notification, recordkeeping,
                                                              Act and state reporting requirements
      commenter noted that periods of SSM                                                                           and reporting requirements in the
                                                              that should be adequate in supplying
      are exempt from compliance under the                                                                          NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR
                                                              timely notification of events. Further,
      rule as proposed and concluded that the                                                                       part 63, subpart A), which are
                                                              the final rule requires information
      proposed requirements are redundant                                                                           mandatory for all owners or operators
                                                              regarding actions inconsistent with the
      and provide no useful information                                                                             subject to NESHAP. These
                                                              SSMP to be submitted in semiannual
      regarding compliance. Another                                                                                 recordkeeping and reporting
                                                              compliance reports. For these reasons,
      commenter also noted that requirements                                                                        requirements are specifically authorized
                                                              and to maintain consistency with the
      in previous rules and the General                                                                             by section 112 of the CAA (42 U.S.C.
                                                              HON and the Consolidated Air Rule
      Provisions differentiate between SSM                                                                          7412). All information submitted to the
                                                              (CAR), we have overridden the
      events and deviations (or exceedances                                                                         EPA pursuant to the recordkeeping and
                                                              immediate SSM reporting required by
      and excursions, in the terminology of                                                                         reporting requirements for which a
                                                              §§ 63.6(e)(3)(iv) and 63.10(d)(5)(ii) of the
      previous rules). According to the                                                                             claim of confidentiality is made is
                                                              General Provisions.
      commenter, changing the terminology                                                                           safeguarded according to Agency
      and requirements for the final rule will                V. Statutory and Executive Order                      policies in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
      at a minimum be confusing for facilities                Reviews                                                 The final NESHAP require
      that also must comply with previous                                                                           maintenance inspections of the control
      rules.                                                  A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory                  devices but do not require any
         Response: We disagree with the                       Planning and Review                                   notifications or reports beyond those
      commenter’s contention that the                            Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR                 required by the NESHAP General
      proposed requirements are redundant.                    51735, October 4, 1993), the EPA must                 Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A).
      Section 63.6(e) of the General Provisions               determine whether the regulatory action               The recordkeeping requirements collect
      requires operation at all times                         is ‘‘significant’’ and, therefore, subject to         only the specific information needed to
      (including during periods of SSM) in a                  review by the Office of Management and                determine compliance.
      manner consistent with safety and good                  Budget (OMB) and the requirements of                    The annual public reporting and
      air pollution control practices for                     the Executive Order. The Executive                    recordkeeping burden for this collection
      minimizing emissions to the levels                      Order defines a ‘‘significant regulatory              of information (averaged over the first 3
      required by the relevant standards (i.e.,               action’’ as one that is likely to result in           years after the effective date of the final
      meet the standards or comply with the                   a rule that may:                                      rule) is estimated to average 79 labor
      SSMP). Nothing in the General                              (1) Have an annual effect on the                   hours per year at an annual cost of
      Provisions says the standards do not                    economy of $100 million or more or                    $3,500 for 129 respondents. These
      apply during periods of SSM, but                        adversely affect in a material way the                estimates include one-time submissions
      compliance with the SSMP is allowed                     economy, a sector of the economy,                     of notifications and precompliance
      in the event the standard cannot                        productivity, competition, jobs, the                  reports, preparation of an SSMP with


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00020   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                       69183

      semiannual reports for any event when                      Our economic analysis identified as                statement, including a cost-benefit
      the procedures in the plan were not                     small businesses 32 of the 58 companies               analysis, for proposed and final rules
      followed, preparation of semiannual                     owning affected coating manufacturing                 with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
      compliance reports, and recordkeeping.                  facilities. This constitutes 55 percent of            result in expenditures by State, local,
      Total annualized capital/startup costs                  the affected businesses. Although small               and tribal governments, in aggregate, or
      associated with the monitoring                          businesses represent 55 percent of the                by the private sector, of $100 million or
      requirements for the 3-year period of the               companies withing the source category,                more in any 1 year. Before promulgating
      ICR are estimated at $10,000/yr. Average                they are expected to incur 24 percent of              an EPA rule for which a written
      operation and maintenance costs                         the total industry compliance costs of                statement is needed, section 205 of the
      associated with the monitoring                          $16 million. According to EPA’s                       UMRA generally requires EPA to
      requirements for the 3-year period are                  economic assessment, there are two                    identify and consider a reasonable
      estimated at $34,000/yr.                                small firms with compliance costs equal               number of regulatory alternatives and
         Burden means the total time, effort, or              to or greater than 3 percent of their                 adopt the least costly, most cost-
      financial resources expended by persons                 sales. In addition, there are five small              effective, or least burdensome
      to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose              firms with cost-to-sales ratios between 1             alternative that achieves the objectives
      or provide information to or for a                      and 3 percent.                                        of the rule. The provisions of section
      Federal agency. This includes the time                     An economic impact analysis was                    205 do not apply when they are
      needed to review instructions; develop,                 performed to estimate the changes in                  inconsistent with applicable law.
      acquire, install, and utilize technology                product price and production quantities               Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to
      and systems for the purpose of                          for the firms affected by subpart                     adopt an alternative other than the least-
      collecting, validating, and verifying                   HHHHH. The analysis shows that of the                 costly, most cost-effective, or least-
      information; adjust the existing ways to                70 facilities owned by affected small                 burdensome alternative if the
      comply with any previously applicable                   firms, one is expected to shut down                   Administrator publishes with the final
      instructions and requirements; train                    after implementation of the NESHAP.                   rule an explanation why that alternative
      personnel to respond to a collection of                    The baseline economic condition of                 was not adopted. Before EPA establishes
      information; search data sources;                       the facility predicted to close affects the           any regulatory requirements that may
      complete and review the collection of                   closure estimate provided by the                      significantly or uniquely affect small
      information; and transmit or otherwise                  economic model. Facilities that are                   governments, including tribal
      disclose the information.                               already experiencing adverse economic                 governments, it must have developed
         An Agency may not conduct or                         conditions will be more severely                      under section 203 of the UMRA a small
      sponsor, and a person is not required to                impacted than those that are not, and                 government agency plan. The plan must
      respond to a collection of information                  the facility predicted to close currently             provide for notifying potentially
      unless it displays a currently valid OMB                has low profitability levels.                         affected small governments, enabling
      control number. The OMB control                            Although the NESHAP will not have                  officials of affected small governments
      number for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR                  a significant economic impact on a                    to have meaningful and timely input in
      are in 40 CFR part 9. When the ICR is                   substantial number of small entities,                 the development of EPA regulatory
      approved by OMB, the Agency will                        EPA nonetheless has tried to limit the                proposals with significant Federal
      publish a technical amendment to 40                     impact of the final rule on small                     intergovernmental mandates, and
      CFR part 9 in the Federal Register to                   entities. We have worked closely with                 informing, educating, and advising
      display the OMB control number for the                  the National Paint and Coatings                       small governments on compliance with
      approved information collection                         Association, the National Association of              the regulatory requirements.
      requirements contained in the final rule.               Printing Ink Manufacturers, and the                      The EPA has determined that the final
                                                              Adhesives and Sealants Council. These                 rule does not contain a Federal mandate
      C. Regulatory Flexibility Act                           trade organizations, which represent the              that may result in expenditures of $100
         The EPA has determined that it is not                majority of facilities covered by subpart             million or more for State, local, and
      necessary to prepare a regulatory                       HHHHH, have represented their                         tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
      flexibility analysis in connection with                 members at stakeholder meetings                       the private sector in any one year. The
      the final rule. The EPA has also                        throughout the standards development                  maximum total annual costs of the final
      determined that the final rule will not                 process. We worked with the coating                   rule for any year is estimated to be less
      have a significant economic impact on                   manufacturers to minimize the overlap                 than $16 million. Thus, the final rule is
      a substantial number of small entities.                 of MACT standards and provide several                 not subject to the requirements of
      For purposes of assessing the impact of                 alternative ways to comply with the                   sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
      today’s rule on small entities, small                   standards to allow as much flexibility as                In addition, the NESHAP contain no
      entity is defined as: (1) A small business              possible. The multi-process vessel                    regulatory requirements that might
      having up to 500 employees, (2) a small                 alternative emission limit and the                    significantly or uniquely affect small
      governmental jurisdiction that is a                     pollution prevention option help those                governments because they contain no
      government of a city, county, town,                     small entities that have been proactive               requirements that apply to such
      school district or special district with a              in reducing their HAP emissions and                   governments or impose obligations
      population of less than 50,000, and (3)                 usage, respectively.                                  upon them. Therefore, the final rule is
      a small organization that is any not-for-                                                                     not subject to the requirements of
      profit enterprise which is independently                D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
                                                                                                                    section 203 of the UMRA.
      owned and operated and is not                             Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
      dominant in its field.                                  Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public                     E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
         After considering the economic                       Law 104–4, establishes requirements for                 Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
      impacts of today’s final rule on small                  Federal agencies to assess the effects of             August 10, 1999) requires EPA to
      entities, EPA has concluded that this                   their regulatory actions on State, local,             develop an accountable process to
      action will not have a significant                      and tribal governments and the private                ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
      economic impact on a substantial                        sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,                State and local officials in the
      number of small entities.                               EPA generally must prepare a written                  development of regulatory policies that


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00021   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69184           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies              analysis required under section 5–501 of              after reviewing the available standards,
      that have federalism implications’’ is                  the Executive Order has the potential to              EPA determined that 13 of the candidate
      defined in the Executive Order to                       influence the regulation. The final rule              consensus standards would not be
      include regulations that have                           is not subject to the Executive Order                 practical due to lack of equivalency,
      ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,             because it is based on technology                     documentation, and validation data.
      on the relationship between the national                performance and not health or safety                  The 13 standards are: ASME C00031 or
      government and the States, or on the                    risks.                                                Performance Test Code 19–10–1981,
      distribution of power and                                                                                     ASTM D3154–91 (1995), ASTM D3464–
                                                              H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
      responsibilities among the various                                                                            96, ASTM D3796–90 (1998), ASTM
                                                              Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
      levels of government.’’                                                                                       D5835–95, ASTM D6060–96, ASTM
         The final rule does not have                         Distribution or Use
                                                                                                                    E337–84 (Reapproved 1996), CAN/CSA
      federalism implications. It will not have                 The final rule is not a ‘‘significant               Z2232.2–M–86, European Norm (EN)
      substantial direct effects on the States,               energy action’’ as defined in Executive               12619 (1999), EN 1911–1,2,3 (1998), ISO
      on the relationship between the national                Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22,                     9096:1992, ISO 10396:1993, and ISO
      government and the States, or on the                    2001) because it is not likely to have a              10780:1994. Of the six remaining
      distribution of power and                               significant adverse effect on the supply,             candidate consensus standards, the
      responsibilities among the various                      distribution, or use of energy.                       following five are under development or
      levels of government, as specified in                   Approximately 3.0 million kwh/yr of                   under EPA review: ASME/BSR MFC
      Executive Order 13132. None of the                      electricity will be needed to operate fans            12M, ASME/BSR MFC 13m, ASTM
      sources are owned or operated by State                  and pumps for control systems.                        D5790–95 (1995), ISO/DIS 12039, and
      or local governments. Thus, Executive                   Generating this amount of electricity                 ISO/FDIS 14965. The EPA plans to
      Order 13132 does not apply to the final                 will consume about 1,000 tpy of coal. If              follow, review, and consider adopting
      rule.                                                   owners and operators elect to use                     these candidate consensus standards
                                                              combustion-based control devices, a                   after their development and further
      F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation                  small amount of natural gas will also be
      and Coordination With Indian Tribal                                                                           review by EPA is completed.
                                                              used.                                                    One consensus standard, ASTM
      Governments
                                                              I. National Technology Transfer                       D6420–99, Standard Test Method for
         Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,                                                                        Determination of Gaseous Organic
      November 9, 2000) requires EPA to                       Advancement Act
                                                                                                                    Compounds by Direct Interface Gas
      develop an accountable process to                          Section 12(d) of the National                      Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry
      ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by                 Technology Transfer and Advancement                   (GC/MS), is appropriate in the cases
      tribal officials in the development of                  Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Public Law No.                   described below for inclusion in these
      regulatory policies that have tribal                    104–113) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs                 NESHAP in addition to the currently
      implications.’’ The final rule does not                 EPA to use voluntary consensus                        available EPA Method 18 codified at 40
      have tribal implications. It will not have              standards in their regulatory and                     CFR part 60, appendix A for
      substantial direct effects on tribal                    procurement activities unless to do so                measurement of organic compounds.
      governments, on the relationship                        would be inconsistent with applicable                 Therefore, the standard ASTM D6420–
      between the Federal government and                      law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary               99 is cited in the final rule.
      Indian tribes, or on the distribution of                consensus standards are technical                        Similar to EPA’s performance based
      power and responsibilities between the                  standards (e.g., materials specifications,            Method 18, ASTM D6420–99 is also a
      Federal government and Indian tribes.                   test methods, sampling procedures,                    performance based method for
      No tribal governments own or operate                    business practices) developed or                      measurement of gaseous organic
      miscellaneous coating operations. Thus,                 adopted by one or more voluntary                      compounds. However, ASTM D6420–99
      Executive Order 13175 does not apply                    consensus bodies. The NTTAA directs                   was written to support the specific use
      to the final rule.                                      EPA to provide Congress, through                      of highly portable and automated GC/
                                                              annual reports to OMB, with                           MS. While offering advantages over the
      G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of                 explanations when an agency does not                  traditional Method 18, the ASTM
      Children From Environmental Health                      use available and applicable voluntary                method does allow some less stringent
      and Safety Risks                                        consensus standards.                                  criteria for accepting GC/MS results
        Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 1985,                       The final rule involves technical                  than required by Method 18. Therefore,
      April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that:               standards. The final rule uses EPA                    ASTM D6420–99 (Docket ID No. OAR–
      (1) is determined to be ‘‘economically                  Methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2G, 2F,                 2003–0178) is a suitable alternative to
      significant’’ as defined under Executive                3, 3A, 3B, 4, 18, 25, 25A, 26, 26A, 305,              Method 18 only where the target
      Order 12866, and (2) concerns an                        320, 624, 625, 1624, 1625, 1666, 1671,                compound(s) are those listed in section
      environmental health or safety risk that                8260, and 8270. Consistent with the                   1.1 of ASTM D6420–99; and the target
      EPA has reason to believe may have a                    NTTAA, the EPA conducted searches to                  concentration is between 150 ppb(v)
      disproportionate effect on children. If                 identify voluntary consensus standards                and 100 ppm(v).
      the regulatory action meets both criteria,              in addition to these EPA methods. The                    For target compound(s) not listed in
      EPA must evaluate the environmental                     search and review results have been                   Table 1.1 of ASTM D6420–99, but
      health or safety effects of the planned                 documented and placed in the docket                   potentially detected by mass
      rule on children, and explain why the                   for the NESHAP (Docket ID No. OAR–                    spectrometry, the regulation specifies
      planned regulation is preferable to other               03–0178). The search for emissions                    that the additional system continuing
      potentially effective and reasonably                    monitoring procedures for measuring                   calibration check after each run, as
      feasible alternatives considered by the                 emissions of the HAP or surrogates                    detailed in Section 10.5.3 of the ASTM
      Agency.                                                 subject to emission limitations in these              method, must be followed, met,
        The EPA interprets Executive Order                    NESHAP identified 19 voluntary                        documented, and submitted with the
      13045 as applying only to those                         consensus standards that appeared to                  data report even if there is no moisture
      regulatory actions that are based on                    have possible use in lieu of EPA                      condenser used or the compound is not
      health or safety risks, such that the                   standard reference methods. However,                  considered water soluble. For target


