[Federal Register: October 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 58499-58504]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04oc06-9]
[[Page 58499]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0178; FRL-8227-5]
RIN 2060-AM72
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action promulgates amendments to the national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants for miscellaneous coating
manufacturing. The amendments clarify that coating manufacturing means
the production of coatings using operations such as mixing and
blending, not reaction or separation processes used in chemical
manufacturing. The amendments extend the compliance date for certain
coating manufacturing equipment that is also part of a chemical
manufacturing process unit. The amendments also clarify that operations
by end users that modify a purchased coating prior to application at
the purchasing facility are exempt. These changes clarify applicability
of the rule and minimize the compliance burden.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 4, 2006.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0178. All documents in the docket are listed on the
http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not
placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air and Radiation Docket, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0178, EPA/
DC, EPA West Building, Room B-102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone
number for the Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.
Note: The EPA Docket Center suffered damage due to flooding
during the last week of June 2006. The Docket Center is continuing
to operate. However, during the cleanup, there will be temporary
changes to Docket Center telephone numbers, addresses, and hours of
operation for people who wish to visit the Public Reading Room to
view documents. Consult EPA's Federal Register notice at 71 FR 38147
(July 5, 2006) or the EPA Web site at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
for current information on docket status, locations, and
telephone numbers.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Randy McDonald, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division,
Coatings and Chemicals Group (E143-01), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-5402; fax number: (919)
541-0246; e-mail address: mcdonald.randy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. The regulated category
and entities affected by this action include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of
Category NAICS Code* regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry........................ 3255, 3259....... Manufacturers of
paints, coatings,
adhesives, or
inks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*North American Industry Classification System
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers likely to be interested in the revisions to the rule
affected by this action. To determine whether your facility, company,
business, organization, etc., is regulated by this action, you should
carefully examine all of the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.7985
of subpart HHHHH (national emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAP) for miscellaneous coating manufacturing), as well
as in today's amendment to the definitions section. If you have
questions regarding the applicability of the amendments to a particular
entity, consult either the air permit authority for the entity or your
EPA regional representative as listed in 40 CFR 63.13 of subpart A
(General Provisions).
World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of the final action will also be available on the
WWW through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature,
a copy of the final action will be posted on the TTN policy and
guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg.
The TTN provides information and technology exchange in
various areas of air pollution control.
Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), judicial review of the final amendments is available only by
filing a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit by December 4, 2006. Under section
307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an objection to the final amendments that
was raised with reasonable specificity during the period for public
comment may be raised during judicial review. Moreover, under section
307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements established by the final
amendments may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal
proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that ``[o]nly an
objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable
specificity during the period for public comment (including any public
hearing) may be raised during judicial review.'' This section also
provides a mechanism for us to convene a proceeding for
reconsideration, ``[i]f the person raising an objection can demonstrate
to the EPA that it was impracticable to raise such objection within
[the period for public comment] or if the grounds for such objection
arose after the period for public comment (but within the time
specified for judicial review) and if such objection is of central
relevance to the outcome of the rule.'' Any person seeking to make such
a demonstration to us should submit a Petition for Reconsideration to
the Office of the Administrator, U.S. EPA, Room 3000, Ariel Rios
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, with a
copy to both the person(s) listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the Associate General Counsel for the
Air and Radiation Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code
2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004.
Organization of this Document. The information presented in this
preamble is organized as follows:
I. Background
II. Response to Comments
A. Compliance Date
B. Affiliated Operations
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
[[Page 58500]]
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
On December 11, 2003, we promulgated NESHAP for miscellaneous
coating manufacturing as subpart HHHHH of 40 CFR part 63 (68 FR 69164).
Subpart HHHHH applies to the facilitywide collection of equipment used
to manufacture coatings. On May 17, 2006 (71 FR 28639), we proposed
amendments to the: (1) Definition of the term ``coating,'' (2)
compliance date for shared equipment that is part of a process unit
group (PUG) developed under the miscellaneous organic chemical
manufacturing NESHAP (MON) (40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF), and (3)
exemptions for operations by end users that are related to the
application of a pre-manufactured coating.
All equipment that is used to manufacture coatings is subject to 40
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH. Because the definition of coating at 40 CFR
63.8105 in subpart HHHHH does not specify that coatings are produced
only by blending, mixing, diluting, and related formulation operations
without chemical synthesis or separation, some products of synthetic
organic chemical manufacturing could be considered coatings. This
overly broad definition of ``coating'' expands the applicability of 40
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH to equipment intended to by covered by 40
CFR part 63, subpart FFFF. The proposed amendments to the definition of
coating clarify that products of reaction and separation, such as
polymers, resins, and synthetic organic chemicals are not coatings and
are not covered by the final rule. In addition, the proposed amendments
to the definition of coating clarify that 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH
also does not apply to the production of formulation components by
chemical synthesis or separation activity if those components are not
stored prior to formulation. We proposed these revisions so that the
applicability of the final rule accurately and appropriately reflects
the coating manufacturing industry and the basis for the maximum
achievable control technology (MACT) floor.
