WPCo (qGYcQ$(2H<$Wfm_UrރUÎPW 0骈R-],s%Ij+z=Lm+OYzB1t"5؂}3ur'19R(ăܺtk[kwu&IyYH#R U N %a 0:g^ w4 m 1 72 1u 721 0bc 0w 1< 72U@ fKaMfaac 0w D5b/ 0A7 02Tx 0Ch 14 72 0U 0F 0/ 0 0 0 0 0 0f 0C: 0} 0T 0( 0 0! 0" 0Z# 0$ 0@$ 0% 0% 0& 0' 0]( 0%) 0) 0* 00i+ 0<+ 0+ 0>, 0v, 0`G- 0`- 0`. 0`g. 0`. 08'/ 0_/ 0210 0c0 0:_1 0Y1 0_1 0 Q2 0j[3 04 D/I6 D+x6 06 D/'8 0V8 06$9 0Z9 0:b: 0^: 0<: Be6; D5S; B*;U6;U >;U*&<NP<lR<p< 0V.= 0<= B= 0N=U,+> D5W> B> D5> B>E> D5> B2? D1O? D5? D5? B*? D5@ B*I@ 0Vs@ 0V@ D5A B*TA C~A D5A B7A B7B C;B CUB CoB CB 0B D5}C BC D7C D/D 0/5D 0dE 0DFF 1G C2H 0/LH 72{I 0@IpI 0V]J]J 0J 0=K 0K 0L 0XM 03N 0D"O 1fP 72P 0K!Q AlQU : RER 1T 72^U UUNU 0bUUNYVV 1OWbW ASW1X 0DX C;Y CUY CoY CY CY CY DAY Z 1)Z 1ZZ 727[ 72i[ 72[ 1[ 72T\T\T\T\T\T\T\T\T\ \\\\\\\\\\\@ \o\\\TIGGER\p1280(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,݃Y.s '.:i+003|xTU09hCEOYcmwAutoList11.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0  1.0 237;AGOW_e1a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a) i)(: $2  0  3  0  (O{$0  2  a  .3  0` (#(#(EhCEOYcmwAutoList21.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 * `(CG TimesScalableTable_ATABLE A< :Body Text I2  Af $TahomaA  5+T ZT hp x (#5     8.` hp x (#8  S]\  `&Times New RomanSdddd)!dxdx2- (Vm$0   (,!$0  0` (#(#  (@$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# ` 8 CSY_ekqw}Numbers 2Numbers1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.*+ (_2623  ..*G+M (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *D+M (_24   ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *A+M (_23  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *>+M (_22   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *;+M (_21   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *8+M (_20  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *5+M (_19   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *2+M (_18    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  * (_1723  Ԁ*GM (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *DM (_15   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *AM (_14  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *>M (_13   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *;M (_12   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *8M (_11  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *5M (_10   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  (2M &_9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  ( &_823  (GM &_7   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  (DM &_6   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  (AM &_5  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  (>M &_4   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  (;M &_3   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  (8M &_2  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  (5M &_1   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  &2M $_    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  0.Normal<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(''&H1      (&H2  (&H3  (&H4 XXX (&H5  (&H6  20Address8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEK\<6X9`(Courier NewKS]\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard K\<6X9`(Courier NewKS]\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/K\<6X9`(Courier NewKS]\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 7O(X7  ?^%2A`Arial?  S]\  `&Times New RomanS7P(X7[)1dxd'dxd<:zTop of For7R(X7  ?^%2A`Arial?  S]\  `&Times New RomanS7P(X7[)2dxd0KS.SampleK\<6X9`(Courier NewKS]\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterK\<6X9`(Courier NewKS]\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB   d[[[[)!dxdx&0 d d<6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial  EMADCommenter SSMadsorberscommenters f b'USUS.,  _@TABLE21.(Continued)(.3$ !USUS.,  <:Default Para  d. ,Body1   $Tahomahhhh)!dxdxP Pdjjjj)!dxdx dmmmm)!dxdx dhh)! dxdxqqqq)!dxdxYYYY)!dxdx&P d dssss)!dxdx&p d Pd(.3$ !USUS.,  (.3$ !USUS.,  wwww)!dxdx&p Pd d2dz{z{)!dxdx3+0 d d d3+0 d d ddddd d<OO :Body Text I1    8.444` hp x (#8    8.` hp x (#8)!dxdx dYYYYY)!dxdxY)!dxdx6Q8 c 4Heading 6 dAf $TahomaA23  ..   S]\  `&Times New RomanS d:K[ 8Body Text 2  # x (##    A7X` hp x (#A  67 '4heading 2  XXX     сLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(UhCEKQW]cioAutoList31.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.dd6Q8 c 4Heading 4 dAf $TahomaA23  ..   S]\  `&Times New RomanS d1.(H$0    f b'USUS.,  _@TABLE21.(Continued)(.3$ !USUS.,  (b$0  0` (#(#2   .3  0 ` (#` (#(xM$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#2(  0  )3  0 (# (#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#2(  a  )3  0h(#(#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#2(   )3  0h(#h(#(4$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#2  0  )3  0(#(#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#2  a  )3  0p(#(#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#0p(#(#2     )3  0p(#p(# xGaeimquy}Bullet ListBullets List( $ Figure  1  tP I&mage <=8C HKKKK,UAZ"Arial Regular  5+ ' mkicenhour0mkicenhour .   (ehCEKQW]cioAutoList41.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.tables(9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular(:3]$ !USUS.,   d 6Times New Roman Regular b'USUS.,  _@ TABLEOFCONTENTS(Continued)  !!G(#Page(hCEKQW]cioAutoList61.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1- utpE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  d(dicfff_fffffffefffnffib_ffff@ffAff 6Z_ffff22Pf=UffTffȡfffdfXff\f=ˑff ffcߑ&eff`6aff-fPfffUf`Effe TLff ff fffOiYf feXff f_f Kf62e=ff _ffi`fUf -f7fff ifL`f difff !ffef`f P=Aff$bffe˙fffffPfE 2XfGffT iffKif4iffYefdEffff6tefʓff6fdfffifef=6iffKffc$ffٚf Xc& ʛfTff6Uf0 Kfe ϔfc ffAf fi @f6ff=abYfM if f_ff ffΔf f fXff`f f KfUff_>ff fff Gf f`feff δOifcʅf |ffffʶfnEfʑf%fL_fffOjj']dff=ff$fEKffo bfPffLΗf>fnfnf[ˆfޘf_=ffZf&fJFf_fifoXfffOߗfxdf/fB{efn}قfAf]f ىffif_ЈЉfYfffțf!ߙfňff٭fx/bfL fN~fcff ʋfNfifd)!fE_ffhfs|SfGfe)ffUf*ffKO\`f.zFfbfhv4fffΧfffdffdZfffsJffRufffffE;5-Yf_fFgfPff; ofr:f$ffeeffN:f]$fitifbf<$ff, fddf(fTf]ffffrfbrfߌ-ffI?fiSfiL -ffffVaf:bff ήJf(tˈfЎfff ftrfcbfOXcf#f]Wfff ffL`faHfefMf/3ffۂfi5ffdffef)ifeffO1f4f ˈffXffffcf_Lf>ff,fb)fnHfff}f`ffȂfϐfI/f;bffififfffff3)fifff/bfeifPff =f#f ffffi)fdgfiff=AfefkوfGffffn^fQfff_Γf(Of ffiJfibfLeff<˓fBsbfQifrf:ifˑߊfffbsNfwdfe(fPffXc4fAٍfRx bfd3~fMv ~4bfiff=fWDh[])w3if ff Gafi:sQf ffif>fU%ffXff<f?<qhfύffE6fi 8HfίލffTLf]f34}_fff fȉfnyifeffffN pffi:|q"gfcf=ff-ȏf [C~1Qiff ^l!~~/QdfpbffXTf$ff fYff =fʌf9rfffOff>4f P ff ,6f_TfeT_ff TfYnf=f <(af_Ɣff =fffff5]ff 5f Q%f%fff efeYƴf6,fTKff _fT̯f ߌffffO=ffU=f YOffePff!ffffa`ffefiYf`f`fYifff==ȉf U!#>BackgroundInformationforFinal B Standards#XX#XX h #XX#9XXSummaryofPublicCommentsandResponses # 9P#    #XX )#   p ` ` Thispageintentionallyleftblank.  `    8XXdd8  EPA453/R03003  January2003    NationalEmissionStandardsfor $ t HazardousAirPollutantsfor  ` WoodBuildingProducts(SurfaceCoating)  L  BackgroundInformationforFinalStandards  8  SummaryofPublicCommentsandResponses   ContractNo.68D01079   WorkAssignmentNo.102   ProjectNo.97/12  U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency %0!$ OfficeofAirQualityPlanningandStandards &"% EmissionStandardsDivision '#& ResearchTrianglePark,NorthCarolina27711 (#'   |*%)  XXXXDisclaimer     8XXdXXd8ThisreporthasbeenreviewedbytheEmissionStandardsDivisionoftheOfficeofAirQuality  PlanningandStandards,EPA,andapprovedforpublication.Mentionoftradenamesor t commercialproductsisnotintendedtoconstituteendorsementorrecommendationforuse.#XXXX# `       @"TABLEOFCONTENTS  !!G(#Page     Vm  Vm 0     Chapter1.Summary#""H(#. (#(##11Vm ݌ ` Ќ  !  !a 0  0` (#(#    1.1SummaryofChangessinceProposal#""H(#.5` (#` (##11!a | ݌ L  Ќ    L 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.1Applicability#""H(#.nn( (# (##12L g ݌ 8  Ќ    9 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.2OverlapwithOtherNESHAP#""H(#.4 (# (##149 T ݌ $ t Ќ    20  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.3Subcategories#""H(#.( (# (##152M݌  ` Ќ    0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.4MACTLimits#""H(#.& (# (##16:݌  L  Ќ     0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.5TestMethods#""H(#.' (# (##16 %݌  8  Ќ    0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.6CostandEconomicAssumptionsandImpacts#""H(#.D (# (##18݌ $  Ќ    0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.7ComplianceProcedures#""H(#.0 (# (##18݌   Ќ    0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.8ControlDeviceOperatingLimitRequirements#""H(#.F (# (##19݌   Ќ    0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.9Startup,Shutdown,andMalfunction(SSM)#""H(#.C (# (##19݌   Ќ    0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.10RecordkeepingandReporting#!!G(#.7 (# (##110"݌   Ќ    0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.11EmissionLimitUnits#!!G(#.rr0 (# (##110݌ p Ќ    0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.12Definitions#!!G(#.<<' (# (##111݌ \ Ќ    0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   1.1.13MiscellaneousComments#!!G(#.2 (# (##112݌ H Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    1.2SummaryofImpactsofPromulgatedRegulation#!!G(#.@` (#` (##112!݌ 4 Ќ  Vm  Vm0     Chapter2.SummaryofPublicComments#""H(#.0(#(##21Vm݌  \ Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    2.1Applicability#""H(#. !` (#` (##25!݌ H Ќ    0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.1.1CeilingBoardorTiles#""H(#.RR1 (# (##25݌ 4 Ќ    {0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.1.2WoodTreatmentandFireRetardantCoatings#""H(#.E (# (##26{݌   Ќ    0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.1.3LaminatesandOverlays#""H(#.1 (# (##27݌   Ќ    {0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.1.4IncidentalCoatingUse#""H(#.1 (# (##28{݌  Ќ    q0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.1.5VolatileOrganicHAPs(VHAPs)#""H(#.8 (# (##29q݌  Ќ    n 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.1.6LowCoatingUseCutoff#""H(#.  1 (# (##29n ݌  Ќ    d!0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.1.7WorkPracticeStandards#!!G(#.2 (# (##210d!!݌ l Ќ    \"0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.1.8EducationandTeachingActivities#!!G(#.""< (# (##211\"w"݌ X  Ќ    ^#0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.1.9ResearchandDevelopment(R&D)Operations#!!G(#.D (# (##212^#y#݌ D! Ќ    h$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.1.10DoorsandWindows#!!G(#., (# (##212h$$݌ 0"  Ќ    Z%0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.1.11PrefabricatedandMobile/ModularHomes#!!G(#.B (# (##212Z%u%݌ #l! Ќ  !  !b&0  0` (#(#    2.2OverlapwithOtherNESHAP#!!G(#.-` (#` (##215!b&}&݌ $X" Ќ    F'0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.2.1OtherSurfaceCoatingMACTRules#!!G(#.; (# (##215F'a'݌ $D # Ќ    G(0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.2.2TemperingOils#!!G(#.>>) (# (##216G(b(݌ %0!$ Ќ    6)0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.2.3CellulosicFiberboards#!!G(#.jj1 (# (##2176)Q)݌ &"% Ќ  !  !-*0  0` (#(#    2.3Subcategories#!!G(#. !` (#` (##218!-*H*݌ '#& Ќ    +0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.3.1OtherInteriorPanels#!!G(#.0 (# (##218+ +݌ (#' Ќ    +0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.3.2ProductGroupings#!!G(#.>>, (# (##219+,݌ )$( Ќ    ,0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.3.3TopcoatedSidingandDoorskinProducts#!!G(#.44A (# (##220,-݌ |*%) Ќ    -0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.3.4InteriorPanelingandTileboard#!!G(#.: (# (##221-.݌ h+&* Ќ    .0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.3.5ColorCoatings/ClearCoatings#!!G(#.8 (# (##222./݌ T,'+ Ќ    /0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.3.6OverlappingSubcategories#!!G(#.4 (# (##222/ 0݌ @-(,r Ќ    00  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.3.7AverageEmissionLimits#!!G(#.JJ2 (# (##2240 1݌ P Ќ    10  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.3.8MouldingandTrim#!!G(#.||, (# (##22412݌ < Ќ    20  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.3.9MiscellaneousProducts#!!G(#.1 (# (##22522݌ (  Ќ    30  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.3.10ExteriorSidingandDoorskins#!!G(#.>>9 (# (##22633݌   Ќ    40  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.3.11FinishedDoorskins#!!G(#.. (# (##22644݌   Ќ  !  !50  0` (#(#    2.4MACTFloorDetermination#!!G(#.>>,` (#` (##227!55݌   Ќ    60  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.4.1ClosedFacilities#!!G(#., (# (##22766݌   Ќ    70  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.4.2AreaSourcesIncludedinMACTFloorDetermination#!!G(#.@@L (# (##22777݌  t Ќ    80  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.4.3WoodFurnitureComponentFacility#!!G(#.< (# (##22888݌ ` Ќ  !  !90  0` (#(#    2.5MACTLimits#!!G(#. ` (#` (##228!99݌ L  Ќ    :0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.5.1AverageEqualsMedian#!!G(#.0 (# (##228::݌ 8  Ќ    y;0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.5.2IncorrectData!InteriorWallPanelingandTileboard#!!G(#.P (# (##229y;;݌ t$  Ќ  !  !<0  0` (#(#    2.6TestMethods#!!G(#. ` (#` (##230!<<݌ `  Ќ    i=0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.1Method25vs.Method25A#!!G(#.3 (# (##230i==݌ L  Ќ    b>0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.2Method25A!LowConcentrations#!!G(#.jj: (# (##231b>}>݌ 8  Ќ    e?0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.3SupplierInformationvs.Method311andMethod24#!!G(#.L (# (##231e??݌ $  Ќ    w@0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.4CureVolatiles#!!G(#.) (# (##233w@@݌  Ќ    fA0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.5UVCoatings#!!G(#.ll& (# (##234fAA݌  Ќ    RB0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.6HeliumGasPycnometer#!!G(#.0 (# (##234RBmB݌  Ќ    HC0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.7ASTMD2697andD6093#!!G(#.vv/ (# (##235HCcC݌  Ќ    =D0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.8VOCs(Method24)vs.HAPs(Method311)#!!G(#.A (# (##237=DXD݌ p Ќ    DE0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.9TestMethodDataTruncationProcedure#!!G(#.@ (# (##238DE_E݌ \ Ќ    JF0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.10MetricVersusEnglishUnits#!!G(#.7 (# (##239JFeF݌ H Ќ    GG0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.11SolventBlendTechnicalData#!!G(#.8 (# (##240GGbG݌ 4 Ќ    EH0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.6.12UpdatedASTMStandards#!!G(#.2 (# (##240EH`H݌ p  Ќ  !  !=I0  0` (#(#    2.7CostandEconomicAssumptionsandImpacts#!!G(#.=` (#` (##241!=IXI݌ \  Ќ    1J0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.7.1CompliantCoatingsCosts#!!G(#.3 (# (##2411JLJ݌ H Ќ    *K0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.7.2TitleVCosts#!!G(#.( (# (##242*KEK݌ 4  Ќ    L0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.7.3MonitoringCosts#!!G(#.+ (# (##243L3L݌  ! Ќ     M0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.7.4EconomicImpacts#!!G(#.$$+ (# (##243 M$M݌  " Ќ    M0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.7.5CaptureandAddOnControlEquipmentCosts#!!G(#.E (# (##244MN݌ " Ќ    O0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.7.6HealthandEnvironmentalRisk#!!G(#.228 (# (##245O O݌ # Ќ    P0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.7.7HighVelocityLowPressure(HVLP)SprayGuns#!!G(#.G (# (##246PP݌ $  Ќ  !  !Q0  0` (#(#    2.8ComplianceProcedures#!!G(#.)` (#` (##246!Q+Q݌ %l! Ќ    Q0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.8.1PollutionPreventionInitiatives#!!G(#.; (# (##246Q R݌ &X" Ќ    R0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.8.2InadvertentUse#!!G(#.DD* (# (##247R S݌ 'D # Ќ    S0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.8.3ApprovalAuthorityforMonitoredParameters#!!G(#.F (# (##248SS݌ (0!$ Ќ    T0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.8.4BiofiltersandOtherInnovations#!!G(#.nn; (# (##248TU݌ l)"% Ќ    U0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.8.5ControlDevice!DataHandlingGuidance#!!G(#.B (# (##249U V݌ X*#& Ќ    V0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.8.6CatalyticOxidizer!MinimumOperatingTemperature#!!G(#.ttM (# (##250VW݌ D+#' Ќ    X0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.8.7ControlDevice!OperatingParameterDeviation#!!G(#.I (# (##251X*X݌ 0,$( Ќ    !Y0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.8.8ThermalOxidizerPerformanceTestIssues#!!G(#.C (# (##252!Yg0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.9.1OperatingLimitAveragingPeriod#!!G(#.; (# (##262>gYg݌ L  Ќ    ?h0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.9.2ControlDeviceDowntimeAllowance#!!G(#...< (# (##263?hZh݌ 8  Ќ    Ai0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.9.3OfftheHourMonitoringPeriods#!!G(#.: (# (##264Ai\i݌ $  Ќ    Aj0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.9.4ControlDeviceBypassRequirements#!!G(#.= (# (##264Aj\j݌  Ќ    Dk0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.9.5TerminologyConsistencywithOtherMACTStandards#!!G(#.L (# (##265Dk_k݌  Ќ    Vl0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.9.6ConsistencywithTitleVRequirements#!!G(#.@ (# (##266Vlql݌  Ќ  !  !\m0  0` (#(#    2.10Startup,Shutdown,andMalfunction(SSM)#!!G(#.vv=` (#` (##266!\mwm݌  Ќ    Pn0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.10.1SSMPeriodsinComplianceAveragingCalculations#!!G(#.,,L (# (##266Pnkn݌ p Ќ    bo0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.10.20 (# (#AddressingControlDeviceBypassSystemRequirementsinSSM \ Plan#!!G(#.   (# (##267bo}o݌ H Ќ    p0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.10.3InclusionofSSMinDefinitionof Deviation#!!G(#.<<I (# (##268pp݌ 4 Ќ    q0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.10.40 (# (#UseofEnvironmentalManagementSystemstoMeetSSMPlan p  Requirements#!!G(#.% (# (##269qq݌ \  Ќ  !  !s0  0` (#(#    2.11RecordkeepingandReporting#!!G(#.""0` (#` (##270!s)s݌ H Ќ    s0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.11.1DuplicationofRecordkeepingRequirements#!!G(#.E (# (##270st݌ 4  Ќ    u0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.11.2RecordsandReportingforZeroHAPCoatings#!!G(#.ddG (# (##270uu݌  ! Ќ     v0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.11.3InitialNotificationRequirements#!!G(#.= (# (##271 v(v݌  " Ќ    w0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.11.4RecordkeepingforFacilitiesSubjecttoMultipleEmissionLimits#!!G(#.( ( \ (# (##272w+w݌ " Ќ  !  !2x0  0` (#(#    2.12EmissionLimitUnits#!!G(#.)` (#` (##273!2xMx݌ # Ќ    y0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.12.1UseofCoatingSolidsVolumeforEmissionLimits#!!G(#.L (# (##273y-y݌ $  Ќ    $z0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.12.2Expressionof ZeroHAPEmissionLimits#!!G(#.zzD (# (##274$z?z݌ %l! Ќ    4{0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.12.3UseofSignificantDigitsforEmissionLimits#!!G(#.I (# (##2754{O{݌ &X" Ќ    C|0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.12.4UseofMetricUnitsinEmissionLimitComplianceEquations#!!G(#.V (# (##275C|^|݌ 'D # Ќ    _}0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.12.5RoundingofComplianceCalculationValues#!!G(#.E (# (##276_}z}݌ (0!$ Ќ  !  !j~0  0` (#(#    2.13DEFINITIONS#!!G(#. ` (#` (##277!j~~݌ l)"% Ќ    A0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.13.1Definitionof BuildingProducts#!!G(#.PP= (# (##277A\݌ X*#& Ќ    J0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.13.2Definitionof TotalVolatileHydrocarbon#!!G(#.LLF (# (##278Je݌ D+#' Ќ    \0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.13.3 FacilityUsedInterchangeablywithSource#!!G(#.G (# (##278\w݌ 0,$( Ќ    o0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.13.4UndefinedTerms#!!G(#.22+ (# (##279o݌ -%) Ќ  !  !`0  0` (#(#    2.14MISCELLANEOUSCOMMENTS#!!G(#.+` (#` (##279!`{݌ P Ќ    B0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.14.1CatalyticOxidizerInspectionandMaintenancePlanRequirements#!!G(#. [ (# (##279B]݌ < Ќ    c0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (# `   2.14.2ErrorsinFederalRegisterProposalNotice#!!G(#.""F (# (##280c~݌ (  Ќ   @#LISTOFTABLES      H  Hۆ0     210(#(#ListofCommentersonProposedStandardsofPerformanceforWoodBuilding ` Products(SurfaceCoating)#""H(#.)