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00022   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                         69185

      compound(s) not listed in Section 1.1 of                Subpart HHHHH—National Emission                       Table 6 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63—
      ASTM D6420–99, and not amenable to                      Standards for Hazardous Air                             Requirements for Heat Exchange Systems
      detection by mass spectrometry, ASTM                                                                          Table 7 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63—
                                                              Pollutants: Miscellaneous Coating
      D6420–99 does not apply.                                                                                        Partially Soluble Hazardous Air Pollutants
                                                              Manufacturing                                         Table 8 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63—
         As a result, EPA cites ASTM D6420–                   Sec.                                                    Soluble Hazardous Air Pollutants
      99 in subpart HHHHH of part 63. The                                                                           Table 9 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63—
      EPA also cites Method 18 as a gas                       What this Subpart Covers                                Requirements for Reports
      chromatography (GC) option in addition                  63.7980 What is the purpose of this                   Table 10 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63—
      to ASTM D6420–99. This will allow the                       subpart?                                            Applicability of General Provisions to
                                                              63.7985 Am I subject to the requirements in             Subpart HHHHH
      continued use of GC configurations
      other than GC/MS.                                           this subpart?
                                                              63.7990 What parts of my plant does this              Subpart HHHHH—National Emission
         Some EPA testing methods and                             subpart cover?                                    Standards for Hazardous Air
      performance standards are specified in                                                                        Pollutants: Miscellaneous Coating
      § 63.8000(d)(1) of subpart HHHHH.                       Compliance Dates
                                                                                                                    Manufacturing
      Most of the standards have been used by                 63.7995 When do I have to comply with
      States and industry for more than 10                        this subpart?                                     What This Subpart Covers
      years. Nevertheless, under § 63.7(f), the               Emission Limits, Work Practice Standards,             § 63.7980   What is the purpose of this
      final rule also allows any State or source              and Compliance Requirements                           subpart?
      to apply to EPA for permission to use                   63.8000 What are my general requirements                This subpart establishes national
      an alternative method in place of any of                    for complying with this subpart?                  emission standards for hazardous air
      the EPA testing methods or performance                  63.8005 What requirements apply to my                 pollutants (NESHAP) for miscellaneous
      standards listed in the NESHAP.                             process vessels?                                  coating manufacturing. This subpart
                                                              63.8010 What requirements apply to my                 also establishes requirements to
      J. Congressional Review Act                                 storage tanks?
                                                              63.8015 What requirements apply to my
                                                                                                                    demonstrate initial and continuous
        The Congressional Review Act, 5                           equipment leaks?                                  compliance with the emission limits,
      U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small               63.8020 What requirements apply to my                 operating limits, and work practice
      Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of                      wastewater streams?                               standards.
      1996, generally provides that before a                  63.8025 What requirements apply to my
      rule may take effect, the agency                            transfer operations?                              § 63.7985 Am I subject to the requirements
                                                                                                                    in this subpart?
      promulgating the rule must submit a                     63.8030 What requirements apply to my
      rule report, which includes a copy of                       heat exchange systems?                               (a) You are subject to the
      the rule, to each House of the Congress                                                                       requirements in this subpart if you own
                                                              Alternative Means of Compliance
      and to the Comptroller General of the                                                                         or operate miscellaneous coating
                                                              63.8050 How do I comply with emissions                manufacturing operations, as defined in
      United States. The EPA will submit a                        averaging for stationary process vessels
      report containing the final rule and                                                                          paragraph (b) of this section, that meet
                                                                  at existing sources?
      other required information to the U.S.                  63.8055 How do I comply with a weight
                                                                                                                    the conditions specified in paragraphs
      Senate, the U.S. House of                                   percent HAP limit in coating products?            (a)(1) through (4) of this section.
      Representatives, and the Comptroller                                                                             (1) Are located at or are part of a
                                                              Notifications, Reports, and Records                   major source of hazardous air pollutants
      General of the United States prior to
      publication of the rule in the Federal                  63.8070 What notifications must I submit              (HAP) emissions, as defined in section
                                                                  and when?                                         112(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
      Register. The final rule is not a ‘‘major               63.8075 What reports must I submit and
      rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).                                                                            (2) Manufacture coatings as defined in
                                                                  when?                                             § 63.8105.
      List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63                      63.8080 What records must I keep?                        (3) Process, use, or produce HAP.
                                                              Other Requirements and Information                       (4) Are not part of an affected source
        Environmental protection,                                                                                   under another subpart of this part 63.
      Administrative practice and procedure,                  63.8090 What compliance options do I have
                                                                  if part of my plant is subject to both this          (b) Miscellaneous coating
      Air pollution control, Hazardous                            subpart and another subpart?                      manufacturing operations include the
      substances, Intergovernmental relations,                63.8095 What parts of the General                     facilitywide collection of equipment
      Reporting and recordkeeping                                 Provisions apply to me?                           described in paragraphs (b)(1) through
      requirements.                                           63.8100 Who implements and enforces this              (4) of this section that is used to
       Dated: August 29, 2003.                                    subpart?                                          manufacture coatings as defined in
                                                              63.8105 What definitions apply to this                § 63.8105. Miscellaneous coating
      Marianne Lamont Horinko,                                    subpart?
      Acting Administrator.                                                                                         manufacturing operations also include
                                                              Tables to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63                    cleaning operations.
      s  For the reasons stated in the preamble,              Table 1 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63—                     (1) Process vessels.
      title 40, chapter I, part 63 of the Code of               Emission Limits and Work Practice                      (2) Storage tanks for feedstocks and
      the Federal Regulations is amended as                     Standards for Process Vessels                       products.
      follows:                                                Table 2 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63—                     (3) Components such as pumps,
                                                                Emission Limits and Work Practice                   compressors, agitators, pressure relief
      PART 63—[AMENDED]                                         Standards for Storage Tanks                         devices, sampling connection systems,
                                                              Table 3 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63—                  open-ended valves or lines, valves,
      s 1. The authority citation for part 63                   Requirements for Equipment Leaks
                                                              Table 4 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63—
                                                                                                                    connectors, and instrumentation
      continues to read as follows:                                                                                 systems.
                                                                Emission Limits and Work Practice
          Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.                    Standards for Wastewater Streams                       (4) Wastewater tanks and transfer
                                                              Table 5 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63—                  racks.
      s 2. Part 63 is amended by adding a new                   Emission Limits and Work Practice                      (c) If the predominant use of a transfer
      subpart HHHHH to read as follows:                         Standards for Transfer Operations                   rack loading arm or storage tank


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00023   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69186           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      (including storage tanks in series) is                  with materials used to manufacture the                subpart at all times, except during
      associated with miscellaneous coating                   coating).                                             periods of startup, shutdown, and
      manufacturing, and the loading arm or                     (4) Quality assurance/quality control               malfunction. You must meet the
      storage tank is not part of an affected                 laboratories.                                         requirements specified in paragraphs (b)
      source under a subpart of this part 63,                                                                       and (c) of this section. You must meet
                                                              § 63.7990 What parts of my plant does this
      then you must assign the loading arm or                                                                       the requirements specified in §§ 63.8005
                                                              subpart cover?
      storage tank to the miscellaneous                                                                             through 63.8025 (or the alternative
                                                                 (a) This subpart applies to each                   means of compliance in § 63.8050),
      coating manufacturing operations. If the
                                                              miscellaneous coating manufacturing                   except as specified in paragraph (d) of
      predominant use cannot be determined,
                                                              affected source as defined in                         this section. You must meet the
      and the loading arm or storage tank is
                                                              § 63.7985(a).                                         notification, reporting, and
      not part of an affected source under a
                                                                 (b) The miscellaneous coating                      recordkeeping requirements specified in
      subpart of this part 63, then you must
                                                              manufacturing affected source is the                  §§ 63.8070, 63.8075, and 63.8080.
      assign the loading arm or storage tank to
                                                              miscellaneous coating manufacturing                      (b) General requirements. (1) If an
      the miscellaneous coating
                                                              operations as defined in § 63.7985(b).                emission stream contains halogen
      manufacturing operations. If the use                       (c) An affected source is a new
      varies from year to year, then you must                                                                       atoms, you must determine whether it
                                                              affected source if you commenced                      meets the definition of a halogenated
      base the determination on the                           construction or reconstruction after
      utilization that occurred during the year                                                                     stream by calculating the concentration
                                                              April 4, 2002, and you met the                        of each organic compound that contains
      preceding December 11, 2003 or, if the                  applicability criteria at the time you
      loading arm or storage tank was not in                                                                        halogen atoms using the procedures
                                                              commenced construction or                             specified in § 63.115(d)(2)(v),
      operation during that year, you must                    reconstruction.
      base the use on the expected use for the                                                                      multiplying each concentration by the
      first 5-year period after startup. You                  Compliance Dates                                      number of halogen atoms in the organic
      must include the determination in the                                                                         compound, and summing the resulting
                                                              § 63.7995 When do I have to comply with               halogen atom concentrations for all of
      notification of compliance status report                this subpart?
      specified in § 63.8075(d). You must                                                                           the organic compounds in the emission
                                                                (a) If you have a new affected source,              stream. Alternatively, you may elect to
      redetermine the predominant use at
                                                              you must comply with this subpart                     designate the emission stream as
      least once every 5 years after the
                                                              according to the requirements in                      halogenated.
      compliance date.
                                                              paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section.               (2) Opening of a safety device, as
         (d) The requirements for                               (1) If you start up your new affected               defined in § 63.8105, is allowed at any
      miscellaneous coatings manufacturing                    source before December 11, 2003, then                 time conditions require it to avoid
      sources in this subpart do not apply to                 you must comply with the requirements                 unsafe conditions.
      operations described in paragraphs                      for new sources in this subpart no later                 (c) Compliance requirements for
      (d)(1) through (4) of this section.                     than December 11, 2003.                               closed vent systems and control devices.
         (1) Research and development                           (2) If you start up your new affected               If you use a control device to comply
      facilities, as defined in section 112(c)(7)             source after December 11, 2003, then                  with an emission limit in Table 1, 2, or
      of the CAA.                                             you must comply with the requirements                 5 to this subpart, you must comply with
         (2) The affiliated operations located at             for new sources in this subpart upon                  the requirements in subpart SS of 40
      an affected source under subparts GG                    startup of your affected source.                      CFR part 63 as specified in paragraphs
      (National Emission Standards for                          (b) If you have an existing affected                (c)(1) through (3) of this section, except
      Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework                      source on December 11, 2003, then you                 as specified in paragraph (d) of this
      Facilities), KK (National Emission                      must comply with the requirements for                 section.
      Standards for the Printing and                          existing sources in this subpart no later                (1) If you reduce organic HAP
      Publishing Industry), JJJJ (NESHAP:                     than December 11, 2005.                               emissions by venting emissions through
      Paper and Other Web Coating), future                      (c) If you add equipment to your                    a closed-vent system to any combination
      MMMM (National Emission Standards                       existing affected source after December               of control devices (except a flare), you
      for Miscellaneous Metal Parts and                       11, 2003 you must comply with the                     must meet the requirements of
      Products Surface Coating Operations)                    requirements for existing sources in this             § 63.982(c) and the requirements
      and SSSS (NESHAP: Surface Coating of                    subpart upon startup of the added                     referenced therein.
      Metal Coil) of 40 CFR part 63. Affiliated               equipment.                                               (2) If you reduce organic HAP
      operations include, but are not limited                   (d) You must meet the notification                  emissions by venting emissions through
      to, mixing or dissolving of coating                     requirements in § 63.8070 according to                a closed-vent system to a flare, you must
      ingredients; coating mixing for viscosity               the schedule in § 63.8070 and in 40 CFR               meet the requirements of § 63.982(b)
      adjustment, color tint or additive                      part 63, subpart A. Some of the                       and the requirements referenced
      blending, or pH adjustment; cleaning of                 notifications must be submitted before                therein. You may not use a flare to
      coating lines and coating line parts;                   you are required to comply with the                   control halogenated vent streams or
      handling and storage of coatings and                    emission limits, operating limits, and                hydrogen halide and halogen HAP
      solvent; and conveyance and treatment                   work practice standards in this subpart.              emissions.
      of wastewater.                                                                                                   (3) If you use a halogen reduction
                                                              Emission Limits, Work Practice
         (3) Ancillary equipment such as                                                                            device to reduce hydrogen halide and
                                                              Standards, and Compliance
      boilers and incinerators (only those not                                                                      halogen HAP emissions that are
                                                              Requirements
      used to comply with the emission limits                                                                       generated by combusting halogenated
      in Tables 1 through 5 to this subpart),                 § 63.8000 What are my general                         vent streams, you must meet the
      chillers and refrigeration systems, and                 requirements for complying with this                  requirements of § 63.994 and the
      other equipment that is not directly                    subpart?                                              requirements referenced therein. If you
      involved in the manufacturing of a                        (a) You must be in compliance with                  use a halogen reduction device before a
      coating (i.e., it operates as a closed                  the emission limits and work practice                 combustion device, you must determine
      system, and materials are not combined                  standards in Tables 1 through 5 to this               the halogen atom emission rate prior to