The recent extension of the compliance date for 40 CFR part 63,
subpart FFFF (see 71 FR 10439, March 1, 2006) raises a timing issue
with respect to 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF and 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHH overlap. The extension for the compliance date for 40 CFR
part 63, subpart FFFF results in the compliance date for 40 CFR part
63, subpart HHHHH occurring before the MON compliance date, thus
creating a problem for plants with equipment subject to both subparts
FFFF and HHHHH of 40 CFR part 63 who opt to develop a PUG. Because we
have extended the compliance date for 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF, a
source that primarily manufactures organic chemicals, but also produces
a coating product in the same equipment, would not be able to comply
with subparts FFFF and HHHHH of 40 CFR part 63 as EPA intended during
the period between the compliance date for 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHH (December 11, 2006) and 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF (May 10,
2008). Due to the significant amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
FFFF, it is unlikely that sources will be able to comply with the
revised 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF by the compliance date for 40 CFR
part 63, subpart HHHHH. Alternatively, if the source was planning to
comply with subpart HHHHH by referencing 40 CFR 63.2535(l)(3)(i), it is
also unlikely the source would have enough time to design and install
interim controls for the coating operations so as to comply with 40 CFR
part 63, subpart HHHHH between December 11, 2006 and May 10, 2008.
Thus, relying on the presumption that equipment should be regulated
according to the standard that effectively applies for a majority of
products produced, we proposed amending the final rule to reference 40
CFR part 63, subpart FFFF requirements for a PUG which produces
primarily 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF products. The proposed
amendments also clarify that if the source so chooses, equipment that
is part of a PUG in which a MON product is the primary product must
comply with the MON by the MON compliance date, not 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HHHHH by the subpart HHHHH compliance date.
In section IV.A of the preamble to the final rule, we stated ``the
final rule does not apply to activities conducted by end users of
coating products in preparation for application'' (68 FR 69164,
December 11, 2003). Although the final rule exempts ``affiliated
operations'' at sources that are subject to surface coating rules, it
does not specifically exempt operations at sources that are not subject
to another subpart of 40 CFR part 63. Therefore, we proposed adding an
exemption in 40 CFR 63.7985(d)(5) for operations by end users who
modify a purchased coating prior to application at the same facility.
This exemption applies only if the purchased product is already a
coating that an end user could apply as purchased, and the modified
coating must be applied at the same facility where the modification is
conducted.
Two trade associations and three coatings manufacturing companies
provided comments on the proposed amendments to the rule. In general,
the commenters supported the proposed changes. One commenter also
requested changes to the compliance date and the exemption for
affiliated operations at sources that are subject to surface coating
MACT rules. After consideration of the comments, we are promulgating
the amendments as proposed.
II. Response to Comments
A. Compliance Date
Comment: One commenter supported the amendment to clarify the
definition of ``coating'' but also expressed concern that this change
could have unanticipated impacts that would make it difficult to
achieve compliance by December 11, 2006. According to the commenter,
the change is a major modification of the rule because it could affect
applicability determinations for some facilities. For example, the
commenter suggested the possibility that some facilities currently
thinking they are subject to the MON may realize that they have to
comply with the Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing NESHAP. To ensure
that facilities have time to review the amendments and make appropriate
changes to their compliance plans, the commenter requested that the
compliance date for all existing sources under 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHH be extended to May 10, 2008.
Response: As noted in the preamble to the proposed amendments,
concerns with the definition of ``coating'' in the final rule were that
it was too expansive. It included all materials that are intended to be
applied to a substrate, regardless of the production process. The
amended definition narrows the scope of the definition, which may
reduce the number of operations that are subject to the MON. Any
operations that are excluded from the amended Miscellaneous Coating
Manufacturing NESHAP will be subject to the MON. Facilities with such
operations will have until May 10, 2008, to comply with the
Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing NESHAP. We are unaware of
any materials that are coatings under the amended definition
[[Page 58501]]
that would not have been coatings under the definition in the final
rule. Thus, we have determined that there is no need to extend the
compliance date for existing sources that are subject to the
Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing NESHAP, except for operations that
are part of a PUG under the MON as discussed in section I of this
preamble.