(#(##22Hۆ݌ L  Ќ  φ  8   @&  XX  Chapter1   @&Summary  #XX ш#  @    OnJune21,2002,theU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)proposednational *z  emissionstandardsforhazardousairpollutants(NESHAP)forwoodbuildingproducts(surface   coating)(67FR34548)underauthorityofSection112oftheCleanAirAct(Act).Public > commentswerereceivedfrom21sourcesconsistingmainlyofwoodbuildingproducts P  manufacturers,coatingmanufacturers,variousindustrytradeassociations,andGovernment   agencies. d   Allofthecommentsthatweresubmittedandtheresponsestothesecommentsare v summarizedinthisdocument.Thissummaryisthebasisfortherevisionsmadetothestandards ( betweenproposalandpromulgation. :   XX  1.1SUMMARYOFCHANGESSINCEPROPOSAL  #XX #  N   Severalchangeshavebeenmadesincetheproposalofthesestandards.Majorchanges  include:areviseddefinitionofwoodbuildingproducttoexcludetheweightofanyglass  N components(asindoorsandwindows);additionallanguageconcerningspecificproductsand `" coatingsthatarenotsubjecttothisfinalrule;reductionofcalculationrequirementsforzeroHAP #  coatings;additionallanguageconcerningthelowcoatingusagelimit;additionallanguage $%t " pertainingtosourcesthatcouldbesubjecttomultiplesourcecategoriesorsubcategoriesofthis &!$ subpart;inclusionofallmouldingandtrimasmiscellaneousproducts;andchangingtheemission '8#& limitmetricunitsfromkilograms(kg)ofHAPperliterofsolids(kgHAP/literofsolids)to J)$( grams(g)ofHAPperliterofsolids(gHAP/literofsolids). *%*   Asummaryofthemajorchangesispresentedinthefollowingsections. ,^',   XX  1.1.1Applicability al #XX #    SeveralcommentersrequestedaclarificationofzeroHAPcoatings,thinners,and N cleaningsolvents.TheycitedtheOSHAdeminimislevelforreportingHAPcontaining  materialsasgreaterthan1percentfornoncarcinogensorgreaterthan0.1percentforcarcinogens.  b TheuseofthisdeminimislevelforHAPreportingwasimpliedbecausethedatausedtosetthe t  MACTfloorwassubmittedunderthesameguidelines.Nevertheless,languagehasbeenadded  &  tothefinalpreambleandruletoclarifythatcoatingswithHAPcontentsbelow1percentfor 8   noncarcinogensand0.1percentforcarcinogensareconsideredtobenonHAPmaterials.     Severalcommentersrequestedspecificexclusionsforproductsorcoatingsthatmayhave L  beenincludedintheMACTfloordeterminationbutdonotfitintothewoodbuildingproducts ^  surfacecoatingsourcecategory.Specifically,commenterscitedcoatingscalledtemperingoils  (suchaslinseed,tall,tung,soy,otasekaandotherdryingoilsormixturesofsuchoils)whichare "r regulatedaspartoftheplywoodandcompositewoodproductsNESHAP.Inresponsetothese  comments,weexcludeddryingortemperingoilsfromthefinalrule.Referto68.4681(c)(1)for 6 alistingofprocessesthatwillmostlikelybecoveredbytheplywoodandcompositewood H productsNESHAP.    Somecommentersreferredtospecificproductsthattheybelievedshouldnotbe  \  applicabletotherequirementsofthewoodbuildingproductssurfacecoatingsourcecategory. n" Theseincludedasphaltcoatedfiberboardandceilingtiles.Commentersassertedthatneither  $ productiscoatedwithHAPcontainingmaterialsandregulatingsuchproductswouldbe 2& burdensomeforrecordkeepingpurposes.  (   Wefurtherevaluatedthetypesofcoatingsandprocessesusedtomakeasphaltcoated !F* fiberboard,alsocalled buildersboardor insulationboard,andfoundthatonlyafewfacilities X#, intheUnitedStatesmaketheseproducts,withvaryingmanufacturingandcoatingprocesses. $ . Withregardstothecoatings,theasphaltcanbeincludedaspartoftheemulsionusedinthe &l!0 fiberboardmanufacturingprocess,ortheasphalt(mixedwithmineralspirits)canbeappliedto ~'"2 thefiberboardsubstrate.Dependingonthecompanyandtheprocess,thecoatingcanbeapplied (0$4 beforethefinaldryerorafterthefinaldryerwiththeproductallowedtoairdry,usuallyoutdoors B*%6  onracks. +&8   Ceilingtilesareusuallycoatedusingslurriesoftitaniumdioxideandvariousclays.   AlthoughnonHAPwettingagentsordefoamersareoccasionallyadded,therearenoorganic b solventsused.Thesecoatingscurebydryingandnotbychemicalreactionandareconsidered t durableonlyfordry,noncontactindoorexposure. &   Becauseofthesmallnumberoffacilitiescoatingtheseproductsandthefactthatmostof 8  thecoatingsassociatedwiththesetypesofproductsareappliedduringthesubstrateforming    process(e.g.,tothewetmatbeingformed)orpriortothefinalsubstratedryingoperation,  L  fiberboardcoatingoperations(includingthoseusedinthemanufactureofasphaltcoated ^  fiberboardandceilingtiles)willbecoveredundertheplywoodandf  g f  g compositewoodproducts   NESHAPwhenthatrulebecomesfinal.Forthisreason,theseproductswillnotbesubjecttothe "r  finalruleforthesurfacecoatingoff  g woodbuildingproductsf  g .     Severalcommentersrequestedmoreresearchconcerningthelowcoatingusagecutoff, 6 suggestingthatthecutoffshouldbehigher.Thelowusagecutoffwasbasedonthetotalannual H coatingusageofthesmallestfacilityintheMACTfloordatabase.Allfacilitiesinthedatabasef  g   haveannualcoatingusagesabove4,170liters(1,100gallons).f  g ԀAvailabledataindicatethatthe  \ coatingapplicationprocessesandcontroltechnologiesbeingconsideredareappropriateforall n sourceswithatleastthislevelofcoatingsusage.f  g ԀConsideringthatthesurveyedsourcesinthe    databaseincludedacrosssectionofvariouscompanies,products,andlocations,wef  g f  g dof  g Ԁnot 2" f  g f  g believef  g Ԁthatf  g Ԁcollectingf  g Ԁadditionaldatawouldraisethiscutoff.Therefore,nochangeshavebeen $ madetothelowcoatingusagecutoff. F&   Whilewecannotjustifyraisingthelowusageamountorestablishingalowusageamount X ( forindividualsubcategories,languagehasbeenaddedtothefinalruletoexemptsourcesthatare ! * notcommercialmanufacturersofwoodbuildingproducts.Therulewasintendedtoapplyonly #l, tof  g Ԁcommercialmanufacturersf  g f  g ,whicharethetypesoffacilitiesrepresentedinourdatabasef  g . ~$.   Severalcommentersrequestedexemptionsforfacilitiesthatlaminatepaperorvinylto %0!0 compositewoodproducts.AlthoughweagreewiththecommentersthatHAPemissionsfrom B'"2 woodlaminatingprocessesaretypicallylowatthepresenttime,anexclusionisnotjustified (#4 becausefuturecoatingtechnologiescouldresultinincreasedHAPemissions.Tofurtherclarify *V%6  applicability,laminatesappliedpriortopressingofthesubstratewillbecoveredbytheplywood h+&8 andcompositewoodproductsNESHAPandthelaminatesappliedafterpressingofthesubstrate  arecoveredbythewoodbuildingproducts(surfacecoating)NESHAP. b    CommenterIVD18statedthattheproposeddefinitionof woodbuildingproduct t excludesthemajorityofthewoodendoorsandwindowsmanufacturedduetotheweight & characteristic.Inresponse,wehaverevisedthedefinitionof woodbuildingproducttoexclude 8  theweightofglasscomponents.      Awoodbuildingproductisnowdefinedasanyproduct(excludingtheweightofglass  L  components)thatcontainsmorethan50percentbyweightwoodorwoodfiberandisusedinthe ^  construction,eitherinteriororexterior,ofaresidential,commercial,orinstitutionalbuilding.     Asaresultofcommentsreceived,theapplicationofantifungalcoatingswasevaluated. "r  Becausethesecoatingscanbeappliedduringmanydifferentstagesofproduction,wehave   clarifiedtheapplicabilityofthefinalruletothesecoatings.Antifungalcoatingswillbecovered 6 bythewoodbuildingproductssurfacecoatingNESHAPiftheyareappliedafterthesubstrate H manufacturingprocess.Otherwise,thesecoatingswillbecoveredbytheplywoodandcomposite  woodproductsNESHAP.  \   XX  &  1.1.2OverlapwithOtherNESHAP alѲ#XX #   \    Manycommenterswereconcernedaboutthelargepotentialforthewoodbuilding " productssurfacecoatingsourcecategorytooverlapwithotherNESHAP,specificallythewood  \$ furnituremanufacturingNESHAPandthemiscellaneousmetalpartsandproductscoating n& NESHAP.'n޲Twocommenterswantedsomewaytoconsolidateallcoatingoperationsinorderto  ( besubjecttoonlyoneNESHAP.Oneofthesetwocommentersstatedthat97percentofthe 2"* coatingsusedbyhiscompany,awindowmanufacturingfacility,areappliedtometal(aluminum) #, windows,andtheremaining3percentofthecoatingsareappliedtowoodcomponentsofthe $F . windows.Thesecondcommentersaidthat95percentofthecoatingsusedbyhisfacilityare X&!0 appliedtowoodfurniturecomponents,andtheremaining5percentofthecoatingsareappliedto ' #2 interiorpanels.f  g  )l$4   Inresponsetothef  g sef  g Ԁcommentsf  g ,wehaveaddedaf  g f  g provisionf  g Ԁtotheapplicabilitysectionof ~*%6 thefinalrule.Thisnewf  g f  g languagef  g Ԁstatesthatanaffectedsourcethatf  g f  g couldbef  g Ԁsubjecttof  g f  g morethan +0'8 onef  g Ԁcoatingf  g f  g NESHAPf  g ,andthathasf  g Ԁonetypeoff  g Ԁsurfacecoatingoperationf  g Ԁthataccountf  g sf  g Ԁforat B-(: least95percentofthetotal(annual)coatingusagef  g Ԁatthesourcef  g ,hastheoptionofcomplying  withtherequirementsofthatf  g predominantf  g coatingrule(includingallapplicableemissions b limitations,operatinglimits,andworkpracticerequirements)forf  g f  g allcoatingoperationsthat t wouldbesubjecttoaNESHAPf  g .f  g  &   f  g Weareallowingthesmallamountofcoating(lessthan5percentofthetotalusage)tobe 8  regulatedatthesamelevel(s)asthemajority(atleast95percent)ofcoatingusagetosimplify    applicabilitydeterminationsandrecordkeepingandreportingforthosesources.f  g ԀWithf  g f  g thisf  g   L  applicabilityprovisionf  g ,thf  g etwosourcesf  g Ԁdescribedabovef  g Ԁwouldbeallowedtocomplywiththe ^  emissionlimitsforthemiscellaneousmetalpartsNESHAPandthewoodfurniture   manufacturingNESHAP,respectively,forf  g f  g alloftheircoatingoperations. "r    Accordingtoourdata,veryfewsourceswillbeabletotakeadvantageofthis   predominantactivityoption.Forthisreason,weexpectanyemissionsincreasethatcouldoccur 6 (wheretheemissionlimitsinthepredominantNESHAParelessstringentthanthelimitsinthe H otherapplicableNESHAP)tobeverysmallf  g .    XX]    1.1.3Subcategories alt#  ]U##XX 6#  n   Severalcommentersrequestedadditionalguidanceonthecorrectclassificationof  \  mouldingandtrim.Originally,mouldingswereclassifiedaccordingtothefinaluseofthe n" moulding.Commentersstatedthatthesamemouldingortrimcouldgoaroundwindowsand  $ doors,beusedasbaseboards,astrimbetweenceilingsandwalls,oraschairrailing.To 2& eliminatetheclassificationofdifferenttypesofmouldingandtrimindifferentsubcategories,we  ( havedecidedtoincludeallmouldingandtriminonesubcategory.Thischangealsoinvolvedthe !F* renamingoftwosubcategories.The DoorsandWindowssubcategoryhasbecomethe Doors, X#, Windows,andMiscellaneoussubcategoryandwillincludeallmoulding,trim,millwork,and $ . miscellaneousproductsthatdonotfitintheothersubcategories.The ExteriorSiding, &l!0 Doorskins,andMiscellaneoussubcategoryhasbecomethe ExteriorSidingandPrimed ~'"2 Doorskinssubcategory.Asaresult,theMACTflooremissionlimitswererecalculatedandare (0$4 includedinthefinalrule. B*%6   Severalcommenterswereconcernedwithpotentialoverlapamongsubcategories. +&8 Accordingtoourdatabase,therearenofacilitiesthatarepotentiallysubjecttomorethanone -V(: subcategoryemissionlimit.Becausesubcategorieswerecreatedtoaccommodateunique  differencesinperformancecriteriathatindicatedaneedfordifferentHAPcontentsf  g Ԁ(basedonthe b informationprovidedbythevariousindustrysegmentsinthedatabase),webelievef  g f  g itisnot t appropriatetocombineoperationsunderseparatesubcategoriesf  g .Therefore,wearenotallowing & f  g f  g af  g Ԁsourcetochooseoneemissionlimitbasedontheamountofcoatingusedinaf  g f  g predominant 8  subcategoryandapplythatsamelimittoanothersubcategory.      SeveralcommentersrequestedreevaluationoftheMACTfloorsduetotheadditionof  L  newproductssuchastopcoateddoorskins.Theseproductsrequirecoatingswithahigherlevel ^  ofHAPcontentormorelayersofcoatingsthanproductsusedintheMACTanalysis.Although   separatingthesetypesoftopcoatedorfinisheddoorskinsfromthe ExteriorSidingandPrimed "r  Doorskinssubcategorycouldcausesourcesthatcoatdoorskinstocomplywithtwoseparate   emissionlimits,weagreethatfinisheddoorskins,whichrequireadditionallayersofcoatings,are 6 likelytohavehigherHAPemissionsthanprimeddoorskins.Wealsoagreethatfinished H doorskinshavemoredemandingandstringentperformancerequirementsthanprimedonly  doorskins.Inresponse,wehaveincludedfinisheddoorskinsinthe Doors,Windows,and  \ Miscellaneoussubcategorywheretheexteriorclimateperformancerequirementsassociated n withalldoorsandwindowshavebeenaccountedforwiththehigheremissionlimits.      XX  1.1.4MACTLimits alC#XX $#  $   SeveralcommentersdisagreedwiththezeroHAPemissionlimitsthatwereestablished 2& fortheNESHAP.Specifically,thecommentersfeltthattheMACTlimitsshouldcontainatleast  ( twosignificantfigurestoaccountforthepresenceofasmallamountofHAPinwhatwehave !F* describedasnonHAPcoatings.ToaddresstheseconcernsandtoclarifythattheMACTlimits X#, arenotabsolutezeroforsomenewsources,thefinalruleincludesachangeinmetricunitsfrom $ . kgHAP/LsolidstogHAP/Lsolidswherethefinalemissionlimitisroundedtothenearest &l!0 integer. ~'"2   XX  1.1.5TestMethods al#XX #  B*%6   CommenterIVD01noticedthatsomeASTMtestmethodshavebeenupdated.Mostof +0'8 thelistedtestmethodshavebeenupdatedandincorporatedbyreferenceintothefinalrule. B-(: However,someofthestandardsarereferencedaspartofEPAMethods24and311andcannot  beupdatedwithoutevaluatingtheapplicabilityoftheMethodsandMACTdeterminations. b   SeveralcommentersaskedforclarificationonusingmethodsspecifiedbytheNESHAP t fordeterminingcertainqualitiesofthecoatings,thinners,andcleaningmaterials.Inthecaseof & styrenemonomercontent(usingASTMD482793andASTMD474702)andnonvolatilemass 8  content(usingASTMD2697andASTMD6093),weaddedprovisionstothefinalrulethat    ownersoroperatorsareallowedtosubmitanalternativetechniqueifthetestmethodsspecified  L  inthefinalruleareinsufficientindeterminingthespecifiedqualities.Formassfractionof ^  organicHAP,thefinalrulehasbeenf  g f  g modifiedf  g Ԁtof  g f  g allowresolutionofanyf  g Ԁdiscrepanciesbetween   thef  g Ԁtestf  g ԀmethodsfordeterminingthemassfractionoforganicHAPf  g f  g versusformulationdataf  g  "r  throughf  g f  g consultationf  g Ԁwiththeregulatorycomplianceauthority.     ManycommentersalsoexpressedconfusionattheuseofMethod24asanalternativeto 6 Method311.Accordingtothecommenters,Method24requiresthatthewatercontentofthe H coatingbedeterminedandsubtractedfromthetotalvolatilecontent.Thisdeterminationcontains  greatervariabilitythanthelimitf  g f  g inf  g Ԁthf  g f  g ef  g Ԁruleforf  g Ԁexistingandnewsourcesthatfallintothe Other  \ InteriorPanelsandthe ExteriorSidingandPrimedDoorskinssubcategoriesandnewsources n thatfallintothe InteriorPanelsandTileboardsubcategory.Therefore,thefinalruleincludes    theprovisionthatMethod24willnotbeusedforthosecoatingswithawatercontentthatwould 2" resultinaneffectivedetectionlimitgreaterthantheapplicableemissionlimit. $   CommentersIVD07andIVD10disagreedwiththeuseofaheliumgaspycnometerto F& determinethevolumefractionofcoatingsolids(whichisrequiredbyASTMD6093).Section X ( 63.4741(b)oftheoriginalproposalprovidedtwooptionsfordeterminingthevolumefractionof ! * coatingsolids(nonvolatiles)foreachcoating:(1)useofeitherofthetworeferencedASTM #l, methods(D269786(1998)orD609397);or(2)useofinformationfromthesupplieror ~$. manufacturerofthematerial.Inresponsetothecommentersconcerns,athirdoptionhasbeen %0!0 addedtothefinalrulethatallowstheamountofcoatingsolidstobecalculatedusingthetotal B'"2 volatilemattercontentofthecoatingandtheaveragedensityofthevolatilematterinthecoating. (#4 Ifthesevaluescannotbedeterminedusingoneofthespecifiedmethods,theowneroroperator *V%6 maysubmitanalternativetechniquefordeterminingtheirvaluesforapprovalbythe h+&8 administrator. ,(:   Severalcommentersaskedthattheruleclearlyspecifywhethercompliancedemonstration  calculationsaretoberoundedortruncatedtothenumberofdecimalplacesspecifiedinthe b emissionlimit.Thecommentersrecommendedthatresultsbetruncatedtothreedigitsafterthe t decimal.Inresponse,languagehasbeenaddedtotheruletospecifythatcomplianceis & demonstratedbyroundingtherolling12monthemissionrate(totwodecimalplacesforEnglish 8  unitsandthenearestintegerformetricunits),andnotbyroundingtheindividualnumbersused    todeterminethe12monthrollingaverage.  L  &   XX  1.1.6CostandEconomicAssumptionsandImpacts#XX # ci     DuetochangesintheMACTflooremissionlimitsforthe OtherInteriorPanels ^  subcategoryandchangestothenumberofestimatedaffectedsourcesinthe ExteriorSidingand  PrimedDoorskinsand' Doors,Windows,andMiscellaneoussubcategories,overallannual "r industrycostimpactshavechangedto$22.5million.    XX  1.1.7ComplianceProcedures _>#XX #  H   SeveralcommentersnotedadiscrepancybetweentheproposedSection63.4692(b)(ii) 6 and(iii).Section63.4692(b)(ii)reducesthedatatoblockaverages,but63.4692(b)(iii) H  maintainsthe3houraveragecombustiontemperatureatorabovethelimit.Wemade " correspondingchangestoTable3toSubpartQQQQtoread, maintainthe3hourblock  \$ averagewhereverwarranted. n&   Threecommentersdisagreedwiththeomissionofcontroldevicesotherthanthermal  ( oxidation.Thecommentersrecommendedthatprovisionsforbiofiltersandotherinnovation 2"* technologiesbeaddedtocomplianceOption3.ComplianceOption3doesnotprecludetheuse #, ofbiofiltersorothercontroltechnologies.Youcansubmityourrequestforanyinnovative $F . controltechnologytotheAdministratorforapproval.Plansformonitoringandrecordkeeping X&!0 requirementsshouldbesubmittedalongwithsuchproposals.However,theproposedPlywood ' #2 andCompositeWoodProductsrule(subpartDDDD)doesincludespecificoperatinglimitsand )l$4 complianceproceduresforbiofiltersandcanbeusedasexampleswhensubmittingarequestfor ~*%6  analternativecontroltechnology. +0'8   CommentersquestionedEPAsrationaleforproposingtoretainapprovalauthorityover   theparameterstobemonitoredtodemonstratecompliance.Nolanguagehasbeenchangedinthe b finalrulebecauseSection63.4767oftherulespecifieswhichparametersaretobemonitoredfor t thermaloxidizers,catalyticoxidizers,carbonadsorbers,concentrators,andcapturesystems.We & haveretainedtheauthoritytoapproveanymajoralternativestomonitoringinSection63.4780. 8    XX  1.1.8ControlDeviceOperatingLimitRequirements _#XX #   L    Severalcommentersstatedthattheproposedruledoesnotspecifyhowtoaccountfor   equipmentstartups,shutdownsormalfunctionsinthecalculationofthe3houraveragesusedto L  determinecompliancewithoperatinglimitsforaddoncontroldevices.Thecommenters ^  suggestedthattherulespecifythattheoperatingdatacollectedwhenthecontroldeviceis not  receivingemissionsnotbeincludedinthe3houraveragecalculations.Wehaveadded "r languagetothefinalruletoexcludemonitoringdatafromthe3houraveragecalculationthat  wasgeneratedduringperiodswhenthecontroldevicewasnotreceivingemissions. 6   Severalcommentersdisagreedwiththerequirementforperiodicallyadjustingtheairto H fuelratioforcatalyticoxidizers.Thecommentersstatedthataddingthisrequirementtothe  inspectionandmaintenanceplanhasnoperformancebenefit.Thepurposeoftheinspectionand  \  maintenanceplanistoassurethatthecatalyticoxidizeroperatesattheconditionsthatwill n" achieveorexceedtheemissiondestructionefficiencyforthecontroldevicedemonstratedbythe  $ performancetest.Basedonourreview,weconcludedthatarequirementforperiodicadjustment 2& oftheairtofuelratioisnotneededtoassurecomplianceofacatalyticoxidizer.Wehave  ( removedtherequirementforperiodicallyadjustingtheairtofuelratiointheinspectionand !F* maintenanceplanfromthefinalrule. X#,    XX  1.1.9Startup,Shutdown,andMalfunction(SSM) _#XX p#  &l!0   CommenterIVD05statedthatbypasslinesareoftenusedinsituationsthatarenot ' #2 consideredmalfunctions.Incertainsituations,operationofthecontroldeviceisnotalways )l$4 necessarytomeettheemissionlimit.Thissituationcanoccuronacoatinglinethatisusedfor ~*%6 differentsubcategoriesofproductsatdifferenttimes.Ifthecoatingsusedononeproductcomply +0'8 withtheapplicableemissionlimit,thefacilitymayprefertobypassthecontroldevicetolower B-(: annualexpensesassociatedwithoperatingtheairpollutioncontrolsystem(e.g.,fuelcostsfor  oxidizers,extendactivatedcarbonlifeforcarbonadsorbers,electricitycostsforcondensers). b ThissituationisnotamalfunctionandwouldnotbeaddressedinthefacilitysSSMplan. t   Toaddressthisissue,thefinalruleexplicitlystatesthattherequirementsfortheuseof & bypasslinesapplyduringperiodsthatcontrolled(emphasisadded)coatingoperationsarebeing 8  conducted(see63.4763(d)and63.4768(b)(2)).Thelanguageassurescontinuouscompliance    withtheapplicableemissionlimitatthosesourceselectingOption3tocomplywiththeemission  L  limitandusingacaptureandcontroldevicesystemthatisequippedwithabypassline. ^   ! ! XX  1.1.10RecordkeepingandReporting oW#XX 8#  "r    Severalcommentersrequestedfewerrecordkeepingandcalculationrequirementsfor  coatingsthatcontainzeroHAPcontent.Weagreethatisnotnecessaryfromtheperspectiveof "r implementingandenforcingtheruletorequireanowneroroperatortoperformallofthe  compliancecalculation,recordkeeping,andreportingrequirementsspecifiedintherulesincethe 6 resultwillalwaysbezeroorganicHAPperliterorgallonofcoatingsolids.Forsuchmaterials, H thefinalrulespecifiesinSection63.4741(a)(1)(i)and(a)(4)thatnoadditionalcompliance  calculationsarerequiredifthesourceisusingthecompliantmaterialoptionandtheorganicHAP  \  contentofthecoatingequalszero.Thefollowingsectionsofthefinalrulepertainingto n" recordkeepingandreportingrequirementswerealsorevisedtoincorporatethisprovision:  $ Sections63.4710(c)(8)(i),63.4720(a)(5)(ii),and63.4730(c),(c)(2),(f),and(g). 