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00024   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                       69187

      the combustion device according to the                  emissions equal to or greater than 1 tpy.             stream, calibrate the monitor on the
      procedures in § 63.115(d)(2)(v).                        If the parameter will not be measured                 predominant organic HAP, and report
         (d) Exceptions to the requirements                   continuously, you must request                        the results as C1. Use Method 18, ASTM
      specified in other subparts of this part                approval of your proposed procedure in                D6420–99, or any approved alternative
      63. (1) Requirements for performance                    the precompliance report. You must                    as the reference method for the relative
      tests. The requirements specified in                    identify the operating limit(s) and the               accuracy tests, and report the results as
      paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (v) of this                measurement frequency, and you must                   C1.
      section apply instead of or in addition                 provide rationale to support how these                   (iii) You must conduct a performance
      to the requirements for performance                     measurements demonstrate the control                  evaluation of each CEMS according to
      testing of control devices as specified in              device is operating properly.                         the requirements in 40 CFR 63.8 and
      subpart SS of 40 CFR part 63.                              (4) Continuous emissions monitoring                according to the applicable Performance
         (i) Conduct gas molecular weight                     systems. Each continuous emissions                    Specification of 40 CFR part 60,
      analysis using Method 3, 3A, or 3B in                   monitoring system (CEMS) must be                      appendix B, except that the schedule in
      appendix A to 40 CFR part 60.                           installed, operated, and maintained                   § 63.8(e)(4) does not apply, and the
         (ii) Measure moisture content of the                 according to the requirements in § 63.8               results of the performance evaluation
      stack gas using Method 4 in appendix A                  and paragraphs (d)(4)(i) through (iv) of              must be included in the notification of
      to 40 CFR part 60.                                      this section.                                         compliance status report.
         (iii) As an alternative to using Method                 (i) Each CEMS must be installed,                      (iv) The CEMS data must be reduced
      18, Method 25/25A, or Method 26/26A                     operated, and maintained according to                 to operating day or operating block
      of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A to                        the applicable Performance                            averages computed using valid data
      comply with any of the emission limits                  Specification of 40 CFR part 60,                      consistent with the data availability
      specified in Tables 1 through 7 to this                 appendix B, and according to paragraph                requirements specified in
      subpart, you may use Method 320 of 40                   (d)(4)(ii) of this section, except as                 § 63.999(c)(6)(i)(B) through (D), except
      CFR part 60, appendix A. When using                     specified in paragraph (d)(4)(i)(A) of this           monitoring data also are sufficient to
      Method 320, you must follow the                         section. For any CEMS meeting                         constitute a valid hour of data if
      analyte spiking procedures of section 13                Performance Specification 8, you must                 measured values are available for at
      of Method 320, unless you demonstrate                   also comply with appendix F, procedure                least two of the 15-minute periods
      that the complete spiking procedure has                 1 of 40 CFR part 60.                                  during an hour when calibration,
      been conducted at a similar source.                        (A) If you wish to use a CEMS other                quality assurance, or maintenance
         (iv) Section 63.997(c)(1) does not                   than a Fourier Transform Infrared                     activities are being performed. An
      apply. For the purposes of this subpart,                Spectroscopy (FTIR) meeting the                       operating block is a period of time from
      results of all initial compliance                       requirements of Performance                           the beginning to end of batch operations
      demonstrations must be included in the                  Specification 15 to measure hydrogen                  in the manufacturing of a coating.
      notification of compliance status report,               halide and halogen HAP before we                      Operating block averages may be used
      which is due 150 days after the                         promulgate a Performance Specification                only for process vessel data.
      compliance date, as specified in                        for such CEMS, you must prepare a                        (5) Continuous parameter monitoring.
      § 63.8075(d)(1).                                        monitoring plan and submit it for                     The provisions in paragraphs (d)(5)(i)
         (v) The option in § 63.997(e)(2)(iv)(C)              approval in accordance with the                       through (iii) of this section apply in
      to demonstrate compliance with a                        procedures specified in § 63.8.                       addition to the requirements for
      percent reduction emission limit by                        (B) [Reserved]                                     continuous parameter monitoring
      measuring total organic carbon (TOC) is                    (ii) You must determine the                        system (CPMS) in subpart SS of 40 CFR
      not allowed.                                            calibration gases and reporting units for             part 63.
         (vi) If you do not have a closed-vent                TOC CEMS in accordance with                              (i) You must record the results of each
      system as defined in § 63.981, you must                 paragraph (d)(4)(ii)(A), (B), or (C) of this          calibration check and all maintenance
      determine capture efficiency using                      section.                                              performed on the CPMS as specified in
      Method 204 of appendix M to 40 CFR                         (A) For CEMS meeting Performance                   § 63.998(c)(1)(ii)(A).
      part 51 for all stationary process vessels              Specification 9 or 15 requirements,                      (ii) When subpart SS of 40 CFR part
      subject to requirements of Table 1 to                   determine the target analyte(s) for                   63 uses the term a range or operating
      this subpart.                                           calibration using either process                      range of a monitored parameter, it
         (2) Design evaluation. To determine                  knowledge of the control device inlet                 means an operating limit for a
      the percent reduction of a small control                stream or the screening procedures of                 monitored parameter for the purposes of
      device, you may elect to conduct a                      Method 18 on the control device inlet                 this subpart.
      design evaluation as specified in                       stream.                                                  (iii) As an alternative to measuring pH
      § 63.1257(a)(1) instead of a performance                   (B) For CEMS meeting Performance                   as specified in § 63.994(c)(1)(i), you may
      test as specified in subpart SS of 40 CFR               Specification 8 used to monitor                       elect to continuously monitor the
      part 63. You must establish the value(s)                performance of a combustion device,                   caustic strength of the scrubber effluent.
      and basis for the operating limits as part              calibrate the instrument on the                          (6) Startup, shutdown, and
      of the design evaluation.                               predominant organic HAP and report                    malfunction. Sections 63.998(b)(2)(iii)
         (3) Periodic verification. For a control             the results as carbon (C1), and use                   and (b)(6)(i)(A), which apply to the
      device with total inlet HAP emissions                   Method 25A or any approved alternative                exclusion of monitoring data collected
      less than 1 ton per year (tpy), you must                as the reference method for the relative              during periods of startup, shutdown,
      establish an operating limit(s) for a                   accuracy tests.                                       and malfunction (SSM) from daily
      parameter(s) that you will measure and                     (C) For CEMS meeting Performance                   averages, do not apply for the purposes
      record at least once per averaging period               Specification 8 used to monitor                       of this subpart.
      (i.e., daily or block) to verify that the               performance of a noncombustion                           (7) Reporting. (i) When §§ 63.8005
      control device is operating properly.                   device, determine the predominant                     through 63.8025 reference other
      You may elect to measure the same                       organic HAP using either process                      subparts in this part 63 that use the term
      parameter(s) that is required for control               knowledge or the screening procedures                 periodic report, it means compliance
      devices that control inlet HAP                          of Method 18 on the control device inlet              report for the purposes of this subpart.


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00025   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69188           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

         (ii) When there are conflicts between                temperature, as required by                           § 63.8010 What requirements apply to my
      this subpart and referenced subparts for                § 63.1257(d)(3)(iii)(B), you may elect to             storage tanks?
      the due dates of reports required by this               measure the liquid temperature in the                    (a) You must meet each emission limit
      subpart, reports must be submitted                      receiver.                                             in Table 2 to this subpart that applies to
      according to the due dates presented in                    (4) You must conduct a performance                 your storage tanks, and you must meet
      this subpart.                                           test or compliance demonstration                      each applicable requirement specified
         (iii) Excused excursions, as defined in              equivalent to an initial compliance                   in § 63.8000(b). For each control device
      subpart SS of 40 CFR part 63, are not                   demonstration within 360 hours of a                   used to comply with Table 2 to this
      allowed.                                                change in operating conditions that are               subpart, you must comply with subpart
                                                              not considered to be within the                       SS of this part 63 as specified in
      § 63.8005 What requirements apply to my                 previously established worst-case                     § 63.8000(c), except as specified in
      process vessels?                                        conditions.                                           § 63.8000(d) and paragraphs (b) through
         (a) You must meet each emission limit                   (e) Establishing operating limits. You             (d) of this section.
      and work practice standard in Table 1                   must establish operating limits under                    (b) Exceptions to subparts SS and WW
      to this subpart that applies to you,                    the conditions required for your initial              of this part 63. (1) If you conduct a
      except as specified in §§ 63.8050 and                   compliance demonstration, except you                  performance test or design evaluation
      63.8055, and you must meet each                         may elect to establish operating limit(s)             for a control device used to control
      applicable requirement specified in                     for conditions other than those under                 emissions only from storage tanks, you
      § 63.8000(b). For each control device                   which a performance test was                          must establish operating limits, conduct
      used to comply with Table 1 to this                     conducted as specified in paragraph                   monitoring, and keep records using the
      subpart, you must comply with subpart                   (e)(1) of this section and, if applicable,            same procedures as required in subpart
      SS of this part 63 as specified in                      paragraph (e)(2) of this section.                     SS of this part 63 for control devices
      § 63.8000(c), except as specified in                       (1) The operating limits may be based              used to reduce emissions from process
      § 63.8000(d) and paragraphs (b) through                 on the results of the performance test                vents instead of the procedures
      (g) of this section.                                    and supplementary information such as                 specified in §§ 63.985(c), 63.998(d)(2)(i),
         (b) When subpart SS of this part 63                  engineering assessments and                           and 63.999(b)(2).
      refers to process vents, it means process               manufacturer’s recommendations. These                    (2) When the term storage vessel is
      vessel vents for the purposes of this                   limits may be established for conditions              used in subparts SS and WW of this part
      section.                                                as unique as individual emission                      63, the term storage tank, as defined in
         (c) Process condensers, as defined in                episodes. You must provide rationale in               § 63.8105 applies for the purposes of
      § 63.1251, are not considered to be                     the precompliance report for the                      this subpart.
      control devices for process vessels.                    specific level for each operating limit,                 (c) Planned routine maintenance. The
         (d) Initial compliance. (1) To                       including any data and calculations                   emission limits in Table 2 to this
      demonstrate initial compliance with a                   used to develop the limit and a                       subpart for control devices used to
      percent reduction emission limit in                     description of why the limit indicates                control emissions from storage tanks do
      Table 1 to this subpart, you must                       proper operation of the control device.               not apply during periods of planned
      conduct the performance test or design                  The procedures provided in this                       routine maintenance. Periods of
      evaluation under conditions as specified                paragraph (e)(1) have not been approved               planned routine maintenance of each
      in § 63.7(e)(1), except that the                        by the Administrator and determination                control device, during which the control
      performance test or design evaluation                   of the operating limit using these                    device does not meet the emission limit
      must be conducted under worst-case                      procedures is subject to review and                   specified in Table 2 to this subpart,
      conditions. Also, the performance test                  approval by the Administrator.                        must not exceed 240 hours per year (hr/
      for a control device used to control                       (2) If you elect to establish separate             yr). You may submit an application to
      emissions from process vessels must be                  operating limits for different emission               the Administrator requesting an
      conducted according to § 63.1257(b)(8),                 episodes, you must maintain records as                extension of this time limit to a total of
      including the submittal of a site-specific              specified in § 63.8085(g) of each point at            360 hr/yr. The application must explain
      test plan for approval prior to testing.                which you change from one operating                   why the extension is needed, it must
      The requirements in § 63.997(e)(1)(i)                   limit to another, even if the duration of             indicate that no material will be added
      and (iii) also do not apply for                         the monitoring for an operating limit is              to the storage tank between the time the
      performance tests conducted to                          less than 15 minutes.                                 240 hr/yr limit is exceeded and the
      determine compliance with the                              (f) Averaging periods. If you elect to             control device is again operational, and
      emission limits for process vessels.                    establish separate operating limits for               it must be submitted at least 60 days
         (2) For the initial compliance                       different emission episodes, you may                  before the 240 hr/yr limit will be
      demonstration for condensers, you must                  elect to determine operating block                    exceeded.
      determine uncontrolled emissions using                  averages instead of the daily averages                   (d) Vapor balancing alternative. As an
      the procedures specified in                             specified in § 63.998(b)(3). An operating             alternative to the emission limits
      § 63.1257(d)(2), and you must determine                 block is a period of time that is equal               specified in Table 2 to this subpart, you
      controlled emissions using the                          to the time from the beginning to end of              may elect to implement vapor balancing
      procedures specified in                                 an emission episode or sequence of                    in accordance with § 63.1253(f), except
      § 63.1257(d)(3)(i)(B) and (iii).                        emission episodes.                                    as specified in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2)
         (3) You must demonstrate that each                      (g) Flow indicators. If flow to a control          of this section.
      process condenser is properly operated                  device could be intermittent, you must                   (1) To comply with § 63.1253(f)(6)(i),
      according to the procedures specified in                install, calibrate, and operate a flow                the owner or operator of an offsite
      § 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(C)(4)(ii) and                        indicator at the inlet or outlet of the               cleaning and reloading facility must
      (d)(3)(iii)(B). The reference in                        control device to identify periods of no              comply with §§ 63.7995 through
      § 63.1257(d)(3)(iii)(B) to the alternative              flow. Periods of no flow may not be                   63.8105 instead of complying with
      standard in § 63.1254(c) does not apply                 used in daily or block averages, and it               § 63.1253(f)(7)(ii).
      for the purposes of this subpart. As an                 may not be used in fulfilling a minimum                  (2) You may elect to set a pressure
      alternative to measuring the exhaust gas                data availability requirement.                        relief device to a value less than the 2.5


