[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 241 (Friday, December 15, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64330-64347]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-29748]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[AD-FRL-5335-3]
RIN 2060-AD98
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair (Surface Coating) Operations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action promulgates national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) under Section 112 of the Clean Air
Act as amended in 1990 (CAA) for shipbuilding and ship repair (surface
coating) operations. The NESHAP requires existing and new major sources
to control emissions using the maximum achievable control technology
(MACT) to control hazardous air pollutants (HAP).
The MACT described herein is based on maximum HAP limits for
various categories of marine coatings. Surface coating operations at
shipyards are the focus of the NESHAP, and a variety of HAP are used as
solvents in marine coatings. The HAP emitted by the facilities covered
by this final rule include xylene, toluene, ethylbenzene, methyl ethyl
ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone, ethylene glycol, and glycol ethers. All
of these pollutants can cause reversible or irreversible toxic effects
following exposure. The potential toxic effects include irritation of
the eye, nose, throat, and skin and damage to the blood cells, heart,
liver, and kidneys. The final rule is estimated to reduce baseline
emissions of HAP by 24 percent or 318.5 megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (350
tons per year (tpy)).
The emissions reductions achieved by these standards, combined with
the emissions reductions achieved by similar standards, will achieve
the primary goal of the CAA, which is to ``enhance the quality of the
Nation's air resources so as to promote the public health and welfare
and productive capacity of its population''. The intent of this final
regulation is to protect the public health by requiring the maximum
degree of reduction in emissions of volatile organic hazardous air
pollutants (VOHAP) from new and existing sources, taking into
consideration the cost of achieving such emission reduction, any nonair
quality, health and environmental impacts, and energy requirements.
DATES: The effective date is December 15, 1995. Incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved
by the director of the Federal Register as of December 15, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Background Information Document. The background information
document (BID) for the promulgated standards may be obtained from the
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service
(NTIS), Springfield, Virginia, 22161, telephone number (703) 487-4650.
Please refer to ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Facilities (Surface
Coating)--Background Information Document for Final Standards,'' EPA-
453/R-95-016b. The BID contains (1) a summary of the changes made to
the standards since proposal and (2) a summary of all the public
comments made on the proposed standards and the Administrator's
response to the comments.
Electronic versions of the promulgation BID as well as this final
rule are available for download from the EPA's Technology Transfer
Network (TTN), a network of electronic bulletin boards developed and
operated by the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. The TTN
provides information and technology exchange in various areas of air
pollution control. The service is free, except for the cost of a phone
call. Dial (919) 541-5742 for data transfer of up to a 14,400 bits per
second. If more information on TTN is needed, contact the systems
operator at (919) 541-5384.
Docket. Docket No. A-92-11, containing supporting information used
in developing the promulgated standards, is available for public
inspection and copying from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
at the EPA's Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Waterside
Mall, Room M-1500, Ground Floor, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460.
A reasonable fee may be charged for copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mohamed Serageldin at (919) 541-
2379, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.
[[Page 64331]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial
review of NESHAP is available only by the filing of a petition for
review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit within 60 days of publication of this rule. Under Section
307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements that are the subject of this
action may not be challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings
brought by the EPA to enforce these requirements.
The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:
I. Regulatory Background and Purpose
II. The Standards
III. Summary of Impacts
IV. Significant Changes to the Proposed Standards
A. Public Participation
B. Comments on the Proposed Standards
C. Significant Comments/Changes
V. Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG)
VI. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Executive Order 12866
D. Executive Order 12875
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
F. Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995
I. Regulatory Background and Purpose
Section 112 of the CAA requires the EPA to evaluate and control HAP
emissions. The control of HAP is to be achieved through promulgation of
emission standards under Sections 112(d) and (f), and of work practice
standards under Section 112(h) where appropriate, for categories of
sources that emit HAP. Pursuant to Section 112(c) of the CAA, the EPA
published in the Federal Register the initial list of source categories
that emit HAP on July 16, 1992 (57 FR. 31576). This list includes major
and area sources of HAP for which the EPA intends to issue regulations
between November 1992 and November 2000.
The CAA was created, in part, ``to protect and enhance the quality
of the Nation's air resources so as to promote the public health and
welfare and productive capacity of its population'' 42 U.S.C.
Sec. 7401(b). This final regulation will protect the public health by
reducing emissions of HAP from surface coating operations at
shipbuilding and ship repair facilities (shipyards).
Many shipyards are major sources of HAP emissions, emitting over 23
Mg/yr (25 tpy) of organic HAP, including toluene, xylene, ethylbenzene,
methanol, methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone, ethylene glycol
and glycol ethers. All of these pollutants can cause reversible or
irreversible toxic effects following exposure. The potential toxic
effects include irritation of the eyes, nose, throat, and skin,
irritation and damage to the blood cells, heart, liver, and kidneys.
These adverse health effects are associated with a wide range of
ambient concentrations and exposure times and are influenced by source-
specific characteristics such as emission rates and local
meteorological conditions. Health impacts are also dependent on
multiple factors that affect human variability, such as genetics, age,
health status (e.g., the presence of pre-existing disease), and
lifestyle.
The final standards will reduce VOHAP emissions from shipyard
surface coating operations by 318.5 Mg/yr (350 tpy) from a baseline
level of 1,362 Mg/yr (1,497 tpy). No significant economic impacts are
associated with the final standards. No firms or facilities are at risk
of closure as a result of the final standards, and there will not be a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
II. The Standards
The final rule is applicable to all existing and new shipbuilding
and repair facilities that are major sources of HAP or are located at
plant sites that are major sources. Major source facilities that are
subject to this rule must not apply any marine coating with a VOHAP
content in excess of the applicable limit and must implement the work
practices required in the rule. Section 112(a) of the CAA defines major
source as a source, or group of sources, located within a contiguous
area and under common control that emits or has the potential to emit,
considering controls, 9.1 Mg/yr (10 tpy) or more of any individual HAP
or 22.7 Mg/yr (25 tpy) or more of any combination of HAP. Area sources
are stationary sources that do not qualify as ``major.'' The term
``affected source'' as used in this rule means the total of all HAP
emission points at each shipbuilding and ship repair facility that is
subject to the rule. ``Potential to emit'' is defined in the Section
112 General Provisions (40 CFR 63.2) as ``the maximum capacity of a
stationary source to emit a pollutant under its physical or operational
design.''
To determine the applicability of this rule to facilities that are
within a contiguous area of other HAP-emitting emission sources that
are not part of the source category covered by this rule, the owner or
operator must determine whether the plant site as a whole is a major
source. A formal HAP emissions inventory must be used to determine if
total HAP emissions from all HAP emission sources at the plant site
meets the definition of a major source. The actual emissions of HAP
from most shipyards are substantially less than the major source cutoff
limits [i.e., 9.1 Mg/yr (10 tpy) of any single HAP, or 22.8 Mg/yr (25
tpy) of all HAP combined]. If the source becomes a synthetic minor
source through accepting enforceable restrictions that ensure potential
and actual HAP emissions will be below the major source cutoffs, the
NESHAP does not apply. See promulgation BID Section 2.4 for additional
details and the associated recordkeeping provisions (see ADDRESSES
section of this preamble).
Existing major sources may switch to area source status by
obtaining and complying with a federally enforceable limit on their
potential to emit prior to the ``compliance date'' of the regulation.
The ``compliance date'' for this regulation is defined as December 16,
1996. New major sources are required to comply with the NESHAP
requirements upon start up or the promulgation date, whichever is
later. Existing major sources may switch to area source status by
obtaining and complying with a federally enforceable limit on their
potential to emit that makes the facility an area source prior to the
``compliance date'' of the regulation. The compliance date for this
regulation is December 16, 1996. A facility that has not obtained
federally enforceable limits on its potential to emit by the compliance
date, and that has not complied with the NESHAP requirements, will be
in violation of the NESHAP. New major sources are required to comply
with the NESHAP requirements upon start-up or the promulgation date,
whichever is later. All sources that are major sources for HAP on the
compliance date are required to comply permanently with the NESHAP to
ensure that the maximum achievable reductions in toxic emissions are
achieved and maintained. All major sources for HAP on the ``compliance
date'' are required to comply permanently with the NESHAP to ensure
that the maximum achievable reductions in toxic emissions are achieved
and maintained.
The final standards impose limits on the VOHAP content of 23 types
of coatings used at shipyards. Compliance with the VOHAP limits must be
demonstrated on a monthly basis. The promulgated standards include four
compliance options to allow owners or operators flexibility in
demonstrating compliance with the VOHAP limits. The final standards
also allow for an alternative means of compliance other than using
compliant coatings, if approved by the Administrator. The Administrator
shall approve the alternative means of limiting emissions if, in the
Administrator's judgment,
[[Page 64332]]
(after control) emissions of VOHAP per volume solids applied will be no
greater than those from the use of coatings that comply with the
applicable VOHAP limits.
The final standards also require that all handling and transfer of
VOHAP containing materials to and from containers, tanks, vats,
vessels, and piping systems be conducted in a manner that minimizes
spills and other factors leading to emissions. (This requirement
includes hand- or brush-application of coatings.) In addition,
containers of thinning solvent or waste that hold any VOHAP must be
normally closed (to minimize evaporation) unless materials are being
added to or removed from them.
Owners or operators of existing shipbuilding and ship repair
(surface coating) operations subject to the requirements promulgated
under Section 112(d) of the CAA are required to comply with the
standards within 1 year from December 15, 1995. Owners or operators of
new shipbuilding and ship repair (surface coating) operations with
initial startup before or after December 15, 1996 are required to
comply with all requirements of the standards upon startup. The first
requirement is the initial notification due 6 months before start up.