2&   XX  1.1.11EmissionLimitUnits oi#XX J#  !F*   CommenterIVD03disagreedwiththeexpressionoftheMACTfloorlimitstotwo #, decimalplacesratherthantwosignificantdigits.Inresponse,thefinalruleincludesachangein $F . metricunitsfromkgHAP/LsolidstogHAP/Lsolids.Thenewlimitsarelistedbelow: X&!0  (y2 " "  'X XX'   23  0    ExteriorSidingandPrimedDoorskins(0.06lbHAP/galsolidsor7gHAP/Lsolids)  ݌' #2(#(# Ќ  " "     23  0    Flooring(0.78lbHAP/galsolidsor93gHAP/Lsolids) ( ݌)l$4(#(# Ќ  " "     23  0    InteriorWallPanelingandTileboard(1.53lbHAP/galsolidsor183gHAP/Lsolids)  ݌~*%6(#(# Ќ  " "     23  0    OtherInteriorPanels(0.17lbHAP/galsolidsor20gHAP/Lsolids) 5 ݌+0'8(#(# Ќ  " "      23  0    Doors,Windows,andMiscellaneous(1.93lbHAP/galsolidsor231gHAP/Lsolids)  : ݌B-(:(#(# Ќ   (2 y4+ XX X+  Severalcommentersarguedthatmetricunitsshouldnotbeusedtodemonstrate  compliance.TheuseofmetricunitsinsteadofEnglishunitsisbasedonFederalgovernment b policy(theMetricConversionActof1975asamendedbytheOmnibusTradeand t CompetitivenessActof1988).Whilemetricunitsareincluded,complianceisnotrequiredtobe & demonstratedusingmetricunitsbecausetheMACTfloordeterminationusedEnglishunits. 8  Accordingly,wehaveaddedlanguagestatingthatcompliancecanbedemonstratedusingeither    oftheemissionlimitunits.  L    XX  1.1.12Definitions o#XX #      CommenterIVD18statedthatthecurrentdefinitionofwoodbuildingproductexcludes ^  mostwindowsandsomedoorssincetheglassistheheaviestcomponentofthefinalproduct.  Languagehasbeenaddedtothefinalruletoclarifythattheapplicabilitydeterminationfor "r windowsandsomedoorswillnotincludetheweightoftheglass.Theweightcriteriawas  originallyaddedtodifferentiatebetweenwoodproductsandcompositewoodproductsthat 6 containsmallamountsofwoodorwoodfibers. H   Severalcommenterssuggestedthattheruledefinetheterm facilitybecausethewordis  usedinterchangeablywith source.Inthefinalrule,wecorrectedalloftherulelanguagetobe  \  consistentwiththerevisionsintheNESHAPGeneralProvisions.Inparticular,wereplacedthe n" term facilitythatwasusedintheproposedrulewitheithertheterm sourceor affected  $ sourceasappropriatetobeconsistentwithmeaningsintheamendedNESHAPGeneral 2& Provisiondefinitions.  (   Severalcommentersdisagreedwiththedefinitionof totalvolatilehydrocarbon(TVH) !F* asthetotalamountofnonaqueousvolatileorganicmatterdeterminedaccordingtocertain X#, methods,withTVHsubstitutedforVOC.Wedonotagreewiththecommentersconcernand $ . believethedefinitionfortotalvolatilehydrocarbon(TVH)isappropriatefortheintendedusein &l!0 thetestmethods. ~'"2   CommenterIVD11requestedspecificdefinitionsfor millwork, sheathing,and (0$4  solventblends.Theterm sheathingisassociatedwithoneoftheenduseapplicationsfor B*%6  fiberboardproductsandsuchproductsarenotcoveredbythefinalrule(seecomment/response +&8 2.2.3).Webelievetheterm solventblendsasdescribedinTables5and6intheruleiseasily  understood.Therefore,onlyadefinitionfor millworkhasbeenaddedtothefinalrule. b    Severalcommentersalsorequestedadefinitionfor blockaverageasrelatedtotestdata t soastoavoidconfusionwitharollingaverageemissionlimitcalculation.Toclarify,anew & definitionof blockaveragehasbeenaddedtothefinalruleinSection63.4781.Blockaverage 8  isanaverageofdatapointscollectedoveranyspecified,continuous180minuteblockoftime    (e.g.,a3hourblockcouldbenoonto2:59p.m.,withasubsequenttotalofeight3hourblocks  L  withina24hourperiod).  ^   XX  1.1.13MiscellaneousComments t7#XX #  "r    Severalcommentersnotedtypographicalerrorsintheproposedrule.Thesehavebeen  correctedinthefinalruleandpreamble. "r   XX  1.2SUMMARYOFIMPACTSOFPROMULGATEDREGULATION t#XX g#  6   Thefinalstandardswillreducenationwideemissionsofhazardousairpollutants(HAP)  fromwoodbuildingproductsurfacecoatingoperationsbyapproximately4,900tonsperyear 6 (tons/yr)(4,400megagramsperyear[Mg/yr])fromexistingmajorsources.Nosignificant H  adversesecondaryair,water,orsolidwasteimpactsareanticipatedfromthepromulgationof " thesestandards.  \$   Theimplementationofthisruleisexpectedtoresultinanoverallannualcostof n& $22.5million.Theeconomicimpactanalysisshowsthattheeconomicimpactsfromthesefinal  ( standardsareinsignificant. 2"*   #,   ` ` *#  ` @&  XX]    Chapter2   @W W SummaryofPublicComments t##  ]###XX ##  @  #  Atotalof21letterscommentingontheproposedstandardsandsupportingtechnical *z  memorandafortheproposedstandardswerereceived.Table21presentsalistofcommenters,   theiraffiliations,andtheEPAdocketnumberassignedtotheircorrespondence. >   Forthepurposeoforderlypresentation,thecommentshavebeencategorizedunderthe P  followingtopics:   ' XX'1.0  Applicability;d(#(# 2.0  OverlapwithotherNESHAP;v(#(# 3.0  Subcategories;((#(# 4.0  MACTFloorDetermination;:(#(#  (h82 ! !" "   (2h  5  .3  Ԉ0    MACTlimits; ()݌(#(# Ќ  6.0  Testmethods;N(#(# 7.0  Costandeconomicassumptionsandimpacts;`(#(# 8.0  Complianceprocedures; (#(# 9.  Controldeviceoperatinglimitrequirements; $"t  10.0  Startup,shutdown,andmalfunction(SSM);# (#(#  11.  Recordkeepingandreporting; $8 "  12.  Emissionlimitunits; J&!$  13.0  Definitions;and'"&(#(#  14.0  Miscellaneouscomments.)^$((#(# ' X X'Thefollowingsectionsofthischaptercontaindiscussionsofthecomments,theissuesthey +"', address,andEPAsresponses. 4-(. aW    tablesTABLE21.LISTOFCOMMENTERSONPROPOSEDSTANDARDSOFPERFORMANCE  FORWOODBUILDINGPRODUCTS(SURFACECOATING) tables-  -*ZYddd Xdd Xdd X(#(#,dd ,dd +  ," ,DocketItemNo.a 0&!<" 0  Commenter/Affiliation >4&<    >IVD01 0&!l" 0Ms.JaniceBardi l AdministrativeAssistant X  ASTMInternational D  a100BarrHarborDrive 0   P.O.BoxC700  l  WestConshohocken,PA194282959 0& X  0ORIVD02 0&! " 0Dr.RobinM.Ridgway,Ph.D.,P.E.   EnvironmentalRegulatoryConsultant t  PurdueUniversityREM/Utilities `  1662CivilEngineeringBuildingB173 L  WestLafayette,IN47907 0&8  0IVD03 0&!" 0Ms.AllisonCasey  MasoniteInternationalCorporation  1955PowisRoad  WestChicago,IL60185 0&| 0IVD04 0&!L" 0Mr.DavidC.Foerter L DeputyDirector 8 InstituteofCleanAirCompanies(ICAC) $ 1660LStreet,NW,Suite1100  Washington,DC20036 0& 0IVD05 0&!,|" 0Mr.PaulJ.Vasquez ,| Manager,EnvironmentalEngineering h WoodProducts T  GeorgiaPacificCorporation @! 55ParkPlace  ," Atlanta,GA30303 0&!# 0IVD06 0&!H#$" 0Mr.ColbyW.Benton H#% EHSandTechnicalManager 4$& CraftMasterManufacturing,Inc.  %p ' P.O.Box311  &\!( Towanda,PA18848 0&&H") 0IVD07 0&!x(#*" 0Mr.JohnBradfield x(#+ VP,RegulatoryAffairs d)$, CompositePanelAssociation P*%- 18922PremiereCourt <+&. Gaithersburg,MD208791574 4*(,x'/ 4IVD08 0&!Hd" 0 Ms.AllisonKeaneand Hd Mr.RobertJ.Nelson,SeniorDirector 4 P TheNationalPaintandCoatingsAssociation  < 1500RhodeIslandAvenue,NW  ( Washington,DC200055597 0&  0IVD09 0&!x " 0Mr.MartinE.Rock,P.E.,J.D. x  President&SeniorPrincipal d  OMNIProfessionalEnvironmentalAssociates Pl  P.O.Box13404 <X  ResearchTrianglePark,NC27709 0&(D  0IVD10 0&! " 0Mr.LouisWagner   DirectorofTechnicalServices   AmericanHardboardAssociation   1210W.NorthwestHighway l  Palatine,IL60067 0&Xt 0IVD11 0&!" 0Mr.RonC.Methier,  Chief,AirProtectionBranch  GeorgiaDepartmentofNaturalResources  EnvironmentalProtectionDivision  4244InternationalParkway,Suite120  Atlanta,GA30354 0&t 0IVD12 0&!" 0Ms.DawnJ.Krueger  SeniorEnvironmentalEngineer  3MEnvironmentalandSafetyServices  P.O.Box33331   St.Paul,MN551333331 0&! 0IVD13 0&!$#@ " 0Mr.KurtBigbee $#@! APA!TheEngineeredWoodAssociation $," P.O.Box11700 $# Tacoma,WA984110700 0&%$ 0IVD14 0&!h'%" 0Mr.J.DavidThornton h'& SectionManager T(p ' Policy&PlanningDivision @)\!( MinnesotaPollutionControlAgency ,*H") 520LafayetteRoad,North +4#* St.Paul,MN551554194 0&, $+ 0IVD15 0&!Hd" 0 Mr.GaryD.Gramp Hd TechnicalDirector 4 P HardwoodPlywood&VeneerAssociation  < P.O.Box2789  ( Reston,VA201950789 0&  0IVD16 0&!x " 0Mr.LouisWagner, x  DirectorofTechnicalServices d  AmericanHardboardAssociation Pl  1210W.NorthwestHighway <X  Palatine,IL60067 0&(D  0IVD17 0&! " 0Mr.LawrenceOtwell   SeniorEnvironmentalEngineer   GeorgiaPacificCorporation   133PeachtreeStreetNE l  Atlanta,GA30303 0&Xt 0IVD18 0&!" 0Mr.TerryNoteboom  CorporateEnvironmentalEngineer  PellaCorporation  102MainStreet  Pella,IA50219 0& 0IVD19 0&!$" 0Mr.LouisE.Wagner $ DirectorofTechnicalServices  AmericanHardboardAssociation  1210W.NorthwestHighway  Palatine,IL60067 7Y&  7IVD20 7Y&!8"T"Y 7Mr.LouisE.Wagner 8"T  DirectorofTechnicalServices $#@! AmericanHardboardAssociation $," 1210W.NorthwestHighway $# Palatine,IL60067 0&%$Y  0IVG01 0&!h'%"  0Mr.DwayneDayley h'& OperationsManagerPrefinishDivision T(p ' WoodgrainMillwork,Inc. @)\!( 300N.W.16thStreet ,*H") P.O.Box566 +4#* Fruitland,ID83619(, $+    ($` XX$JaThedocketnumberforthewoodbuildingproducts(surfacecoating)NESHAPisA-9752. g-%, ( X` XJ(  XX  2.1APPLICABILITY K#XX K#     XX  2.1.1CeilingBoardorTiles IL#XX *L#  N   Comment:CommentersIVD07andIVD10questionedtheapplicabilityofthisruleto < coatingsappliedtoceilingboardortiles.Thecommentersstatedthe othercoatingsfor N  fiberboardhavetraditionallybeenslurriesoftitaniumdioxideandvariousclays.Occasionally,   nonHAPwettingagentsordefoamersareadded.Therearenoorganicsolventsused.These  b  slurriesareoftenmixedonsiteandcurebydrying,notbychemicalreaction.Theproductsstill t   producedusingthesecoatingsareceilingboardortiles.Thesecoatingscanbescrapedoffwitha &  fingernailandareconsidereddurableonlyfordry,noncontactindoorexposure.WithnoHAP 8  emissionsandnorecordkeepingsystemsinplace,regulatingtheseslurriescausesburdenswith   noenvironmentalimprovement. L   Bothcommentersalsostatedthereisamuchlargerindustrythatproducesceiling ^ productsusingthesameslurriesonamineralfibersubstrate.Ifwoodfiberboardisregulatedand  themineralfiberboardisnot,thenanunfaircompetitiveadvantagehasbeengrantedtothe "r mineralfibermanufacturers.    Response:Wecollectedinformationonanyandallcoatingsappliedtofiberboardand 6 agreethatthereportedcoatingsdonotcontainoremitHAPs.Mostfiberboardcoatingsare H  appliedduringthesubstrate(fiberboard)manufacturingprocess(es)whilethewetmatisstill " beingformedand/ordried.Weagreewiththecommentersandhaveaddedfiberboardcoatings  \$ (clayslurryandtitaniumdioxide)tothelistin63.4681(c)(1)ofthefinalrulethatarecoveredby n& theplywoodandcompositewoodproducts(PCWP)MACTrule.Asaresultofthatdecision,we  ( haveremovedthefiberboardcoatingfacilitiesfromthewoodbuildingproductssurfacecoating 2"* MACTdatabaseandrecalculatedtheMACTfloorforthe OtherInteriorPanelssubcategory. #, Therecalculatedemissionlimitsareincludedinthefinalrule. $F .   X&!0   XX  2.1.2WoodTreatmentandFireRetardantCoatings \ZV#XX ;V#     Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,IVD10,IVD14,andIVD17submitted N commentsrelatedtowoodtreatmentandfireretardantoperations.    CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10arguedthatsometypesofwoodtreatments  b andfireretardantsareappliedtopanelproductswithrollcoatersorsprayboothsafterpassing t  throughthepress.Othertreatmentsmaybeaddedbeforehotpressing.Bothoftheseprocesses  &  shouldbecoveredundertheplywoodandcompositewoodproductsNESHAP,SubpartDDDD, 8   andexcludedfromthissubpartbecausetheyarepartofthesubstratemanufacturingprocess.     CommenterIVD17arguedthatthewoodtreatmentandpreservationoperationsshould L  becoveredbythissubpart.Someoperationsapplysimilarmaterials,generallyinfarmoredilute ^  form,bynonpressuremeansasatemporarymeasuretoprotectagainstsurfacemoisture  absorptionand/orbacterial/fungalgrowth.Theactivitiesoccurprimarilyindimensionallumber "r manufacturingandarenotdecorativeinnature.Similaractivitieshavealreadybeenrecognized  andexemptedforwoodpanelmanufacturingoperationscoveredunderthependingplywoodand 6 compositewoodproductsNESHAP.Theseexemptionsarefurthercitedunderthisproposedrule H butonlywithrespecttopanels.CommenterIVD17suggestedthattheexemptionofthese  activitieswithrespecttosolidwood/dimensionallumbermanufacturingalsobeclearlystated  \  withinthisproposedruleinordertoavoidfutureconfusionoverapplicability. n"   CommenterIVD14wasconcernedthat63.4681(c)(5)oftheproposedruleexemptsthe  $ woodtreatmentprocess.Thecommenterrevieweddatafromtwoofthecountryslargest 2& windowmanufacturersandfoundthatamajorportionoftheHAPemissionsfromthesefacilities  ( comefromthewoodtreatmentprocess.ThecommenternotedEPAshouldreconsiderthe !F* exemptionofthisprocessandprovideddatashowingactualemissioninventorydataforthetwo X#, companies. $ .   Response:AreviewofthecoatingsinformationintheMACTdatabaseshowedthatnot &l!0 allwoodtreatmentcoatingsareappliedduringthewoodsubstrateproductionprocess.Those ~'"2 woodtreatmentandfireretardantchemicalsappliedduringthewoodsubstratemanufacturing (0$4 process(e.g.,duringblendingorformingofthesubstrate)willbecoveredundertheproposed B*%6  plywoodandcompositewoodproducts(PCWP)MACTrule.ThePCWPruledoesnotstatethat +&8 miscellaneouscoatingoperationsareexempt;therulesimplyhasnorequirementsforthese  specificsurfacecoatingprocesses,whichinclude edgesealsand moisturesealants. b    Suchwoodtreatmentprocessesasthoseatthetwowoodwindowmanufacturing t companiesdescribedbycommenterIVD14arenotexemptedfromthewoodbuildingproducts & (surfacecoating)MACTrule.Theexemptiondescribedin63.4681(c)(5)appliesonlytowood 8  treatmentoperationsthatinvolveusingaretortorotherpressurevessel.Thetypesofwood    treatmentoperationsusedatmostwindowanddoorfacilitiesinvolveonlydiptanksanddonot  L  usepressuretoimpregnatethewoodproductwiththewoodtreatmentchemicals.Therefore,the ^  woodbuildingproducts(surfacecoating)NESHAPappliestothewoodtreatmentoperations   locatedatthesefacilities. "r    XX  2.1.3LaminatesandOverlays \Bg#XX #g#  6   Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,IVD10,andIVD15requestedvarying  typesofexemptionsinvolvinglaminatingoperations. 6   Threecommenters(IVD05,IVD07,andIVD10)statedthereshouldbeanexemption H formediumdensityoverlay(MDO),highdensityoverlay(HDO),andfoillaminatesthatarepart  ofthesoftwoodplywood/orientedstrandboard(OSB)productionprocess.Theapplicationof  \  MDO,HDO,andfoillaminatestoeithersoftwoodplywoodorotherengineeredwoodproducts n" suchasOSBorlaminatedveneerlumber(LVL)ispartoftheproductionprocessforproducts  $ fromthosefacilitiesandshouldbecoveredundertheplywoodandcompositewoodproducts 2& NESHAP,SubpartDDDD.Therefore,MDO,HDO,andfoillaminatesontheseproductsshould  ( beaddedtothelistat63.4681(c)(1)(i)through(x)ofoperationstowhichthissubpartdoesnot !F* apply. X#,   CommentersIVD07andIVD10recommendedspecificexclusionsforthermallyfused $ . melamineandpolyesterimpregnatedpapersonwoodsubstrates.Theyfurtherstatedthat &l!0 activitiesinvolvingthetreatmentorimpregnatingofthepaperwithresinsarecoveredunderthe ~'"2 paperandotherwebcoatingNESHAP,SubpartJJJJ. (0$4   CommenterIVD05offeredspecificlanguagetobeaddedtotheruleat63.4681(c): B*%6 8  Thissubpartdoesnotapplytosurfacecoatingandotheroperationsthatmeetthe +&8 criteriaofparagraphs(c)(1)through(6)ofthissection.,'9   Ї  and  8  (6)Laminatingactivitiesinvolvingthebondingofdrylayerstothesubstrateasa  partofthesubstratemanufacturingprocess.Laminatedwoodproductsproduced t bybondingdrylayerstothesubstrateinclude,butarenotlimitedto,thermally ` fusedmelaminepaper.L    0n  CommenterIVD15requestedthatfacilitiesthatlaminatepaperorvinyltocomposite   woodproductsbeexemptedfromthisrule.Thecommenterreferencedameetingheldafterthe  L  initialevaluationoftheICRdataduringwhichparticipantswereadvisedthatpaperandvinyl ^  laminatingfacilitieshadverylowornoHAPemissionsandwerenotmajorsources.     CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10suggestedthatEPAshoulddiscussinthe "r  preambleandthefinalruleanyinformationgatheredrelatedtolaminatingactivitiesinthewood   productsindustry. 6   Response:AlthoughweagreewiththecommentersthatHAPemissionsfromwood H laminatingprocessesaretypicallylowatthepresenttime,anexclusionisnotjustifiedbecause  futurecoatingtechnologiesinvolvingdifferentsolventsoradhesivescouldresultinincreased  \ HAPemissions.Tofurtherclarifyapplicability,laminatesappliedpriortopressingofthe n substratewillbecoveredbytheplywoodandcompositewoodproductsNESHAPandthe   laminatesappliedafterpressingofthesubstratearecoveredbythewoodbuildingproducts 2  (surfacecoating)NESHAP. "   XX  2.1.4IncidentalCoatingUse v#XX {v#  X &   Comment:CommentersIVD07andIVD10feltthatincidentalusersofwoodbuilding !F( productscoatingsshouldbeexempted. X#*   Response:Incidentalcoatinguserscanutilizethelowcoatingusageapplicabilitycutoff $ , includedinboththeproposedandfinalrules.Languagehasbeenaddedtothefinalruleto &l!. exemptsourcesthatarenotcommercialmanufacturersofwoodbuildingproducts.Therulewas ~'"0 intendedtoapplyonlytof  g Ԁcommercialmanufacturersf  g f  g ,whicharethetypesoffacilitiesrepresented (0$2 inourdatabase. B*%4  -V(8   XX  2.1.5VolatileOrganicHAPs(VHAPs) >z#XX z#     Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthatthelawrequiresthat N MACTrulesbewrittentoregulateemissions;therefore,thecorrectdescriptionforregulated  HAPsinmostMACTsisvolatileorganicHAPsorVHAPs.Thisrequirementhasbeen  b recognizedmanytimesbyEPAbyinclusionofTestMethods24and311,andnowAmerican t  SocietyforTestingandMaterials(ASTM)D2697andD6093,astheultimateinHAPs  &  compliance.ThecommentersstatedthattheruleshouldbewrittensothattheHAPlimitsapply 8   onlytoHAPsthatareemitted.Thiscanbeaccomplishedbyworkingouttestingprocedureswith   coatingsuppliers.ThecommentersrecommendedthatbecauseoftheexceedinglylowMACT L  compliancenumbersandthenonemission(orpartialemission)characteristicsofthesefour ^  HAPs"styrene,dibutylphthalate,ethyleneimines(aziridines)andBis2ethylhexylphthalate  (DEHP)"specialcompliancealternativesshouldbedeveloped.Thecompliancealternatives "r wouldallowthenonvolatileportionforanyoftheseHAPcomponentsinafinishtobeexempted  fromrequiredcalculations. 6   Response:Whileweagreewiththetechnicalfactsraisedbythecommenters,itis H importanttonotethatthedatacollectionactivitiesandsubsequentMACTfloordeterminations  weremadeusingtheassumptionthatallvolatileorganicHAPareemitted,i.e.,organicHAP  \  contentf  g ofthecoatingsf  g isequivalenttoHAPemitted.f  g  n"   Werealizethatinafewcases,suchasthefourcompoundsidentifiedbythecommenters,  $ ourassumptionisnottotallyaccuratef  g f  g Ԁbecauseaf  g Ԁsmallfractionofthef  g f  g totalf  g ԀHAPf  g f  g maybef  g Ԁtiedupin 2& thef  g coating.f  g f  g However,webelievethattf  g he12monthrollingaverageemissionlimitsprovidean  ( adequatetimeframeforsuchspecialcoatingstobeusedandaveragedinwiththeothercoatings !F* andstillmeettheemissionlimits. X#,   Duetothesereasons,wedonotbelievespecialcompliancealternativesarewarrantedfor $ . afewcompoundsusedinsomecoatings.Affectedsourcescanf  g f  g usef  g Ԁalternativetestf  g f  g proceduresf  g Ԁto &l!0 demonstratealowerHAPemissionsvalueforaparticularcoating. ~'"2   XX  2.1.6LowCoatingUseCutoff #XX #  B*%6   Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthatEPAisproposinga +0'8 sourceexemptionforfacilitiesthatuselessthan1,100gallons(gal)peryear.Thisdecisionwas B-(: basedonthefactthat1,100galperyearwastheamountusedatthesmallestplantsurveyed.  Consideringthatlessthanonethirdoftheplantsweresurveyed,thecommentersstatedthatthis b isaflawedmethodonwhichtobasetherule.Thisplantalsodidnotexceedthe10/25ton t potentialtoemitHAPrequirement.Thecommenterrecommendedthatthelevelberecalculated. & Forcomparison,inthewoodfurnituremanufacturingNESHAP,SubpartJJ,thelowvolume 8  sourceexemptionis3,000galperyear.Thislevelwassetusing5actualtonsofHAP,takingthe    worstcasefurniturecoating,anddeterminingthepercentHAPs,whichcalculatedto3,000galof  L  coating. ^    Forthewoodbuildingproduct(surfacecoating)NESHAP,thecommenters   recommendedusingasimilarthoughtprocessasonebehindthewoodfurnituremanufacturing "r  NESHAPforeachindividualsourcecategory.     