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00026   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                        69189

      psig required in § 63.1253(f)(5) if you                 you may conduct wastewater analyses                   exchange systems, except as specified in
      provide rationale in your notification of               using Method 1666 or 1671 of 40 CFR                   paragraphs (b) through (e) of this
      compliance status report explaining                     part 136, appendix A, and comply with                 section.
      why the alternative value is sufficient to              the sampling protocol requirements                      (b) The phrase a chemical
      prevent breathing losses at all times.                  specified in § 63.144(b)(5)(ii). The                  manufacturing process unit meeting the
                                                              validation requirements specified in                  conditions of § 63.100(b)(1) through
      § 63.8015 What requirements apply to my                                                                       (b)(3) of this section in § 63.104(a)
      equipment leaks?
                                                              § 63.144(b)(5)(iii) do not apply if you
                                                              use Method 1666 or 1671 of 40 CFR part                means the miscellaneous coating
         (a) You must meet each requirement                   136, appendix A.                                      manufacturing operations defined in
      in Table 3 to this subpart that applies to                 (c) For each enhanced biological                   § 63.7985(b) for the purposes of this
      your equipment leaks, except as                         treatment unit used to comply with the                subpart.
      specified in paragraphs (b) through (d)                 requirements in Table 4 to this subpart,                (c) The reference to § 63.100(c) in
      of this section.                                        you must monitor total suspended                      § 63.104(a) does not apply for the
         (b) The requirement in § 63.424(a) to                                                                      purposes of this subpart.
                                                              solids (TSS), biological oxygen demand
      inspect each piece of equipment during                                                                          (d) The reference to § 63.103(c)(1) in
                                                              (BOD), and the biomass concentration.
      the loading of a gasoline cargo tank                                                                          § 63.104(f)(1) does not apply. For the
      means when the equipment is operating                   In the precompliance report you must
                                                              identify and provide rationale for                    purposes of this subpart, records must
      in organic HAP service for the purposes                                                                       be retained as specified in § 63.10(b)(1).
      of this subpart.                                        proposed operating limits for these
                                                              parameters, methods for monitoring, the                 (e) The reference to the periodic
         (c) When § 63.1036 refers to batch                                                                         report required by § 63.152(c) of subpart
      processes, any part of the miscellaneous                frequency of monitoring, and
                                                              recordkeeping and reporting procedures                G of this part means the compliance
      coating manufacturing operations                                                                              report required by § 63.8075(e) for the
      applies for the purposes of this subpart.               that will demonstrate proper operation
                                                              of the enhanced biological treatment                  purposes of this subpart.
         (d) For the purposes of this subpart,
      pressure testing for leaks in accordance                unit. Alternatively, you may use the                  Alternative Means of Compliance
      with § 63.1036(b) is not required after                 precompliance report to request to
                                                              monitor other parameters, and you must                § 63.8050 How do I comply with emissions
      reconfiguration of an equipment train if                                                                      averaging for stationary process vessels at
      flexible hose connections are the only                  include a description of planned                      existing sources?
      disturbed equipment.                                    reporting and recordkeeping procedures
                                                              and the basis for the selected monitoring                (a) As an alternative to complying
      § 63.8020 What requirements apply to my                 frequencies and the methods that will                 with the requirements in Table 1 to this
      wastewater streams?                                     be used.                                              subpart for each individual stationary
         (a) You must meet each requirement                      (d) If you transfer the wastewater                 process vessel, you may elect to comply
      in Table 4 to this subpart that applies to              offsite for enhanced biological                       with emissions averaging for stationary
      your wastewater streams, and you must                   treatment, you must obtain written                    process vessels greater than or equal to
      meet each applicable requirement                        certification from the offsite facility               250 gallons (gal) at your existing
      specified in § 63.8000 and paragraphs                   stating that the offsite facility will                affected source as specified in
      (b) through (d) of this section.                        comply with the requirements of this                  paragraphs (b) through (e) of this
         (b) For each wastewater stream that                  subpart. The certifying entity may                    section.
      you generate, you must either designate                                                                          (b) General requirements. (1) A State
                                                              revoke the certification by providing 90
      the wastewater stream as a Group 1                                                                            may prohibit averaging of HAP
                                                              days notice. Upon expiration of the
      wastewater stream according to the                                                                            emissions and require the owner or
                                                              notice period, you may not transfer
      procedures in paragraph (b)(1) of this                                                                        operator of an existing affected source to
                                                              wastewater to that treatment facility.
      section, or you must determine whether                                                                        comply with the emission limits and
      the wastewater stream is a Group 1                      § 63.8025 What requirements apply to my               work practice standards in Table 1 to
      wastewater stream according to the                      transfer operations?                                  this subpart.
      procedures in paragraph (b)(2) of this                     (a) You must comply with each                         (2) All stationary process vessels in an
      section.                                                emission limit and work practice                      emissions averaging group must be
         (1) You may designate any wastewater                 standard in Table 5 to this subpart that              equipped with a tightly-fitting vented
      stream as a Group 1 wastewater stream.                  applies to your transfer operations, and              cover.
      You do not have to determine the                        you must meet all applicable                             (c) Initial compliance. To demonstrate
      concentration for any designated Group                  requirements specified in § 63.8000(b).               initial compliance with the emissions
      1 wastewater stream.                                    For each control device used to comply                averaging alternative, you must comply
         (2) For wastewater streams that you                  with Table 5 to this subpart, you must                with the provisions in paragraphs (c)(1)
      do not designate as Group 1 wastewater                  comply with subpart SS of this part 63                through (4) of this section.
      streams, you must use the procedures                    as specified in § 63.8000(c), except as                  (1) Estimate uncontrolled emissions
      specified in § 63.144(b) to establish the               specified in § 63.8000(d) and paragraph               from each affected stationary process
      concentrations, except as specified in                  (b) of this section.                                  vessel in pounds per batch using the
      paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (ii) of this                      (b) If you have Group 1 transfer                   procedures specified in § 63.1257(d)(2),
      section.                                                operations, as defined in § 63.8105, then             except as specified in paragraphs
         (i) References to Table 8 compounds                  all transfer racks used for bulk loading              (c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section. For the
      in § 63.144 do not apply for the                        coatings must meet the requirements for               purposes of this section, uncontrolled
      purposes of this subpart.                               high throughput transfer racks in                     emissions means the emissions from the
         (ii) Alternative test methods. (A) As                subpart SS of this part.                              vessel if it were equipped only with a
      an alternative to the test methods                                                                            tightly-fitting vented cover. You must
      specified in § 63.144(b)(5)(i), you may                 § 63.8030 What requirements apply to my               identify the range of typical operating
      use Method 8260 or 8270 as specified in                 heat exchange systems?                                parameters and perform the calculation
      § 63.1257(b)(10)(iii).                                    (a) You must comply with the                        using the values that result in the
         (B) As an alternative to using the                   requirements specified in Table 6 to this             highest emissions, and you must
      methods specified in § 63.144(b)(5)(i),                 subpart that apply to your heat                       document the operating parameters and


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00027   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69190             Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      resulting emissions calculations in the                    Mo=molecular weight of reference                      per batch developed in accordance with
      precompliance report.                                            compound (e.g., 18.02 for water)                paragraph (c) of this section.
         (i) When you are required to calculate                  Mi=molecular weight of individual                       (2) Sum the actual emissions for all of
      uncontrolled emissions from heating,                             condensable compounds in the                    the process vessels in the emissions
      you may not calculate emissions using                            emission stream                                 averaging group every three months,
      Equation 13 of subpart GGG of this part                    n=number of condensable compounds                     with the first 3-month period beginning
      63.                                                              in the emission stream                          on the compliance date, and compare
         (ii) The statement in                                      (2) Estimate controlled emissions in               the resulting total with the total
      § 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(B) that ‘‘the partial                   pounds per batch for each vessel as                   emissions for the vessels calculated in
      pressure of HAP shall be assumed to be                     specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through             accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this
      25 percent of the saturated value if the                   (iii) of this section.                                section. Compliance is demonstrated if
      purge flow rate is greater than 100 scfm’’                    (i) Except as specified in paragraphs              the sum of the actual emissions is less
      does not apply. For the purposes of this                                                                         than the emissions estimated in
                                                                 (c)(2)(ii) and (iii) of this section,
      subpart, multiply the HAP partial                                                                                accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this
                                                                 estimate controlled emissions as if the
      pressure in Equation 12 of 40 CFR part                                                                           section.
                                                                 vessel were controlled in compliance
      63, subpart GGG by a HAP-specific                                                                                  (3) For control devices, establish
                                                                 with entry 2.b.i. in Table 1 to this
      saturation factor determined in                                                                                  operating limits and monitor as
                                                                 subpart.
      accordance with Equations 1 through 3                                                                            specified in § 63.8000.
                                                                    (ii) Estimate the controlled emissions
      of this section. Solve equation 1 of this                                                                          (e) Recordkeeping and reporting.
                                                                 using the control level achieved on
      section iteratively beginning with                                                                               Comply with §§ 63.8070, 63.8075, and
                                                                 November 15, 1990 if that value is
      saturation factors (in the right-hand side                                                                       63.8080.
                                                                 greater than the applicable control level
      of the equation) of 1.0 for each
                                                                 required by entry 2.b.i in Table 1 to this
      condensable compound. Stop iterating                                                                             § 63.8055 How do I comply with a weight
                                                                 subpart.                                              percent HAP limit in coating products?
      when the calculated saturation factors
                                                                    (iii) Estimate the controlled emissions
      for all compounds are the same to two                                                                               (a) As an alternative to complying
                                                                 using the control level required to
      significant figures for subsequent                                                                               with the requirements in Table 1 to this
                                                                 comply with a State or Federal rule
      iterations. Note that for multi-                                                                                 subpart for each individual stationary
                                                                 other than this subpart if that level is
      component emission streams, saturation                                                                           process vessel at an existing source, you
                                                                 greater than the applicable control level
      factors must be calculated for all                                                                               may elect to comply with a 5 weight
                                                                 required by entry 2.b.i in Table 1 to this
      noncondensables in the emission                                                                                  percent HAP limit for process vessels at
                                                                 subpart and the other rule was in effect
      stream.                                                                                                          your affected source that are used to
                                                                 before the date when you request
                                                                 approval to comply with emissions                     manufacture coatings with a HAP
                            KiA                                                                                        content of less than 0.05 kg per kg
         Si =                    n                  Eq. 1        averaging.
                                                                                                                       product as specified in paragraph (b) of
                K i A + V + ∑ Si Vi sat                             (3) Determine actual emissions in
                                                                                                                       this section.
                                                                 pounds per batch for each vessel in
                                i =1                                                                                      (b) You may only comply with the
                                                                 accordance with paragraphs (c)(2)(i),
                                                                 (ii), or (iii), as applicable.                        alternative during the production of
                                                                    (i) If emissions are routed through a              coatings that contain less than 5 weight
                             VPi                                                                                       percent HAP, as determined using any
             Vi sat =                           Eq. 2            closed-vent system to a condenser
                                                                                                                       of the procedures specified in
                                n                              control device, determine controlled
                         PT − ∑ Pi                             emissions using the procedures                        paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this
                              i =1                             specified in § 63.1257(d)(3).                         section.
                                                                    (ii) If emissions are routed through a                (1) Method 311 (appendix A to 40
                                                                 closed-vent system to any control device              CFR part 63).
                                       1/ 3                      other than a condenser, determine                        (2) Method 24 (appendix A to 40 CFR
                        M                                                                                            part 60). You may use Method 24 to
                Ki = Ko  o                   Eq. 3             actual emissions after determining the
                                                                                                                       determine the mass fraction of volatile
                         Mi                                    efficiency of the control device using
                                                                 the procedures in subpart SS of this part             matter and use that value as a substitute
      where:                                                                                                           for the mass fraction of HAP.
                                                                 63 as specified in § 63.8000(c).
      S1=saturation factor for individual                           (iii) If the vessel is vented to the                  (3) You may use an alternative test
           condensable compounds in the                          atmosphere, then actual emissions are                 method for determining mass fraction of
           emission stream                                       equal to the uncontrolled emissions                   HAP if you obtain prior approval by the
      Pi=partial pressure of individual                                                                                Administrator. You must follow the
                                                                 estimated in accordance with paragraph
           condensable compounds in the                                                                                procedure in § 63.7(f) to submit an
                                                                 (c)(1) of this section.
           emission stream calculated using                                                                            alternative test method for approval.
                                                                    (4) Provide rationale in the
           Raoult’s Law or other appropriate
                                                                 precompliance report for why the sum                  Notification, Reports, and Records
           methods
      PT=pressure of the vessel vapor space                      of the actual emissions will be less than
                                                                                                                                                                       ER11DE03.003</MATH>




                                                                 the sum of emissions from the vessels if              § 63.8070 What notifications must I submit
      A=surface area of liquid                                                                                         and when?
      V=purge flow rate as used in Equation                      they had been controlled in accordance
           12 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart GGG                     with Table 1 to this subpart. The                        (a) You must submit all of the
      Visat=volumetric flowrate of condensable                   approved actual emissions calculated                  notifications in §§ 63.6(h)(4) and (5),
           compounds in the emission stream                      according to paragraph (c)(3) of this                 63.7(b) and (c), 63.8(e), (f)(4) and (6),
                                                                                                                                                                       ER11DE03.002</MATH>




      Ki=mass transfer coefficient of                            section are emission limits that must be              63.9(b) through (h) that apply to you by
           individual condensable compounds                      incorporated into your operating permit.              the dates specified.
           in the emission stream                                   (d) Continuous compliance. (1)                        (b) Initial notification. (1) As specified
      Ko=mass transfer coefficient of a                          Maintain a monthly log of the number                  in § 63.9(b)(2), if you have an existing
           reference compound (e.g., 0.83 cm/                    of batches produced that can be                       affected source on December 11, 2003,
                                                                                                                                                                       ER11DE03.001</MATH>




           s for water)                                          correlated with the emissions estimates               you must submit an initial notification