III. Summary of Impacts
These standards will reduce nationwide emissions of HAP from
shipbuilding and ship repair (surface coating) operations by
approximately 318.5 Mg (350 tons) in 1997 compared to the emissions
that would result in the absence of the standards. These standards will
also reduce volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions from those same
shipbuilding and ship repair (surface coating) operations by
approximately 837 Mg (920 tons) in 1997 compared to the emissions that
would result in the absence of the standards. No significant adverse
secondary air, water, solid waste, or energy impacts are anticipated
from the promulgation of these standards.
Implementation of this regulation is expected to result in
nationwide annualized costs for existing shipyards of about $2 million
beyond baseline. This estimation is based on an analysis of the
application of VOHAP limits on marine coatings at all existing major
source facilities not currently controlled to the level of the
standards.
The economic impact analysis conducted prior to proposal showed
that the economic impacts from the proposed standard would be
insignificant. An update of the economic impact analysis (due to
revisions to the final rule) indicates that the original conclusion
still holds true. Implementation of the rule is not expected to cause
significant economic impacts for the 35 major source facilities in this
industry.
IV. Significant Changes to the Proposed Standards
A. Public Participation
The standards were proposed and the preamble was published in the
Federal Register on December 6, 1994 (59 FR 62681). The preamble to the
proposed standards discussed the availability of the regulatory text
and proposal BID, which described the regulatory alternatives
considered and the impacts of those alternatives. Public comments were
solicited at the time of proposal, and copies of the regulatory text
and BID were distributed to interested parties. Electronic versions of
the preamble, regulation, and BID were made available to interested
parties via the TTN (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
preamble).
To provide interested persons the opportunity for oral presentation
of data, views, or arguments concerning the proposed standards, a
public hearing was held on January 18, 1995 in Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina. The public comment period was from December 6, 1994 to
February 17, 1995. In all, 22 comment letters were received (including
one duplicate). The comments have been carefully considered, and
changes have been made to the proposed standards when determined by the
Administrator to be appropriate.
B. Comments on the Proposed Standards
Comments on the proposed standards were received from 22
commenters; the commenters were comprised mainly of States, shipyard
owners or operators, marine coating manufacturers, environmental
groups, and trade associations. A detailed discussion of these comments
and responses can be found in the promulgation BID, which is referred
to in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. The summary of comments
and responses in the BID serve as the basis for the revisions that have
been made to the standards between proposal and promulgation. (Some
additional changes have been made to clarify the standards and improve
their organization.) Most of the comment letters contained multiple
comments. For summary purposes, the comments were grouped into several
topic areas.
C. Significant Comments/Changes
Several changes have been made since the proposal of these
standards. The majority of the changes have been made to clarify
portions of the rule that were unclear to the commenters. A summary of
the major comments and changes is presented below.
(1) Applicability to Coating Manufacturers
Several commenters asked the EPA to regulate the manufacture and
sale of marine coatings rather than the end users (shipyards). While
this approach has some obvious advantages, the EPA does not have
authority to regulate (with this NESHAP) the manufacture and sale of
coatings under Section 112(d). The EPA plans to address requirements
for coating manufacturers under Section 183(e) of the CAA by March 1997
through either a national rule or a control techniques guidelines
(CTG).
(2) Number of Major Sources/MACT Floor
Some commenters thought the EPA underestimated the number of major
source shipyards, and thereby erred in the MACT floor determination.
Although the EPA based the proposed number of major sources on the best
available information at the time, there has been recent additional
information provided by the Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality (Louisiana having more shipyards than any other State) showing
there are four other shipyards with HAP emissions greater than the
major source cutoffs. At the same time, however, the same additional
information indicated that one of the shipyards identified in the
original list of 25 has HAP emissions well below the major source
cutoffs (based on recent operating permit data).
This information along with other State permit data on annual paint
usage and VOC/VOHAP emissions indicates that there are 35 major
sources, instead of the estimated 25 discussed in the proposal
preamble. Even though 10 additional major sources have been identified,
the MACT floor would not change. At proposal, the EPA based the MACT
floor on the control achieved by the best-performing 5 sources, as
required by Section 112 (d)(3) of the CAA when there are less than 30
sources in the category. If there are 35 sources in the category, the
MACT floor would be based on the best-performing 4.2 sources (12
percent of the 35) as required by Section 112 (d)(3). Under both
situations, the MACT floor is the same.
Another point to be considered is that even if there are 45 major
source
[[Page 64333]]
shipyards, the best 12 percent is still represented by the best 0.12
x 45 = 5.4 or best 5 yards. Both the MACT floor and the associated
marine coating VOHAP limits would be identical. Since the NESHAP
proposal date, the Navy has adopted VOC limits identical to (or more
stringent than) the 1992 California limits for all Naval shipyards and
Navy-related work. Since at least two of the Naval shipyards qualify as
major sources, if the MACT floor were to be recalculated today, the
limits would be identical to the proposed (and promulgated) limits,
regardless of the approach used to determine the mean or median level
of control. The Louisiana limits, which are less stringent for the
major use categories of coatings, would not enter into any of the floor
calculations.
Recent indications from the Navy and other industry representatives
reveal that fewer affected sources exist today because of base closings
and consolidation efforts. The original estimation of 25 major source
shipyards was based on annual paint and solvent usage, type of work
conducted (new construction versus repair), number of employees, and
type (size) of vessels serviced. The (weighted) average HAP
concentration of all marine coatings is an integral part of emissions
estimates and determining if a shipyard qualifies as a major source
facility. Other HAP-emitting processes at most shipyards such as
welding, metal forming/cutting, and abrasive blasting exist, but the
vast majority of HAP emissions come from organic solvents used in
marine paints and solvents used for thinning and cleaning.
(3) Elimination of Compliance Option 1
Proposed compliance option 1 required that each and every container
of coating be tested or certified prior to application. Based on
comments pertaining to its impracticality and the unrealistic costs
associated with testing/certifying every container of coating,
compliance option 1 was eliminated from the final rule. The flow
diagram (included as Figure 1 in the regulation) summarizing the
various compliance options was similarly revised and simplified.
(4) Training Requirements
In the proposed rule, the EPA required training and certification
for all personnel involved with paints and/or solvents. There were
several comments regarding the inappropriate amount and level of detail
involved with the training and annual personnel certifications. Some
commenters indicated that there was a high turnover rate involving
personnel, and the proposed training requirements would impose a
significant impact for very little reduction in HAP emissions. The EPA
has determined that it is appropriate to leave the details of training
to the individual shipyards who can best define the real needs of their
specific locations and applications. Affected sources are responsible
for complying with the standards, and it is in their own best interest
to ensure that workers are aware of the associated requirements.
Therefore, all training requirements related to painting/thinning,
handling/transfer of VOHAP-containing materials, and certification of
all personnel involved with surface coating operations have been
eliminated from the final rule.
(5) Definition of Pleasure Craft
A definition of pleasure craft has been added to ensure that the
standards apply only to those coatings (and solvents) used on
commercial and military vessels. Some commenters were concerned that,
as proposed, the rule could be interpreted to regulate coatings used on
pleasure crafts. Other commenters suggested that pleasure crafts should
be included. The EPA did not intend to include coatings used on
pleasure crafts in these standards. Such coatings (applications) will
be considered under the development of the Boat Manufacturing NESHAP.
(6) Definition of Affected Source
The definition of affected source was modified to ensure that the
requirements of the standards apply only to those sources (major source
shipyards) with a minimum annual marine coating usage of 1,000 L (264.2
gal). The primary focus of this NESHAP is surface coating operations
and this clarification will minimize/eliminate the impact on shipyards
with minimal surface coating emissions.
(7) Reporting and Notification Changes
Changes have also been made to the notification and reporting
schedules. The initial notification deadline has been extended from 120
to 180 days. The frequency of reporting has also been reduced from the
proposed quarterly requirement to semiannual. This change was made to
allow shipyards to be consistent with current/upcoming Title V permit
requirements. The first compliance certification report is due 6 months
after the compliance date.
(8) Exemptions
Several commenters recommended that the EPA adopt some of the
exemptions provided in various State regulations. Since the MACT floor
was based on three shipyards located in California and those yards have
exemptions similar to those requested, the EPA determined there would
be no significant impact and adopted the following exemptions:
a. Any individual coating with annual usage less than 200 liters
(52.8 gallons) is exempt from the requirements of the standards (i.e.,
the applicable VOHAP limit). The total amount of all coatings exempted
in any given year cannot exceed 1,000 liters (264.2 gallons); and
b. Any coating applied via nonrefillable hand-held aerosol cans is
exempt from the requirements of the standards.
(9) Revision of Equations
The equations used with compliance options 2 and 3 (proposed
options 3 and 4) have been changed so that calculations are based on
volume solids. The revised equations require the VOHAP limits based on
volume solids be used in place of the VOHAP limits based on volume of
coating less water and non-HAP exempt solvents. This change was made to
provide a uniform basis for calculating emission reductions (i.e.,
associated with thinning additions or add-on control devices).