Response:Basedonthecommentersarguments,wedonotbelieveraisingthelowusage 6 applicabilitylimitorbasingthelowusagelimitonsubcategoriesisjustified.Thelowusage H cutoffwasbasedonthetotalannualcoatingusageofthesmallestfacilityintheMACTfloor  database.Allfacilitiesinthedatabasef  g Ԁhaveannualcoatingusagesabove4,170liters(1,100  \ gallons).f  g ԀAvailabledataindicatethatthecoatingapplicationprocessesandcontroltechnologies n beingconsideredareappropriateforallsourceswithatleastthislevelofcoatingsusage.f  g Ԁ    Consideringthatthesurveyedsourcesinthedatabaseincludedacrosssectionofvarious 2" companies,products,andlocations,wef  g f  g dof  g Ԁnotf  g f  g believef  g Ԁthatf  g Ԁcollectingf  g Ԁadditionaldatawouldraise $ thiscutoff.Therefore,nochangeshavebeenmadetothelowcoatingusagecutoff. F&   XX  2.1.7WorkPracticeStandards he#XX ˑ#  ! *   Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07andIVD10statedthatEPAnotedthat X#, emissionsfromsurfacepreparation,storage,handling,andwaste/wastewateroperationsare $ . relativelysmall.Further,manyfacilitiesuseworkpracticemeasurestominimizeHAPemissions &l!0 frommixing,cleaning,storage,andwaste/wastewaterhandlingproceduresandthustominimize ~'"2 workerexposure.Thecommentersnotedthattheseprocedureswereneverquantifiedbythe (0$4 agencyduringruledevelopment.Becausethehazardisminimal,emissionsaresmall,and B*%6  addingworkpracticestandardswouldincreasethecomplexityofcomplianceandtheregulatory +&8 burden,surfacepreparation,storage,handling,andwaste/wastewaterproceduresshouldbe  exemptedfromrequirementsundertherule. b    Response:Workpracticestandardsapplyonlytothoseaffectedsourcesoptingtouse t addoncontrolequipment(complianceOption3)tocomplywiththeapplicableemissionlimit. & Whenthecontroloptionisselected,theemissionscoveredbyworkpracticestandardsarenot 8  completelyaccountedforinthecontrollimit.However,theemissionsfromthesesourcesare    accountedforifthefacilityusescomplianceOption1orcomplianceOption2because  L  compliancefortheseoptionsrequiresrecordkeepingthataccountsforthemassofallorganic ^  HAPmaterialsused.     Basedontheverysmallnumberofexistingsourcescurrentlyusingaddoncontrol "r  equipment,anyimpactoftheseworkpracticestandardsisprojectedtobeminimal.   &   XX  2.1.8EducationandTeachingActivities he#XX #  H   Comment:CommenterIVD02statedthatPurdueUniversityisamajorsourceofHAP 6 emissionsduetothesizeoftheircoalfiredboilersattheirpowerplant.Variousdepartmentson H 'Hcampushavewoodcoatingactivitiesassociatedwithundergraduateandgraduateteachingusing  onlyademinimisquantityofmaterialannuallyontheorderof1to2galtotal.UnderIndianas  \  titleVpermitprogram,educationandteachingactivitiesareinsignificantsourcesofemissions n" andarespecificallyexemptedfromtitleVrules.Thecommenterrequestedthatasimilar  $ exemptionbeaddedtothefinalwoodbuildingproductsMACTrule. 2&   Response:Majorsourcesusingonlyafewgallonsofcoatingsannually,suchastheone  ( describedbythecommenter,areencouragedtoutilizethelowcoatingusageapplicabilitycutoff !F* criteria.Sourcesthatcoatwoodbuildingproductsbutarenotcommercialmanufacturersarenot X#, requiredtocomplywiththefinalrule.Sourcesthatarecommercialmanufacturersarenot $ . requiredtocomplywiththefinalruleifthesourceuseslessthan1,100gal(4,170liters)peryear &l!0 ofsurfacecoatingsonwoodbuildingproducts. ~'"2   (0$4   XX  2.1.9ResearchandDevelopment(R&D)Operations he#XX p#     Comment:CommenterIVD12supportedtheinclusionofanR&Dexemptioninthe N rule.Thecommenteralsosupportedthedefinitionof researchorlaboratoryfacilitiesinthe  proposedrule.  b   Response:Noresponseneeded. t  & &  XX  2.1.10DoorsandWindows he#XX #  8     Comment:CommenterIVD18statedthattheproposeddefinitionof woodbuilding &  productexcludesthemajorityofthewoodenwindowsanddoorshiscompanymanufactures. 8  Becauseawindowframe,withoutglass,isnotaproduct,onlyverysmallwindowsandvirtually   '&8 snodoorsmeettheproposeddefinitionofwoodbuildingproduct.Glassisnearlyalwaysthe L heaviestcomponentinthecommentersproducts.Fromthecommenterscostmodeldata,wood ^ comprisedapproximately25percentoftheweightofthewindow.Thecommenterpointedout  thatthisfigurevariesconsiderablywithsize,numberofglazingpanels,andspecialfeatures. "r Basedontheproposedrule,thecommenterwouldneedtofollowthisMACTruleforavery  smallportionofproducts,whichcouldcreatesubstantialproducttrackingissueswithinthe 6 factoryaswellasamajorundertakingtodeterminewhichwindowconfigurationsmeetthe H  proposeddefinition.ThecommenterrequestedthatEPAclarifythedefinitionof woodbuilding " productanditsapplicabilitytothewindow/doorsubcategory.  \$   Response:Languagehasbeenaddedtothefinalruletoclarifythattheapplicability n& determinationforallwoodbuildingproducts(includingwindowsanddoors)willexcludethe  ( weightofanyglasscomponents.Theweightcriterionwasoriginallyaddedtodifferentiate 2"* betweenwoodproductsandcompositewoodproductsthatcontainsmallamountsofwood. #,   XX  2.1.11PrefabricatedandMobile/ModularHomes heS#XX 4#  X&!0   Comment:CommenterIVD11stated63.4681(c)(3)specificallyexemptssurface 'F#2 coatingthatoccursduringthemanufactureofprefabricatedhomesandmobile/modularhomes. X)$4 Thisexemptionisnotdiscussedanywhereintheproposedruleanddoesnotappeartobe * &6 justified.TherearemobilehomemanufacturersthataremajorsourcesforHAPsthat,because ,l'8 theyonlyassemblecomponentsonsiteratherthanfinishthem,donotfitintoanyother  NESHAPcategory.Inaddition,thecommenteridentifiedafacilitythatfinisheswallpanels, b moulding,andtrimforuseinmobilehomesthatis majorsourceforHAPs.Thecommenter t notedthatthisfacilityfitswellintotheWoodBuildingProductNESHAPfortheproductssoldto & mobilehomemanufacturers. 8    However,themouldingandtrimarenoteasilycategorized(orsubcategorized)because    theycouldgoaroundwindowsanddoorsorbeusedasbaseboards,trimbetweenceilingsand  L  walls,orchairrailing.Inaddition,thesamemouldingandtrimcoatingandlaminating ^  operationsarealsousedformakingpictureframesandwallmirrorstobesoldtoretailers(the   sameadhesivesandmachinesareused,onlyadifferentlaminateisappliedtoadifferentshaped "r  woodtrim).CommenterIVD11wantedtoknowwhatNESHAPcategoryappliestothese   products.Doesoneofthesubcategoriesinthewoodbuildingproduct(surfacecoating) 6 NESHAPapplytotheseproducts,shouldtheybeconsideredwoodfurnitureproductstowhich H thewoodfurnituremanufacturingNESHAP(SubpartJJ)applies,ordotheyrequiretheirownas  yetunspecifiedcategory?  \   Response:Althoughmanypremanufacturedhomesmeetthecriteria(e.g.,description)of n awoodbuildingproductintherule,thedifferencesinemissionpoints,thelackofthinning    solvents,andoverlapwithmultipleexistingregulationssuggestthatpremanufacturedhome 2" manufacturingfacilitiesarebettersuitediftheyareexcludedfromthesourcecategory.Affected $ sourceswithcoatingoperationsinvolvingwoodproductsusedinorcomponentsof F& premanufacturedhomesarestillcovered. X (   Thereareatleasttwoexistingregulationsthatpotentiallycoveraportionofthe ! * premanufacturedhomeindustry.ThefirstregulationistheMACTstandardforwoodfurniture #l, manufacturingoperationspromulgatedDecember1,1995(40CFRpart63,subpartJJ).The ~$. standardcoversanyfacilityengagedinthemanufactureof woodfurnitureorwoodfurniture %0!0 components,includingforexample,drawersides,cabinetdoors,andlaminatedtops.The B'"2 premanufacturedhomeindustryusesmanyoftheseproductsintheproductionprocess,suchas (#4 cabinetdoorsandlaminatedtopsforcounters.Anywoodfurnitureorfurniturecomponentsthat *V%6 arecoatedatapremanufacturedhomemanufacturingfacilityarecoveredbythewoodfurniture h+&8 manufacturingMACTlimits. ,(:   AnotherexistingregulationwithpotentialoverlapistheArchitecturalCoatingsRule  (alsoknownastheArchitecturalandIndustrialMaintenance[AIM]rule),whichaddresses b volatileorganiccompound(VOC)contentofcoatings.TheAIMrulelistsanarchitectural t coatingasa coatingrecommendedbythemanufacturerforfieldapplicationtothesurfaceofa & stationarystructure,portablebuilding,pavement,orcurbtoprotect,decorate,orservesomeother 8  function.Architecturalcoatingsincludeseveralcategoriesthatwouldapplytopremanufactured    housing,suchasinteriorandexteriorpaints,aswellasindustrialmaintenancecoatings.  L    Thedatagatheredfromthewoodbuildingproductsindustrysurveyshowthat ^  premanufacturedhomemanufacturersuseprimarilysealers,topcoats,stains,andclearcoats.   Thedataalsoshowthatpremanufacturedhomemanufacturersclaimtousenothinningsolvents. "r  Inthiscase,theAIMruleisanationalruleapplyingtothecoatingmanufacturersordistributors   anddoesnotcovertheenduser(i.e.,thepersonbuyingorapplyingthecoating). 6   Finally,thereisalsothepotentialofoverlapbetweenthepremanufacturedhomeindustry H andotherfutureregulations.Specifically,theproposedplywoodandcompositewoodproducts  (PCWP)MACTstandard(40CFRpart63,subpartDDDD)wouldpotentiallycoverthe  \ manufactureofwoodbuildingproductssuchasplywood,particleboard,OSB,mediumdensity n fiberboard(MDF),hardboard,andfiberboard.Manyofthesewoodproductsareroutinelyused    inpremanufacturedhomes,andthePCWPMACTrulewouldthereforecovertheHAPemissions 2" emittedduringmanufactureoftheseproducts. $   Toeliminatethepossibleclassificationofdifferenttypesofmouldingandtriminto F& differentsubcategories,wehavealsochangedhow miscellaneousproductsaretobe X ( subcategorized.Thefinalrulehasa Doors,Windows,andMiscellaneoussubcategorythat ! * includesallmouldingandtrim,exceptforthatassociatedwithwoodcabinetsandothertypesof #l, woodfurniture(whicharesubjecttothewoodfurnituremanufacturingNESHAP,SubpartJJ). ~$. Theproposed ExteriorSiding,Doorskins,andMiscellaneoussubcategorywaschangedtothe %0!0  ExteriorSidingandPrimedDoorskinssubcategoryinthefinalrule.Theproductsmentioned B'"2 bycommenterIVD11wouldbecoveredunderthe Doors,Windows,andMiscellaneous (#4 subcategory(exceptforpictureframesandmirrors,whicharenotconsideredtobestructural *V%6 componentsofabuildingandare,therefore,notconsideredtobe woodbuildingproductsfor h+&8 purposesofthefinalrule). ,(: Ї&   XX  2.2OVERLAPWITHOTHERNESHAP #XX #     XX  2.2.1OtherSurfaceCoatingMACTRules #XX #  N   Comment:CommentersIVD07andIVD10statedthattheproposedruleanticipates < overlapwithotherMACTrules,delineatesapplicabilitydifferences,andattemptstoestablish N  circumstancesunderwhichthedifferentMACTrulesapply.CommentersIVD03,IVD05,   'andIV-D09raisedtheissueofoverlapbetweenSubpartQQQQandthewoodfurnitureindustry  b  regulationscoveredbySubpartJJ.Allcommentersrequestedclarificationastowhichruletakes t   precedenceifmorethanonerulecouldapply. &    CommenterIVD18statedthatlessthan3percentofhiscompanyswindowanddoor 8  productshaveasurfacecoatingappliedtowood.Thecommenterswindowsanddoorsareclad   withaluminum.Most,butnotall,woodenproductsarecoatedindistinct,isolatedpaintbooths. L ThecommenterrequestedlanguagebeaddedtothewoodbuildingproductsMACTruleandthe ^ miscellaneousmetalpartsandproductscoatingMACTruletoreference predominantusageof  afacilitytodeterminewhichMACTapplies. "r   CommentersIVD07andIV-D-10statedthatthepreambleneedstospecificallyaddress  productionunitsthat,giventhestatedapplicabilitydefinitions,maybesubjecttotwodifferent 6 MACTrules.Itisentirelypossiblethataplantthatanticipatedbeingcompletelycoveredby H  SubpartQQQQwillbepartiallyorpredominantlycoveredbySubpartJJ.Althoughthiswillnot " createatechnicalproblem,thecommenterswereconcernedaboutanoncomplianceissue  \$ becauseSubpartJJwasfinalizedonDecember12,1995andhashadreportingrequirementsin n& placesinceNovember21,1997.Thecommenterssuggestedguidelinesandguidancememosthat  ( willexemptfacilitiesfrominappropriatefinesandpenaltiesiftheyfindthemselvesinthis 2"* compliancedilemma. #,   CommentersIVD07andIVD10recommendedthatEPAoffermoreextensive $F . applicabilityguidanceforallMACTrulesthatcouldconflictinthismanner.Conflictswiththe X&!0 miscellaneousmetalpartsandproductscoatingNESHAP,SubpartMMMM,andthe ' #2 miscellaneousplasticpartsandproductscoatingNESHAP,SubpartPPPP,mightpossibly )l$4 develop. ~*%6   CommenterIVD03recommendedthatindustryshouldcomplywiththeMACTthat +0'8 dealswiththegreatesttotalVHAPsemissionsprovidedfromeachcoating.CommenterIVD05 B-(: recommendedthatthepreambleandtheregulationshouldindicatethatifmorethan50percentof  thecoatings(primarypurpose)beingpurchasedforaproductionunitfallunderoneMACT,the b facilitywouldhavetheopportunitytomeettheapplicableemissionlimitsforonlythisMACT. t CommenterIV-D09requestedaddingademinimisexemptionforfacilitiesthathavesurface & coatingoperationsinvolvingwoodbuildingproductscomprisinglessthan15percentofannual 8  production.      Response:Weappreciatethecommentersoverlapconcernsandhavetriedtoalleviateor  L  minimizethecomplianceissuesdocumentedbythecommenters.Inresponsetothef  g sef  g Ԁcommentsf  g , ^  wehaveaddedparagraph63.4681(d)totheapplicabilitysectionf  g Ԁofthefinalrule.Thisnew   f  g f  g languagef  g Ԁstatesthatanaffectedsourcethatf  g f  g couldbef  g Ԁsubjecttof  g f  g morethanonef  g Ԁcoatingf  g f  g NESHAPf  g , "r  andthathasf  g Ԁonetypeoff  g Ԁsurfacecoatingoperationf  g Ԁthataccountf  g sf  g Ԁforatleast95percentofthetotal   (annual)coatingusagef  g Ԁatthesourcef  g ,hastheoptionofcomplyingwiththerequirementsofthat 6 f  g predominantf  g coatingrule(includingallapplicableemissionslimitations,operatinglimits,and H workpracticerequirements)forf  g f  g allcoatingoperationsthatwouldbesubjecttoaNESHAPf  g .f  g     f  g Weareallowingthesmallamountofcoating(lessthan5percentofthetotalusage)tobe  \ regulatedatthesamelevel(s)asthemajority(atleast95percent)ofcoatingusagetosimplify n applicabilitydeterminationsandrecordkeepingandreportingforthosesources.Withf  g f  g thisf  g     applicabilityprovisionf  g ,thf  g esourcef  g ԀdescribedbycommenterIVD18f  g Ԁwouldbeallowedtocomply 2" withtheemissionlimitsforthemiscellaneousmetalpartsNESHAPforf  g f  g alloftheircoating $ operations. F&   XX  2.2.2TemperingOils Ti#XX J#  ! *   Comment:Threecommenters(IVD03,IVD07,andIVD10)statedthatthe X#, applicationoflinseed,tall,tung,soy,otaseka,andotherdryingoilsormixturesofsuchoilsis $ . clearlyregulatedaspartoftheplywoodandcompositewoodproductsNESHAP.Indraftsof &l!0 thatrule,controldevicesforhardboardbakeovens,theunitassociatedwithtemperingoils,are ~'"2 discussedexplicitly.Theuseoftheseoilsandthetemperingprocessclearlyshouldbeexempted (0$4  fromthisrule. B*%6   Response:Weagreewiththecommentersandhaveexcludeddryingortemperingoils  fromthefinalrule.Referto68.4681(c)(1)foralistingofthisandotherprocessesthatwillmost b likelybecoveredbytheplywoodandcompositewoodproductsNESHAP. t   XX  2.2.3CellulosicFiberboards T#XX #  8    Comment:Fourcommenters(IVD03,IVD05,IVD07,andIVD10)statedthatthe  &  applicationofasphaltandothercoatingscurrentlyappliedtocellulosicfiberboardsispartofthe 8   fiberboardproductionprocesstobecoveredundertheplywoodandcompositewoodproducts   NESHAP,SubpartDDDD.Thecommentersfurtherstatedthatsomeasphaltcoatingsare L  appliedtothewetmatattheformingmachineaftertheheadbox,beforethefirstsetofpress ^  rolls,andbeforethefiberboarddryingovens.Otherasphaltcoatingproductsareappliedafterthe  matleavesthedryingoven,whichallowsthemeltedasphalttobepressedintofiberboardmat. "r Inbothcircumstances,theboardandasphaltarecooledtoambienttemperature,thegrademark  andcompanyidentificationareprintedoneachpiece,andtheboardispackagedforshipment. 6 Thecommentersstatedthatfiberboarddryingandcoolingprocesseswillberegulatedunderthe H plywoodandcompositewoodproductsNESHAP,andthesecoatingsshouldclearlybeexempted  fromthisrule.  \    Additionally,theasphaltproductsusedareendproductsofthepetroleumcracking n" process.Becausetheyareproducedlateinthatprocess,thevolatilecomponentshavebeen  $ drivenoff.Therefore,theemissionsfromtheseproductsarereportedasbeingzero.Havingto 2& developandmaintainrecordsshowingnoHAPwouldimposeanunnecessaryrecordkeeping  ( burdenonboththeasphaltproducerandthefiberboardproducer.Thecommenters !F* recommendedthatfiberboardasphaltcoatingsbeaddedtothelistofoperationstowhichthis X#, subpartdoesnotapply(see63.4681(c)(1)(i)through(x)oftheproposedrule). $ .   Response:Wefurtherevaluatedthesetypesofcoatingsandprocessesusedtomake &l!0 asphaltcoatedfiberboard,alsocalled buildersboardor insulationboard,andfoundthatonly ~'"2 afewfacilitiesintheUnitedStatesmaketheseproducts,withvaryingmanufacturingandcoating (0$4 processes.Withregardstothecoatings,theasphaltcanbeincludedaspartoftheemulsionused B*%6 inthefiberboardmanufacturingprocess,ortheasphalt(mixedwithmineralspirits)canbe +&8 appliedtothefiberboardsubstrate.Dependingonthecompanyandtheprocess,thecoatingcan -V(: beappliedbeforethefinaldryerorafterthefinaldryerwiththeproductallowedtoairdry,  usuallyoutdoorsonracks. b   Thewoodbuildingproductssurfacecoatingdatabasecontainsnoasphaltcoatings. t Becauseofthesmallnumberoffacilitiesutilizingthistechnologyandthefactthatmostofthe & coatingsassociatedwiththesetypesofproductsareappliedduringthesubstrateformingprocess 8  (e.g.,tothewetmatbeingformed)orpriortothefinalsubstratedryingoperation,fiberboard    coatingoperations(includingthoseusedinthemanufactureofasphaltcoatedfiberboard)willbe  L  coveredundertheproposedplywoodandwoodcompositeMACTrule.Forthisreasonthese ^  productswillnotbesubjecttothewoodbuildingproducts(surfacecoating)finalrule(see2.1.1   forrelatedcomment). "r  & b  XX  2.3SUBCATEGORIES seM#XX .#  6   XX  2.3.1OtherInteriorPanels se#XX #     Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthattheextremelylow "r HAPlevelforthe OtherInteriorPanelssubcategoryisbasedonasmallsetofproductsthatare  very'bdissimilarfromothersinthegroup.CommentersIV-D07andIVD10recommendedthat 6 theproductsinthissubcategorybereevaluatedandunderstoodandthatproductsdeservingtheir H  ownsubcategorymightbesoclassified.Examplesofdissimilarproductscurrentlylistedinthe " subcategoryincludefiberboardsheathingandperforatedpanels.(EPAusestheterm pegboard,  \$ whichisaregisteredtradenameownedbyMasoniteInternationalCorporation.Thecorrect n& nameforthegenericproductis perforatedpanel.)Thatfiberboardsheathingislistedinthis  ( subcategoryasanexampleillustratesalackofunderstandingoftheproductbecauseitisnot 2"* trulycoated. #,   Earliercommunicationsinthedocketfrommembersofthiscoalitionprovidemore $F . backgroundanddata.CommentersIV-D07andIVD10wereconcernedthatEPAhassimply X&!0 establishedacatchallsubcategoryformiscellaneousanddissimilarproducts. ' #2   Response:AccordingtotheinformationintheMACTdatabase,theproductscoveredby )l$4 the OtherInteriorPanelssubcategoryareusedforinteriorapplicationsotherthanwallpaneling ~*%6 ortileboardandusefewercoatinglayers.Otherinteriorpanelstypicallyareproducedwitha +0'8 singlecolorandhavefewercoatingsteps,lessstringentproductperformancerequirements,and B-(: someultraviolet(UV)applications,whichallowlowerorganicHAPcontentsandemissionrates.  Productspecificationsinthe OtherInteriorPanelssubcategoryarenotcoveredbyconsensus b standardsbutareestablishedbetweenthebuyerandseller.Primersandbasecoatscomprise t 32percentofallthecoatingsusedontheseproductsandaverage1.8pounds(lb)ofHAP/gal & solids;prefinishes(clearcoats,paints/inks,sealers,stains,andtopcoats)makeup47percentof 8  thecoatingusageandaverage1.7lbHAP/galsolids.      Asnotedinearliercommentresponses(2.1.1and2.2.3),weagreewiththecommenters  L  concerningthedifferencesassociatedwithcoatingoperationsinvolvingfiberboardproducts. ^  Therefore,fiberboardcoatingoperationshavebeenremovedfromthewoodbuildingproducts   surfacecoatingMACTdatabaseandtheMACTfloorforthe OtherInteriorPanelssubcategory "r  wasrecalculated.TheexistingsourceMACTflooremissionlimitforthe OtherInteriorPanels   subcategorychangedfrom0.01lbHAP/galsolids(1gHAP/literofsolids)to0.17lbHAP/gal 6 solids(20gHAP/literofsolids). H   XX  2.3.2ProductGroupings setԀ#XX U#   \   Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedseveralofthetypesof  productsgroupedtogetherinthecurrentproposedruleneedtobeseparatedduetothenatureof  \  thecoatingsappliedandtheapplicationsfortheproducts.Separatecategorieswillnot n" significantlyincreaseemissionsbutwillinthelongrunmakeenforcementsimpler.  $   Inestablishingsubcategories,EPAconsideredfactorssuchasprocessoperation(typesof 2& process,rawmaterials,chemistry/formulationdata,associatedequipment,andfinalproducts),  ( emissionscharacteristics(amountandtypeofHAPs),controldeviceapplicability,and !F* opportunitiesforpollutionprevention.ThecommentersagreedthatEPAshouldconsiderthe X#, typesofprocess,chemistry,andfinalproductinmoredetailwhenselectingasubcategory. $ . However,thecommentersfeltthatdespitethebesteffortsofEPAstaff,thesubcategorization &l!0 workisincompletebecausethesecriteriawerenotfullysatisfied. ~'"2   Asanexample,bothcommentersstatedthatthe ExteriorSiding,Doorskins,and (0$4 Miscellaneoussubcategoryispoorlydefined.Thecommenterswereconcernedthatproducts B*%6 thatareactuallydissimilarinemissionshavebeenplacedtogetherandassignedthesame +&8 subcategory. -V(:   Response:Wedonotagreewiththecommentersandbelievethesubcategorization  schemeadoptedforthissourcecategoryisappropriateandcomplete.Allsubcategorieswere b evaluatedwithrespecttoproductperformancerequirements,associatedcoatingusage,organic t HAPemissions,coatingapplicationequipment,andcontroldeviceapplicability.Each & subcategoryshowedtechnicaldifferenceswithinoneormoreofthesecriteria.Forexample,the 8  renamed(inthefinalrule) ExteriorSidingandPrimedDoorskinssubcategoryhasrigidproduct    performancerequirementsduetoenvironmentalexposure.Mostoftheproductsincludedinthis  L  subcategoryareeitherexposedtoextremeexteriorweatherconditionsorextremeinterior ^  conditionssuchashighhumidityandfrequentuse.Also,theseproductshaveahighrateof   primerusethatmustbecompatiblewithallsubsequentcoatinglayers. "r    XX  2.3.3TopcoatedSidingandDoorskinProducts s, #XX  #  6   Comment:CommentersIVD07andIVD10statedthatsincetheMACTfloorwas  determined,newtopcoatedproductshavecomeintothemarketplacethathavedifferentlevelsof 6 HAPintheircoatingsthantheproductsthatweresimplyprimed.TheMACTfloorneedstobe H reevaluatedtoreflectthischange.Unlessthismistakeiscorrected,therequirementsforthese  subcategorieswillleadtocurtailmentofproductionoftopcoatedproducts.  \    Finisheddoorskinsareaproductquiteunlikeprimeddoorfacings,andthecoating n" technologyutilizedintheirmanufactureissimilartothatoftileboard/interiorwallpaneling.The  $ productproducedisgenerallymoldedinahotpresstoproduceatypicaldoorpaneldesignand 2& hasthesamecolormatchingrequirementsasdecorativewallpaneling.Theproductperformance  ( ismoredemandingthanthatofdecorativewallpanelingduetostressesimposedbyopeningand !F* closingthefinisheddooraswellasdifferentialconditionsfromoneroomtothenext,with X#, productdemandsapproachingthosefortileboard.Keepingthisrequirementatthecurrentlevel $ . fordoorskinswillnotreduceHAPemissions;higherHAPproductswillbeusedinunregulated &l!0 downstreamconstructionapplications(doorskintopcoatHAPlevelsareapproximately3.3lb/dry ~'"2 galofsolids).BecauseprimersandtopcoatshavesuchdramaticallydifferentHAPlevels,EPA (0$4 mustconsiderdistinguishingbetweenthesefinishingstageswithinseparate ExteriorSidingand B*%6  Doorskinssubcategoryinthefinalrule. +&8   Response:Althoughseparatingthesetypesoftopcoatedorfinisheddoorskinsfromthe   ExteriorSidingandPrimedDoorskinssubcategorycouldcausesourcesthatcoatdoorskinsto b complywithtwoseparateemissionlimits,weagreethatfinisheddoorskins,whichrequire t additionallayersofcoatings,arelikelytohavehigherHAPemissionsthanprimeddoorskins. & Wealsoagreethatfinisheddoorskinshavemoredemandingandstringentperformance 8  requirementsthanprimedonlydoorskins.Wehavedecidedtoincludefinisheddoorskinsinthe     Doors,Windows,andMiscellaneoussubcategorywheretheexteriorclimateperformance  L  requirementsassociatedwithalldoorsandwindowshavebeenaccountedforwiththehigher ^  emissionlimits.     XX  2.3.4InteriorPanelingandTileboard s,#XX w#      Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthat Tileboard "r Manufacturingand InteriorWallPanelingshouldbetwoseparatesubcategoriescreatedwitha  MACTfloorasdefinedbytheinformationcollectedintheinformationrequestsurvey. 6   Response:Interiorwallpanelingandtileboardaretheprimarycomponentsofthe H  InteriorWallPanelingandTileboardsubcategoryofwoodbuildingproducts.Product  specificationsareestablishedfortheseproductsbyconsensusstandards.Interiorwallpaneling  \  hasmoredecorativecoatingrequirementsthandocomponentsofothersubcategoriesandis n" typicallymanufacturedatthesamefacilitiesastileboard,althoughinmuchsmallerquantities.  $ Tileboard,apremiuminteriorwallpaneling,hasevenmorestringentproductperformance 2& requirements(i.e.,adhesionandhardnessstandards,householdstain,scrubandmoisture  ( resistencewhilemaintainingarelativesmoothsurface)comparedtostandardinteriorwall !F* paneling. X#,   Decorativeappearance(embossed,grooved,orgrainprinted)andperformanceofthe $ . intermediateandendproductsrequiremultiplecoatinglayersandcoatingstepsfarexceeding &l!0 thoseinothersubcategories.Productionspeedsof30to35boardsperminuterequirethat ~'"2 coalescentsolventsthatcomeoutofthewetfilmwithoutleavingcureblistersandwithout (0$4 leavingresidualsolventinthecoatingfilmorsubstratebeused.Residualsolventscancause B*%6  product blocking(productsstickingtogether)duringstorage.Tileboardandinteriorwall +&8 panelingproductsutilizehightemperatureaminoplastcrosslinkablecoatingsthatareusedon  substratesthatcantoleratehigherprocessingtemperatures. b    Wedonotbelievethatfurthersubcategorizationhasbeentechnicallyjustifiedbythe t commenters,andanyadditionalseparationamongtheseproductswouldcausemoreissuesand & potentialconfusionsincemanyfacilitiesproducebothtypesofproducts. 8    XX  2.3.5ColorCoatings/ClearCoatings pr "#XX !#   L    Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthatcolorcoatingand   clearcoatingsshouldhaveseparateMACTlimitsundertheproposed InteriorWallPanelingand L  Tileboard, OtherInteriorPanels,and ExteriorSiding,Doorskins,andMiscellaneous ^  subcategories.    Response:Becausethecommentersofferednoexplanationforthedifferencesbetween "r colorandclearcoatings,wecanonlyconsiderthefactthatbusinessdecisionsweremadetoadd  colorcoatings.Thisaloneisnotacompellingtechnicalreasontosubcategorizedifferentlyorto 6 changetheMACTfloors.ThedatausedtodeterminesubcategoriesandtheapplicableMACT H floorlevelofcontrolwerethebestinformationavailabletoEPAatthetime.Productionis  updatedcontinuouslyforvariousreasons,andchangingtheMACTfloordeterminationbasedon  \  constantlychangingconditionswouldnotbeappropriate. n"   XX  2.3.6OverlappingSubcategories pr?'#XX  '#  2&   Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthatallowingfacilitiesto  ( switchbetweencoveragebyonesubcategoryofcoatingandothersubcategoriesisimplicitinthe 2"* proposedrule,andthecommenterssupportedthisflexibilityintherule.However,the #, mechanismsbywhichthiscouldbeaccomplishedwiththeappropriatecomplianceguidance $F . needtobeestablished,andguidanceinthepreambleonthissubjectisminimalorlacking.The X&!0 commentersrecommendedthatthepreambleandtheregulationshouldindicatethatifthe ' #2 majorityofthecoatingsbeingpurchasedforaproductionunitfallunderthedefinitionfora )l$4 subcategory,thenthatsubcategoryappliestotheunit.Thus,ifaplantproducedproductsfrom ~*%6 twosubcategories,theywouldhavetheopportunitytorequestthatthelimitsofthegreatestHAP +0'8 coatingsystemapply.Iftheyproducedproductsfromthreeormoresubcategories,theywould B-(: havetheopportunitytorequestthatthelimitsofthemajorityHAPcoatingsystemapply.The  ruleshouldadoptthisorsimilarapproachesindevelopingitsapplicabilitydeterminationadvice b forpermittingauthorities. t   CommenterIVD16hadcommentsregardingSectionE.2,GuidanceforSwitching & CoverageBetweenSubcategories.Thecommenttohavetheopportunitytodefaulttothe 8  subcategoryforwhichthemajorityofthecoatingsarepurchasedwasviewedasgoodbythe    commenter.  L    CommenterIVD08raisedtheissueofoverlappingsubcategories.Thecommenter ^  neededflexibilityincomplyingwiththeregulationsbetweensubcategories,whichrepresent   significantdifferencesinendproducts,substrate,finishingprocesses,andmaterials.The "r  commenterwantedEPAtoallowamanufacturertheflexibilitytooptintooroutofacertain   subcategorytoprovidethenecessarymeanstoachieveperformanceanddecreasetheneedfor 6 additionalrecordkeepingandreportingrequirements. H   Response:Thecommentersdidnotprovidedataorspecificsonanyknownfacilities.  Issuesrelatedtocoatingrequirementsforvariousproductswereconsideredwhenwedeveloped  \ thefivesubcategoriesandservedasthebasisformanyofthosedecisions.Accordingtothe n projectdatabase,therearenofacilitiesthatarepotentiallysubjecttomorethanonesubcategory    emissionlimit.Becausef  g Ԁsubcategoriesweref  g f  g createdf  g Ԁtoaccommodatef  g f  g uniquedifferencesin 2" performancecriteriathatindicatedaneedfordifferentHAPcontentsf  g Ԁ(basedontheinformation $ providedbythevariousindustrysegmentsinthedatabase),webelievef  g f  g itisnotappropriateto F& combineoperationsunderseparatesubcategoriesf  g .Therefore,wearenotallowingf  g f  g af  g Ԁsourceto X ( chooseoneemissionlimitbasedontheamountofcoatingusedinaf  g f  g predominantsubcategoryand ! * applythatsamelimittoanothersubcategory. #l,   Thesechoicesareincludedintheapplicabilitysection(63.4681)andtheemission ~$. limitationssection(63.4690)inthefinalrule.Ifyouswitchbetweencomplianceoptionsfor %0!0 anycoatingoperationorgroupofcoatingoperations,youmustdocumentthisswitchasrequired B'"2 by63.4730(c),andyoumustreportitinthenextsemiannualcompliancereportrequiredin (#4 63.4720. *V%6  ,(:   XX  2.3.7AverageEmissionLimits ri8#XX 8#     Comment:CommenterIVD16suggestedthatfacilitiesbeallowedtoaveragethe N emissionlimitsforthosethatareproducingproductsthatfitinmorethanonesubcategory.For  instance,ifafacilityisproducing45percentinteriorwallpaneling,45percentotherinterior  b panels,and10percentdoors,theaveragelimitforthisfacilitywouldbe(1.53x.45)+(.01x.45) t  +(1.45x.1)=0.84lbHAPs/galsolid.Thelimitcouldbeestablishedquarterlybasedonthe  &  previousquartersactualproductionorpaintusageineachsubcategory.Thiswouldsimplifythe 8   daytodayrecordkeeping.     EPAspecificallystatesthat thoseaffectedsourcescoatingmultipleproductscoveredby L  twoormoresubcategoriesmustmaintainproductorsubcategoryspecificrecordsinorderto ^  demonstratecompliancewitheachapplicableemissionlimitforallproductscoatedatthe  affectedsource.Thecommenterclaimedthiswillbearecordkeepingnightmare. "r   Response:Weagreewiththecommentersthattherecordkeepingandreportingwillbe  moredifficultandtimeconsumingforthosesourcesthatcoatproductsinmultiplesubcategories. 6 However,allowingsuchsourcestodevelopan averageorcompositeemissionlimitwould H causeitsownsetofproblemsforboththeaffectedsourceandtheenforcementagencies.We  optedforthe12monthrollingaveragecompliancedeterminationtoprovideflexibilitytothose  \  sourceswithvariouscoatingrequirements,especiallythosethatcanbeeitherseasonalorclient n" driven.  $   Assummarizedinresponse2.3.7,theprojectdatabasedoesnotsupporttheoptionof 2& allowingsourcestochooseoneemissionlimitbasedontheamountofcoatingusedinacertain  ( subcategory.Anypotentiallyaffectedsourcewilleitherchoosetokeeprecordsforallapplicable !F* sourcecategoriesandcomplywitheachlimitseparatelyorchoosetocomplywiththeemission X#, limitthatisthemoststringent. $ .   Thesechoicesareincludedintheapplicabilitysection(63.4681)andtheemission &l!0 limitationssection(63.4690)inthefinalrule. ~'"2   XX  2.3.8MouldingandTrim riC#XX C#  B*%6   Comment:CommenterIVD11believedthesubcategoriesneedtobemorespecifically +0'8 definedandjustified.Forinstance,thedoorsandwindowssubcategoryspecificallyincludes the B-(: mouldingandtrimthatareassembledwithdoorsandwindowstocreateafixture.However,the  samemouldingandtrimmanufacturedforuseondoorsandwindowscouldbeusedastrim b betweenaceilingandwallorasbaseboards.Therefore,simplybecausethesamemouldingor t trimwasnotaffixedtoadoororawindow,thefacilitywouldhavetocomplywithasignificantly & morestringentemissionlimitforadifferentsubcategoryforthesameproduct.Similarly,would 8  baseboards(typicallyattachedtothewallratherthanthefloor,andtheymaybetotallydifferent    fromwoodflooringproducts)bepartofthe flooringsubcategoryorthe otherinteriorpanels  L  subcategory?CommenterIVD11requestedthatEPAbeasspecificaspossibletodefineeach ^  category.     Response:Toeliminatetheclassificationofdifferenttypesofmouldingandtrimin "r  differentsubcategories,wehavedecidedtoincludeallmouldingandtriminonesubcategory   exceptforthatassociatedwithwoodcabinetsandothertypesofwoodfurniture(whichare 6 subjecttothewoodfurnituremanufacturingNESHAP,SubpartJJ).Thischangealsoinvolved H therenamingoftwosubcategories.The DoorsandWindowssubcategoryhasbecomethe   Doors,Windows,andMiscellaneoussubcategoryandwillincludeallmoulding,trim,and  \ miscellaneousproductsthatdonotfitintheothersubcategories.The ExteriorSiding, n Doorskins,andMiscellaneoussubcategoryhasbecomethe ExteriorSidingandPrimed    Doorskinssubcategory. 2"   XX  2.3.9MiscellaneousProducts eyL#XX L#  F&   Comment:CommenterIVD11statedtheruleshouldspecifyifthe miscellaneouspart  ( ofthe ExteriorSiding,Doorskin,andMiscellaneouscategoryisspecificallyonlyforexterior !F* woodbuildingproductsorifitisacatchallforallinteriorandexteriorproductsnotspecifically X#, namedinanyothersubcategory. $ .   CommenterIVD05statedguidanceshouldbedevelopedthatwouldallowpermitting &l!0 authoritiestoplace otherormiscellaneousproductsintotheappropriatesubcategoryonacase ~'"2 bycasebasisregardlessofwhetherthoseproductswereintendedforinteriororexterior (0$4 applications. B*%6   Response:Miscellaneousproductsincludeallproductsthatmeetthedefinitionofawood +&8 buildingproductandthatdonotfitintoanyofthedescriptionsoftheothersubcategories.This -V(: classificationincludesallmouldingandtrim,andthesubcategoryisnowcalled Doors,  Windows,andMiscellaneous. b   XX  2.3.10ExteriorSidingandDoorskins ey^R#XX ?R#  &   Comment:CommenterIVD05requestedthe ExteriorSidingandDoorskinsbe t  separatedintodifferentsubcategoriesandthatnewMACTfloorlevelsbecalculated.  &    Response:Therenamed ExteriorSidingandPrimedDoorskinssubcategoryinthefinal 8   rulewasdevelopedbasedonthecoatingsdataandinformationthatshowedthatthemajorityof   theseproductsareprimedandthensold.Exteriorproductsarealsosimilarinperformanceand L  durabilityrequirements.Accordingtothedata,mostofthetopcoatsareappliedinthefield, ^  wheretheyarematchedwithotherexteriorcoatings.    XX  2.3.11FinishedDoorskins ey V#XX U#     Comment:CommentersIVD06andIVD08raisedtheissueofsubcategoriesrelatedto "r primeddoorfacingsandfinisheddoorskins.Thecommentersstatedthatfinisheddoorskins  utilizeacoatingtechnologysimilartothatoftileboardandinteriorwallpaneling.Because 6 primersandtopcoatshavedramaticallydifferentrequirementsandHAPlevels,thecommenter H  askedEPAtoconsiderdistinguishingbetweenthefinishingstageswithinseparate Exterior " SidingandDoorskinssubcategories.  \$   Response:Althoughseparatingthesetypesoftopcoatedorfinisheddoorskinsfromthe n&  ExteriorSidingandPrimedDoorskinssubcategorycouldcausesourcesthatcoatdoorskinsto  ( complywithtwoseparateemissionlimits,weagreethatfinisheddoorskins,whichrequire 2"* additionallayersofcoatings,arelikelytohavehigherHAPemissionsthanprimeddoorskins. #, Wealsoagreethatfinisheddoorskinshavemoredemandingandstringentperformance $F . requirementsthanprimedonlydoorskins.Wehavedecidedtoincludefinisheddoorskinsinthe X&!0  Doors,Windows,andMiscellaneoussubcategorywheretheexteriorclimateperformance ' #2 requirementsassociatedwithalldoorsandwindowshavebeenaccountedforwiththehigher )l$4 emissionlimits. ~*%6    XX   B-(: 2.4MACTFLOORDETERMINATION ey\#XX \#     XX  2.4.1ClosedFacilities ey]#XX r]#  N   Comment:CommenterIVD03statedthatthefiberboardmanufacturingfacilityinPilot < Rock,OR,closedinDecember1999.Thefacilitywassurveyed,reported0.01lbHAP/gal N  solids,andwasincludedintheMACTfloordeterminationforthe InteriorWallPanelingand   Tileboardsubcategory.ThefacilityinUkiah,CA,produceddoorskinsandexteriorsidingand  b  closedinJune2001.ExteriorsidingproductionattheLaurel,MS,facilitywasincludedinthe t   MACTfloordeterminationforexteriorsiding,andthoseoperationsceasedinMay2001.The &  commenterstatedthatthesefacilitiesshouldberemovedfromthefloordeterminationastheyno 8  longerrepresenttheindustry.     Response:ThedatausedtodeterminesubcategoriesandtheapplicableMACTfloor L levelofcontrolwerethebestinformationavailabletousatthetime.Facilitiesclosefora ^ numberofvariousreasonsallthetime,andchangingtheMACTfloordeterminationbasedon  issuesnotrelatedtotheregulatorydevelopmentprocesswouldnotbeappropriate.Thecoatings "r andcontroltechnologiesusedatthetimetheinformationwasreported(1997)arevalid  regardlessoftheclosurestatusofthevariousfacilities. 6   XX  2.4.2AreaSourcesIncludedinMACTFloorDetermination eyd#XX c#  "   Comment:CommenterIVD15requestedthatEPAreevaluatetheinformation H$ collectedintheICRresponsestoensurethatnoareasourcesareincludedinthecalculationsfor & theMACTfloorineachsubcategory.  !\(   Response:InreviewingtheresponsestotheICR,wefoundthatseveralofthefacilities n"* didnotprovidegoodorsufficientdatatomakedefinitivedeterminationsastotheirmajorsource # , status.Mostfacilitiesprovidedonlyactualemissionsinformationanddidnotconsidertheir 2% . potentialtoemit.Wefollowedupwithseveraloftherespondentsinanattempttodetermineor &!0 confirmthemajorsourcestatusofthewoodbuildingproductssurfacecoatingoperations.We 'F#2 usedthebestinformationavailable(reported)tousandtriedtoverifyit.Wealsohadtoconsider X)$4 potentialtoemitforthosefacilitiesthatmadenoattempttoestimatepotentialemissionsdata. * &6 Webasedourlistofmajorsourcesontheseestimatesandthefacilityreportedstatus. ,l'8 Ї  XX  2.4.3WoodFurnitureComponentFacility eyi#XX xi#     Comment:CommenterIVD15statedthatFacility1inSegmentBoftheMACTfloor N summarymemo(Table1)shouldnotbeincludedinthewoodbuildingproductsMACTfloor  becauseallfinishedproductionissoldtothefurnitureindustry(therefore,thecoatingsusedat  b thefacilityarecoveredbythewoodfurnituremanufacturingNESHAP)andonlyanoHAP t  (100percentUV)topcoatisapplied.Nostainsorcolorsareusedatthefacility,andtheoptionto  &  colororstainwoodisessentialtothehardwoodplywoodindustry. 8     Response:Thereferencedfacility,ColumbiaForestProductsinChatham,Virginia,was   notusedtodeterminetheMACTfloor(s)inthewoodbuildingproducts(surfacecoating) L  NESHAP.Thefacilitywasalsonotconsideredtobeanaffectedsource.Moredetailsare ^  locatedinDocumentIIC52ofDocketA-97-52.     XX  2.5MACTLIMITS eyzn#XX [n#     XX  2.5.1AverageEqualsMedian eyo#XX n#  "r   Comment:CommentersIVD07andIVD10statedthattheselectionofsubcategories  shouldbebasedontheaverageemissionlimitationachievedbythebestperforming12percent "r ofexistingsources(orthebestperformingfiveexistingsourcesforcategoriesorsubcategories   withfewerthan30sources)forwhichtheyhaveinformation.TheEPAgoesontosaythatfor 6" twoofthefivesubcategories,theexistingsourceMACTfloorwasbasedonthetop12percentof H$ thefacilitiesbecausethesubcategorieswereprojectedtohavemorethan30sources.The & existingsourceMACTfloorfortheotherthreesubcategorieswasbasedonthetopfivefacilities  !\( becausethesubcategorieswereprojectedtohavefewerthan30sources.The averageemission n"* rateforeachsubcategorywasinterpretedasthe medianemissionrate.EPAgoesontosaythat # , themedianemissionratewasselectedratherthanthemeanormodebecauseitisassociatedwith 2% . anactualemissionratebeingachievedbyarealfacility.Thisexplanationorjustificationfor &!0 usingthemedianinsteadoftheaveragecannotbesupportedbytheinformationcollectedbyEPA 'F#2 intheindustrysurvey. X)$4   ThecommentersstatedthatEPAsuseofthemedianasameasureofcentraltendency * &6 arbitrarilylowerstheMACTfloor.TheEPAacknowledgesthatthecosteffectivenessestimates ,l'8 forsomeofthesubcategoriescoveredbytheproposedrulesuggestthatachievingtheMACT  floorwillbeexpensiveconsideringthevolumeoforganicHAPcontrolled.Becauseofthe b choiceofmedian,goingbeyondthefloorisnoteconomicallyjustified.Giventheeconomic t impactoftheproposedrule,commentersIV-D-07andIVD10recommendedthattheaverage & beusedparticularlyinanysubcategoryforwhichthemedianleadstoamorestringentstandard. 