VerDate jul<14>2003     15:46 Dec 10, 2003    Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00028   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                       Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                         69191

      not later than 120 calendar days after                   than those specified in §§ 63.8005                       (v) Identify storage tanks for which
      December 11, 2003.                                       through 63.8025, including parameters                 you are complying with the vapor
         (2) As specified in § 63.9(b)(3), if you              for enhanced biological treatment units.              balancing alternative in § 63.8010(e).
      start up your new affected source on or                  Alternatively, you may make these                        (vi) If you transfer Group 1
      after December 11, 2003, you must                        requests according to § 63.8(f).                      wastewater stream to an offsite facility
      submit an initial notification not later                    (2) Descriptions of daily or per batch             for treatment, include the name and
      than 120 calendar days after you                         demonstrations to verify that control                 location of the transferee and a
      become subject to this subpart.                          devices subject to § 63.8000(d)(3) are                description of the Group 1 wastewater
         (c) Notification of performance test. If              operating as designed.                                stream that is sent to the treatment
      you are required to conduct a                               (3) A description of the test                      facility. If the offsite facility provides
      performance test, you must submit a                      conditions, data, calculations, and other             enhanced biological treatment, also
      notification of intent to conduct a                      information used to establish operating               include the certification required by
      performance test at least 60 calendar                    limits according to § 63.8005(e)(1).                  § 63.8020(d) that the offsite facility will
      days before the performance test is                         (4) If you comply with emissions                   comply with the requirements of this
      scheduled to begin as required in                        averaging in § 63.8050, the data and                  subpart.
      § 63.7(b)(1). For any performance test                   results of emission calculations as                      (e) Compliance report. The
      required as part of the initial                          specified in § 63.8050(c)(1) through (3),             compliance report must contain the
      compliance procedures for process                        and rationale for why the sum of actual               information specified in paragraphs
      vessels in Table 1 to this subpart, you                  emissions will be less than the sum of                (e)(1) through (8) of this section.
      must also submit the test plan required                  emissions if the process vessels were                    (1) Company name and address.
      by § 63.7(c) and the emission profile                    controlled in accordance with Table 1 to                 (2) Statement by a responsible official
      with the notification of the performance                 this subpart as specified in                          with that official’s name, title, and
      test.                                                    § 63.8050(c)(4).                                      signature, certifying the accuracy of the
                                                                  (d) Notification of compliance status              content of the report.
      § 63.8075       What reports must I submit and           report. You must submit a notification                   (3) Date of report and beginning and
      when?                                                    of compliance status report according to              ending dates of the reporting period.
         (a) You must submit each report in                    the schedule in paragraph (d)(2) of this                 (4) Applicable records and
      Table 9 to this subpart that applies to                  section, and the notification of                      information for periodic reports as
      you.                                                     compliance status report must include                 specified in referenced subparts F, SS,
         (b) Unless the Administrator has                      the information specified in paragraph                TT, UU, and WW of this part 63.
      approved a different schedule for                        (d)(2) of this section.                                  (5) For each SSM during which excess
      submission of reports under § 63.10(a),                     (1) You must submit the notification               emissions occur, the compliance report
      you must submit each report as                           of compliance status report no later than             must include the information specified
      specified in Table 9 to this subpart and                 150 days after the applicable                         in paragraphs (e)(5)(i) and (ii) of this
      paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section.               compliance date specified in § 63.7995.               section.
         (1) The compliance reports must be                       (2) The notification of compliance                    (i) Records that the procedures
      submitted semiannually. The first report                 status report must include the                        specified in your startup, shutdown,
      must be submitted no later than 240                      information in paragraphs (d)(3)(i)                   and malfunction plan (SSMP) were
      days after the applicable compliance                     through (vi) of this section.                         followed or documentation of actions
      date and shall cover the 6-month period                     (i) The results of any applicability               taken that are not consistent with the
      beginning on the compliance date. Each                   determinations (e.g., HAP content of                  SSMP.
      subsequent compliance report must                        coating products; halogenated vent                       (ii) A description of each malfunction.
      cover the 6-month period following the                   stream determinations; group                             (6) The compliance report must
      preceding period.                                        determinations for storage tanks,                     contain the information on deviations,
         (2) For each affected source that is                  wastewater, and transfer operations; and              as defined in § 63.8105, according to
      subject to permitting regulations                        equipment that is in organic HAP                      paragraphs (e)(6)(i), (ii), and (iii) of this
      pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR                     service).                                             section.
      part 71, and if the permitting authority                    (ii) The results of performance tests,                (i) If there are no deviations from any
      has established dates for submitting                     engineering analyses, design                          emission limit, operating limit, or work
      semiannual reports pursuant to 40 CFR                    evaluations, flare compliance                         practice standard specified in this
      70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR                             assessments, inspections and repairs,                 subpart, include a statement that there
      71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), you may submit the                   and calculations used to demonstrate                  were no deviations from the emission
      first and subsequent compliance reports                  initial compliance according to                       limits, operating limits, or work practice
      according to the dates the permitting                    §§ 63.8005 through 63.8025 and                        standards during the reporting period.
      authority has established instead of                     63.8055. For performance tests, results                  (ii) For each deviation from an
      according to the dates in Table 9.                       must include descriptions of sampling                 emission limit, operating limit, and
         (c) Precompliance report. You must                    and analysis procedures and quality                   work practice standard that occurs at an
      submit a precompliance report to                         assurance procedures.                                 affected source where you are not using
      request approval of any of the                              (iii) Descriptions of monitoring                   a continuous monitoring system (CMS)
      information in paragraphs (c)(1) through                 devices, monitoring frequencies, and the              to comply with the emission limit or
      (4) of this section. We will either                      operating limits established during the               work practice standards in this subpart,
      approve or disapprove the report within                  initial compliance demonstrations,                    you must include the information in
      90 days after we receive it. If we                       including data and calculations to                    paragraphs (e)(6)(ii)(A) through (C) of
      disapprove the report, you must still be                 support the levels you establish.                     this section.
      in compliance with the emission                             (iv) Identification of parts of the                   (A) The total operating time of each
      limitations and work practice standards                  affected source that are subject to                   affected source during the reporting
      in this subpart by the compliance date.                  overlapping requirements described in                 period.
         (1) Requests for approval to set                      § 63.8090 and the authority under                        (B) Information on the number,
      operating limits for parameters other                    which you will comply.                                duration, and cause of deviations


VerDate jul<14>2003    17:52 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00029   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69192           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      (including unknown cause, if                            status report or any previously reported                (g) If you establish separate operating
      applicable), as applicable, and the                     change to the notification of compliance              limits as allowed in § 63.8005(e), you
      corrective action taken.                                status report, you must document the                  must maintain a log of operation or a
         (C) Operating logs for the day(s)                    change in your compliance report. The                 daily schedule indicating the time when
      during which the deviation occurred,                    notification must include all of the                  you change from one operating limit to
      except operating logs are not required                  information in paragraphs (e)(8)(i)(A)                another.
      for deviations of the work practice                     and (B) of this section.
      standards for equipment leaks.                            (A) Revisions to any of the                         Other Requirements and Information
         (iii) For each deviation from an                     information reported in the original                  § 63.8090 What compliance options do I
      emission limit or operating limit                       notification of compliance status report              have if part of my plant is subject to both
      occurring at an affected source where                   under paragraph (d) of this section.                  this subpart and another subpart?
      you are using a CMS to comply with the                    (B) Information required by the                       (a) Compliance with 40 CFR parts 264
      emission limit in this subpart, you must                notification of compliance status report              and 265, subparts AA, BB, and/or CC.
      include the information in paragraphs                   under paragraph (d) of this section for               (1) After the compliance dates specified
      (e)(6)(iii)(A) through (K) of this section.             changes involving the addition of                     in § 63.7995, if a control device that you
      This includes periods of SSM.                           processes or equipment at the affected                use to comply with this subpart is also
         (A) The date and time that each CMS                  source.
                                                                                                                    subject to monitoring, recordkeeping,
      was inoperative, except for zero (low-                    (ii) You must submit a report 60 days
                                                                                                                    and reporting requirements in 40 CFR
      level) and high-level checks.                           before the scheduled implementation
                                                              date of any of the changes identified in              part 264, subpart AA, BB, or CC; or the
         (B) The date, time, and duration that                                                                      monitoring and recordkeeping
      each CEMS was out-of-control,                           paragraphs (e)(8)(ii)(A), (B), or (C) of this
                                                              section.                                              requirements in 40 CFR part 265,
      including the information in                                                                                  subpart AA, BB, or CC; and you comply
      § 63.8(c)(8).                                             (A) Any change to the information
                                                              contained in either the precompliance                 with the periodic reporting
         (C) The date and time that each
                                                              report or any previously reported                     requirements under 40 CFR part 264,
      deviation started and stopped, and
                                                              change to the precompliance report.                   subpart AA, BB, or CC that would apply
      whether each deviation occurred during
                                                                (B) A change in the status of a control             to the device if your facility had final-
      a period of startup, shutdown, or
                                                              device from small to large.                           permitted status, you may elect to
      malfunction or during another period.
                                                                (C) A change in compliance status.                  comply either with the monitoring,
         (D) A summary of the total duration
                                                                                                                    recordkeeping, and reporting
      of the deviation during the reporting                   § 63.8080    What records must I keep?                requirements of this subpart; or with the
      period, and the total duration as a                       You must keep the records specified                 monitoring and recordkeeping
      percent of the total source operating                   in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this                 requirements in 40 CFR part 264 or 265
      time during that reporting period.                      section.
         (E) A breakdown of the total duration                                                                      and the reporting requirements in 40
                                                                (a) Each applicable record required by              CFR part 264, as described in this
      of the deviations during the reporting                  subpart A of this part 63 and in
      period into those that are due to startup,                                                                    paragraph (a), which constitute
                                                              referenced subparts SS, TT, UU, and                   compliance with the monitoring,
      shutdown, control equipment problems,                   WW of this part 63.
      process problems, other known causes,                                                                         recordkeeping, and reporting
                                                                (b) If complying with emissions                     requirements of this subpart. If you elect
      and other unknown causes.                               averaging, records of the monthly
         (F) A summary of the total duration of                                                                     to comply with the monitoring,
                                                              number of batches for each process                    recordkeeping, and reporting
      CMS downtime during the reporting                       vessel, the quarterly actual emissions for
      period, and the total duration of CMS                                                                         requirements in 40 CFR parts 264 and/
                                                              each process vessel, the quarterly                    or 265, you must report the information
      downtime as a percent of the total                      estimated emissions for each process
      source operating time during that                                                                             required for the compliance report in
                                                              vessel if it had been controlled as                   § 63.8075(e), and you must identify in
      reporting period.                                       specified in Table 1 to this subpart, and
         (G) An identification of each HAP that                                                                     the notification of compliance status
                                                              comparison of the sums of the quarterly               report required by § 63.8075(d) the
      is known to be in the emission stream                   actual and estimated emissions as
      or wastewater stream, as applicable.                                                                          monitoring, recordkeeping, and
                                                              specified in § 63.8050(d).
         (H) A description of the product being                                                                     reporting authority under which you
                                                                (c) A record of each time a safety
      produced.                                                                                                     will comply.
                                                              device is opened to avoid unsafe
         (I) Identification of the CMS.                       conditions in accordance with                           (2) After the compliance dates
         (J) The date of the latest CMS                       § 63.8000(b)(2).                                      specified in this section, if any
      certification or audit.                                   (d) Records of the results of each                  equipment at an affected source that is
         (K) The operating day or operating                   CPMS calibration check and the                        subject to this subpart is also subject to
      block average values of monitored                       maintenance performed, as specified in                40 CFR part 264, subpart BB or to 40
      parameters for each day(s) during which                 § 63.8000(d)(5).                                      CFR part 265, subpart BB, then
      the deviation occurred.                                   (e) For each CEMS, you must keep the                compliance with the recordkeeping and
         (7) If you use a CEMS, and there were                records of the date and time that each                reporting requirements of 40 CFR part
      no periods during which it was out-of-                  deviation started and stopped, and                    264 and/or 265 may be used to comply
      control as specified in § 63.8(c)(7),                   whether the deviation occurred during a               with the recordkeeping and reporting
      include a statement that there were no                  period of startup, shutdown, or                       requirements of § 63.1255, to the extent
      periods during which the CEMS was                       malfunction or during another period.                 that the requirements of 40 CFR part 264
      out-of-control during the reporting                       (f) In the SSMP required by                         and/or 265 duplicate the requirements
      period.                                                 § 63.6(e)(3), you are not required to                 of this subpart. You must identify in the
         (8) Notification of process change. (i)              include Group 2 or non-affected                       notification of compliance status report
      Except as specified in paragraph                        emission points. For equipment leaks                  required by § 63.8075(d) if you will
      (e)(8)(ii) of this section, whenever you                only, the SSMP requirement is limited                 comply with the recordkeeping and
      change any of the information submitted                 to control devices and is optional for                reporting authority under 40 CFR part
      in either the notification of compliance                other equipment.                                      264 and/or 265.


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00030   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                       69193