(10) Weather-related VOHAP limits
The proposal preamble requested comments on how to handle thinning
issues for various climatic conditions. The EPA reviewed the comments
and collected additional information on both cold-and hot/humid-weather
thinning practices. As a result of this information, cold-weather VOHAP
limits are included as part of the final rule. If the temperature is
below 4.5 deg.C (40 deg.F) at the time the coating is applied and the
source needs to thin that coating beyond the applicable VOHAP limit,
the date, time, and temperature (including units) must be documented,
and the applicable cold-weather VOHAP limit may be used. The cold-
weather VOHAP limits on a solids basis were increased equivalently, but
the actual values vary for each coating category. The cold-weather
VOHAP limits are applicable only to as-supplied coatings that are
greater than 40 percent solids by volume.
With regards to hot/humid weather conditions, the data and
responses to Section 114 information requests sent by EPA to nine
shipyards and other information received did not provide a basis for
including a humid weather thinning allowance. Respondents identified
meteorological conditions under which coatings must be thinned
[[Page 64334]]
or not applied at all. Only one shipyard, which uses large quantities
of water-based preconstruction primer, maintained that a humid weather
thinning allowance should be adopted. However, the shipyard did not
explain how hydrocarbon-based thinners would relate to its water-based
operation.
Hot and humid weather conditions appear to inhibit coating
operations work less frequently than does cold weather. The different
responses can best be understood as they relate to the specifications
for thinning under different climatic conditions, which are dependent
on paint type and manufacturer. Some coating formulations lose at high
temperature more organic solvent than others which could lead to
thickening (increase in viscosity) of the paint. This occurs where the
rate of application is low and paint containers remain uncovered.
Nevertheless, beginning in September 1994, shipyards performing work
for the Navy in humid climates such as Louisiana, Florida, and Virginia
are required by the Navy to use paints with VOHAP contents levels that
are in compliance with the limits in the NESHAP, without provision for
additional thinning. There is no reason that VOHAP limits that are
achievable for paints used by the Navy cannot also be achieved for
paints used by commercial shipyards located in humid climates and that,
therefore, a thinning allowance for hot/humid weather conditions is not
necessary. If conditions necessitate application of small amount of
noncompliant coatings, the regulation provides a low usage exemption of
1,000 liters of coating per year.
D. Minor Changes
This section contains a list of several of the minor changes to the
final rule. A discussion of these changes can be found in the
promulgation BID. (See ADDRESSES section of this preamble.)
(1) Revisions to definitions and phrasing have been made to clarify
the regulation.
(2) Based on comments received and on changes to the notification
and recordkeeping and reporting requirements, those sections of the
standard have been reorganized and overlapping requirements clarified
or eliminated.
(3) Table 2, which contains the VOHAP limits for the various
coating categories, has been simplified to contain only one set of
units (metric). The conversion factor for English units is included as
a footnote to the table.
V. Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG)
Section 183(b)(4) of the CAA requires the Administrator to issue a
CTG document for limiting VOC and particulate matter emissions from
coatings (paints) and solvents used in the shipbuilding and ship repair
industry. Since VOHAP emissions from this industry are generally a
subset of VOC emissions, the control techniques evaluated for the MACT
standard are also applicable to VOC emissions. Therefore, the EPA has
developed the CTG concurrently with the NESHAP and will be issuing
final guidance under a separate notice. As explained in the proposal
notice (AD-FR- ), no CTG is being issued for particulate matter
emissions.
VI. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
The Docket is an organized and complete file of all the information
considered by the EPA in the development of this rulemaking. The Docket
is a dynamic file, since material is added throughout the rulemaking
development. The docketing system is intended to allow members of the
public and industries involved to readily identify and locate documents
so that they can effectively participate in the rulemaking process.
Along with the statement of basis and purpose of the proposed and
promulgated standards and the EPA responses to significant comments,
the contents of the Docket will serve as the record in case of judicial
review [see 42 U.S.C. 7607(d)(7)(A)].
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is currently reviewing
the information collection request (ICR) requirements contained in this
rule under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0330 and EPA ICR
number 1712.2.
The information required to be collected by this rule is needed as
part of the overall compliance and enforcement program. It is necessary
to identify the regulated entities who are subject to the rule and to
ensure their compliance with the rule. The recordkeeping and reporting
requirements are mandatory and are being established under authority of
Section 114 of the Act. All information submitted to the EPA for which
a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the
EPA policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart B--
Confidentiality of Information (see 40 CFR part 2; 41 FR 36902,
September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 39999, September 8, 1978; 43 FR
42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).
The total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden for this
collection averaged over the first 3 years is estimated to be $26,218
per year. The average burden, per respondent, is 772 hours per year.
This estimate includes the time needed to review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes
of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information. The total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The rule requires
an initial one-time notification from each respondent and subsequent
notification every 6 months to indicate their compliance status. At the
time of the initial notification each respondent would also be required
to submit an implementation plan that describes compliance procedures.
A respondent would also be required to keep necessary records of data
to determine compliance with the standards in the regulation. The data
would be recorded monthly. A report would need to be submitted semi-
annually by each respondent. There would be an estimated 35 respondents
to the proposed collection requirements.
Send comments on the EPA's need for this information, the accuracy
of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated
collection techniques to the Director, OPPE
[[Page 64335]]
Regulatory Information Division; U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
(2136); 401 M Street SW.; Washington, DC 20460; and to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
725 17th Street NW.; Washington, DC 20503; marked ``Attention: Desk
Officer for EPA.'' Include the OMB number and the EPA ICR number in any
correspondence.
C. Executive Order 12866: Administrative Designation and Regulatory
Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866 [58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)], the
EPA is required to judge whether a regulation is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of this Executive
Order to prepare a regulatory impact analysis (RIA). The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may (1) have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs, or the rights and obligation of recipients thereof; or (4)
raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive
Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been
determined that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory action''
and is therefore not subject to OMB review.
D. Executive Order 12875
To reduce the burden of federal regulations on States and small
governments, the President issued Executive Order 12875 on October 26,
1993, entitled Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership. In
particular, this executive order is designed to require agencies to
assess the effects of regulations that are not required by statute and
that create mandates upon State, local, or tribal governments. Two
methods exist for complying with the requirements of the executive
order: (1) Assure that funds necessary to pay direct costs of
compliance with a regulation are provided, or (2) provide OMB a
description of the communications and consultations with State/local/
tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, any written
submission from them, and the EPA's position supporting the need to
issue the regulation.
The EPA has always been concerned about the effect of the cost of
regulations on small entities; the EPA has consulted with and sought
input from public entities to explain costs and burdens they may incur.
The EPA advised interested parties on July 16, 1992 (57 FR 21592),
of the categories considered as major and area sources of HAP, and
shipbuilding and ship repair (surface coating) industry was listed as a
category of both major and area sources. The EPA made significant
effort to hear from all levels of interest and all segments of the
shipbuilding and ship repair industry. To facilitate comments and
input, the EPA conducted comprehensive mailouts of draft and proposal
package materials in 1993 and 1994 to shipyards, Department of the Navy
(Naval Sea Systems Command), marine coating manufacturers, and State
and local government officials. All were given opportunity to comment
on the presented regulatory development activities of the standard.
Throughout the regulatory development process and more specifically in
consultation meetings, industry representatives from commercial/private
shipyards, the U.S. Navy, and various trade associations were given an
opportunity to comment on the proposed regulatory approach and the MACT
alternatives being developed. The major topic areas resulting from
these discussions included the need for cold-weather thinning limits,
flexibility in compliance approaches, and the need for additional data
regarding certain coating categories (i.e., inorganic zincs). Some of
these meetings were held at EPA, while others were conducted at
shipyard locations. In addition, individual consultations were
conducted with three local (air quality management) districts in
California regarding the use of the mass of VOHAP/volume of solids for
determining compliance when the coating is thinned.
The EPA addressed many of the suggestions and comments received
from State and local agencies during the public comment period, many of
which will reduce the impact to small businesses. Some of these
suggestions resulted in changes to the rule, including modification of
the definition of pleasure craft to clarify that the standards apply
only to coatings (and solvents) used on commercial and military vessels
and not to boats in non-military shipyards less than 20 meters in
length; modification of the definition of affected source to ensure
that the requirements of the standards apply only to those sources
(major source shipyards) with a minimum annual marine coating usage of
1,000 Liters (264.2 gallons); exemption of any individual coating with
annual usage less than 200 liters (52.8 gallons) (i.e., the applicable
VOHAP limit); exemption of any coating applied via nonrefillable hand-
held aerosol cans; making the equations used to determine thinning
allowance the same for all options to provide a uniform basis for
calculating emission reductions (i.e., associated with thinning
additions or add-on control devices); extension of the initial
notification deadline from 120 to 180 days and reduction of the
frequency of reporting from the proposed quarterly requirement to
semiannual, which allows shipyards to be consistent with current/
upcoming Title V permit requirements; reorganization and clarification
of the notification and recordkeeping and reporting requirement,
including revision of the definitions and phrasing to ensure that the
terminology is understandable; and the addition of 10 major sources
based on data provided by Louisiana and Texas State agencies.
Some of the other major concerns that were noted in the State and/
or local agency comments and that were considered by the EPA in
developing the proposed and final rule involved realistic work practice
standards, multiple compliance options to provide flexibility for
shipyard owners/operators and State regulators, and streamlining (or
eliminating) any overlapping recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Documentation of all meetings and public comments can be found in
Docket A-92-11.