B. Affiliated Operations
Comment: One commenter supports our position, as stated in the
preamble to the proposed amendments, that 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH
does not apply to activities conducted by end users of coating products
in preparation for application. According to the commenter, these
activities cannot be regulated under 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH
because they are not coating manufacturing operations and were not part
of the MACT analysis for 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH. For the rule to
be consistent with this position, the commenter believes 40 CFR
63.7985(d)(2) should exempt ``affiliated operations'' at all surface
coating facilities, not just those at sources that are subject to the
surface coating rules in subparts GG, KK, JJJJ, MMMM, and SSSS of 40
CFR part 63. The commenter suggested listing each surface coating
category in 40 CFR 63.7985(d)(2).
Response: We decided not to adopt the changes suggested by the
commenter. Listing all surface coating categories in 40 CFR
63.7985(d)(2) is unnecessary and impractical. There are three
categories of end users to consider: Sources that are subject to 40 CFR
part 63 surface coating rules that do not include ``affiliated
operations'' in the affected source, sources that are subject to 40 CFR
part 63 surface coating rules that do include ``affiliated operations''
in the affected source, and sources that are not subject to a 40 CFR
part 63 surface coating rule. Operations at end user facilities in two
categories are exempted by existing provisions in the rule, and
operations at end user facilities in the third category are exempted by
the proposed amendments.
First, as the commenter noted, explicit exemptions for affiliated
operations, as defined in 40 CFR 63.7985(d)(2), apply to affiliated
operations that are located at affected sources under subparts GG, KK,
JJJJ, MMMM, and SSSS of 40 CFR part 63. All of these rules lack
requirements for affiliated operations, but affiliated operations were
considered during development of the rules. Therefore, an exemption was
needed in the Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing NESHAP to avoid a
conflict between the decisions made in the development of the five
surface coating rules and the applicability of 40 CFR part 63, subpart
HHHHH.
Facilities in the second group of end users are also subject to
surface coating rules, but the affiliated operations at these
facilities are part of the affected sources under the applicable
surface coating rule. These affiliated operations are exempt from 40
CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH by 40 CFR 63.7985(a)(4), which specifies
that operations are miscellaneous coating manufacturing operations and
subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH only if they are not part of
an affected source under another subpart of 40 CFR part 63. Therefore,
exempting these source categories by listing them in 40 CFR
63.7985(d)(2) would be redundant.
The third group of end users includes all facilities that are not
part of a source category that is subject to a surface coating NESHAP.
Listing all of these surface coating categories in 40 CFR 63.7985(d)(2)
would be impractical because there is no way of knowing all possible
categories. Therefore, the proposed exemption in new paragraph (d)(5)
of 40 CFR 63.7985 provides a general exemption for all facilities in
this group. This new provision exempts operations that modify a
purchased coating prior to application at the purchasing facility.
Therefore, we have decided to promulgate this proposed amendment
without changes.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under the Executive Order.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The final rule amendments impose no new information collection
requirements on the industry. The final rule amendments clarify
applicability of the final rule and extend the compliance date for
owners and operators of certain coating manufacturing equipment. These
changes have the potential to result in minor reductions in the
information collection burden. Therefore, the Information Collection
Request (ICR) has not been revised.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved
the information collection requirements contained in the existing
regulations (40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHH) under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and has assigned OMB
control number 2060-0535 (EPA ICR number 2115.01). A copy of the OMB
approved ICR may be obtained from Susan Auby, by mail at the Office of
Environmental Information, Collection Strategies Division; U.S. EPA
(2822T); 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail
at auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 566-1672. A copy may also be
downloaded off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. Include the ICR
or OMB number in any correspondence.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with the final rule amendments.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of the final rule amendments
on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as
defined by the Small Business Administrations' regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district, or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; or (3) a small organization that is any
not-for-profit enterprise that is independently owned and operated and
is not dominant in its field.
For sources subject to the final rule amendments, the relevant
NAICS and associated employee sizes are listed below:
[[Page 58502]]
NAICS 32551--Paint and Coatings Manufacturing--500 employees or fewer.
NAICS 32552--Adhesives and Sealants Manufacturing--500 employees or
fewer.
NAICS 32591--Printing Ink Manufacturing--500 employees or fewer.
After considering the economic impacts of the final rule amendments
on small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant
economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603
and 604. Thus, an agency may conclude that a rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive
economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule. The
final rule amendments clarify applicability of the final rule and
extend the compliance date for owners and operators of certain coating
manufacturing equipment. These changes have the potential to result in
minor burden reductions for small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995, Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures by 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 final rule amendments do not
contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or the private sector in any 1 year. Therefore, the final
rule amendments are not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and
205 of the UMRA. In addition, the final rule amendments contain no
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments because they contain no requirements that apply to
such governments or impose obligations upon them. Therefore, the final
rule amendments are not subject to the requirements of section 203 of
the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have
federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government.''