        (b) Compliance with 40 CFR part 60,                   § 63.8105    What definitions apply to this           (SIC) codes 285 or 289 and North
      subpart Kb. After the compliance dates                  subpart?                                              American Industry Classification
      specified in § 63.7995, you are in                         (a) For an affected source complying               System (NAICS) codes 3255 and 3259.
      compliance with this subpart for any                    with the requirements in subpart SS of                   Construction means the onsite
      storage tank that is assigned to                        this part 63, the terms used in this                  fabrication, erection, or installation of
      miscellaneous coating manufacturing                     subpart and in subpart SS of this part 63             an affected source. Addition of new
      operations and that is both controlled                  have the meaning given them in                        equipment to an affected source does
      with a floating roof and in compliance                  § 63.981, except as specified in                      not constitute construction, but it may
      with the provisions of 40 CFR part 60,                  §§ 63.8000(d)(5)(ii) and (7),                         constitute reconstruction of the affected
      subpart Kb. You are in compliance with                  63.8010(c)(2), 63.8025(b), and paragraph              source if it satisfies the definition of
      this subpart if you have a storage tank                 (g) of this section.                                  reconstruction in § 63.2.
      with a fixed roof, closed-vent system,                     (b) For an affected source complying                  Deviation means any instance in
      and control device in compliance with                   with the requirements in subpart TT of                which an affected source subject to this
      40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb, you must                    this part 63, the terms used in this                  subpart, or an owner or operator of such
      comply with the monitoring,                             subpart and in subpart TT of this part                a source:
                                                              63 have the meaning given them in                        (1) Fails to meet any requirement or
      recordkeeping, and reporting
                                                              § 63.1001.                                            obligation established by this subpart
      requirements in this subpart. You must
                                                                 (c) For an affected source complying               including, but not limited to, any
      also identify in your notification of                                                                         emission limit, operating limit, or work
                                                              with the requirements in subpart UU of
      compliance status report required by                                                                          practice standard;
                                                              this part 63, the terms used in this
      § 63.8075(d) which storage tanks are in                                                                          (2) Fails to meet any term or condition
                                                              subpart and in subpart UU of this part
      compliance with 40 CFR part 60,                                                                               that is adopted to implement an
                                                              63 have the meaning given them in
      subpart Kb.                                                                                                   applicable requirement in this subpart
                                                              § 63.1020.
      § 63.8095 What parts of the General                        (d) For an affected source complying               and that is included in the operating
      Provisions apply to me?                                 with the requirements in subpart WW of                permit for any affected source required
                                                              this part 63, the terms used in this                  to obtain such a permit; or
        Table 10 to this subpart shows which                  subpart and subpart WW of this part 63                   (3) Fails to meet any emission limit,
      parts of the General Provisions in                      have the meaning given them in                        operating limit, or work practice
      §§ 63.1 through 63.15 apply to you.                     § 63.1061, except as specified in                     standard in this subpart during startup,
                                                              §§ 63.8000(d)(7), 63.8010(c)(2), and                  shutdown, or malfunction, regardless of
      § 63.8100 Who implements and enforces
                                                              paragraph (g) of this section.                        whether or not such failure is permitted
      this subpart?
                                                                 (e) For an affected source complying               by this subpart.
         (a) This subpart can be implemented                  with requirements in §§ 63.1253,                         Enhanced biological treatment system
      and enforced by us, the U.S.                            63.1257, and 63.1258, the terms used in               means an aerated, thoroughly mixed
      Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.                   this subpart and in §§ 63.1253, 63.1257,              treatment unit(s) that contains biomass
      EPA), or a delegated authority such as                  and 63.1258 have the meaning given                    suspended in water followed by a
      your State, local, or tribal agency. If the             them in § 63.1251, except as specified in             clarifier that removes biomass from the
      U.S. EPA Administrator has delegated                    § 63.8000(d)(7) and paragraph (g) of this             treated water and recycles recovered
      authority to your State, local, or tribal               section.                                              biomass to the aeration unit. The mixed
      agency, then that agency also has the                      (f) For an affected source complying               liquor volatile suspended solids
      authority to implement and enforce this                 with the requirements of § 63.104, the                (biomass) is greater than 1 kilogram per
      subpart. You should contact your U.S.                   terms used in this subpart and in                     cubic meter throughout each aeration
      EPA Regional Office to find out if this                 § 63.104 have the meaning given them                  unit. The biomass is suspended and
      subpart is delegated to your State, local,              in § 63.101, except as specified in                   aerated in the water of the aeration
      or tribal agency.                                       § 63.8000(d)(7) and paragraph (g) of this             unit(s) either by submerged air flow or
                                                              section.                                              mechanical agitation. A thoroughly
         (b) In delegating implementation and
                                                                 (g) All other terms used in this                   mixed treatment unit is a unit that is
      enforcement authority of this subpart to
                                                              subpart are defined in the CAA, in 40                 designed and operated to approach or
      a State, local, or tribal agency under 40               CFR 63.2, and in this paragraph (g). If               achieve uniform biomass distribution
      CFR part 63, subpart E, the authorities                 a term is defined in § 63.2, § 63.981,                and organic compound concentration
      contained in paragraphs (b)(1) through                  § 63.1001, § 63.1020, § 63.1061, or                   throughout the aeration unit by quickly
      (4) of this section are retained by the                 § 63.1251 and in this paragraph (g), the              dispersing the recycled biomass and the
      Administrator of U.S. EPA and are not                   definition in this paragraph (g) applies              wastewater entering the unit.
      delegated to the State, local, or tribal                for the purposes of this subpart.                        Excess emissions means emissions
      agency.                                                    Bulk loading means the loading, into               greater than those allowed by the
         (1) Approval of alternatives to the                  a tank truck or rail car, of liquid coating           emission limit.
      non-opacity emission limits and work                    products that contain one or more of the                 Group 1a storage tank means a storage
      practice standards in § 63.8000(a) under                organic HAP, as defined in section 112                tank at an existing source with a
      § 63.6(g).                                              of the CAA, from a loading rack. A                    capacity greater than or equal to 20,000
         (2) Approval of major alternatives to                loading rack is the system used to fill               gal storing material that has a maximum
      test methods under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and                 tank trucks and railcars at a single                  true vapor pressure of total organic HAP
      (f) and as defined in § 63.90.                          geographic site.                                      greater than or equal to 1.9 pounds per
                                                                 Coating means any material such as a               square inch, absolute (psia). Group 1a
         (3) Approval of major alternatives to                paint, ink, or adhesive that is intended              storage tank also means a storage tank
      monitoring under § 63.8(f) and as                       to be applied to a substrate and consists             at a new source with either a capacity
      defined in § 63.90.                                     of a mixture of resins, pigments,                     greater than or equal to 25,000 gal
         (4) Approval of major alternatives to                solvents, and/or other additives.                     storing material that has a maximum
      recordkeeping and reporting under                       Typically, these materials are described              true vapor pressure of total HAP greater
      § 63.10(f) and as defined in § 63.90.                   by Standard Industry Classification                   than or equal to 0.1 psia or a capacity


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00031   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69194           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

      greater than or equal to 20,000 gal and                 average of the liquid storage or transfer             that has been validated according to the
      less than 25,000 gal storing material that              temperature for liquids stored or                     procedures in Method 301 of appendix
      has a maximum true vapor pressure of                    transferred above or below the ambient                A of this part, are not considered
      total HAP greater than or equal to 1.5                  temperature or at the local maximum                   process vessel vents. Flexible elephant
      psia.                                                   monthly average temperature as                        trunk systems when used with closed
         Group 1b storage tank means a storage                reported by the National Weather                      vent systems and drawing ambient air
      tank at a new source that has a capacity                Service for liquids stored or transferred             (i.e., the system is not ducted, piped, or
      greater than or equal to 10,000 gal,                    at the ambient temperature, as                        otherwise connected to the unit
      stores material that has a maximum true                 determined:                                           operations) away from operators when
      vapor pressure of total organic HAP                        (1) In accordance with methods                     vessels are opened are not process
      greater than or equal to 0.02 psia, and                 described in American Petroleum                       vessel vents. Process vessel vents do not
      is not a Group 1a storage tank.                         Institute Publication 2517, Evaporative               include vents on storage tanks,
         Group 2 storage tank means a storage                 Loss From External Floating-Roof Tanks                wastewater emission sources, or pieces
      tank that does not meet the definition of               (incorporated by reference as specified               of equipment subject to the
      a Group 1a or Group 1b storage tank.                    in § 63.14 of subpart A of this part 63);             requirements in Table 3 of this subpart.
         Group 1 transfer operations means all                or                                                    A gas stream going to a fuel gas system
      bulk loading of coating products if the                    (2) As obtained from standard                      is not a process vessel vent. A gas
      coatings contain greater than or equal to               reference texts; or                                   stream routed to a process for a process
      3.0 million gallons per year (gal/yr) of                   (3) As determined by the American                  purpose is not a process vessel vent.
      HAP with a weighted average HAP                         Society for Testing and Materials                        Recovery device, as used in the
      partial pressure greater than or equal to               Method D2879–83 (incorporated by                      wastewater provisions, means an
      1.5 psia.                                               reference as specified in § 63.14 of                  individual unit of equipment used for
         Group 2 transfer operations means                    subpart A of this part); or                           the purpose of recovering chemicals for
      bulk loading of coating products that                      (4) Any other method approved by the               fuel value (i.e., net positive heating
      does not meet the definition of Group 1                 Administrator.                                        value), use, reuse, or for sale for fuel
      transfer operations.                                       Partially soluble HAP means HAP                    value, use, or reuse. Examples of
         Group 1 wastewater stream means a                    listed in Table 7 of this subpart.                    equipment that may be recovery devices
      wastewater stream that contains total                      Point of determination (POD) means                 include organic removal devices such as
      partially soluble and soluble HAP at an                 each point where process wastewater                   decanters, strippers, or thin-film
      annual average concentration greater                    exits the miscellaneous coating                       evaporation units. To be a recovery
      than or equal to 4,000 parts per million                operations.                                           device, a decanter and any other
      by weight (ppmw) and load greater than                     Note to definition for point of                    equipment based on the operating
      or equal to 750 pounds per year (lb/yr)                 determination: The regulation allows                  principle of gravity separation must
      at an existing source or greater than or                determination of the characteristics of a             receive only multi-phase liquid streams.
      equal to 1,600 ppmw and any partially                   wastewater stream at the point of                     A recovery device is considered part of
      soluble and soluble HAP load at a new                   determination or downstream of the point of           the miscellaneous coating
                                                              determination if corrections are made for             manufacturing operations.
      source.
                                                              changes in flow rate and annual average
         Group 2 wastewater stream means a                                                                             Responsible official means
                                                              concentration of partially soluble and soluble
      wastewater stream that does not meet                    HAP compounds as determined in § 63.144.              responsible official as defined in 40 CFR
      the definition of a Group 1 wastewater                  Such changes include losses by air                    70.2.
      stream.                                                 emissions; reduction of annual average                   Safety device means a closure device
         Halogenated vent stream means a                      concentration or changes in flow rate by              such as a pressure relief valve, frangible
      vent stream determined to contain                       mixing with other water or wastewater                 disc, fusible plug, or any other type of
      halogen atoms in organic compounds at                   streams; and reduction in flow rate or annual         device which functions exclusively to
      a concentration greater than or equal to                average concentration by treating or                  prevent physical damage or permanent
                                                              otherwise handling the wastewater stream to           deformation to a unit or its air emission
      20 ppmv as determined by the
                                                              remove or destroy HAP.                                control equipment by venting gases or
      procedures specified in § 63.8000(b).
         Hydrogen halide and halogen HAP                        Process vessel means any stationary or              vapors directly to the atmosphere
      means hydrogen chloride, chlorine, and                  portable tank or other vessel with a                  during unsafe conditions resulting from
      hydrogen fluoride.                                      capacity greater than or equal to 250 gal             an unplanned, accidental, or emergency
         In organic HAP service means that a                  and in which mixing, blending,                        event. For the purposes of this subpart,
      piece of equipment either contains or                   diluting, dissolving, temporary holding,              a safety device is not used for routine
      contacts a fluid (liquid or gas) that is at             and other processing steps occur in the               venting of gases or vapors from the
      least 5 percent by weight of total organic              manufacturing of a coating.                           vapor headspace underneath a cover
      HAP as determined according to the                        Process vessel vent means a vent from               such as during filling of the unit or to
      provisions of § 63.180(d). The                          a process vessel or vents from multiple               adjust the pressure in response to
      provisions of § 63.180(d) also specify                  process vessels that are manifolded                   normal daily diurnal ambient
      how to determine that a piece of                        together into a common header, through                temperature fluctuations. A safety
      equipment is not in organic HAP                         which a HAP-containing gas stream is,                 device is designed to remain in a closed
      service.                                                or has the potential to be, released to the           position during normal operations and
         Large control device means a control                 atmosphere. Emission streams that are                 open only when the internal pressure,
      device that controls total HAP emissions                undiluted and uncontrolled containing                 or another relevant parameter, exceeds
      of greater than or equal to 10 tpy, before              less than 50 ppmv HAP, as determined                  the device threshold setting applicable
      control.                                                through process knowledge that no HAP                 to the air emission control equipment as
         Maximum true vapor pressure means                    are present in the emission stream or                 determined by the owner or operator
      the equilibrium partial pressure exerted                using an engineering assessment as                    based on manufacturer
      by the total organic HAP in the stored                  discussed in § 63.1257(d)(2)(ii), test data           recommendations, applicable
      or transferred liquid at the temperature                using Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60,                    regulations, fire protection and
      equal to the highest calendar-month                     appendix A, or any other test method                  prevention codes and practices, or other


VerDate jul<14>2003   15:46 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00032   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                      Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                               69195

      requirements for the safe handling of                    steps taken differ from routine                       contain an accumulation of wastewater
      flammable, combustible, explosive,                       procedures for putting the equipment                  and is constructed primarily of
      reactive, or hazardous materials.                        into operation.                                       nonearthen materials (e.g., wood,
         Shutdown means the cessation of                          Storage tank means a tank or other                 concrete, steel, plastic) which provide
      operation of an affected source, any                     vessel that is used to store organic                  structural support.
      process vessels within an affected                       liquids that contain one or more HAP as                  Wastewater stream means water that
      source, or equipment required or used                    raw material feedstocks or products.                  is discarded from miscellaneous coating
      to comply with this subpart if steps                     The following are not considered                      manufacturing operations through a
      taken to cease operation differ from                     storage tanks for the purposes of this                POD, and that contains an annual
      those under routine procedures for                       subpart:                                              average concentration of total partially
      removing the vessel or equipment from                       (1) Vessels permanently attached to                soluble and soluble HAP compounds of
      service. Shutdown also applies to the                    motor vehicles such as trucks, railcars,              at least 1,600 ppmw at any flow rate.
      emptying and degassing of storage                        barges, or ships;                                     For the purposes of this subpart,
      tanks.                                                      (2) Pressure vessels designed to                   noncontact cooling water is not
         Small control device means a control                  operate in excess of 204.9 kilopascals                considered a wastewater stream.
      device that controls total HAP emissions                 and without emissions to the
      of less than 10 tpy, before control.                     atmosphere;                                             Work practice standard means any
         Soluble HAP means the HAP listed in                      (3) Vessels storing organic liquids that           design, equipment, work practice, or
      Table 8 of this subpart.                                 contain HAP only as impurities;                       operational standard, or combination
         Startup means the setting in operation                   (4) Wastewater storage tanks; and                  thereof, that is promulgated pursuant to
      of a new affected source. For new                           (5) Process vessels.                               section 112(h) of the Clean Air Act.
      equipment added to an affected source,                      Total organic compounds or (TOC)                   Tables to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63
      including equipment required or used to                  means the total gaseous organic
      comply with this subpart, startup means                  compounds (minus methane and                            As required in § 63.8005, you must
      the first time the equipment is put into                 ethane) in a vent stream.                             meet each emission limit and work
      operation. Startup includes the setting                     Wastewater storage tank means a                    practice standard in the following table
      in operation of equipment any time the                   stationary structure that is designed to              that applies to your process vessels:

      TABLE 1 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR PROCESS VESSELS
      For each . . .                                            You must . . .                                        And you must . . .

      1. Portable process vessel at an existing                 Equip the vessel with a cover or lid that must        Non applicable
        source.                                                   be in place at all times when the vessel
                                                                  contains a HAP.