The EPA has considered the purpose and intent of Executive Order
12875 and has determined that shipbuilding and ship repair facility
NESHAP are needed. The rule is generally required by statute under
Section 112 of the CAA because shipbuilding and ship repair facilities
emit significant quantities of air pollutants. Through meetings and
consultations during project development and proposal, efforts were
made to inform entities of the costs required to comply with the
regulation; in addition, modifications were made to reduce the burden
to small entities.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires the
EPA to consider potential impacts of proposed regulations on small
business ``entities.'' If a preliminary analysis indicates that a
proposed regulation would have a
[[Page 64336]]
significant economic impact on 20 percent or more of small entities,
then a regulatory flexibility analysis must be prepared. The EPA's
analysis of these impacts was provided in the preamble to the proposed
rule (59 FR 62681) and no negative impacts for small businesses will
result from the changes incorporated into the final rule.
Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), I hereby certify
that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small business entities.
F. Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under Section 202 of the UMRA, the
EPA generally must prepare a written statement including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, Section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of Section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
Section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
Section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
The EPA has determined that the action promulgated today does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate, or to the private sector. Therefore, the requirements of the
Unfunded Mandates Act do not apply to this action.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Marine coating limits, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Shipbuilding and ship repair standards.
Dated: November 14, 1995.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SHIPBUILDING AND SHIP REPAIR (SURFACE COATING)
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sections 101, 112, 114, 116, and 301 of the Clean Air
Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., as amended by Pub. L. 101-549, 104
Stat. 2399).
2. Section 63.14 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(4) through
(b)(14) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.14 Incorporation by reference.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) ASTM D523-89, Standard Test Method for Specular Gloss, IBR
approved for Sec. 63.782.
(5) ASTM D1475-90, Standard Test Method for Density of Paint,
Varnish, Lacquer, and Related Products, IBR approved for Sec. 63.788
appendix A.
(6) ASTM D2369-93, Standard Test Method for Volatile Content of
Coatings, IBR approved for Sec. 63.788 appendix A.
(7) ASTM D3912-80, Standard Test Method for Chemical Resistance of
Coatings Used in Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants, IBR approved for
Sec. 63.782.
(8) ASTM D4017-90, Standard Test Method for Water and Paints and
Paint Materials by Karl Fischer Method, IBR approved for Sec. 63.788
appendix A.
(9) ASTM D4082-89, Standard Test Method for Effects of Gamma
Radiation on Coatings for Use in Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants, IBR
approved for Sec. 63.782.
(10) ASTM D4256-89 [reapproved 1994], Standard Test Method for
Determination of the Decontaminability of Coatings Used in Light-Water
Nuclear Power Plants, IBR approved for Sec. 63.782.
(11) ASTM D3792-91, Standard Test Method for Water Content of
Water-Reducible Paints by Direct Injection into a Gas Chromatograph,
IBR approved for Sec. 63.788 appendix A.
(12) ASTM D3257-93, Standard Test Methods for Aromatics in Mineral
Spirits by Gas Chromatography, IBR approved for Sec. 63.786(b).
(13) ASTM E260-91, Standard Practice for Packed Column Gas
Chromatography, IBR approved for Sec. 63.786(b).
(14) ASTM E180-93, Standard Practice for Determining the Precision
of ASTM Methods for Analysis and Testing of Industrial Chemicals, IBR
approved for Sec. 63.786(b).
3. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart II to read as follows:
Subpart II--National Emission Standards for Shipbuilding and Ship
Repair (Surface Coating)
Secs.
63.780 Relationship of subpart II to subpart A of this part.
63.781 Applicability.
63.782 Definitions.
63.783 Standards.
63.784 Compliance dates.
63.785 Compliance procedures.
63.786 Test methods and procedures.
63.787 Notification requirements.
63.788 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Table 1 to Subpart II of Part 63--General Provisions of
Applicability to Subpart II
Table 2 to Subpart II of Part 63--Volatile Organic HAP (VOHAP)
Limits for Marine Coatings
Table 3 to Subpart II of Part 63--Summary of Recordkeeping and
Reporting Requirements
Appendix A to Subpart II of Part 63--VOC Data Sheet
Appendix B to Subpart II of Part 63--Maximum Allowable Thinning
Rates As a Function of As Supplied VOC Content and Thinner Density
Subpart II--National Emission Standards for Shipbuilding and Ship
Repair (Surface Coating)
Sec. 63.780 Relationship of subpart II to subpart A of this part.
Table 1 of this subpart specifies the provisions of subpart A of
this part that apply to owners and operators of sources subject to the
provisions of this subpart.
Sec. 63.781 Applicability.
(a) The provisions of this subpart apply to shipbuilding and ship
repair operations at any facility that is a major source.
(b) The provisions of this subpart do not apply to coatings used in
volumes of less than 200 liters (52.8 gallons) per
[[Page 64337]]
year, provided the total volume of coating exempt under this paragraph
does not exceed 1,000 liters per year (264 gallons per year) at any
facility. Coatings exempt under this paragraph shall be clearly labeled
as ``low-usage exempt,'' and the volume of each such coating applied
shall be maintained in the facility's records.
(c) The provisions of this subpart do not apply to coatings applied
with hand-held, nonrefillable, aerosol containers or to unsaturated
polyester resin (i.e., fiberglass lay-up) coatings. Coatings applied to
suitably prepared fiberglass surfaces for protective or decorative
purposes are subject to this subpart.
(d) The provisions in subpart A of this part pertaining to
startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions and continuous monitoring do not
apply to this source category unless an add-on control system is used
to comply with this subpart in accordance with Sec. 63.783(c).
Sec. 63.782 Definitions.
Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air Act (CAA),
in subpart A of part 63, or in this section as follows:
Add-on control system means an air pollution control device such as
a carbon absorber or incinerator that reduces pollution in an air
stream by destruction or removal prior to discharge to the atmosphere.
Affected source means any shipbuilding or ship repair facility
having surface coating operations with a minimum 1,000 liters (L) (264
gallons [gal]) annual marine coating usage that is subject to this
subpart.
Air flask specialty coating means any special composition coating
applied to interior surfaces of high pressure breathing air flasks to
provide corrosion resistance and that is certified safe for use with
breathing air supplies.
Antenna specialty coating means any coating applied to equipment
through which electromagnetic signals must pass for reception or
transmission.
Antifoulant specialty coating means any coating that is applied to
the underwater portion of a vessel to prevent or reduce the attachment
of biological organisms and that is registered with the EPA as a
pesticide under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act.
As applied means the condition of a coating at the time of
application to the substrate, including any thinning solvent.
As supplied means the condition of a coating before any thinning,
as sold and delivered by the coating manufacturer to the user.
Batch means the product of an individual production run of a
coating manufacturer's process. A batch may vary in composition from
other batches of the same product.
Bitumens mean black or brown materials that are soluble in carbon
disulfide and consist mainly of hydrocarbons.
Bituminous resin coating means any coating that incorporates
bitumens as a principal component and is formulated primarily to be
applied to a substrate or surface to resist ultraviolet radiation and/
or water.
Certify means, in reference to the volatile organic compounds (VOC)
content or volatile organic hazardous air pollutants (VOHAP) content of
a coating, to attest to the VOC content as determined through analysis
by Method 24 of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60 or through use of forms
and procedures outlined in appendix A of this subpart, or to attest to
the VOHAP content as determined through an Administrator-approved test
method. In the case of conflicting results, Method 24 of Appendix A to
40 CFR part 60 shall take precedence over the forms and procedures
outlined in appendix A to this subpart for the options in which VOC is
used as a surrogate for VOHAP.
Coating means any material that can be applied as a thin layer to a
substrate and which cures to form a continuous solid film.
Cold-weather time period means any time during which the ambient
temperature is below 4.5 deg.C (40 deg.F) and coating is to be applied.
Container of coating means the container from which the coating is
applied, including but not limited to a bucket or pot.
Cure volatiles means reaction products which are emitted during the
chemical reaction which takes place in some coating films at the cure
temperature. These emissions are other than those from the solvents in
the coating and may, in some cases, comprise a significant portion of
total VOC and/or VOHAP emissions.
Epoxy means any thermoset coating formed by reaction of an epoxy
resin (i.e., a resin containing a reactive epoxide with a curing
agent).
Exempt compounds means specified organic compounds that are not
considered VOC due to negligible photochemical reactivity. Exempt
compounds are specified in 40 CFR 51.100(s).
Facility means all contiguous or adjoining property that is under
common ownership or control, including properties that are separated
only by a road or other public right-of-way.
General use coating means any coating that is not a specialty
coating.
Hazardous air pollutants (HAP) means any air pollutant listed in or
pursuant to section 112(b) of the CAA.
Heat resistant specialty coating means any coating that during
normal use must withstand a temperature of at least 204 deg.C
(400 deg.F).
High-gloss specialty coating means any coating that achieves at
least 85 percent reflectance on a 60 degree meter when tested by ASTM
Method D523 (incorporation by reference--see Sec. 63.14).
High-temperature specialty coating means any coating that during
normal use must withstand a temperature of at least 426 deg.C
(800 deg.F).
Inorganic zinc (high-build) specialty coating means a coating that
contains 960 grams per liter (8 pounds per gallon) or more elemental
zinc incorporated into an inorganic silicate binder that is applied to
steel to provide galvanic corrosion resistance. (These coatings are
typically applied at more than 2 mil dry film thickness.)
Major source means any source that emits or has the potential to
emit, in the aggregate, 9.1 megagrams per year (10 tons per year) or
more of any HAP or 22.7 megagrams per year (25 tons per year) or more
of any combination of HAP.
Maximum allowable thinning ratio means the maximum volume of
thinner that can be added per volume of coating without violating the
standards of Sec. 63.783(a), as determined using Equation 1 of this
subpart.