8    CommenterIVD15questionedEPAsinterpretationof averageemissionrateasthe     medianemissionrate.ThecommenterrequestedthatEPArevisetheMACTfloorcalculations  L  usingtheaverageemissionrateforeachsubcategory. ^    Response:InaFederalRegisternoticepublishedonJune6,1994(59FR29196),the   EPAannounceditsconclusionthatCongressintended average,asusedinSection112(d)(3),to "r  meanameasureofmean,median,mode,orsomeothermeasureofcentraltendency.TheEPA   concludedthatitretainssubstantialdiscretion,withinthestatutoryframework,tosetMACT 6 floorsatappropriatelevelsandthatitconstruestheword average(asusedinSection H 112(d)(3))toauthorizeEPAtouseanyreasonablemethod,inaparticularfactualcontext,of  determiningthecentraltendencyofadataset.Therefore,theuseofmedianisanacceptable  \ meansofsettingtheMACTfloor. n   XX  2.5.2IncorrectData!InteriorWallPanelingandTileboard ar}#XX |#  2"   Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthatoneofthedata  $ pointsusedtocalculatetheMACTfloorwasincorrect.Emissionsrelatedinformationforthe 2& GeorgiaPacificSavannahHardwoodPlywoodfacilityusedtodeterminetheMACTfloorforthe  (  InteriorWallPanelingandTileboardsubcategoryappeartobeinerror.GeorgiaPacific !F* reviewedtheinformationsubmittedtoEPAtodeterminetheMACTfloor,estimatedthatthe X#, calculatedpoundsofHAPspergallonofsolidsshouldbe0.79,not0.56.Thecommenter $ . submittedasamplecalculationoftherevisedemissionrate.Ifcorrect,itshouldcausean &l!0 adjustmentintheMACTfloorfrom1.53to3.2lbofHAPpergalofsolidsbasedontheaverage ~'"2 ofthebestperformingfiveexistingsources. (0$4   Response:WedonotagreewiththecommenterscalculationoftheaverageHAP B*%6 emissionratefromtheGeorgiaPacificSavannahHardwoodPlywoodfacility.Thecalculations +&8 wereceivedfromMr.PaulVasquezofGeorgiaPacificdonotmatchthedatathatwere -V(: submittedbythefacility.Specifically,ProductNumbers4(PN4)andPN6havesignificantly  higherHAPemissionsthanwerereportedbytheSavannahfacility.Becausethedatawas b receivedin1998andnocorrectionsweresubmitteduntiltherulewasproposed,weconsiderour t calculationscorrect. &   Althoughthereisadiscrepancybetweenthetwodatasets,theMACTfloordetermination 8  wouldnotchangeeveniftheemissionratefortheSavannahfacilityis0.79lbHAP/galsolids.    Themedianfacilityandthecorrespondingemissionratewouldnotchangeforthissubcategory.  L  &   XX  2.6TESTMETHODS arօ#XX #      XX  2.6.1Method25vs.Method25A ard#XX E#  ^    Comment:CommentersIV-D07andIVD10statedthattherearefewsampling L companiescapableofperformingEPAMethod25becausetheanalysisistimeconsumingand ^ costly.ManycreditabletestingfirmsareavailablethatcancosteffectivelyperformEPA  Method25AtestingforVOCs.' "r   CommentersIV-D07andIVD10statedthatEPAMethod25isadifficultprocedure,  anditsresultsshowahighdegreeofvariability.Thevariabilityinherentinthemethodrequires 6 thatatleastduplicatesamplesbetakenforeachsamplingruntovalidatethatresultsare H  consistentandeliminatestatisticaloutliers.Thehighdegreeofvariabilityinsamplingresults " makescompliancedeterminationuncertain.Conversely,EPAMethod25Adoesnotexhibit  \$ theseproblems. n&   Response:ThefinalruleallowstheuseofeitherMethod25orMethod25A.The  ( guidanceregardingtheuseofthesemethodsformeasuringVOCconcentrationwasreviewedin 2"* EmissionMeasurementCenterGuidelineDocumentGD033(EMCGD033).Thedocument #, states, TheEPAmandatestheuseofMethod25formeasuringgasstreamVOCconcentration $F . whendeterminingthedestructionefficiency(DE)ofafterburners.Italsoallowstheuseof X&!0 Method25A,inlieuofMethod25,underanyofthefollowingcircumstances:(1)whenthe ' #2 applicableregulationlimitstheexhaustVOCconcentrationtolessthan50ppm;(2)whenthe )l$4 VOCconcentrationattheinletofthecontrolsystemandtherequiredlevelofcontrolaresuchto ~*%6 resultinexhaustVOCconcentrationsof50ppmorless;or(3)if,becauseofthehighefficiency +0'8 ofthecontroldevice,theanticipatedVOCconcentrationatthecontrolsystemexhaustis50ppm B-(: orless,regardlessoftheinletconcentration.Thedocumentfurtherstates, ifasourceelectsto  useMethod25Aunderoption3,above,theexhaustconcentrationmustbe50ppmorlessandthe b requiredDEmustbemetforthesourcetohavedemonstratedcompliance.IftheMethod25A t testresultsshowthattherequiredDEapparentlyhasbeenmet,buttheexhaustconcentrationis & above50ppm,thisisanindicatorthatMethod25Aisnottheappropriatetestmethodandthat 8  Method25shouldbeused.    & &  XX  2.6.2Method25A!LowConcentrations r#XX ̑#  ^    Comment:CommentersIVD05,IV-D07,andIVD10statedthatEPAMethod25Ais L  asuitablemethodfordeterminingthedestructionandremovalefficiency(DRE)atallHAP ^  concentrations.ItworksequallywellatbothhighandlowVOCconcentrations.Thereisno  '&^reasontospecifyitsuseatlowconcentrationsonly.Thecommentersstatedthatfacilitiesneedto "r performpreliminarystackteststodeterminewhethertheemissionconcentrationsareaboveor  below50partspermillion(ppm)toselectwhichtestmethodtouseforcompliancetesting.If 6 thecontroldeviceoutletconcentrationiscloseto50ppm,thefacilitywillneedtotestwithboth H methodsandusetheonethatmeetstherequirementsoftheregulationorriskrepeated  compliancetestsuntiltherighttestmethodisused.Thisdifficultycouldbeeliminatedby  \  allowing,butnotrequiring,theuseofEPAMethod25atconcentrationsabove50ppmand n" allowingtheuseofEPAMethod25Aatallconcentrations.  $   Response:GuidelineshavebeenestablishedinEmissionMeasurementCenterGuideline 2& DocumentGD033(EMCGD033)foruseofMethod25A.Thelanguageinthewoodbuilding  ( products(surfacecoating)MACTruleisconsistentwithotherMACTrulesconcerningthe !F* requireduseofMethod25andMethod25A.Thewoodbuildingproducts(surfacecoating) X#, MACTruleisalsoconsistentwithotherrulesconcerningflexibilityaroundthe50ppmcutoffby $ . usingthelanguage expectthetotalgaseousorganicconcentrationascarbontobe50ppmor &l!0 less. ~'"2   XX  2.6.3SupplierInformationvs.Method311andMethod24 r0#XX #  B*%6   Comment:Severalcommenters(IVD05,IVD06,IV-D07,IVD10,andIVD15) +0'8 statedthattheMACTfloorforthisrulewassetonthebasisoffinishingsupplierinformation B-(: providedina114surveyofwoodproductfacilities.Thesupplierinformationwasbasedon  finishformulations,notMethods311and24tests.However,theproposedrulesetsthetest b methodsastheultimatemeasureofcompliantcoatings.Thischangeisnotsupportedbyany t information/datacontainedinthedocket.IfsuppliertestsindicatedifferentHAPlevelsthando & theformulabasedlevelsusedinthesurveysthatcreatedtheMACTfloor,theMACTfloorwill 8  needtoberecalculated.      EPAhasindicatedincommunicationssincetheproposalthattestflexibilitywithin  L  Method311canaddresstheseindustryconcerns.However,withouttestdataforverification,too ^  muchuncertaintyremains.IfadjustmentstotheMethod311protocolprovetobesufficientto   resolvethisissue,EPAwillstillneedtoworkwithindustrytodeveloptheappropriateguidance "r  forpermittingauthoritiesregardingthistest.     Followingthepublicationoftherule,commentersIV-D07andIVD10requestedan 6 extensionofthecommentperiodfortheexplicitpurposeofdevelopingdatatoaddressour H concerns.Inthedenialofthecommentersrequest,EPAstatedthat testingsomeofthecoatings  thatwereincludedinthefloorfacilitiesisunlikelytoaffecttheMACTfloordeterminationsfor  \ primarilytworeasons.Datawerecollectedin1998andrepresentthebaseyear1997,soitwould n bedifficulttoextrapolateanytestresultsconductedoncoatingsinuseatthepresenttime.Also,    testingaportionofthecoatingsrepresentedinthefloordatabasewouldnotallowfor 2" comparisonsbetweenthetestdataandalltheremainingcoatingsinthefloordata. $   Manyofthecoatingsthatestablishedthefloorarestillinuse,thusthecommentersdid F& notagreewiththisanalysis.Thecommentersplannedtopursuecomparisondatacollection.If X ( thosedataindicatediscrepanciesthataffecttheMACTfloorcalculations,thecommenters ! * recommendedthatEPAconsideranysuchinformationbeforetheproposedruleisfinalized. #l,   Response:Forthetypesofcoatingsdescribedbythecommenters,youmayuseMethod ~$. 24todeterminethemassfractionofnonaqueousvolatilematter,whichyoucanthenuseasa %0!0 substituteformassfractionoforganicHAP.YoumayuseMethod311fordeterminingthemass B'"2 fractionoforganicHAP,alongwithothermethodsdescribedin63.4741(a)(1)through(a)(5). (#4 Thefinalrulehasbeenchangedtoclarifythatdiscrepanciesbetweenthemethodsfor *V%6 determiningthemassfractionoforganicHAPmustberesolvedthroughconsultationwiththe h+&8 regulatorycomplianceauthority. ,(: Ї  XX  2.6.4CureVolatiles dd#XX #     Comment:CommentersIVD05,IV-D07,andIVD10statedsomeofthecoatings N usedinthewoodbuildingproducts(surfacecoating)MACTproducecurevolatileswhen  analyzedbyMethod311.Ifthecurevolatileisnotanintentionallyaddedingredientsubjectto  b OccupationalandSafetyHealthAdministration(OSHA)quantityreportingrequirements, t  Method311isnotaproblem.Inothercases,methanolandfreeformaldehydemaybeintentional  &  ingredients,butMethod311willproduceamountslargerthantheformulationamount. 8     Perthecommenters,theEPAstewardforthewoodfurnituremanufacturingMACThas   allowedindustrytostatethatthereportableVHAPcontentcomesfromformulationdatabecause L  noapprovedMethod311testconditionforVHAPcontentofthewetcoatingexistswherecure ^  volatilesarepossible.CommentersIV-D07andIVD10recommendedthatthislanguage  contentbeincorporatedintothisrulewherepossibleMethod311exceedancescomefromcure "r volatiles.    Response:CurevolatilesaretheHAPsthatareformedandemittedbychemicalreaction 6 whencertainwaterborneorpowdercoatingsarecuredordriedatelevatedtemperatures.These H HAPsarecontrastedwiththevolatileHAPsthatareaddedtoaliquidcoatingwhenitis  manufactured(andarelistedintheformulationdata).Thesubjectofcurevolatilesiscomplex,  \  anddataarelimitedandsometimesconflicting. n"   Atthetimethatwerequesteddataoncoatingsfromindustry,therewasnoconsensus  $ methodforquantifyingemissionsofcurevolatiles.TheEPAsMethod311,forexample, 2& specificallyexcludestheseemissionsandnotesthata separateormodifiedtestproceduremust  ( beusedtomeasurecurevolatiles.Becausecoatingspecificdatawereunavailable,wedidnot !F* considercurevolatilesasemissionscontributorsforthepurposeofdevelopingtheproposed X#, emissionlimits.Asaresult,curevolatilesneednotbemeasuredorreportedinafacilitys $ . compliancecalculations. &l!0   YoumayuseMethod311fordeterminingthemassfractionoforganicHAP,alongwith ~'"2 othermethodsdescribedin63.4741(a)(1)through(a)(5).Ifyouchoosetouseformulationdata, (0$4 notethatthefinalrulestatesthatdiscrepanciesbetweenthemethodsmustberesolvedthrough B*%6 consultationwiththeregulatorycomplianceauthority. +&8  -V(:   XX  2.6.5UVCoatings ddߴ#XX #     Comment:CommentersIVD05,IV-D07,andIVD10statedthatstyrenemonomer N canbeasignificantcomponentofradiationcuredcoatingsforsomewoodbuildingproducts  sources.Method311specificallystatesthatASTM482793orASTMD474787canbeused  b forstyrenedetermination.Thesemethodsaredesignedtodeterminesmallquantitiesofresidual t  styreneinlatexcoatings.Theinterlabprecisionis71percentand59percent,respectively.  &    Obviously,theprecisionvaluesmakethesetestmethodsunsuitableforsourcecategories 8   withextremelylowcompliancevalues,suchasthesubcategoriesintheproposedrule.     ThecommentersrecommendedthatEPAcontinuetobeactiveinthedevelopmentofthe L  ASTMtestmethodandreferenceitinthisstandardinthefuture. ^    Response:BothASTMD482793( StandardTestMethodforDeterminingthe  UnreactedMonomerContentofLatexesUsingCapillaryColumnGasChromatography)and "r ASTMD474702( StandardTestMethodforDeterminingUnreactedMonomerContentof  LatexesUsingGasLiquidChromatography)aretherecommendedtestmethodsforstyrene 6 monomercontentdetermination,incorporatedbyreferencefromMethod311.Ifthesevalues H cannotbedeterminedusingthesetestmethods,theowneroroperatormaysubmitanalternative  techniquefordeterminingtheirvaluesforapprovalbytheadministrator.  \    XX  2.6.6HeliumGasPycnometer ddL#XX -#   $   Comment:CommentersIV-D07andIVD10statedthatASTMD6093requirestheuse n& ofaheliumgaspycnometer.Thisinstrument,whichcomesfromasinglesource,ispricedat  ( approximately$5,000.Notasingleinstrumentisavailableatthecoatingmanufacturerswho 2"* supplythewoodbuildingproductsindustry.Thetesthasnotbeenevaluatedforthewood #, buildingproductsindustry.ThisisnotsurprisingbecausebothASTMD2697andD6093do $F . notapproachthenumbersinthetestmethodsprecisionandbiasstatementsforcoatings X&!0 formulatedabovethecriticalpigmentvolumeconcentration(CPVC).Thevolumeofcoatings ' #2 usedinthewoodbuildingproductsindustryisheavilyweightedtowardscoatingsabovethe )l$4 CPVC.AnalyticalchemistsfromASTMhaveshownthatforhighCPVCcoatings,thevolume ~*%6 measuredcanbeeasily10percentgreaterthanthetheoreticalvolume.Becausethemeasured +0'8 volumegoesinthedenominatoroftheequation,thishighervaluecalculatestoalower B-(: complianceresult.Althoughthisdiscrepancyworksinfavorofthesource,itisnotinthebest  interestofrulemakingtopromulgatefaultyregulationthatignorestechnicaldifficulties. b   Response:Heliumgaspycnometersarecommerciallyavailablefromseveralvendors. t Wewereabletolocatethreevendorsthatofferedeightdifferentpycnometermodelsthrough & Internetsearches.Thepricerangeforpycnometersandheliumgaspycnometers,asidentifiedin 8  oursearch,variedfrommanufacturertomanufacturerandrangedfrom$4,280to$18,000.The    costoftheinstrumentrelatestothatofsimilaranalyticalinstrumentsrequiredintheconductof  L  normalbusinesspractices. ^    Thetestmethodsdomeasurecoveragesofcoatingsinbothlowandhighpigmented   volumecoatings.Thedifferencebetweenthetestmethodsistheirabilitytomeasurenonvolatile "r  matterinthenormalpigmentvolumeconcentrationrange(MethodD2697)andatthehigh   pigmentvolumeconcentrationrange(MethodD6093).Therefore,ananalystcandetermine 6 whichtestmethodissuitableforthecoatinginquestion. H   Athirdoptionhasbeenaddedtothefinalrulethatallowstheamountofcoatingsolidsto  becalculatedusingthetotalvolatilemattercontentofthecoatingandtheaveragedensityofthe  \ volatilematterinthecoating.Ifthesevaluescannotbedeterminedusingoneofthespecified n methods,theowneroroperatormaysubmitanalternativetechniquefordeterminingtheirvalues    forapprovalbytheAdministrator. 2"   XX  2.6.7ASTMD2697andD6093 po0#XX #  F&   Comment:CommentersIV-D07andIVD10statedthatthepreparationofthesolid  ( coatingfilmforactualmeasurementbyeitherASTMD2697orD6093presentssignificant !F* difficultiesforcoatingtypesusedinthewoodbuildingproductsindustry.Also,ASTMD2697 X#, andD6093arenotapplicableascurrentlywrittenforthevolumeofsolidsmeasurementof $ . radiationcuredcoatings. &l!0   ThecommentersstatedthatfilmpreparationinASTMD6093requiresabakeof110$C ~'"2 for1hour.Thecurewouldbeinadequateformanybuildingproductscoatings,andthefilm (0$4 wouldnot shrinktoasizerepresentedbythesourcescureparameters.Thiswouldleadto B*%6  highervolumesolidsmeasurements. +&8   ThecommentersstatedthatASTMD2697requirestheuseofmercuryinsomecases.   Mercuryisamaterialthat,forhealthreasons,isnotallowedtobeusedinmostindustriallabs b andpresentsasignificantdisposalproblem.Inplaceofmercury,ASTMD2697suggeststheuse t ofwater.Manyofthecoatingsusedbythewoodbuildingproductsindustrycontaintechnology & thatdoesnotallowthecoatingsurfacetobeuniformlywetbywater(thewaterformsbeads). 8  TheASTMD2697alsosuggeststhatalittlesurfactantinthewaterprovidesuniformwettingof    thesetypesofsurfaces.Thisistrue,butoneofthemostimportanttestsforaccelerated  L  performanceofacoatingonawoodbuildingproductssubstrateisASTMD5795, ^   DeterminationofLiquidPermeabilityofAppliedCoatingsonHardboardandOtherComposite   WoodProductsviaCobbRingApparatus,whichusessurfactantwaterplacedonacoated "r  surfaceandcalculatestheweightgainperstandardarea.Itappearsasuitableliquidmediumis   notavailableforusingASTMD2697withwoodbuildingproductscoatings.TheASTMD 6 2697alsohasinadequatecureconditionsformanybuildingproductscoatings,whichwillgreatly H affecttheweightpickup.    Thecommentersbelievedthatforsafetyconcerns,testinaccuraciesonmanycoatings,  \ andgenerallackofprovenknowledgeaboutthetestmethods,allmethodsshouldbeallowedin n determiningthevolumefractionofcoatingsolids,butthatnoneoftheseoptionsshouldtake    precedenceovertheothers. 2"   Response:BothASTMD2697andASTMD6093havebeenusedinthreepreviousfinal $ rules:boatmanufacturing,largeappliancecoating,andmetalcoilcoating.Theprovisionthat F& facilitiesmayrelyuponeithertheASTMmethodsorformulationdatawithoutoneprevailing X ( overtheotherwasmadeinthemetalcoilcoatingNESHAP.Thelargeappliancecoating ! * NESHAPalsodoesnotspecifythatASTMmethodswillgovernoverformulationdatafor #l, volumesolids.Therefore,wehaverevisedthefinalruletoindicatethatneitheroftheseoptions ~$. takesprecedenceovertheother. %0!0   Ifthesevaluescannotbedeterminedusingthespecifiedmethods,theowneroroperator B'"2 maysubmitanalternativetechniquefordeterminingtheirvaluesforapprovalbythe (#4 administrator. *V%6  ,(:   XX  2.6.8VOCs(Method24)vs.HAPs(Method311) st#XX #     Comment:CommentersIV-D07andIVD10statedthatSection63.4741allowsan N optionofusingEPAMethod24asanalternativetoMethod311.Thismethodprovidesalower  costmethodtodemonstratethatHAPsmeettherequiredlimitbyshowingthatthetotalVOC  b contentofacoatingislessthantheproposedlimitforHAPcontentinthecoating.Inthis t  demonstration,allVOCsareassumedtobeHAPs,andiftheVOCcontentofthecoatingmeets  &  thelimits,thentheHAPcontentmeetsthelimit.Thecommentersappreciatedhavingan 8   alternativemethodavailable.     However,Method24requiresthatthewatercontentofthecoatingbedeterminedand L  subtractedfromthetotalvolatilecontent.Thevariabilityofthisdeterminationisgreaterthanthe ^  limitproposedbythisrule.Therefore,themethodisofnopracticaluse.Forexample,the  betweenlaboratoryvariabilityofdeterminingthewatercontentofacoatingis7.5percent,and "r thevariabilityindeterminingthetotalvolatilecontentis4.7percent.Acoatingmaybe  50percentwaterbyweightandhaveadensityof9lb/gal.Thevariabilityinmeasuringthewater 6 contentofthecoatingwouldbe9lb/galx0.5lbwater/lbcoatingx0.075=0.34lb/gal.This H variabilityistheeffectivedetectionlimitofthemethod.IftheHAPcontentofthecoatingisless  thanthatofthedetectionlevel,themethodisincapableofdistinguishingacoatingthatmeetsthe  \  proposedHAPcontentlimitfromonethatdoesnot. n"   Method24canbeusedonlytoassesscompliancewiththelimitfor Doorsand  $ Windows, Flooringfornewandexistingfacilities,and InteriorWallPanelingand 2& Tileboardforexistingfacilities.  (   AnalternativemethodtoMethod24wouldbeuseful.TheEPAMethod25Dcanalso !F* determinethevolatilecontentofamaterial.Theresultsarereportedascarbonbutcouldbe X#, adjustedtoreflectothermolecularweights.CommentersIV-D07andIVD10suggestedthat $ . EPAalsoallowuseofMethod25Dmeasurementsofvolatilecontentofacoatingtodemonstrate &l!0 thatcoatingslackofvolatilecontent. ~'"2   Response:WeagreewiththecommentersconcerningtheuseofMethod24.Therefore, (0$4 thefinalruleincludestheprovisionthatMethod24beusedonlyforthefollowingsubcategories: B*%6  (y8' XX'" "     d23  0    Doors,Windows,andMiscellaneous; d݌+&8(#(# Ќ  " "     H23  0    Flooring;and H݌-V(:(#(# Ќ  " "     23  0    InteriorWallPanelingandTileboard(existingsourcesonly). P݌(#(# Ќ  + X X=+  GuidelineshavebeenestablishedinEmissionMeasurementCenterGuidelineDocument b GD033(EMCGD033)foruseofMethod25AinlieuofMethod25;thereappearstobeno t similarguidelineforusingMethod25DinlieuofMethod24.WhileMethod24hasbeenusedin & several(nine)previousfinalMACTstandardsforavarietyofsourcecategories,including 8  printingandpublishingindustry,largeappliancecoating,metalcoilcoating,shipbuildingand    shiprepair,andwoodfurnituremanufacturingoperations,Method25Disnotappropriateforthe  L  categoriesforwhichMethod24doesnotworkwell.However,affectedsourceshavetheoption ^  ofsubmittingalternativetestmethodsunderSection63.7(f)oftheGeneralProvisions.     