      2. Stationary process vessel at an existing               a. Equip the vessel with a cover or lid that          i. Considering both capture and any combina-
        source.                                                   must be in place at all times when the ves-             tion of control (except a flare), reduce emis-
                                                                  sel contains a HAP; or.                                 sions by ≥75 percent by weight for each
                                                                                                                          HAP with a vapor pressure ≥0.6 kPa and by
                                                                                                                          ≥60 percent for each HAP with a vapor
                                                                                                                          pressure <0.6 kPa.
                                                                b. Equip the vessel with a tightly fitting vented     i. Reduce emissions of each HAP with a
                                                                  cover or lid that must be closed at all times           vapor pressure ≥0.6 kPa by ≥75 percent by
                                                                  when the vessel contains HAP.                           weight and each HAP with a vapor pressure
                                                                                                                          <0.6 kPa by ≥60 percent by weight by vent-
                                                                                                                          ing emissions through a closed-vent system
                                                                                                                          to any combination of control devices (ex-
                                                                                                                          cept a flare); or
                                                                                                                      ii. Reduce emissions of total organic HAP by
                                                                                                                          venting emissions from a non-halogenated
                                                                                                                          vent stream through a closed-vent system
                                                                                                                          to a flare; or
                                                                                                                      iii. Reduce emissions of total organic HAP by
                                                                                                                          venting emissions through a closed-vent
                                                                                                                          system to a condenser that reduces the
                                                                                                                          outlet gas temperature to:
                                                                                                                          <10°C if the process vessel contains HAP
                                                                                                                          with a partial pressure <0.6 kPa, or
                                                                                                                          <2°C if the process vessel contains HAP
                                                                                                                          with a partial pressure ≥0.6 kPa and <17.2
                                                                                                                          kPa, or
                                                                                                                         <¥5°C if the process vessel contains HAP
                                                                                                                          with a partial pressure ≥17.2 kPa.




VerDate jul<14>2003    17:52 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00033   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
      69196           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

            TABLE 1 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR PROCESS
                                                VESSELS—Continued
      For each . . .                                            You must . . .                                        And you must . . .

      3. Portable and stationary process vessel at a            a. Equip the vessel with a tightly fitting vented     i. Reduce emissions of total HAP by ≥95 per-
        new source.                                               cover or lid that must be closed at all times           cent by weight by venting emissions
                                                                  when the vessel contains HAP.                           through a closed-vent system to any com-
                                                                                                                          bination of control devices (except a flare);
                                                                                                                          or
                                                                                                                      ii. Reduce emissions of total organic HAP by
                                                                                                                          venting emissions from a non-halogenated
                                                                                                                          vent stream through a closed-vent system
                                                                                                                          to a flare; or
                                                                                                                      iii. Reduce emissions of total organic HAP by
                                                                                                                          venting emissions through a closed-vent
                                                                                                                          system to a condenser that reduces the
                                                                                                                          outlet gas temperature to:
                                                                                                                          <¥4°C if the process vessel contains HAP
                                                                                                                          with a partial pressure <0.7 kPa, or
                                                                                                                          <20°C if the process vessel contains HAP
                                                                                                                          with a partial pressure ≥0.7 kPa and <17.2
                                                                                                                          kPa, or
                                                                                                                          <¥30°C if the process vessel contains HAP
                                                                                                                          with a partial pressure ≥17.2 kPa.

      4. Halogenated vent steam from a process ves-             a. Use a halogen reduction device after the           i. Reduce overall emissions of hydrogen ha-
        sel subject to the requirements of item 2 or 3            combustion control device; or                           lide and halogen HAP by ≥95 percent; or
        of this table for which you use a combustion                                                                  ii. Reduce overall emissions of hydrogen ha-
        control device to control organic HAP emis-                                                                       lide and halogen HAP to ≤0.45 kilogram per
        sions.                                                                                                            hour (kg/hr).
                                                                b. Use a halogen reduction device before the          Reduce the halogen atom mass emission rate
                                                                  combustion control device.                              to ≤0.45 kg/hr.



       As required in § 63.8010, you must                      following table that applies to your
      meet each emission limit in the                          storage tanks:

                                TABLE 2 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS FOR STORAGE TANKS
      For each . . .                        Then you must . . .

      1. Group 1a storage tank .....        a. Comply with the requirements of subpart WW of this part, except as specified in § 63.8010(b); or
                                            b. Reduce total organic HAP emissions from the storage tank by ≥90 percent by weight by venting emissions
                                               through a closed-vent system to any combination of control devices (excluding a flare); or
                                            c. Reduce total organic HAP emissions from the storage tank by venting emissions from a non-halogenated vent
                                               stream through a closed-vent system to a flare.

      2. Group 1b storage tank .....        a. Comply with the requirements of subpart WW of this part, except as specified in § 63.8010(b); or
                                            b. Reduce total organic HAP emissions from the storage tank by ≥80 percent by weight by venting emissions
                                               through a closed-vent system to any combination of control devices (excluding a flare); or
                                            c. Reduce total organic HAP emissions from the storage tank by venting emissions from a non-halogenated vent
                                               stream through a closed-vent system to a flare.



       As required in § 63.8015, you must                      table that applies to your equipment
      meet each requirement in the following                   leaks:

                               TABLE 3 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—REQUIREMENTS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS
      For all . . .                         You must . . .

      1. Equipment that is in or-           a. Comply with the requirements in §§ 63.424(a) through (d) and 63.428(e), (f), and (h)(4), except as specified in
        ganic HAP service at an                § 63.8015(b); or
        existing source.                    b. Comply with the requirements of subpart TT of this part; or
                                            c. Comply with the requirements of subpart UU of this part, except as specified in § 63.8015(c) and (d).

      2. Equipment that is in or-           a. Comply with the requirements of subpart TT of this part; or
        ganic HAP service at a              b. Comply with the requirements of subpart UU of this part, except as specified in § 63.8015(c) and (d).
        new source.




VerDate jul<14>2003    17:52 Dec 10, 2003   Jkt 203001   PO 00000   Frm 00034   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                                                                                 69197

          TABLE 4 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER
                                                     STREAMS
      For each . . .                                   You must . . .

      1. Wastewater tank used to                       Maintain a fixed roof, which may have openings necessary for proper venting of the tank, such as pressure/vacu-
        store a Group 1 waste-                          um vent or j-pipe vent.
        water stream.

      2. Group 1 wastewater                            a. Convey using hard-piping and treat the wastewater as a hazardous waste in accordance with 40 CFR part
        stream.                                          264, 265, or 266 either onsite or offsite; or
                                                       b. If the wastewater contains <50 ppmw of partially soluble HAP, you may elect to treat the wastewater in an en-
                                                         hanced biological treatment system that is located either onsite or offsite.



       As required in § 63.8025, you must                                         practice standard in the following table
      meet each emission limit and work                                           that applies to your transfer operations:

             TABLE 5 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—EMISSION LIMITS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR TRANSFER
                                                     OPERATIONS
      For each . . .                                   You must. . . .

      1. Group 1 transfer operation                    a. Reduce emissions of total organic HAP by ≥75 percent by weight by venting emissions through a closed-vent
        vent stream.                                     system to any combination of control devices (except a flare); or
                                                       b. Reduce emissions of total organic HAP by venting emissions from a non-halogenated vent stream through a
                                                         closed-vent system to a flare; or
                                                       c. Use a vapor balancing system designed and operated to collect organic HAP vapors displaced from tank
                                                         trucks and railcars during loading and route the collected HAP vapors to the storage tank from which the liquid
                                                         being loaded originated or to another storage tank connected by a common header.

      2. Halogenated Group 1                           a. Use a halogen reduction device after the combustion device to reduce emissions of hydrogen halide and halo-
        transfer operation vent                          gen HAP by ≥95 percent by weight or to ≤0.45 kg/hr; or
        stream for which you use                       b. Use a halogen reduction device before the combustion device to reduce the halogen atom mass emission rate
        a combustion device to                           to ≤0.45 kg/hr.
        control organic HAP emis-
        sions.



       As required in § 63.8030, you must                                         table that applies to your heat exchange
      meet each requirement in the following                                      systems:

                                TABLE 6 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—REQUIREMENTS FOR HEAT EXCHANGE SYSTEMS
      For each . . .                                   You must . . .

      Heat exchange system, as                         Comply with the requirements in § 63.104, except as specified in § 63.8030.
        defined in § 63.101.



        As specified in § 63.8020, the partially                                  requirements in this subpart are listed
      soluble HAP in wastewater that are                                          in the following table:
      subject to management and treatment

                             TABLE 7 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—PARTIALLY SOLUBLE HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
      Chemical name . . .                                                                                                                                                                                           CAS No.

      1. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (methyl chloroform) ..........................................................................................................................................                          71556
      2. 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ...................................................................................................................................................................                 79345
      3. 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ...........................................................................................................................................................................             79005
      4. 1,1-Dichloroethylene (vinylidene chloride) ..........................................................................................................................................                         75354
      5. 1,2-Dibromoethane ..............................................................................................................................................................................             106934
      6. 1,2-Dichloroethane (ethylene dichloride) .............................................................................................................................................                       107062
      7. 1,2-Dichloropropane ............................................................................................................................................................................              78875
      8. 1,3-Dichloropropene ............................................................................................................................................................................             542756
      9. 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ...........................................................................................................................................................................             95954
      10. 2-Butanone (MEK) .............................................................................................................................................................................               78933
      11. 1,4-Dichlorobenzene ..........................................................................................................................................................................              106467
      12. 2-Nitropropane ...................................................................................................................................................................................           79469
      13. 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) ...........................................................................................................................................................                     108101
      14. Acetaldehyde .....................................................................................................................................................................................           75070
      15. Acrolein ..............................................................................................................................................................................................     107028



VerDate jul<14>2003        15:46 Dec 10, 2003          Jkt 203001       PO 00000       Frm 00035        Fmt 4701       Sfmt 4700       E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM              11DER3
      69198                Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

                 TABLE 7 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—PARTIALLY SOLUBLE HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS—Continued
      Chemical name . . .                                                                                                                                                                                            CAS No.

      16.   Acrylonitrile ........................................................................................................................................................................................     107131
      17.   Allyl chloride ......................................................................................................................................................................................      107051
      18.   Benzene .............................................................................................................................................................................................       71432
      19.   Benzyl chloride ..................................................................................................................................................................................         100447
      20.   Biphenyl .............................................................................................................................................................................................      92524
      21.   Bromoform (tribromomethane) ..........................................................................................................................................................                      75252
      22.   Bromomethane ..................................................................................................................................................................................             74839
      23.   Butadiene ...........................................................................................................................................................................................      106990
      24.   Carbon disulfide .................................................................................................................................................................................          75150
      25.   Chlorobenzene ..................................................................................................................................................................................           108907
      26.   Chloroethane (ethyl chloride) ............................................................................................................................................................                  75003
      27.   Chloroform .........................................................................................................................................................................................        67663
      28.   Chloromethane ..................................................................................................................................................................................            74873
      29.   Chloroprene .......................................................................................................................................................................................        126998
      30.   Cumene .............................................................................................................................................................................................        98828
      31.   Dichloroethyl ether .............................................................................................................................................................................          111444
      32.   Dinitrophenol ......................................................................................................................................................................................        51285
      33.   Epichlorohydrin ..................................................................................................................................................................................         106898
      34.   Ethyl acrylate .....................................................................................................................................................................................       140885
      35.   Ethylbenzene .....................................................................................................................................................................................         100414
      36.   Ethylene oxide ...................................................................................................................................................................................          75218
      37.   Ethylidene dichloride .........................................................................................................................................................................             75343
      38.   Hexachlorobenzene ...........................................................................................................................................................................              118741
      39.   Hexachlorobutadiene .........................................................................................................................................................................               87683
      40.   Hexachloroethane ..............................................................................................................................................................................             67721
      41.   Methyl methacrylate ..........................................................................................................................................................................              80626
      42.   Methyl-t-butyl ether ............................................................................................................................................................................         1634044
      43.   Methylene chloride ............................................................................................................................................................................             75092
      44.   N-hexane ...........................................................................................................................................................................................       110543
      45.   N,N-dimethylaniline ............................................................................................................................................................................           121697
      46.   Naphthalene ......................................................................................................................................................................................          91203
      47.   Phosgene ...........................................................................................................................................................................................        75445
      48.   Propionaldehyde ................................................................................................................................................................................           123386
      49.   Propylene oxide .................................................................................................................................................................................           75569
      50.   Styrene ..............................................................................................................................................................................................     100425
      51.   Tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene) ...........................................................................................................................................                         79345
      52.   Tetrachloromethane (carbon tetrachloride) .......................................................................................................................................                           56235
      53.   Toluene ..............................................................................................................................................................................................     108883
      54.   Trichlorobenzene (1,2,4–) .................................................................................................................................................................                120821
      55.   Trichloroethylene ...............................................................................................................................................................................           79016
      56.   Trimethylpentane ...............................................................................................................................................................................           540841
      57.   Vinyl acetate ......................................................................................................................................................................................       108054
      58.   Vinyl chloride .....................................................................................................................................................................................        75014
      59.   Xylene (m) .........................................................................................................................................................................................       108383
      60.   Xylene (o) ..........................................................................................................................................................................................       95476
      61.   Xylene (p) ..........................................................................................................................................................................................      106423



       As specified in § 63.8020, the soluble                                     requirements of this subpart are listed in
      HAP in wastewater that are subject to                                       the following table:
      management and treatment

                                          TABLE 8 TO SUBPART FFFF OF PART 63—SOLUBLE HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
      Chemical name . . .                                                                                                                                                                                            CAS No.

      1. Acetonitrile ...........................................................................................................................................................................................       75058
      2. Acetophenone ......................................................................................................................................................................................            98862
      3. Diethyl sulfate ......................................................................................................................................................................................         64675
      4. Dimethyl hydrazine (1,1) .....................................................................................................................................................................                 58147
      5. Dimethyl sulfate ...................................................................................................................................................................................           77781
      6. Dinitrotoluene (2,4) ..............................................................................................................................................................................           121142
      7. Dioxane (1,4) .......................................................................................................................................................................................         123911
      8. Ethylene glycol dimethyl ether ............................................................................................................................................................                   110714
      9. Ethylene glycol monobutyl ether acetate ............................................................................................................................................                          112072
      10. Ethylene glycol monomethyl ether acetate .......................................................................................................................................                             110496
      11. Isophorone .........................................................................................................................................................................................          78591
      12. Methanol ............................................................................................................................................................................................         67561
      13. Nitrobenzene .....................................................................................................................................................................................            98953
      14. Toluidine (o-) .....................................................................................................................................................................................          95534



VerDate jul<14>2003        15:46 Dec 10, 2003          Jkt 203001       PO 00000        Frm 00036       Fmt 4701       Sfmt 4700       E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM               11DER3
                           Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                                                                             69199

                             TABLE 8 TO SUBPART FFFF OF PART 63—SOLUBLE HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS—Continued
      Chemical name . . .                                                                                                                                                                                       CAS No.