Military exterior specialty coating or Chemical Agent Resistant
Coatings (``CARC'') means any exterior topcoat applied to military or
U.S. Coast Guard vessels that are subject to specific chemical,
biological, and radiological washdown requirements.
Mist specialty coating means any low viscosity, thin film, epoxy
coating applied to an inorganic zinc primer that penetrates the porous
zinc primer and allows the occluded air to escape through the paint
film prior to curing.
Navigational aids specialty coating means any coating applied to
Coast Guard buoys or other Coast Guard waterway markers when they are
recoated aboard ship at their usage site and immediately returned to
the water.
Nonskid specialty coating means any coating applied to the
horizontal surfaces of a marine vessel for the specific purpose of
providing slip resistance for personnel, vehicles, or aircraft.
[[Page 64338]]
Nonvolatiles (or volume solids) means substances that do not
evaporate readily. This term refers to the film-forming material of a
coating.
Normally closed means a container or piping system is closed unless
an operator is actively engaged in adding or removing material.
Nuclear specialty coating means any protective coating used to seal
porous surfaces such as steel (or concrete) that otherwise would be
subject to intrusion by radioactive materials. These coatings must be
resistant to long-term (service life) cumulative radiation exposure
(ASTM D4082-89 [incorporation by reference--see Sec. 63.14]),
relatively easy to decontaminate (ASTM D4256-89 [reapproved 1994]
[incorporation by reference--see Sec. 63.14]), and resistant to various
chemicals to which the coatings are likely to be exposed (ASTM D3912-80
[incorporation by reference--see Sec. 63.14]). [For nuclear coatings,
see the general protective requirements outlined by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission in a report entitled ``U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission Regulatory Guide 1.54'' dated June 1973, available through
the Government Printing Office at (202) 512-2249 as document number
A74062-00001.]
Operating parameter value means a minimum or maximum value
established for a control device or process parameter that, if achieved
by itself or in combination with one or more other operating parameter
values, determines that an owner or operator has complied with an
applicable emission limitation or standard.
Organic zinc specialty coating means any coating derived from zinc
dust incorporated into an organic binder that contains more than 960
grams of elemental zinc per liter (8 pounds per gallon) of coating, as
applied, and that is used for the expressed purpose of corrosion
protection.
Pleasure craft means any marine or fresh-water vessel used by
individuals for noncommercial, nonmilitary, and recreational purposes
that is less than 20 meters in length. A vessel rented exclusively to
or chartered by individuals for such purposes shall be considered a
pleasure craft.
Pretreatment wash primer specialty coating means any coating that
contains a minimum of 0.5 percent acid, by mass, and is applied only to
bare metal to etch the surface and enhance adhesion of subsequent
coatings.
Repair and maintenance of thermoplastic coating of commercial
vessels (specialty coating) means any vinyl, chlorinated rubber, or
bituminous resin coating that is applied over the same type of existing
coating to perform the partial recoating of any in-use commercial
vessel. (This definition does not include coal tar epoxy coatings,
which are considered ``general use'' coatings.)
Rubber camouflage specialty coating means any specially formulated
epoxy coating used as a camouflage topcoat for exterior submarine hulls
and sonar domes. Sealant for thermal spray aluminum means any epoxy
coating applied to thermal spray aluminum surfaces at a maximum
thickness of 1 dry mil.
Ship means any marine or fresh-water vessel used for military or
commercial operations, including self-propelled vessels, those
propelled by other craft (barges), and navigational aids (buoys). This
definition includes, but is not limited to, all military and Coast
Guard vessels, commercial cargo and passenger (cruise) ships, ferries,
barges, tankers, container ships, patrol and pilot boats, and dredges.
For purposes of this subpart, pleasure crafts and offshore oil and gas
drilling platforms are not considered ships.
Shipbuilding and ship repair operations means any building, repair,
repainting, converting, or alteration of ships.
Special marking specialty coating means any coating that is used
for safety or identification applications, such as markings on flight
decks and ships' numbers.
Specialty coating means any coating that is manufactured and used
for one of the specialized applications described within this list of
definitions.
Specialty interior coating means any coating used on interior
surfaces aboard U.S. military vessels pursuant to a coating
specification that requires the coating to meet specified fire
retardant and low toxicity requirements, in addition to the other
applicable military physical and performance requirements.
Tack specialty coating means any thin film epoxy coating applied at
a maximum thickness of 2 dry mils to prepare an epoxy coating that has
dried beyond the time limit specified by the manufacturer for the
application of the next coat.
Thinner means a liquid that is used to reduce the viscosity of a
coating and that evaporates before or during the cure of a film.
Thinning ratio means the volumetric ratio of thinner to coating, as
supplied.
Thinning solvent: see Thinner.
Undersea weapons systems specialty coating means any coating
applied to any component of a weapons system intended to be launched or
fired from under the sea.
Volatile organic compounds (VOC) is as defined in Sec. 51.100(s) of
this chapter.
Volatile organic hazardous air pollutants (VOHAP) means any
compound listed in or pursuant to section 112(b) of the CAA that
contains carbon, excluding metallic carbides and carbonates. This
definition includes VOC listed as HAP and exempt compounds listed as
HAP.
Weld-through preconstruction primer (specialty coating) means a
coating that provides corrosion protection for steel during inventory,
is typically applied at less than 1 mil dry film thickness, does not
require removal prior to welding, is temperature resistant (burn back
from a weld is less than 1.25 centimeters [0.5 inch]), and does not
normally require removal before applying film-building coatings,
including inorganic zinc high-build coatings. When constructing new
vessels, there may be a need to remove areas of weld-through
preconstruction primer due to surface damage or contamination prior to
application of film-building coatings.
Sec. 63.783 Standards.
(a) No owner or operator of any existing or new affected source
shall cause or allow the application of any coating to a ship with an
as-applied VOHAP content exceeding the applicable limit given in Table
2 of this subpart, as determined by the procedures described in
Sec. 63.785 (c)(1) through (c)(4). For the compliance procedures
described in Sec. 63.785 (c)(1) through (c)(3), VOC shall be used as a
surrogate for VOHAP, and Method 24 of Appendix A to 40 CFR part 60
shall be used as the definitive measure for determining compliance. For
the compliance procedure described in Sec. 63.785(c)(4), an alternative
test method capable of measuring independent VOHAP shall be used to
determine compliance. The method must be submitted to and approved by
the Administrator.
(b) Each owner or operator of a new or existing affected source
shall ensure that:
(1) All handling and transfer of VOHAP-containing materials to and
from containers, tanks, vats, drums, and piping systems is conducted in
a manner that minimizes spills.
(2) All containers, tanks, vats, drums, and piping systems are free
of cracks, holes, and other defects and remain closed unless materials
are being added to or removed from them.
(c) Approval of alternative means of limiting emissions. (1) The
owner or operator of an affected source may apply to the Administrator
for permission to use an alternative means (such as an
[[Page 64339]]
add-on control system) of limiting emissions from coating operations.
The application must include:
(i) An engineering material balance evaluation that provides a
comparison of the emissions that would be achieved using the
alternative means to those that would result from using coatings that
comply with the limits in Table 2 of this subpart, or the results from
an emission test that accurately measures the capture efficiency and
control device efficiency achieved by the control system and the
composition of the associated coatings so that the emissions comparison
can be made;
(ii) A proposed monitoring protocol that includes operating
parameter values to be monitored for compliance and an explanation of
how the operating parameter values will be established through a
performance test; and
(iii) Details of appropriate recordkeeping and reporting
procedures.
(2) The Administrator shall approve the alternative means of
limiting emissions if, in the Administrator's judgment, postcontrol
emissions of VOHAP per volume applied solids will be no greater than
those from the use of coatings that comply with the limits in Table 2
of this subpart.
(3) The Administrator may condition approval on operation,
maintenance, and monitoring requirements to ensure that emissions from
the source are no greater than those that would otherwise result from
this subpart. Sec. 63.784 Compliance dates.
(a) Each owner or operator of an existing affected source shall
comply within 1 year after the effective date of this subpart.
(b) Each owner or operator of an existing unaffected area source
that increases its emissions of (or its potential to emit) HAP such
that the source becomes a major source that is subject to this subpart
shall comply within 1 year after the date of becoming a major source.
(c) Each owner or operator of a new or reconstructed source shall
comply with this subpart according to the schedule in Sec. 63.6(b).
Sec. 63.785 Compliance procedures.
(a) For each batch of coating that is received by an affected
source, the owner or operator shall (see Figure 1 of this section for a
flow diagram of the compliance procedures):
(1) Determine the coating category and the applicable VOHAP limit
as specified in Sec. 63.783(a).
(2) Certify the as-supplied VOC content of the batch of coating.
The owner or operator may use a certification supplied by the
manufacturer for the batch, although the owner or operator retains
liability should subsequent testing reveal a violation. If the owner or
operator performs the certification testing, only one of the containers
in which the batch of coating was received is required to be tested.
(b)(1) In lieu of testing each batch of coating, as applied, the
owner or operator may determine compliance with the VOHAP limits using
any combination of the procedures described in paragraphs (c)(1),
(c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4) of this section. The procedure used for each
coating shall be determined and documented prior to application.
(2) The results of any compliance demonstration conducted by the
affected source or any regulatory agency using Method 24 shall take
precedence over the results using the procedures in paragraphs (c)(1),
(c)(2), or (c)(3) of this section.