XX  2.6.9TestMethodDataTruncationProcedure st#XX #      Comment:CommentersIVD05,IV-D07,andIVD10statedthatsomelimitsinthe "r proposedruleareexpressedas0.00kg/L(0.00lb/gal).ThecommentersstatedthatEPAshould  expresstheintendedflooremissionlimittotwosignificantdigits(nottotwodecimalplaces)at 6 thevaluejustifiedbythedatabase. H   Thecommenterscitedthecompliancetestmethoddatatruncationprocedurespecifiedin  Method311.Accordingtotheprocedure,thezerolimitsareeffectively0.00099lb/tonor  \  0.00099kg/L,whicharenotconsistentwitheachother,asper significantdigits.These n" emissionlimitsareclearlybelowthedetectionlevelsofthecompliancedemonstrationmethods  $ andarelikelybelowthefloorbecausethedatausedtosetthefloorwerehandleddifferently.If 2& the zeroistobeinterpretedasmeaningabsolutelynoHAPs"notevenonemolecule"inthe  ( coating,thentheyareimpossibletocomplywithandarewellbeyondthefloor. !F*   ThecommentersalsonotedtheuseofbothmetricandEnglishunitsexpressedwithtwo X#, digitsafterthedecimalpoint.Forsomeofthecategories,thereisonlyonesignificantdigitinthe $ . limitwhichcouldbeconfusingbecauseasourcemaydemonstratecompliancewithonesetof &l!0 unitsbutnotwiththeothersetofunits.Themetricequivalentsshouldlistanadditional ~'"2 significantdigitbecausetheproposedrulehasthemathematicaleffectofroundingdownthe (0$4 Englishunits,whichwerethebasisfortheMACTfloorcalculation. B*%6   Thecommentersconcludedthattheruleshouldclearlyspecifywhethercompliance +&8 demonstrationcalculationsaretoberoundedortruncatedtothenumberofdecimalplaces -V(: specifiedintheemissionlimit.Thecommentersrecommendedthatresultsbetruncatedtothree  digitsafterthedecimal. b   Response:TheprovisioninMethod311totruncatevaluestothreedecimalplaceswas t notfound.Therearespecificationsthatcarriergaspuritybe99.995percentorhigherandthat & coatingsampleweightsaretobedeterminedwithabalancecapableofweighingto0.1mg 8  (0.0001g).Thisvalueisusedincalculations(correctedweightofreferencematerialequalsthe    weightofthereferencematerialmultipliedbythepurity);however,thisdoesnotmandatethat  L  theanalystshouldtruncatecalculationsofmaterialweightstothreedecimalplaces. ^    Theemissionlimit(metric)unitshavebeenchangedfromkgHAP/litersofsolidstog   HAP/litersofsolids.Also,languagehasbeenaddedtothepreambletospecifythatcompliance "r  isdemonstratedbyroundingtherolling12monthHAPemissionrate.Affectedsourcescan   complywitheithertheEnglishunits(lbsHAP/galsolids)orthemetricunits(gHAP/litersof 6 solids). H   XX  2.6.10MetricVersusEnglishUnits st#XX #   \   Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10citedthedifficultyofusing  metricunitsforcompliance.Twodifficultiesarisewiththisrequirement.Americansingeneral  \  donotunderstandmetricmeasurementseventhoughconversiontablesarereadilyavailable. n" Secondly,paintcalculationsanddataterminologyarelaboriousforexperiencedcoatingchemists  $ usingEnglishunitsandsometimesdifficulttounderstandeventhoughthesecalculationsarenow 2& donebycomputer.ThecommentersspecificallyciteddensitiesandtheamountofHAPastwo  ( ofthemostdifficultconversions. !F*   Finally,thecommenterscitedthedeterminationoftotalvolumeofcoatingsolids.No X#, sourceinthisMACTcategorytrackssolidcoatingvolume,onlythewetgallons.Unless $ . alternativesarecreated,thecommentersbelievedthatthelargestreportingdiscrepanciesinthe &l!0 industrywilloccurinthiscalculation. ~'"2   IndustryrequeststhatcalculatingandreportingbedoneinEnglishunitsforall (0$4 complianceoptionsinordertoimprovetheoverallunderstandingoftheruleandtheaccuracyof B*%6  allcompliancereports. +&8   Response:ItisaFederalgovernmentpolicy(theMetricConversionActof1975as   amendedbytheOmnibusTradeandCompetitivenessActof1988)tousemetricratherthan b Englishunitsinregulations.Whilemetricunitsareincluded,complianceisnotrequiredtobe t demonstratedusingmetricunitsbecausetheMACTfloordeterminationwasconductedusing & Englishunits.Affectedsourcesmaydemonstratecomplianceusingeitheroftheemissionlimit 8  units.      XX  2.6.11SolventBlendTechnicalData ra#XX #  ^    Comment:CommenterIVD11claimedthat63.4741(a)(5)statesthatwhentestdata L  andmanufacturersdataforsolventblendsarenotavailable,youmayusethedefaultvaluesfor ^  themassfractionoforganicHAPinthesesolventblendslistedinTable5or6ofthissubpart.  However,commenterIVD11knewofnoreasonwhymanufacturersdatashouldbe "r unavailable.Thisallowancemakesittooeasyforafacilitytonotevenlookformanufacturers  data. 6   Response:Whendevelopingthestandards,wefoundthatmanysolventsuppliersonly H providearangeofcontentsincertainproductssuchassolventblendsduetovariabilityofraw  materials(e.g.,petroleum)andprocesssteps.Thissolventblendprovisionisincludedinother  \  promulgatedMACTrules(e.g.,thelargeappliancecoatingMACTandtheboatmanufacturing n" MACT)andhasalsobeenincludedinseveralotherproposedMACTrulesincluding  $ miscellaneousmetalpartscoatingNESHAPandmetalfurniturecoatingNESHAP.Solvent 2& blenddatashouldonlybeusedwhennootherinformationisavailable.Whiletheuseofthe  ( tablesisallowed,stateshavethediscretiontobemorestringentandmayrequiresourcesto !F* locatemanufacturersdataforsolventblends. X#,    XX  2.6.12UpdatedASTMStandards ra #XX n #  &l!0   Comment:CommenterIVD01informedusthatseveraloftheASTMstandards ' #2 referencedintheproposedrulehavebeenupdated:D147590isnowD147598,D236995is )l$4 nowD236901,D379291isnowD379299,D401796aisnowD401702,D445785isnow ~*%6 D445702;D1979-91isnowD197997,D474787isnowD474702,andPS994hasbeen +0'8 withdrawnwithoutreplacement. B-(:   Response:TheEPAthanksthecommenterforthisinformation.Thecommenteroffered  ASTMstandardsthathavebeenupdatedbyASTMsincebeinglistedintheproposal.Section b 12(d)oftheNationalTransferTechnologyTransferandAdvancementAct(NTTAA)of1995 t (PublicLawNo.104113;15U.S.C.272note)directstheEPAtousevoluntaryconsensus & standardsintheirregulatoryandprocurementactivitiesunlessdoingsowouldbeinconsistent 8  withapplicablelaworotherwiseimpractical.Voluntaryconsensusstandardsaretechnical    standardsdevelopedoradoptedbyoneormorevoluntaryconsensusbodies.TheEPAconducts  L  searchestoidentifystandardscompatiblewithEPAMethods,inthiscaseEPAMethods24and ^  311.     TheASTMStandardD315400isnotanacceptablealternativeinlieuofEPAsstandard "r  referencemethod.WeremovedreferencetoPS994andreplaceditwithASTMD591096.     TheASTMD147590,ASTMD236995,ASTMD379291,ASTMD445785 6 (Reapproved91),andASTMD197991areincorporatedbyreferenceintoEPAMethod24. H ASTMD197991,ASTMD343289,ASTMD474787,ASTMD482793,andASTMPS994  areincorporatedbyreferenceinEPAMethod311.Thesestandardsarealreadyacceptable  \ proceduresthatwereactuallyincorporatedbyreferenceinMethod24astheywereestablishedat n thetimeofEPAreview.      Therefore,forthosestandardsalreadyincorporatedintoEPAMethods24and311,the 2" standardscannotbechangedtoreflectthedatesspecifiedbythecommenter.TheEPAcannot $ citethenewdatesoftheupdatedstandardsbecauseithasnotbeenabletodetermineifthese F& updatedversionsaretechnicallythesameasthepreviouslyincorporatedversions.Iftheupdated X ( versionsofthesemethodsweretechnicallydifferentfromthepreviouslyincorporatedversions, ! * theirusemightchangetheapplicationsoftheMethods.Thismightinturnaffectthestringency #l, oftheemissionlimitsthatuseMethods24and311todeterminecompliance. ~$.   XX  2.7COSTANDECONOMICASSUMPTIONSANDIMPACTS a#XX #  B'"2   XX  2.7.1CompliantCoatingsCosts a#XX f#  (0$4   Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthattherearemany ~*%6 complianceactivitiesthatarepartoftitleVthatoverlapandareduplicatedintheproposedrule +0'8 fortheindustry.Ifallofthe205affectedmajorsourcesidentifiedchoosesolventsubstitution B-(: and/orchangetononHAPcompliantcoatings,theestimatedcostimpactmaybe$2to$5  (conversiontononHAPcoatingsorwaterbasedcoatings)pergal. b   Inmostcases,thelargerpercentageofmajorsourcesthatsurfacecoattheirproductsusea t greaterquantityofcoatingsonanannualbasisandthereforewouldincurahighermaterialcost. & Astheindustryconsolidates,thiswouldsupportmorecoatingbeingusedatlocationsthathave 8  acquiredvolumeattheexpenseofthosesourcesthathaveexitedtheindustry.      Response:Thecostestimateswerebasedoninformationfromeachindividualfacilityin  L  theprojectdatabaseincludingthetotalamountofannualcoatingusage,thepresenceofaddon ^  controlequipment,andtheoverallsizeofthefacility/corporation.Thisanalysisiscontainedin   theBackgroundInformationforProposedStandards,datedMay2001(Document "r  EPA-453/R-00003)andcontainsmoredetails,includingthespecificassumptionsthatwere   made. 6   Compliancecostshavebeenupdatedslightlyforthepromulgationversionofthe H regulation.However,thecostassumptionsusedinDocumentEPA453/R00003were  maintained,withchangesmadetothenumberofaffectedsourcesandtheemissionlimits  \ applicabletothe OtherInteriorPanelssubcategoryandthe Doors,Windows,and n Miscellaneoussubcategory.Asaresult,theoverallindustrycostshavechangedto$22.5    million.Overall,webelievethatthecoststochangetolowornoHAPcoatingsshouldbeclose 2" toourestimates. $   Accordingtotheeconomicanalysis,thisruleisnotexpectedtohaveasignificantimpact F& ontheindustrysofew,ifany,sourcesareexpectedtocloseasaresult. X (   XX  2.7.2TitleVCosts a #XX  #  #l,   Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10claimedthatifasourcealready $ . incursfeesforemissionsfromtitleVortheirannualemissionrate(e.g.,forVOC),HAP &l!0 emissionwouldalreadybeapartoftheannualfee,andthereforethesourcesshouldnotincur ~'"2 duplicationfees.IftheEPAenforcesafeesolelyforHAPemissions,itshouldallowplantsto (0$4 separateHAPfromVOCandnotpayanadditionalfeebecauseVOCfeesalreadyincludeHAP. B*%6   Recordkeepingforlaborhourstocollect,assemble,andreportonusagedataisapartof +&8 existingcomplianceactivities,butadditionaltimeandresourceallocationwillberequiredto -V(: complywithMACTrecordkeepingandreporting.Initially,thisaddedcostwillbefrontloaded  asrecordkeepingandreportingproceduresaredeveloped. b   TheEPAcanreduceandconsolidatecostsbydirectingtheStatestoderiveasmuchofthe t MACTperformance,monitoring,datacollection,recordkeeping,andreportingaspossiblefrom & existingtitleVrequirements. 8    Response:ThecostanalysisincludedonlycostsincurredthroughMACTrecordkeeping    andreporting.Ifexistingcomplianceactivitiesincludesomeoftheseoverlappingrequirements,  L  thesecostswillnotbeduplicated.Therefore,theactualfacilitycostscouldbelowerthanthe ^  calculatedcostanalysisundercertaincircumstances.     XX  2.7.3MonitoringCosts aK(#XX ,(#      Comment:CommentersIVD07andIVD10statedthatmonitoringcoststoconfirm "r ongoingperformanceofcontroldeviceswillundoubtedlyincreaseoperatingcostsbecause  systemupgradesmaybenecessaryforsomesourcestoattaindatatosupportcontinuous 6 compliancewiththeMACTcriteria. H   Response:AllestimatedcostsarebasedonEPAsCostManualandprovideanestimate  oftheaveragecosts;therefore,somecomponentsmaybehigherinrealitythanintheestimate.  \  Othercomponents,however,maybelowerthanestimated,suchasperformancetests,whichthe n" commentersstatedwereconductedaspartoftitleVpermitrequirements.Overall,webelieve  $ theactualmonitoringcoststotheindustryshouldbeclosetotheseestimates. 2&   XX  2.7.4EconomicImpacts a,#XX ,#  !F*   Comment:CommentersIVD07andIVD10feltthestatementmaderegarding #, economicimpactsassumesmarginallossforsmallandlargesourcesintermsofthe $F . representativemedianprofitmargin.Thisassumptionmayholdtrueinsomecategories,but X&!0 companiesoperatingalreadyonlowmarginscenariosshouldnotbeforcedintoalesser ' #2 profitableposition,whichwillhappenbecausethisisanonvalueaddingstandard.Withoutsome )l$4 degreeofreliefassistanceintermsoffeerestructuringoremissionreductioncredits,industry ~*%6  consolidationwilllikelyoccur. +0'8   Response:Thereductioninprofitmarginprovidedinthepreambleisaresultofapplying   aneconomicmodelanduseseconomicandfinancialdatathatreflecttheaffectedindustriesand b theirmarkets.Theapplicationofthismodelisnotpredicatedonanyassumptionsotherthan t thosefoundinstandardeconomictheory.Also,thiseconomicmodelpresumestheproducers & receivethefullimpactoftheregulationandhavenoabilitytopassthroughanycoststo 8  consumers.Inthatsense,theestimatedeconomicimpactsarelikelytooverstatetheactual    economicimpactsassociatedwiththeproposedrule.Itshouldbenotedthatthereductionin  L  profitmarginisonly0.1percent,henceitislikelythateventhosefirmsexperiencingagreater ^  reductioninmarginshouldnotexperiencealargefallinprofits.Italsoshouldbenotedthatthis   MACTstandardisproposedattheleaststringentlevelofcontrolandburdenallowedbytheAct. "r  Mostregulationssuchasthisonearelikelytobe,butnotalways, nonvalueaddinginthesense   thatpollutioncontrolactivitiesmaynotleadtoincreasesinprofits.Finally,giventhelowlevel 6 ofimpactestimatedforthisproposal,thelikelihoodofadditionalindustryconsolidationspurred H bythisruleseemsminimal.    XX  2.7.5CaptureandAddOnControlEquipmentCosts aJ6#XX +6#  n   Comment:CommenterIVD04statedthatEPAscostestimateforthe captureandadd  \  oncontrol(captureandcontrol)technologyoptionappear,evenwithlimitedinformation,tobe n" inaccurate.TheEPAestimatedthatthecurrentlyavailableemissionscaptureandcontrol  $ technologieswouldreduceHAPemissionsbyapproximately5,300tonseachyear.TheEPA 2& alsoestimatesthat205facilitieswouldbeaffectedbytheproposedrule.Onaverage,thiswould  ( resultinalmost26tonsperyearperfacilityinemissionreductionsfromutilizingthemore !F* aggressivecaptureandcontroloptionidentifiedandconsideredintheproposedrule,or X#, alternatively,theaverageamountofHAPperfacilitythatwouldcontinuetobeemittedunderthe $ . proposedNESHAP.Coincidentally,25tonsisalsothethresholdthatdeterminesamajorsource &l!0 undertheNESHAP/MACTrequirementsoftheAct.TheEPAestimatesthecostofthecapture ~'"2 andaddoncontroloptionat$25,300pereachtonofHAPreduced.Althoughthisestimate (0$4 seemshigh,itisstillwithintheupperrangeofcosteffectivenessthatregulatorsconsiderfor B*%6 reducingVOCemissionsthatcontributetotroposphericozoneformation.Combiningthis +&8 estimatewithEPAscostestimateof$25,300pertonofHAPreducedviathecaptureandcontrol -V(: optionwouldyieldacostofapproximately$650,000per26toncontrolledfacilityincurredeach  year.Theseestimatesarewellbeyondanynormalortypicalcostofcombinedcaptureand b controlsystems.GiventhatEPAhasrejectedtheoptionofrequiring addoncontrolssolelyon t thebasisofcost,theInstituteofCleanAirCompanies(ICAC)invitesEPAtocontactittobetter & characterizethetruecostofcaptureandcontrolofHAPemissionsfromthisindustry. 8    Response:Thecostestimateincludesmorethantheregenerativethermaloxidizer    (RTO).Theestimateincludesequipmentpurchase,foundation,installation,labor,engineering,  L  construction,andoperation,accordingtotheEPAcostmanual.Italsoincludesacostfor ^  permanenttotalenclosures(PTEs),whicharebuiltaroundanemissionsourcetoensure   100percentcaptureoforganicHAPemissions.Inaddition,recordkeepingandreportingcosts, "r  computerequipmentpurchasecosts,andperformancetestingcostsareincluded.Equipment   costs(forPTEsandcomputerequipment)wereannualizedovera5yearperiodwithanannual 6 interestrateof7percent. H   Therearemanyfacilitiesthatwillnotbeabletocomplywiththeemissionlimitsthrough  theuseofaddoncontroldevices.Onlyacontroldeviceoperatingatextremelyhighefficiencies  \ canmeetanylowemissionlimit.Therefore,itisincorrecttoaveragetheamountofHAP n reductionoverallsubcategories.Dependingonthesubcategory,costeffectivenesswas    estimatedtobeaslowas$1,900pertonofHAP( InteriorWallPanelingandTileboard 2" subcategory)andashighas$29,300pertonofHAPremoved( ExteriorSidingandPrimed $ Doorskins).ThisisduetotheMACTemissionlimitsandsomesubcategorieshavinglessHAP F& availableforremoval. X (   XX  2.7.6HealthandEnvironmentalRisk edF#XX E#  #l,   Comment:CommenterIVD04statedthatthehealthandenvironmentalimpactsand $ . riskstoHAPemissionsfromthewoodbuildingproductsindustryhasbeenwelldocumentedby &l!0 EPA,particularlywithinthecontextoftheNESHAP/MACTprogramrequirements.Thetypical ~'"2 emissionsofHAPfromthewoodbuildingproductssourcecategoryincludeorganicHAPsuchas (0$4 xylenes,toluene,ethylbenzene,ethyleneglycolbutylether(EGBE),glycolethers,methylethyl B*%6 ketone(MEK),methylisobutylketone(MIBK),methanol,styrene,andformaldehyde,aswellas +&8 inorganicHAP,includingchromium,manganese,andantimonycompounds.Inadditiontodirect -V(: healthimpactsfromexposuretoHAP,manyoftheseHAPemissionsarealsoVOCemissions  thatcontinuetocontributetothepersistentformationoftroposphericozonethatisahealth b problemacrosstheUnitedStates,particularlyinheavilypopulatedareas.Althoughthe t commentergenerallydisagreedwithanyproposal(SectionIII,D)todeferahealthand & environmentalriskevaluation,anyadditionalbenefit,eitherqualitativeorquantitative,would 8  ensurethatimplementationofthecaptureandcontroloptionwouldbeahigherpriority.In    addition,anyavoidedhealthorenvironmentalcostwouldalsoshowthecaptureandaddon  L  controloptionasbeingthatmuchmorecosteffective. ^    Response:Noresponseneeded.     XX  2.7.7HighVelocityLowPressure(HVLP)SprayGuns edzM#XX [M#      Comment:CommenterIVD11believedthatthereductioninwasteandvolatileHAP "r emissionsfromlimitingtheuseofconventionalsprayguns(similartorestrictionsinSubpartJJ)  justifiesdoingsointhissubpart,evenifonlyasmallnumberoffacilitiesusesprayingversusroll 6 coatingorothercoatingtechnologiesforwoodbuildingproductfinishing.Inthecommenters H experience,mostfacilitiesfinditcosteffectivetouseHVLPspraygunsduetomaterialscost  savingsbutmaynothaveexploredthisoptionwithoutregulatoryincentive.  \    Response:Basedontheinformationwecollectedonthewoodbuildingproducts n" industry,spraycoatingiscurrentlyusedonlyatafewfacilitiesforspecificapplications;  $ therefore,thecostofchangingtosprayingwouldmostlikelyrepresentanincreaseincostwith 2& onlyaminimalreductioninemissions.Wehavedecidedthatthisisnotaviableoptionforthe  ( woodbuildingproductsNESHAP. !F* & b  XX  2.8COMPLIANCEPROCEDURES edR#XX R#  $ .   XX  2.8.1PollutionPreventionInitiatives edS#XX gS#  X&!0   Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthatsimplicityand 'F#2 flexibilitycouldbeaddedtotherulebyproposingafourthcomplianceoption.Thecommenters X)$4 statedthereare'b$Rnospecificprovisionsintheproposedruletoencourageeithertheuseof * &6 pollutionpreventioninitiativestoreduceHAPemissions,ortheuseorapplicationofalternative ,l'8 technologiesincludingcontroldevices,tominimizetheoverallimpactofHAPemissionsonthe  environment.Theproposedruleshouldaddresstheuseofonsiteexistingcombustiondevices b thatcouldbeusedforthetreatmentofcontaminatedgases. t Ѐ  Response:Theemissionlimit(s)thattheaffectedsourcemustmeetarein63.4690of & thefinalrule.ComplianceOption3allowstheuseofaddoncontroldevicesandisdescribedin 8  sections63.4760through63.4768.ComplianceOption3doesnotprecludetheuseofonsite    existingcombustiondevices.However,youmustsubmitanyrequestforinnovativecontrol  L  technologytotheAdministratorforapproval.Plansformonitoringandrecordkeeping ^  requirementsshouldbesubmittedalongwithsuchproposals.     XX  2.8.2InadvertentUse Y#XX Y#      Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthereshouldbe "r allowancesmadeforinadvertentorunavoidableuseofHAPcontainingthinners/cleaners.The  commentersrecommendedthisbedoneintwoways.First,allowtheuseofa deminimis 6 volumeofsuchmaterials.Second,createaneasyprocedurethatwouldallowafacilitytoswitch H fromthecompliantcoatingOption1forlimitingHAPtoOption2,whichwouldallowsome  degreeofHAPinthethinners/cleaners.  \    Response:Majorsourcesusingonlyafewgallonsofcoatingsannually,suchastheone n" describedbythecommenters,areencouragedtoutilizethelowcoatingusageapplicabilitycutoff  $ criteria.Sourcesthatcoatwoodbuildingproductsbutarenotcommercialmanufacturersarenot 2& requiredtocomplywiththefinalrule.Sourcesthatarecommercialmanufacturersarenot  ( requiredtocomplywiththefinalruleifthesourceuseslessthan1,100gal(4,170liters)peryear !F* ofsurfacecoatings. X#,   AsourcethatusesHAPcontainingcleaningandthinningmaterialscanchooseOption2 $ . tocomplywiththestandard.Option1wouldalsobeavailabletoasourcethatusesnonHAP &l!0 cleaningandthinningmaterialsandcomplieswiththeemissionlimitsunderthatoption. ~'"2   Ifyouswitchbetweencomplianceoptionsforanycoatingoperationorgroupofcoating (0$4 operations,youmustdocumentthisswitchasrequiredby63.4730(c),andyoumustreportitin B*%6 thenextsemiannualcompliancereportrequiredin63.4720. +&8  -V(: & &  XX  2.8.3ApprovalAuthorityforMonitoredParameters b#XX a#     Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10didnotunderstandEPAs N rationaleforproposingtoretainapprovalauthorityovertheparameterstobemonitoredto  demonstratecompliance.TheywerenotawareofanyotherMACTstandardinwhichEPA  b retains'&atheauthoritytoapprovetheseparameters.AmongtheproposedMACTstandards, t  SubpartQQQQrepresentstheleastcontroversialMACTstandard,andthereforeitshouldnotbe  &  madethemoststringent.Thereferencesshouldbedeleted. 