      15. Triethylamine .....................................................................................................................................................................................     121448



        As required in § 63.8075(a) and (b),                                     applies to you on the schedule shown
      you must submit each report that                                           in the following table:

                                               TABLE 9 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—REQUIREMENTS FOR REPORTS
      You must submit a . . .                                                     The report must contain . . .                                             You must submit the report . . .

      1. Precompliance report .....................................               The information specified in § 63.8075(c) ........                        At least 6 months prior to the compliance
                                                                                                                                                              date; or for new sources, with the applica-
                                                                                                                                                              tion for approval of construction or recon-
                                                                                                                                                              struction.

      2. Notification of compliance status report ........                        The information specified in § 63.8075(d) ........                        No later than 150 days after the compliance
                                                                                                                                                             date specified in § 63.7995.

      3. Compliance report .........................................              The information specified in § 63.8075(e) ........                        Semiannually according to the requirements in
                                                                                                                                                              § 63.8075(b).



        As specified in § 63.8095, the parts of
      the General Provisions that apply to you
      are shown in the following table:

                TABLE 10 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART HHHHH
                           Citation                                                  Subject                                                                         Explanation

      § 63.1 ...............................................     Applicability ....................................      Yes.
      § 63.2 ...............................................     Definitions ......................................      Yes.
      § 63.3 ...............................................     Units and Abbreviations ................                Yes.
      § 63.4 ...............................................     Prohibited Activities .......................           Yes.
      § 63.5 ...............................................     Construction/Reconstruction .........                   Yes.
      § 63.6(a) ...........................................      Applicability ....................................      Yes.
      § 63.6(b)(1)–(4) ................................          Compliance Dates for New and                            Yes.
                                                                   Reconstructed sources.
      § 63.6(b)(5) .......................................       Notification .....................................      Yes.
      § 63.6(b)(6) .......................................       [Reserved].
      § 63.6(b)(7) .......................................       Compliance Dates for New and                            Yes.
                                                                   Reconstructed Area Sources
                                                                   That Become Major.
      § 63.6(c)(1)–(2) ................................          Compliance Dates for Existing                           Yes.
                                                                   Sources.
      § 63.6(c)(3)–(4) ................................          [Reserved].
      § 63.6(c)(5) .......................................       Compliance Dates for Existing                           Yes.
                                                                   Area Sources That Become
                                                                   Major.
      § 63.6(d) ...........................................      [Reserved].
      § 63.6(e)(1)–(2) ................................          Operation & Maintenance .............                   Yes.
      § 63.6(e)(3)(i), (ii), and (v) through                     SSMP ............................................       Yes, except information regarding Group 2 emission points and
         (viii).                                                                                                           equipment leaks is not required in the SSMP, as specified in
                                                                                                                           § 63.8080(f).
      § 63.6(e)(3)(iii) and (iv) ....................            Recordkeeping and Reporting                             No, §§ 63.998(d)(3) and 63.998(c)(1)(ii)(D) through (G) specify the
                                                                   During Startup, Shutdown, and                           recordkeeping requirement for SSM events, and § 63.8075(e)(5)
                                                                   Malfunction (SSM).                                      specifies reporting requirements.
      § 63.6(f)(1) ........................................      Compliance Except During SSM ...                        Yes.
      § 63.6(f)(2)–(3) .................................         Methods for Determining Compli-                         Yes.
                                                                   ance.
      § 63.6(g)(1)–(3) ................................          Alternative Standard ......................             Yes.
      § 63.6(h) ...........................................      Opacity/Visible Emission (VE)                           Only for flares for which Method 22 observations are required as part
                                                                   Standards.                                              of a flare compliance assessment.
      § 63.6(i)(1)–(14) ...............................          Compliance Extension ...................                Yes.
      § 63.6(j) ............................................     Presidential Compliance Exemp-                          Yes.
                                                                   tion.
      § 63.7(a)(1)–(2) ................................          Performance Test Dates ...............                  Yes, except substitute 150 days for 180 days.
      § 63.7(a)(3) .......................................       CAA Section 114 Authority ...........                   Yes, and this paragraph also applies to flare compliance assess-
                                                                                                                           ments as specified under § 63.997(b)(2).
      § 63.7(b)(1) .......................................       Notification of Performance Test ...                    Yes.



VerDate jul<14>2003        15:46 Dec 10, 2003         Jkt 203001      PO 00000        Frm 00037       Fmt 4701       Sfmt 4700      E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM              11DER3
      69200               Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

              TABLE 10 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART HHHHH—
                                                      Continued
                           Citation                                               Subject                                                        Explanation

      § 63.7(b)(2) .......................................     Notification of Rescheduling ..........             Yes.
      § 63.7(c) ...........................................    Quality Assurance/Test Plan .........               Yes, except the test plan must be submitted with the notification of
                                                                                                                     the performance test if the control device controls process vessels.
      § 63.7(d) ...........................................    Testing Facilities ............................     Yes.
      § 63.7(e)(1) .......................................     Conditions for Conducting Per-                      Yes, except that performance tests for process vessels must be con-
                                                                 formance Tests.                                     ducted under worst-case conditions as specified in § 63.8005.
      § 63.7(e)(2) .......................................     Conditions for Conducting Per-                      Yes.
                                                                 formance Tests.
      § 63.7(e)(3) .......................................     Test Run Duration .........................         Yes.
      § 63.7(f) ............................................   Alternative Test Method ................            Yes.
      § 63.7(g) ...........................................    Performance Test Data Analysis ..                   Yes.
      § 63.7(h) ...........................................    Waiver of Tests .............................       Yes.
      § 63.8(a)(1) .......................................     Applicability of Monitoring Require-                Yes.
                                                                 ments.
      § 63.8(a)(2) .......................................     Performance Specifications ...........              Yes.
      § 63.8(a)(3) .......................................     [Reserved].
      § 63.8(a)(4) .......................................     Monitoring with Flares ...................          Yes.
      § 63.8(b)(1) .......................................     Monitoring ......................................   Yes.
      § 63.8(b)(2)–(3) ................................        Multiple Effluents and Multiple                     Yes.
                                                                 Monitoring Systems.
      § 63.8(c)(1) .......................................     Monitoring System Operation and                     Yes.
                                                                 Maintenance.
      § 63.8(c)(1)(i) ....................................     Maintain and operate CMS ...........                Yes.
      § 63.8(c)(1)(ii) ...................................     Routine repairs ..............................      Yes.
      § 63.8(c)(1)(iii) ..................................     SSMP for CMS ..............................         Yes.
      § 63.8(c)(2)–(3) ................................        Monitoring System Installation ......               Yes.
      § 63.8(c)(4) .......................................     Requirements ................................       Only for CEMS; requirements for CPMS are specified in referenced
                                                                                                                     subpart SS of 40 CFR part 63. This subpart does not contain re-
                                                                                                                     quirements for continuous opacity monitoring systems (COMS).
      § 63.8(c)(4)(i) ....................................     CMS Requirements .......................            No. This subpart does not require COMS.
      § 63.8(c)(4)(ii) ...................................     CMS requirements ........................           Yes.
      § 63.8(c)(5) .......................................     COMS Minimum Procedures ........                    No. This subpart does not contain opacity or VE limits.
      § 63.8(c)(6) .......................................     CMS Requirements .......................            Only for CEMS; requirements for CPMS are specified in referenced
                                                                                                                     subpart SS of 40 CFR part 63.
      § 63.8(c)(7)–(8) ................................        CMS Requirements .......................            Only for CEMS. Requirements for CPMS are specified in referenced
                                                                                                                     subpart SS of 40 CFR part 63.
      § 63.8(d) ...........................................    CMS Quality Control .....................           Only for CEMS; requirements for CPMS are specified in referenced
                                                                                                                     subpart SS of 40 CFR part 63.
      § 63.8(e) ...........................................    CMS Performance Evaluation .......                  Section 63.8(e)(6)(ii) does not apply because this subpart does not
                                                                                                                     require COMS. Other sections apply only for CEMS; requirements
                                                                                                                     for CPMS are specified in referenced subpart SS of 40 CFR part
                                                                                                                     63.
      § 63.8(f)(1)–(5) .................................       Alternative Monitoring Method ......                Yes, except you may also request approval using the precompliance
                                                                                                                     report.
      § 63.8(f)(6) ........................................    Alternative to Relative Accuracy                    Only for CEMS.
                                                                 Test.
      § 63.8(g)(1)–(4) ................................        Data Reduction ..............................       Only when using CEMS, except § 63.8(g)(2) does not apply because
                                                                                                                     data reduction requirements for CEMS are specified in
                                                                                                                     § 63.8000(d)(4)(iv).
                                                                                                                   The requirements for COMS do not apply because this subpart has
                                                                                                                     no opacity or VE limits.
      § 63.8(g)(5) .......................................     Data Reduction ..............................       No. Requirements for CEMS are specified in § 63.8000(d)(4).
                                                                                                                   Requirements for CPMS are specified in referenced subpart SS of 40
                                                                                                                     CFR part 63.
      § 63.9(a) ...........................................    Notification Requirements .............             Yes.
      § 63.9(b)(1)–(5) ................................        Initial Notifications .........................     Yes.
      § 63.9(c) ...........................................    Request for Compliance Extension                    Yes.
      § 63.9(d) ...........................................    Notification of Special Compliance                  Yes.
                                                                  Requirements for New Source.
      § 63.9(e) ...........................................    Notification of Performance Test ...                Yes.
      § 63.9(f) ............................................   Notification of VE/Opacity Test .....               No. This subpart does not contain opacity or VE limits.
      § 63.9(g) ...........................................    Additional      Notifications         When          Only for CEMS; requirements for CPMS are specified in referenced
                                                                  Using CMS.                                         subpart SS of 40 CFR part 63.
      § 63.9(h)(1)–(6) ................................        Notification of Compliance Status                   Yes, except this subpart has no opacity or VE limits, and § 63.9(h)(2)
                                                                                                                     does not apply because § 63.8075(d) specifies the required con-
                                                                                                                     tents and due date of the notification of compliance status report.
      § 63.9(i) ............................................   Adjustment of Submittal Deadlines                   Yes.
      § 63.9(j) ............................................   Change in Previous Information ....                 No, § 63.8075(e)(8) specifies reporting requirements for process
                                                                                                                     changes.
      § 63.10(a) .........................................     Recordkeeping/Reporting ..............              Yes.
      § 63.10(b)(1) .....................................      Recordkeeping/Reporting ..............              Yes.



VerDate jul<14>2003       15:46 Dec 10, 2003         Jkt 203001     PO 00000      Frm 00038      Fmt 4701      Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3
                          Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2003 / Rules and Regulations                                                                     69201

              TABLE 10 TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART HHHHH—
                                                      Continued
                           Citation                                                   Subject                                                            Explanation

      § 63.10(b)(2)(i)–(iv) ..........................            Records related to SSM ................                   No, §§ 63.998(d)(3) and 63.998(c)(1)(ii)(D) through (G) specify rec-
                                                                                                                              ordkeeping requirements for periods of SSM.
      § 63.10(b)(2)(iii) ................................         Records related to maintenance of                         Yes.
                                                                   air pollution control equipment.
      § 63.10(b)(2)(vi), (x), and (xi) ...........                CMS Records ................................              Only for CEMS; requirements for CPMS are specified in referenced
                                                                                                                              subpart SS of 40 CFR part 63.
      § 63.10(b)(2)(vii)–(ix) ........................            Records       .........................................   Yes.
      § 63.10(b)(2)(xii) ...............................          Records       .........................................   Yes.
      § 63.10(b)(2)(xiii) ..............................          Records       .........................................   Yes.
      § 63.10(b)(2)(xiv) ..............................           Records       .........................................   Yes.
      § 63.10(b)(3) .....................................         Records       .........................................   Yes.
      § 63.10(c)(1)–(6),(9)–(15) .................                Records       .........................................   Only for CEMS; requirements for CPMS are specified in referenced
                                                                                                                              subpart SS of 40 CFR part 63.
      § 63.10(c)(7)–(8) ..............................            Records .........................................         No. Recordkeeping requirements are specified in § 63.8080.
      § 63.10(d)(1) .....................................         General Reporting Requirements                            Yes.
      § 63.10(d)(2) .....................................         Report of Performance Test Re-                            Yes.
                                                                    sults.
      § 63.10(d)(3) .....................................         Reporting Opacity or VE Observa-                          No. This subpart does not contain opacity or VE limits.
                                                                    tions.
      § 63.10(d)(4) .....................................         Progress Reports ..........................               Yes.
      § 63.10(d)(5)(i) .................................          SSM Reports .................................             No, § 63.8075(e)(5) and (6) specify the SSM reporting requirements.
      § 63.10(d)(5)(ii) .................................         Immediate SSM reports ................                    No.
      § 63.10(e)(1)–(2) ..............................            Additional CMS Reports ................                   Only for CEMS, but § 63.10(e)(2)(ii) does not apply because this sub-
                                                                                                                              part does not require COMS.
      § 63.10(e)(3) .....................................         Reports ..........................................        No. Reporting requirements are specified in § 63.8075.
      § 63.10(e)(3)(i)–(iii) ...........................          Reports ..........................................        No. Reporting requirements are specified in § 63.8075.
      § 63.10(e)(3)(iv)–(v) .........................             Excess Emissions Reports ............                     No. Reporting requirements are specified in § 63.8075.
      § 63.10(e)(3)(vi–viii) .........................            Excess Emissions Report and                               No. Reporting requirements are specified in § 63.8075.
                                                                    Summary Report.
      § 63.10(e)(4) .....................................         Reporting COMS data ...................                   No. This subpart does not contain opacity or VE limits.
      § 63.10(f) ..........................................       Waiver for Recordkeeping/Report-                          Yes.
                                                                    ing.
      § 63.11     .............................................   Flares .............................................      Yes.
      § 63.12     .............................................   Delegation .....................................          Yes.
      § 63.13     .............................................   Addresses .....................................           Yes.
      § 63.14     .............................................   Incorporation by Reference ...........                    Yes.
      § 63.15     .............................................   Availability of Information ..............                Yes.



      [FR Doc. 03–22928 Filed 12–10–03; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6560–50–U




VerDate jul<14>2003       15:46 Dec 10, 2003           Jkt 203001      PO 00000        Frm 00039        Fmt 4701       Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11DER3.SGM   11DER3

								
To top