(3) The results of any compliance demonstration conducted by the
affected source or any regulatory agency using an approved test method
to determine VOHAP content shall take precedence over the results using
the procedures in paragraph (c)(4) of this section.
(c)(1) Coatings to which thinning solvent will not be added. For
coatings to which thinning solvent (or any other material) will not be
added under any circumstance or to which only water is added, the owner
or operator of an affected source shall comply as follows:
(i) Certify the as-applied VOC content of each batch of coating.
(ii) Notify the persons responsible for applying the coating that
no thinning solvent may be added to the coating by affixing a label to
each container of coating in the batch or through another means
described in the implementation plan required in Sec. 63.787(b).
(iii) If the certified as-applied VOC content of each batch of
coating used during a calendar month is less than or equal to the
applicable VOHAP limit in Sec. 63.783(a) (either in terms of g/L of
coating or g/L of solids), then compliance is demonstrated for that
calendar month, unless a violation is revealed using Method 24 of
Appendix A to 40 CFR part 60.
(2) Coatings to which thinning solvent will be added--coating-by-
coating compliance. For a coating to which thinning solvent is
routinely or sometimes added, the owner or operator shall comply as
follows:
(i) Prior to the first application of each batch, designate a
single thinner for the coating and calculate the maximum allowable
thinning ratio (or ratios, if the affected source complies with the
cold-weather limits in addition to the other limits specified in Table
2 of this subpart) for each batch as follows:
where:
R=Maximum allowable thinning ratio for a given batch (L thinner/L
coating as supplied);
Vs=Volume fraction of solids in the batch as supplied (L solids/L
coating as supplied);
VOHAP limit=Maximum allowable as-applied VOHAP content of the coating
(g VOHAP/L solids);
mVOC=VOC content of the batch as supplied [g VOC (including cure
volatiles and exempt compounds on the HAP list)/L coating (including
water and exempt compounds) as supplied];
Dth=Density of the thinner (g/L).
If Vs is not supplied directly by the coating manufacturer,
the owner or operator shall determine Vs as follows:
where:
mvolatiles=Total volatiles in the batch, including VOC, water, and
exempt compounds (g/L coating); and
Davg=Average density of volatiles in the batch (g/L).
The procedures specified in Sec. 63.786(d) may be used to determine
the values of variables defined in this paragraph. In addition, the
owner or operator may choose to construct nomographs, based on Equation
1 of this subpart, similar or identical to the one provided in appendix
B of this subpart as a means of easily estimating the maximum allowable
thinning ratio.
(ii) Prior to the first application of each batch, notify painters
and other persons, as necessary, of the designated thinner and maximum
allowable thinning ratio(s) for each batch of the coating by affixing a
label to each container of coating or through another means described
in the implementation plan required in Sec. 63.787(b).
(iii) By the 15th day of each calendar month, determine the volume
of each batch of the coating used, as supplied, during the previous
month.
(iv) By the 15th day of each calendar month, determine the total
allowable volume of thinner for the coating used during the previous
month as follows:
[[Page 64340]]
where:
Vth=Total allowable volume of thinner for the previous month (L
thinner);
Vb=Volume of each batch, as supplied and before being thinned,
used during non-cold-weather days of the previous month (L coating as
supplied);
Rcold=Maximum allowable thinning ratio for each batch used during
cold-weather days (L thinner/L coating as supplied);
Vb-cold=Volume of each batch, as supplied and before being
thinned, used during cold-weather days of the previous month (L coating
as supplied);
i=Each batch of coating; and
n=Total number of batches of the coating.
(v) By the 15th day of each calendar month, determine the volume of
thinner actually used with the coating during the previous month.
(vi) If the volume of thinner actually used with the coating
[paragraph (c)(3)(v) of this section] is less than or equal to the
total allowable volume of thinner for the coating [paragraph (c)(3)(iv)
of this section], then compliance is demonstrated for the coating for
the previous month, unless a violation is revealed using Method 24 of
Appendix A to 40 CFR part 60.
(3) Coatings to which the same thinning solvent will be added--
group compliance. For coatings to which the same thinning solvent (or
other material) is routinely or sometimes added, the owner or operator
shall comply as follows:
(i) Designate a single thinner to be added to each coating during
the month and ``group'' coatings according to their designated thinner.
(ii) Prior to the first application of each batch, calculate the
maximum allowable thinning ratio (or ratios, if the affected source
complies with the cold-weather limits in addition to the other limits
specified in Table 2 of this subpart) for each batch of coating in the
group using the equations in paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
(iii) Prior to the first application of each ``batch,'' notify
painters and other persons, as necessary, of the designated thinner and
maximum allowable thinning ratio(s) for each batch in the group by
affixing a label to each container of coating or through another means
described in the implementation plan required in Sec. 63.787(b).
(iv) By the 15th day of each calendar month, determine the volume
of each batch of the group used, as supplied, during the previous
month.
(v) By the 15th day of each calendar month, determine the total
allowable volume of thinner for the group for the previous month using
Equation 3 of this subpart.
(vi) By the 15th day of each calendar month, determine the volume
of thinner actually used with the group during the previous month.
(vii) If the volume of thinner actually used with the group
[paragraph (c)(3)(vi) of this section] is less than or equal to the
total allowable volume of thinner for the group [paragraph (c)(3)(v) of
this section], then compliance is demonstrated for the group for the
previous month, unless a violation is revealed using Method 24 of
Appendix A to 40 CFR part 60.
(4) Demonstration of compliance through an alternative (i.e., other
than Method 24 of Appendix A to 40 CFR part 60) test method. The owner
or operator shall comply as follows:
(i) Certify the as-supplied VOHAP content (g VOHAP/L solids) of
each batch of coating.
(ii) If no thinning solvent will be added to the coating, the owner
or operator of an affected source shall follow the procedure described
in Sec. 63.785(c)(1), except that VOHAP content shall be used in lieu
of VOC content.
(iii) If thinning solvent will be added to the coating, the owner
or operator of an affected source shall follow the procedure described
in Sec. 63.785(c)(2) or (3), except that in Equation 1 of this subpart:
the term ``mVOC'' shall be replaced by the term ``mVOHAP,''
defined as the VOHAP content of the coating as supplied (g VOHAP/L
coating) and the term ``Dth'' shall be replaced by the term
``Dth(VOHAP)'' defined as the average density of the VOHAP
thinner(s) (g/L).
(d) A violation revealed through any approved test method shall
result in a 1-day violation for enforcement purposes. A violation
revealed through the recordkeeping procedures described in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (c)(4) of this section shall result in a 30-day
violation for enforcement purposes, unless the owner or operator
provides sufficient data to demonstrate the specific days during which
noncompliant coatings were applied.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[[Page 64341]]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
[[Page 64342]]
Sec. 63.786 Test methods and procedures.
(a) For the compliance procedures described in Sec. 63.785(c) (1)
through (c)(3), Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, is the
definitive method for determining the VOC content of coatings, as
supplied or as applied. When a coating or thinner contains exempt
compounds that are volatile HAP or VOHAP, the owner or operator shall
ensure, when determining the VOC content of a coating, that the mass of
these exempt compounds is included.
(b) For the compliance procedure described in Sec. 63.785(c)(4),
the Administrator must approve the test method for determining the
VOHAP content of coatings and thinners. As part of the approval, the
test method must meet the specified accuracy limits indicated below for
sensitivity, duplicates, repeatability, and reproducibility coefficient
of variation each determined at the 95 percent confidence limit. Each
percentage value below is the corresponding coefficient of variation
multiplied by 2.8 as in the ASTM Method E180-93: Standard Practice for
Determining the Precision of ASTM Methods for Analysis and Testing of
Industrial Chemicals (incorporation by reference--see Sec. 63.14).
(1) Sensitivity. The overall sensitivity must be sufficient to
identify and calculate at least one mass percent of the compounds of
interest based on the original sample. The sensitivity is defined as
ten times the noise level as specified in ASTM Method D3257-93:
Standard Test Methods for Aromatics in Mineral Spirits by Gas
Chromatography (incorporation by reference--see Sec. 63.14). In
determining the sensitivity, the level of sample dilution must be
factored in.
(2) Repeatability. First, at the 0.1-5 percent analyte range the
results would be suspect if duplicates vary by more than 6 percent
relative and/or day to day variation of mean duplicates by the same
analyst exceeds 10 percent relative. Second, at greater than 5 percent
analyte range the results would be suspect if duplicates vary by more
than 5 percent relative and/or day to day variation of duplicates by
the same analyst exceeds 5 percent relative.
(3) Reproducibility. First, at the 0.1-5 percent analyte range the
results would be suspect if lab to lab variation exceeds 60 percent
relative. Second, at greater than 5 percent range the results would be
suspect if lab to lab variation exceeds 20 percent relative.
(4) Any test method should include information on the apparatus,
reagents and materials, analytical procedure, procedure for
identification and confirmation of the volatile species in the mixture
being analyzed, precision and bias, and other details to be reported.
The reporting should also include information on quality assurance (QA)
auditing.
(5) Multiple and different analytical techniques must be used for
positive identification if the components in a mixture under analysis
are not known. In such cases a single column gas chromatograph (GC) may
not be adequate. A combination of equipment may be needed such as a GC/
mass spectrometer or GC/infrared system. (If a GC method is used, the
operator must use practices in ASTM Method E260-91: Standard Practice
for Gas Chromatography [incorporation by reference--see Sec. 63.14].)