The final rule amendments do not have federalism implications. They
will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. None of the affected
facilities are owned or operated by State or local governments. Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the final rule amendments.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' The final rule amendments do not have
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The final
rule amendments clarify applicability of the rule and extend the
compliance date for owners and operators of certain coating
manufacturing equipment. Therefore, the final rule amendments will not
have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to the final rule amendments.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. The final rule amendments
are not subject to the Executive Order because they are based on
technology performance and not on health or safety risks.
[[Page 58503]]
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
The final rule amendments do not constitute a ``significant energy
action'' as defined in Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22,
2001) because they are not likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The final rule
amendments clarify applicability of the rule and extend the compliance
date for owners and operators of certain coating manufacturing
equipment. Further, we have concluded that the final rule amendments
are not likely to have any adverse energy effects.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
As noted in the proposed rule, section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) of 1995, Public Law
104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use
voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its regulatory activities unless
to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. VCS are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA
directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the
Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
During the rulemaking, the EPA conducted searches to identify VCS
in addition to EPA test methods referenced by the final rule. The
search and review results have been documented and placed in the docket
for the NESHAP (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0178). The final rule
amendments do not require the use of any additional technical standards
beyond those cited in the final rule. Therefore, EPA is not considering
the use of any additional VCS for the final rule amendments.
J. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing the
final rule amendments and other required information to the United
States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and the
Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the
final rule amendments in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take
effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The
final rule amendments are effective on October 4, 2006.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 28, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of
the Code of the Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
Subpart HHHHH--[Amended]
0
2. Section 63.7985 is amended by revising paragraph (d) introductory
text and adding paragraph (d)(5) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.7985 Am I subject to the requirements of this subpart?
* * * * *
(d) The requirements for miscellaneous coating manufacturing
sources in this subpart do not apply to operations described in
paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of this section.
* * * * *
(5) Modifying a purchased coating in preparation for application at
the purchasing facility.
0
3. Section 63.7995 is amended by adding introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.7995 When do I have to comply with this subpart?
Except as specified in Sec. 63.8090, you must comply with this
subpart according to the requirements of this section.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 63.8090 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.8090 What compliance options do I have if part of my plant is
subject to both this subpart and another subpart?
* * * * *
(c) Compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF.
After the compliance dates specified in Sec. 63.7995, an affected
source under this subpart HHHHH that includes equipment that is also
part of an affected source under 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF is deemed
in compliance with this subpart HHHHH if all of the conditions
specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this section are met.
(1) Equipment used for both miscellaneous coating manufacturing
operations and as part of a miscellaneous organic chemical
manufacturing process unit (MCPU), as defined in Sec. 63.2435, must be
part of a process unit group developed in accordance with the
provisions in Sec. 63.2535(l).
(2) For the purposes of complying with Sec. 63.2535(l), a
miscellaneous coating manufacturing ``process unit'' consists of all
coating manufacturing equipment that is also part of an MCPU in the
process unit group. All miscellaneous coating manufacturing operations
that are not part of a process unit group must comply with the
requirements of this subpart HHHHH.
(3) The primary product for a process unit group that includes
miscellaneous coating manufacturing equipment must be organic chemicals
as described in Sec. 63.2435(b)(1).
(4) The process unit group must be in compliance with the
requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF as specified in Sec.
63.2535(l)(3)(i) no later than the applicable compliance dates
specified in Sec. 63.2445.
(5) You must include in the notification of compliance status
report required in Sec. 63.8070(d) the records as specified in Sec.
63.2535(l)(1) through (3).
5. Section 63.8105 is amended by revising the definition of the
term ``coating'' in paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.8105 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
(g) * * *
Coating means a material such as paint, ink, or adhesive that is
intended to be applied to a substrate and consists of a mixture of
resins, pigments, solvents, and/or other additives, where the material
is produced by a manufacturing operation where materials are blended,
mixed, diluted, or otherwise formulated. Coating does not include
materials made in processes where a formulation component is
synthesized by chemical reaction or separation activity and then
transferred to another vessel where it is formulated to produce a
material used as a coating,
[[Page 58504]]
where the synthesized or separated component is not stored prior to
formulation. Typically, coatings include products described by the
following North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes,
code 325510, Paint and Coating Manufacturing, code 325520, Adhesive and
Sealant Manufacturing, and code 325910, Ink Manufacturing.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E6-16407 Filed 10-3-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P