(c) A coating manufacturer or the owner or operator of an affected
source may use batch formulation data as a test method in lieu of
Method 24 of Appendix A to 40 CFR part 60 to certify the as-supplied
VOC content of a coating if the manufacturer or the owner or operator
has determined that batch formulation data have a consistent and
quantitatively known relationship to Method 24 results. This
determination shall consider the role of cure volatiles, which may
cause emissions to exceed an amount based solely upon coating
formulation data. Notwithstanding such determination, in the event of
conflicting results, Method 24 of appendix A of 40 CFR part 60 shall
take precedence.
(d) Each owner or operator of an affected source shall use or
ensure that the manufacturer uses the form and procedures mentioned in
appendix A of this subpart to determine values for the thinner and
coating parameters used in Equations 1 and 2 of this subpart. The owner
or operator shall ensure that the coating/thinner manufacturer (or
supplier) provides information on the VOC and VOHAP contents of the
coatings/thinners and the procedure(s) used to determine these values.
Sec. 63.787 Notification requirements.
(a) Each owner or operator of an affected source shall comply with
all applicable notification requirements in Sec. 63.9(a) through (d)
and (i) through (j), with the exception that the deadline specified in
Sec. 63.9(b) (2) and (3) shall be extended from 120 days to 180 days.
Any owner or operator that receives approval pursuant to Sec. 63.783(c)
to use an add-on control system to control coating emissions shall
comply with the applicable requirements of Sec. 63.9(e) through (h).
(b) Implementation plan. The provisions of Sec. 63.9(a) apply to
the requirements of this paragraph.
(1) Each owner or operator of an affected source shall:
(i) Prepare a written implementation plan that addresses each of
the subject areas specified in paragraph (b)(3) of this section; and
(ii) Not later than 180 days after the effective date of this
subpart, submit the implementation plan to the Administrator for
approval along with the notification required by Sec. 63.9(b) (2) or
(5), as applicable.
(2) The Administrator may require revisions to the initial plan
where the Administrator finds that the plan does not adequately address
each subject area listed in paragraph (b)(3) of this section or that
the requirements in the plan are unclear.
(3) Implementation plan contents. Each implementation plan shall
address the following subject areas:
(i) Coating compliance procedures. The implementation plan shall
include the compliance procedure(s) under Sec. 63.785(c) that the
source intends to use.
(ii) Recordkeeping procedures. The implementation plan shall
include the procedures for maintaining the records required under
Sec. 63.788, including the procedures for gathering the necessary data
and making the necessary calculations.
(iii) Transfer, handling, and storage procedures. The
implementation plan shall include the procedures for ensuring
compliance with Sec. 63.783(b).
(4) Major sources that intend to become area sources by the
compliance date. Existing major sources that intend to become area
sources by the compliance date December 16, 1996 may choose to submit,
in lieu of the implementation plan required under paragraph (b)(1) of
this section, a statement that, by the compliance date, the major
source intends to obtain and comply with federally enforceable limits
on their potential to emit which make the facility an area source.
Sec. 63.788 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
(a) Each owner or operator of an affected source shall comply with
the applicable recordkeeping and reporting requirements in Sec. 63.10
(a), (b), (d), and (f). Any owner that receives approval pursuant to
Sec. 63.783(c) to use an add-on control system to control coating
emissions shall also comply with the applicable requirements of
Sec. 63.10 (c) and (e). A summary of recordkeeping and reporting
requirements is provided in Table 3 of this subpart.
[[Page 64343]]
(b) Recordkeeping requirements. (1) Each owner or operator of an
unaffected major source, as described in Sec. 63.781(b), shall record
the total volume of coating applied at the source to ships. Such
records shall be compiled monthly and maintained for a minimum of 5
years.
(2) Each owner or operator of an affected source shall compile
records on a monthly basis and maintain those records for a minimum of
5 years. At a minimum, these records shall include:
(i) All documentation supporting initial notification;
(ii) A copy of the affected source's approved implementation plan;
(iii) The volume of each low-usage-exempt coating applied;
(iv) Identification of the coatings used, their appropriate coating
categories, and the applicable VOHAP limit;
(v) Certification of the as-supplied VOC content of each batch of
coating;
(vi) A determination of whether containers meet the standards as
described in Sec. 63.783(b)(2); and
(vii) The results of any Method 24 of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60
or approved VOHAP measurement test conducted on individual containers
of coating, as applied.
(3) The records required by paragraph (b)(2) of this section shall
include additional information, as determined by the compliance
procedure(s) described in Sec. 63.785(c) that each affected source
followed:
(i) Coatings to which thinning solvent will not be added. The
records maintained by facilities demonstrating compliance using the
procedure described in Sec. 63.785(c)(1) shall contain the following
information:
(A) Certification of the as-applied VOC content of each batch of
coating; and
(B) The volume of each coating applied.
(ii) Coatings to which thinning solvent will be added--coating-by-
coating compliance. The records maintained by facilities demonstrating
compliance using the procedure described in Sec. 63.785(c)(2) shall
contain the following information:
(A) The density and mass fraction of water and exempt compounds of
each thinner and the volume fraction of solids (nonvolatiles) in each
batch, including any calculations;
(B) The maximum allowable thinning ratio (or ratios, if the
affected source complies with the cold-weather limits in addition to
the other limits specified in Table 2 of this subpart for each batch of
coating, including calculations;
(C) If an affected source chooses to comply with the cold-weather
limits, the dates and times during which the ambient temperature at the
affected source was below 4.5 deg.C (40 deg.F) at the time the coating
was applied and the volume used of each batch of the coating, as
supplied, during these dates;
(D) The volume used of each batch of the coating, as supplied;
(E) The total allowable volume of thinner for each coating,
including calculations; and
(F) The actual volume of thinner used for each coating.
(iii) Coatings to which the same thinning solvent will be added--
group compliance. The records maintained by facilities demonstrating
compliance using the procedure described in Sec. 63.785(c)(3) shall
contain the following information:
(A) The density and mass fraction of water and exempt compounds of
each thinner and the volume fraction of solids in each batch, including
any calculations;
(B) The maximum allowable thinning ratio (or ratios, if the
affected source complies with the cold-weather limits in addition to
the other limits specified in Table 2 of this subpart) for each batch
of coating, including calculations;
(C) If an affected source chooses to comply with the cold-weather
limits, the dates and times during which the ambient temperature at the
affected source was below 4.5 deg.C (40 deg.F) at the time the coating
was applied and the volume used of each batch in the group, as
supplied, during these dates;
(D) Identification of each group of coatings and their designated
thinners;
(E) The volume used of each batch of coating in the group, as
supplied;
(F) The total allowable volume of thinner for the group, including
calculations; and
(G) The actual volume of thinner used for the group.
(iv) Demonstration of compliance through an alternative (i.e., non-
Method 24 in appendix A to 40 CFR part 60) test method. The records
maintained by facilities demonstrating compliance using the procedure
described in Sec. 63.785(c)(4) shall contain the following information:
(A) Identification of the Administrator-approved VOHAP test method
or certification procedure;
(B) For coatings to which the affected source does not add thinning
solvents, the source shall record the certification of the as-supplied
and as-applied VOHAP content of each batch and the volume of each
coating applied;
(C) For coatings to which the affected source adds thinning solvent
on a coating-by-coating basis, the source shall record all of the
information required to be recorded by paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this
section; and
(D) For coatings to which the affected source adds thinning solvent
on a group basis, the source shall record all of the information
required to be recorded by paragraph (b)(3)(iii) of this section.
(4) If the owner or operator of an affected source detects a
violation of the standards specified in Sec. 63.783, the owner or
operator shall, for the remainder of the reporting period during which
the violation(s) occurred, include the following information in his or
her records:
(i) A summary of the number and duration of deviations during the
reporting period, classified by reason, including known causes for
which a Federally-approved or promulgated exemption from an emission
limitation or standard may apply.
(ii) Identification of the data availability achieved during the
reporting period, including a summary of the number and total duration
of incidents that the monitoring protocol failed to perform in
accordance with the design of the protocol or produced data that did
not meet minimum data accuracy and precision requirements, classified
by reason.
(iii) Identification of the compliance status as of the last day of
the reporting period and whether compliance was continuous or
intermittent during the reporting period.
(iv) If, pursuant to paragraph (b)(4)(iii) of this section, the
owner or operator identifies any deviation as resulting from a known
cause for which no Federally-approved or promulgated exemption from an
emission limitation or standard applies, the monitoring report shall
also include all records that the source is required to maintain that
pertain to the periods during which such deviation occurred and:
(A) The magnitude of each deviation;
(B) The reason for each deviation;
(C) A description of the corrective action taken for each
deviation, including action taken to minimize each deviation and action
taken to prevent recurrence; and
(D) All quality assurance activities performed on any element of
the monitoring protocol.
(c) Reporting requirements. Before the 60th day following
completion of each 6-month period after the compliance date specified
in Sec. 63.784, each owner or operator of an affected source shall
submit a report to the Administrator for each of the previous 6 months.
The report shall include all of the information that must be retained
pursuant to paragraphs (b) (2) through (3) of this section, except for
that
[[Page 64344]]
information specified in paragraphs (b)(2) (i) through (ii), (b)(2)(v),
(b)(3)(i)(A), (b)(3)(ii)(A), and (b)(3)(iii)(A). If a violation at an
affected source is detected, the source shall also report the
information specified in paragraph (b)(4) of this section for the
reporting period during which the violation(s) occurred. To the extent
possible, the report shall be organized according to the compliance
procedure(s) followed each month by the affected source.
Table 1 To Subpart II of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart II
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference Applies to subpart II Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
63.1(a)(1)-(3)....................... Yes................... .................................................
63.1(a)(4)........................... Yes................... Subpart II clarifies the applicability of each
paragraph in subpart A to sources subject to
subpart II.
63.1(a)(5)-(7)....................... Yes...................
63.1(a)(8)........................... No.................... Discusses State programs.
63.1(a)(9)-(14)...................... Yes...................
63.1(b)(1)........................... Yes................... Sec. 63.781 specifies applicability in more
detail.
63.1(b)(2)-(3)....................... Yes...................
63.1(c)-(e).......................... Yes...................
63.2................................. Yes................... Additional terms are defined in Sec. 63.782;
when overlap between subparts A and II occurs,
subpart II takes precedence.
63.3................................. Yes................... Other units used in subpart II are defined in
that subpart.
63.4................................. Yes...................
63.5(a)-(c).......................... Yes...................
63.5(d).............................. Yes................... Except information on control devices and control
efficiencies should not be included in the
application unless an add-on control system is
or will be used to comply with subpart II in
accordance with Sec. 63.783(c).
63.5(e)-(f).......................... Yes...................
63.6(a)-(b).......................... Yes...................
63.6(c)-(d).......................... Yes................... Except Sec. 63.784(a) specifies the compliance
date for existing affected sources.
63.6(e)-(f).......................... No.................... If an alternative means of limiting emissions
(e.g., an add-on control system) is used to
comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.
63.783(c), then these paragraphs do apply.
63.6(g).............................. No.................... Sec. 63.783(c) specifies procedures for
application and approval of alternative means of
limiting emissions.
63.6(h).............................. No.................... Subpart II does not contain any opacity or
visible emission standards.
63.6(i)-(j).......................... Yes...................
63.7................................. No.................... If an alternative means of limiting emissions
(e.g., an add-on control system) is used to
comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.
63.783(c), then this section does apply.
63.8................................. No.................... If an alternative means of limiting emissions
(e.g., an add-on control system) is used to
comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.
63.783(c), then this section does apply.
63.9(a)-(d).......................... Yes................... Sec. 63.787(a) extends the initial notification
deadline to 180 days. Sec. 63.787(b) requires
an implementation plan to be submitted with the
initial notification.
63.9(e).............................. No.................... If an alternative means of limiting emissions
(e.g., an add-on control system) is used to
comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.
63.783(c), then this paragraph does apply.
63.9(f).............................. No.................... Subpart II does not contain any opacity or
visible emission standards
63.9(g)-(h).......................... No.................... If an alternative means of limiting emissions
(e.g., an add-on control system) is used to
comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.
63.783(c) then these paragraphs do apply.
63.9(i)-(j).......................... Yes...................
63.10(a)-(b)......................... Yes................... Sec. 63.788(b)-(c) list additional recordkeeping
and reporting requirements.
63.10(c)............................. No.................... If an alternative means of limiting emissions
(e.g., an add-on control system) is used to
comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.
63.783(c), then this paragraph does apply.
63.10(d)............................. Yes...................
63.10(e)............................. No.................... If an alternative means of limiting emissions
(e.g., an add-on control system) is used to
comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.
63.783(c), then this paragraph does apply.
63.10(f)............................. Yes...................
63.11................................ No.................... If an alternative means of limiting emissions
(e.g., an add-on control system) is used to
comply with subpart II in accordance with Sec.
63.783(c), then this section does apply.
63.12-63.15.......................... Yes...................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2 to Subpart II of Part 63.--Volatile Organic HAP (VOHAP) Limits
for Marine Coatings
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOHAP limits a b c
--------------------------------------
Grams/liter Grams/liter solids d
coating -------------------------
Coating category (minus
water and t < 4.5="" exempt="" eq=""> 4.5 deg. C e
compounds) deg. C
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General use...................... 340 571 728
Specialty:
Air flask...................... 340 571 728
Antenna........................ 530 1,439
Antifoulant.................... 400 765 971
Heat resistant................. 420 841 1,069
High-gloss..................... 420 841 1,069
High-temperature............... 500 1,237 1,597
[[Page 64345]]
Inorganic zinc high-build...... 340 571 728
Military exterior.............. 340 571 728
Mist........................... 610 2,235
Navigational aids.............. 550 1,597
Nonskid........................ 340 571 728
Nuclear........................ 420 841 1,069
Organic zinc................... 360 630 802
Pretreatment wash primer....... 780 11,095
Repair and maint. of
thermoplastics................ 550 1,597
Rubber camouflage.............. 340 571 728
Sealant for thermal spray
aluminum...................... 610 2,235
Special marking................ 490 1,178
Specialty interior............. 340 571 728
Tack coat...................... 610 2,235
Undersea weapons systems....... 340 571 728
Weld-through precon. primer.... 650 2,885
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a The limits are expressed in two sets of equivalent units. Either set
of limits may be used for the compliance procedure described in Sec.
63.785(c)(1), but only the limits expressed in units of g/L solids
(nonvolatiles) shall be used for the compliance procedures described
Sec. 63.785(c) (2) through (4).
b VOC (including exempt compounds listed as HAP) shall be used as a
surrogate for VOHAP for those compliance procedures described in Sec.
63.785(c) (1) through (3).
c To convert from g/L to lb/gal, multiply by (3.785 L/gal)(1/453.6 lb/g)
or 1/120. For compliance purposes, metric units define the standards.
d VOHAP limits expressed in units of mass of VOHAP per volume of solids
were derived from the VOHAP limits expressed in units of mass of VOHAP
per volume of coating assuming the coatings contain no water or exempt
compounds and that the volumes of all components within a coating are
additive.
e These limits apply during cold-weather time periods, as defined in
Sec. 63.782. Cold-weather allowances are not given to coatings in
categories that permit over a 40 percent VOHAP content by volume. Such
coatings are subject to the same limits regardless of weather
conditions.
Table 3 to Subpart II of Part 63.--Summary of Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements a b c
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Opts. Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Requirement ---------------------------------------------------------------
Rec Rep Rec Rep Rec Rep Rec Rep
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification (Sec. 63.9(a)-(d))................ X X
Implementation plan (Sec. 63.787(b)) d......... X X
Volume of coating applied at unaffected major
sources (Sec. 63.781(b))...................... X
Volume of each low-usage-exempt coating applied
at affected sources (Sec. 63.781(c)).......... X X
ID of the coatings used, their appropriate
coating categories, and the applicable VOHAP
limit.......................................... X X
Determination of whether containers meet the
standards described in Sec. 63.783(b)(2)...... X X
Results of M-24 or other approved tests......... X X
Certification of the as-supplied VOC content of
each batch..................................... X
Certification of the as-applied VOC content of
each batch..................................... X
Volume of each coating applied.................. X X
Density of each thinner and volume fraction of
solids in each batch........................... X X
Maximum allowable thinning ratio(s) for each
batch.......................................... X X X X
Volume used of each batch, as supplied.......... X X X X
Total allowable volume of thinner............... X X X X
Actual volume of thinner used................... X X X X
Identification of each group of coatings and
designated thinners............................ X X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Affected sources that comply with the cold-weather limits must record and report additional information, as
specified in Sec. 63.788(b)(3) (ii)(C), (iii)(C), and (iv)(D).
b Affected sources that detect a violation must record and report additional information, as specified in Sec.
63.788(b)(4).
c OPTION 4: the recordkeeping and reporting requirements of Option 4 are identical to those of Options 1, 2, or
3, depending on whether and how thinners are used. However, when using Option 4, the term ``VOHAP'' shall be
used in lieu of the term ``VOC,'' and the owner or operator shall record and report the Administrator-approved
VOHAP test method or certification procedure.
d Major sources that intend to become area sources by the compliance date may, in lieu of submitting an
implementation plan, choose to submit a statement of intent as specified in Sec. 63.787(b)(4).
[[Page 64346]]
Appendix A to Subpart II of Part 63--VOC Data Sheet \1\
Properties of the Coating ``As Supplied'' by the Manufacturer \2\
Coating Manufacturer:--------------------------------------------------
* Incorporation by reference--see Sec. 63.14.
\1\ Adapted from EPA-340/1-86-016 (July 1986), p. II-2.
\2\ The subscript ``s'' denotes each value is for the coating
``as supplied'' by the manufacturer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coating Identification:------------------------------------------------
Batch Identification:--------------------------------------------------
Supplied To:-----------------------------------------------------------
Properties of the coating as supplied \1\ to the customer:
A. Coating Density: (Dc)s ____ g/L
[ ] ASTM D1475-90 * [ ] Other \3\
\3\ Explain the other method used under ``Remarks.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Total Volatiles: (mv)s ____ Mass Percent
[ ] ASTM D2369-93 * [ ] Other \3\
C. Water Content: 1. (mw)s ____ Mass Percent
[ ] ASTM D3792-91 * [ ] ASTM D4017-90 * [ ] Other \3\
2. (vw)s ____ Volume Percent
[ ] Calculated [ ] Other \3\
D. Organic Volatiles: (mo)s ____ Mass Percent
E. Nonvolatiles: (vn)s ____ Volume Percent
[ ] Calculated [ ] Other \3\
F. VOC Content (VOC)s:
1. ____ g/L solids (nonvolatiles)
2. ____ g/L coating (less water and exempt compounds)
G. Thinner Density: Dth ____ g/L
ASTM ____ [ ] Other \3\
Remarks: (use reverse side)
Signed: ______________ Date: ____
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[[Page 64347]]
[FR Doc. 95-29748 Filed 12-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