8     Response:Section63.4767oftherulespecifieswhichparametersaretobemonitoredfor   thefollowingtypesofcontroldevices:thermaloxidizers,catalyticoxidizers,carbonadsorbers, L  concentrators,andemissioncapturesystems.Forexample,ifasourceplanstouseathermal ^  oxidizeraspartoftheircompliancestrategy,therulerequiresthemtomonitorthecombustion  temperatureastheoperatingparameter.Section63.4780(a)statesthattherulecanbe "r implementedandenforcedbyus,theEPA,oradelegatedauthoritysuchasStates,local,ortribal  agencies.AsspecifiedinSection63.4780(c),wehaveretainedapprovalauthorityfor 6 alternativestotheworkpracticestandards,majoralternativestothetestmethods,major H alternativestomonitoring,andmajorchangestorecordkeepingandreporting.Therefore,we  wouldonlyhaveapprovalauthorityovertheparameterstobemonitoredassociatedwitha  \  (alternative)controltechnologynotincludedintherule. n"   XX  2.8.4BiofiltersandOtherInnovations j#XX i#  2&   Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthat,forfacilitiesusing  ( complianceOption3throughtheuseofaddoncontrols,theprovisionsareexclusivelygeared 2"* towardsthermaloxidation.Thecommentersrecommendedthatprovisionsforbiofiltersand #, otherinnovationmeansbeaddedtocomplianceOption3. $F .   Response:ComplianceOption3isgearedtowardtheuseofthermaloxidationbecause X&!0 almostalldatathatwerecollectedandanalyzedfortheruleinvolvingaddoncontrolsfocusedon ' #2 thermaloxidation.WealsotriedtobeconsistentwithothersurfacecoatingMACTrulesfor )l$4 thoseaffectedsourceswithoverlappingrequirements.However,complianceOption3doesnot ~*%6  precludetheuseofbiofiltersorothercontroltechnologies.Youcansubmityourrequestforany +0'8 innovativecontroltechnologytotheAdministratorforapproval.Plansformonitoringand  recordkeepingrequirementsshouldbesubmittedalongwithsuchproposals. b    BecauseofthetypeandlevelofHAPemissionsatmostwoodbuildingproductsurface t coatingoperations,wedonotconsiderbiofilterstobealikelycontroltechnologytobeappliedto & suchemissionsources.Therefore,wehavenotaddedspecificoperatinglimitsandcompliance 8  proceduresforbiofilterstothefinalrule.However,otherrecentrules,suchastheproposed    PlywoodandCompositeWoodProducts(PCWP)rule,includespecificoperatinglimitsand  L  complianceproceduresforbiofilterswhichcanbeusedasexampleswhensubmittingyour ^  requestforanalternativecontroltechnology.   & &  XX  2.8.5ControlDevice!DataHandlingGuidance r#XX mr#      Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthatdatahandling "r guidanceneedsmoreconsistency.Thelimitsforfiveofthesevenlistedcontroldevicesshown  inTable3areintermsof3hourblockaverages.Dataarecollectedatleastonceevery 6 15minutes.Thisis'&^rinterpretedtomeanthateveryhoura3houraverageisrecalculated(as H opposedtorecalculatingmoreorlessfrequently,sayevery15minutesoronceevery3hours).In  Table3,beconsistentintheuseofblockaverages.Forexample,forthermaloxidizers,proposed  \  ruleSection63.4692(b)(ii)specifies toreducethedatatoblockaverages,and(iii)specifies to n" maintainthe3houraveragecombustiontemperatureatorabovethelimit.Subsection(iii)  $ shouldread tomaintainthe3hourblockaveragecombustiontemperatureatorabovethelimit. 2&   Languageshouldbeaddedtothedefinitionsectionsthatspecifieshowoftenthe3hour  ( averagesarecalculatedsonoreaderhastomakeassumptions.Somepermittingauthoritiesuse !F*  blocktomeanfixedblocks(e.g.,noon,3pm,6pm,etc.),and rollingtomeananhourly X#, recalculation,whichmayleadtosomeconfusion. $ .   Response:Weagreewiththecommenters.WemadecorrespondingchangestoTable3 &l!0 toSubpartQQQQtoread, maintainthe3hourblockaveragewhereverwarranted.Inthis ~'"2 case,thedataarethevaluescollectedatleastevery15minutesovera3hourperiod.Block (0$4 averageisanaverageofdatapointscollectedoveraspecified,continuousblockoftime(e.g.,a B*%6 3hourblockmightbenoonto2:59p.m.,withasubsequenttotalofeight3hourblockaverage +&8 periodsina24hourperiod). -V(: Ї  XX  2.8.6CatalyticOxidizer!MinimumOperatingTemperature c{#XX {#     Comment:CommentersIVD07andIVD10statedthatestablishingaminimum N operatingtemperatureofacatalyticoxidizerasthe3houraveragecombustiontemperature  duringtheinitialperformancetestisinappropriate.Forafacilitytoassurecontinuous  b compliancewiththisrequirement,itwillneedtooperatethecatalyticoxidizeratatemperature t  lowerthantheanticipatedactualoperatingordesigntemperatureduringthecompliancetestto  &  establishamarginofsafetytoallowforvariationincombustionchambertemperature. 8     CommentersIVD07andIVD10statedthattheideabehindthismonitoringmethodis   thatatemperatureriseresultingfromcombustionoftheVOCsheatingthecatalystwillindicate L  thatthecatalystisoperatingproperly.Complianceisdemonstratedbymaintainingthe ^  temperatureriseacrossthecatalystgreaterthantheamountestablishedduringtheinitial  performancetest.Thisapproachtomonitoringcatalyticsystemshasseveralfallacies. "r   Thetemperatureriseacrossthecatalystisafunctionoftheorganicloadingtothecatalyst.  AnytimetheinletloadingofVOCstothecatalystdropsbelowthatwhichoccurredduringthe 6 performancedemonstrationtest,theresultwillbeareducedtemperatureincreaseacrossthe H catalyst.Theunitwouldbeconsideredtobeoutofcomplianceanytimethecoatingoperation  wouldbeoperatedatanyconditionotherthanfullload.Theonlywayamillcouldrelyonthis  \  methodtodemonstratecompliancewouldbetocontinuallyfeedsupplementalorganicfueltothe n" catalysttomaintainthetemperatureriseatalltimes"anapproachthatnegatesthemonitoring  $ approachconceptbecauseautomaticcontrolswouldjustincreasethesupplementalfuelflowif 2& thecatalystefficiencydecreased.  (   Inmanycases,theorganicloadingtothecatalystwillbetoolowtocreateameasurable !F* temperatureriseacrossthecatalyst.TheVOCconcentrationinthegaswouldneedtobegreater X#, than360ppmtocausea6 Ftemperatureriseacrossthecatalyst.Theminimumthermocouple $ . sensitivityrequiredbytheruleis6 Fforacatalyticsystemoperatingat800 F. &l!0   Insummary,thiscompliancemonitoringtechniqueisincapableofdemonstrating ~'"2 compliancewithapercentremovalrequirement.Thisoptionshouldberemovedfromtherule. (0$4 Tokeepitintheproposedrulemayresultinpermitwritersinappropriatelyincludingthe B*%6 provisionindraftpermitsandissuingofpermitswithwhichcomplianceisimpossibleto +&8 facilitiesunawareofthedifficultiesinthesemethods. -V(:   Response:We%  Ԁincludedanalternativeoperatinglimitforcatalyticoxidizersin  63.4767(b)(3)and(4)oftheproposedrule.Ifthefacilitydevelopsandfollowsanonsite b inspectionandmaintenanceplanforthecatalyticoxidizer,thefacilitycanmonitoronlythe t temperaturebeforethecatalystbed. &   XX  2.8.7ControlDevice!OperatingParameterDeviation c#XX q#       Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthatregardingthe 8   discussionofoperatingparameterdeviationinSection63.4762(c)(2)oftheproposedrule,   assumingthattheefficiencyofanaddoncontroldevicedropstozeroifthemonitoring L  parametersdeviatefromtheconditionsexperiencedduringthecompliancedemonstrationtestis ^  notreasonable.Theruleshouldbemodifiedtoallowthefacilitytoreestablishtheremoval  efficiencyoftheunitattheconditionsthatdeviatedfromtheinitialcompliancedemonstration "r andusethenewlyestablishedHAPremovalrateincalculatingtheannualaverageHAP  emissionspervolumeofcoating. 6   CommenterIVD05statedthattheruleshouldbemodifiedtoallowthefacilitytore H establishthecontroldeviceHAPremovalefficiencyatthenewoperatingconditionratherthan  usinga0percentremovalefficiency.  \    Response:Ifthemonitoredparameterdeviatesfromtheacceptablerangeandinthe n" absenceofanysupportingperformancetestdata(results)forthecontrolunitattheconditions  $ underwhichthedeviationoccurred,anassumedzeropercentcontrolefficiencymustbeusedfor 2& allHAPemissioncalculationsassociatedwiththedurationofthedeviation.Thislanguageis  ( consistentwithothersurfacecoatingruleswithsimilaremissionsourcesandcontroldevices, !F* suchasthemetalcoilcoatingNESHAPandthelargeappliancecoatingNESHAP.However, X#, sourcescanopttorunperformancetestsatvariousconditions(e.g.,lowertemperatures)tohave $ . suchinformationavailabletosupportthelowerHAPremovalefficiencythatcouldbeusedinthe &l!0 calculationsfordeterminingthe12monthrollingaverageHAPemissionrate.Also,therule ~'"2 providesflexibilitytosourceswiththeirstartup,shutdown,andmalfunctionplan(SSMP)which (0$4 couldalsobeusedtosupportwhatHAPemissionremovalefficiencycanbeusedforatime B*%6 periodassociatedwithanoperatingparameterdeviation. +&8  -V(:   XX  2.8.8ThermalOxidizerPerformanceTestIssues c#XX #     Comment:CommentersIVD07andIVD10statedthatinSection63.4767(a)(2)on N thermaloxidizerminimumcombustiontemperature,establishingaminimumoperating  temperatureofathermaloxidizerasthe3houraveragecombustiontemperatureduringtheinitial  b performancetestisinappropriate.Forafacilitytoassurecontinuouscompliancewiththis t  requirement,itwillneedtooperatethethermaloxidizeratatemperaturelowerthanthe  &  anticipatedactualoperatingordesigntemperatureduringthecompliancetesttoestablisha 8   marginofsafetytoallowforvariationincombustionchambertemperature.Ifafacilityis   requiredtooperatetheunitatthetemperatureestablishedduringthelastcompliancetestin L  futurecompliancetests,itwillhavetocontinuouslyraisetheoperatingtemperatureoftheunit. ^  Establishmentofminimumoperatingtemperatureofthermaloxidizersisinappropriate.    Furthermore,astudyofthermaloxidizerdestructionefficienciesbytheNationalCouncil "r ofthePaperIndustryforAirandStreamImprovement(NCASI)showsthatHAPdestructionis  notaffectedbytheoxidizertemperatureoverthenormalrangeofoperation.(InsomecasesHAP 6 emissionsmayincreasewithcombustiontemperature.CombustionprocessesproduceHAPs H suchasformaldehyde.)Minimumthermaloxidizertemperaturesareselectedtominimizecarbon  monoxideemissions.  \    Theruleshouldberewordedtoallowthefacilitytooperatethethermaloxidizerata n" temperaturenotlessthan50 Fbelowtheaverageestablishedduringthecompliancetest.This  $ wouldallowtheownerofthecontroldevicetooperateitatthedesignspecificationsduringthe 2& compliancetestratherthanatsomespecialconditionforcompliancetestingpurposes.  (   Response:Establishingtheaddoncontroldeviceoperatinglimitatthelevel !F* demonstratedduringtheperformancetestisappropriate.Theoperatinglimitisbasedona3 X#, houraverage(ratherthananinstantaneousor15minutevalue,forexample)toaccommodate $ . normalvariationduringoperation.Ingeneral,selectionoftherepresentativeoperating &l!0 parametersforboththeprocessandthecontroldeviceforconductingtheperformancetestisan ~'"2 important,andsometimescomplex,task.Thefacilitydoeshavetheoptionofoperatingthe (0$4 oxidizeratalowersetpointduringtheperformancetestinordertoprovideamarginofsafety B*%6  duringnormaloperation. +&8   Thecommenterstatedthatiftheyarerequiredinfuturecomplianceteststooperatethe   unitatthetemperatureestablishedduringthelastcompliancetest,thefacilitywillhaveto b continuouslyraisetheoperatingtemperatureoftheunit.Thisisnotcorrect;thefacilitysimply t wouldneedtooperateatthesametemperatureaspreviouslydemonstrated.Thiswouldbetrue & evenifthefacilityhadloweredtheoperatingtemperatureforthepurposeofachievingan 8  operatinglimitlowerthanthenormaloperatingtemperature(i.e.,amarginofcompliance).For    example,assumethefacilitynormallyoperatestheincineratorat1600$F(i.e.,theauxiliary  L  burnersetpointis1600$F)butdecidedtolowerthesetpointto1580$Fduringtheperformance ^  test,resultinginan3houraveragetemperatureof1575$F.Theoperatinglimitis1575$F.   Aftertheperformancetest,thefacilitychoosestoresettheincineratoroperatingsetpointto "r  1600$Ftoprovideamarginofsafety.Thereisnothingtopreventthefacilityfromresettingthe   setpointtothelowervalueforthenextperformancetest,therebymaintainingthesameoperating 6 conditionsaspreviouslydemonstrated.Furthermore,underthisregulation,thefacilitycould H establishanew,loweroperatinglimitbyconductingfuture(oradditional)performancetests  whichdemonstratecontroldeviceefficiencyatloweroperatingtemperatures.Ofcourseifa  \ performancetestisgoingtobeconductedatatemperaturelowerthantheexistingoperating n limit,itisprudenttoassurethatthisisclearlynotedinthetestplansubmittedtothepermitting    agencyandtheirapprovalobtained. 2"   XX  2.8.9TemperatureMonitoringLocation ra#XX #  F&   Comment:CommentersIVD07andIVD10statedthatinSection63.4767(b)(1)the  ( proposedrulerequiresinstallationandmonitoringofagastemperaturemonitorinthegasstream !F* immediatelybeforethecatalystbedincatalyticoxidizers.Thisrequirementmaybeapplicableto X#, recuperativecatalyticoxidizersbutisnotpracticalformostRCOs. $ .   MostRCOshavetwocatalystsections,withsupplementalgasheatinglocatedin &l!0 between.Thedirectionofthegasflowchangesperiodicallytoaffecttherecuperativeheat ~'"2 recovery.Thetemperatureriseofgasesflowingacrossthecatalystisconstantlychanging.Ina (0$4 regenerativecatalyticoxidizer(RCO),thecatalystbedisalsoactingaspartoftheheatexchange B*%6 mechanism.EachtimethegasflowdirectionisreversedinanRCO,heatisdepositedinpartof +&8 thecatalystbedandpickedupinotherpartsofthebed.Thetemperaturedifferentialacrossthe -V(: bedisverycomplex,withalowertemperatureatthecatalystoutletthanattheinletatthe  beginningofthecycle,andtheoppositeattheendofthecycle.Insituationsinwhichpartofthe b VOCcombustionoccursintheheatexchangemediumpriortoenteringthecatalyst,theinlet t temperaturetothecatalystwillalwaysbehigherthantheoutlettemperature.Ifmonitoringis & requiredattheinlet,twosetsofmonitorswillberequiredwithdatarecordingswitchedwithflow 8  direction.      Response:ThecommentersproperlyindicatedthatmostRCOshavetwocatalyst  L  sectionswithsupplementalgasheatinglocatedinbetween.Thepurposeofthesupplementalgas ^  heatinginbetweenistoprovidethenecessaryheatinputduringstartupaswellasassurethatthe   minimumtemperaturenecessarytoinitiatethecombustionreactiononthecatalystismaintained "r  duringoperation,i.e.,thataminimumcatalystinlettemperatureismaintained.Supplementalgas   heatingmayormaynotbenecessarytoachievetheminimumcatalystinlettemperatureduring 6 operation,dependinguponthesolventloadingtotheRCO.Theintentionistomonitorthis H  minimumtemperatureofthegasenteringthecatalysttoassurethattheminimumtemperature  ismaintainedattheoperatinglevelduringwhichcompliancewasdemonstrated.Thiscanbe  \ accomplishedbymeasuringthetemperatureintheregenerativechambersatoneormore n locations.Thereisnointentiontorequiretheseparatemeasurementofeach inlettemperature    byswitchingthedatarecordingbackandforthtocoincidewiththeflowdirectionintothebed. 2" Thefacilitycanselecttheappropriatelocation(s)formonitoringtemperatureindicativeofa $ minimuminlettemperatureduringtheperformancetest. Themonitoringlocation(s)selected F& maydependontheoperatingconditions(i.e.,VOCloadingtotheunit)duringtheperformance X ( testandhowtheunitisexpectedtobeoperatedinthefuture. ! *   Therulehasbeenrewordedtoclarifythatthefacilitycanselectthespecificlocation(s) #l, formonitoringtemperature(s)indicativeoftheinlettemperaturetothecatalystbed(s)foran ~$. RCO.Theagencyintendstoissueadditionalexplanationclarifyingthesemeasurementsaspart %0!0 oftheimplementationmaterialsforthis,andotherMACTrules. B'"2   Theagencyrecognizesthatthetemperaturesintheregenerationchamberwilldepend (#4 uponthesolventloadingtotheincinerator.Consequently,theoperatingtemperatureestablished *V%6 duringspecificoperatingconditionsduringtheperformancetestmaynotbeachievableforall h+&8 processoperatingconditions,i.e.,atlowproductionlevels(lowsolventloadingtotheoxidizer), ,(: thefacilitymayhavedifficultymeetinganoperatinglimitforthetemperatureestablishedunder  highproduction(highsolventloading)conditions.Multipleperformancetestsatdifferent b processoperatingconditionsmaybenecessarytodemonstratecomplianceatanoperating t temperaturethatprovidesflexibilityinprocessoperatingconditions(alsoseeresponseto & comment2.8.8). 8    XX  2.8.10ConventionalHAPControlTechnologies raؽ#XX #   L    Comment:CommentersIVD07andIVD10hadcommentsontheuseofconventional   HAPcontroltechnologies.TheproposedNESHAPdoesnottakeadvantageofcurrently L  availableandproventechnologiesthatwouldsubstantiallyreduceemissionsfromthesurface ^  coatingofthewoodbuildingproductsindustrydespitewelldocumentedhealthinformationon  exposuretoHAPemissionstypicalofthisindustry.BoththetypesofHAPemissionsthatwould "r becontrolledandthecaptureandcontroltechnologiesare typicalintheairpollutioncontrol  industry.Forexample,oxidizertechnologiesarecommonlyandsuccessfullyusedinmanyother 6 analogousindustriesandofteninindustrieswithsimilarHAPemissionprofiles.Ingeneral,there H appearstobenothingextraordinarythatwouldprecludeutilizingconventionalcaptureand  controltechnologiestoreduceHAPemissionsfromthewoodbuildingproductsindustry.The  \  proposalisaffirmingofthisfactsuchthatEPAregardsthecombinationofcaptureandcontrol n" systemsastechnicallyfeasible.  $   Response:Whenwecollectedinformationfromwoodbuildingproductssurfacecoating 2& operations,onlythreefacilitiesreportedusingaddoncontrols.Weagreewiththecommentersin  ( thatoxidizertechnologiescanbe(andare)usedbythisindustry.Wealsoincludedaddon !F* controlsaspartofourevaluationofbeyondthefloorindeterminingMACTforeachofthe X#, subcategories.However,theuseoflowandnoHAPcoatingsisapreferablecompliance $ . approachfromapollutionpreventionperspective.Weacknowledgedthelikelyuseofoxidizers &l!0 (andothertypesofaddoncontrols)bysomefacilities,andthatcomplianceapproachisincluded ~'"2 incomplianceOption3. (0$4  -V(:   XX  2.8.11LowCoatingUsageCutoff raԀ#XX #     Comment:CommenterIVD11claimedthat63.4681(b)statesthatasourceissubject N tothissubpartifituses4,170liters(1,100gal)peryear,ormore,ofcoatings(paraphrased).  BecausetheintentoftheMACT,asstatedinthepreamble,istoreducetheemissionsofHAPs,  b thecommenterbelievedthatspecifying HAPcontainingcoatingswouldbeappropriateto t  establishademinimislevelforregulation.Inthisway,somefacilitiescouldoptoutof  &  regulationbythissubpartentirelybymaterialsubstitution.Inaddition,thecommenterbelieved 8   thatbecausecleaningmaterialsandthinnersareincludedinemissionscalculations,thisde   minimislevelshouldincludeHAPcontainingcleaningmaterialsandthinnerusage(whenthey L  areusedinthefinishingorlaminationofanywoodbuildingproduct)aswell. ^    Response:Thelowusagecutoffincludedaspartoftheapplicabilitycriteriaforaffected  sourceswasbasedonthetotalannualcoatingusageofthesmallest(intermsofannualcoating "r usage)facilityintheMACTfloordatabase.AllfacilitiesintheMACTdatabasehaveannual  coatingusagesabove4,170liters(1,100gallons).Whenwewereevaluatingcoatingsdata 6 submittedbytheindustry,therewassomeconfusionaboutHAPcontentlevelsthathadtobe H reported,especiallyforthosecoatingscontainingsolventssuchasmineralspirits,naphthas,and  Stoddardsolvent.WedidnotspecifyHAPcontainingcoatingsintheapplicabilitylanguageto  \  avoidthesameissuesandconfusion.Availabledataindicatethatthecoatingapplication n" processesandcontroltechnologiesbeingconsideredareappropriateforallsourceswithatleast  $ thislevelofcoatingsusage. 2& &   XX  2.8.12WorkPracticeStandardsApplicability ha#XX #  !F*   Comment:CommenterIVD11statedthatnotrequiringworkpracticestandardsfor #, everysource,includingthoseusingthecompliantcoatingsoption,appearsunjustifiable.The $F . workpractice'!standardslisted(closingcontainers,cleaningupspillsofHAPcontaining X&!0 materials,transportingHAPcontainingmaterialsinclosedcontainers,keepingmixingcontainers ' #2 closed,andgenerallyjustminimizingHAPemissions)arewhattheywouldexpectafacilitytodo )l$4 tocomplywith63.6(e)(1)(i)inthattheyareminimalexpectationsforgoodairpollutioncontrol ~*%6 practicesforminimizingemissions.IftheNESHAPisgoingtospecifytheseminimal +0'8 expectations,thentheyshouldbespecifiedforeverysource. B-(:   Response:Emissionsfromtheactivitiescoveredbyworkpracticestandardsare  accountedforincomplianceOptions1and2(ascompliancefortheseoptionsrequires b recordkeepingandreportingthataccountsforthemassofallorganicHAPused).Compliance t Option3doesnotaccountforemissionsfromtheoperationscoveredbyworkpracticestandards. &   Thepurposeoftheworkpracticestandardistominimizelossesofcoatingvolatilesprior 8  toandafterthesurfacecoatingoperations,whichisalreadyagoalofwoodbuildingproducts    manufacturingfacilitiesintheireffortstoreducecostsandoptimizetheproductionprocess.  L  Thus,webelievethatsourceswillseekopportunitiestoapplythisstandardtotheirown ^  processesinthebestway.     XX  2.8.13CombinationComplianceOption ha#XX #      Comment:CommenterIVD05statedEPAshouldprovideregulatoryflexibilityand "r encourageresourceeffectivenessbyproposingafourthcomplianceoption.Thisoptionwould  allowindustrytouseacombinationofanyofthethreecurrentlyproposedcomplianceoptions 6 (i.e.,materialcompliance,emissionratewithoutaddoncontrols,andaddoncontrols)tomeet H therespectiveemissionlimits.Thisoptionwouldallowforaddoncontrolemissionsfrom  specificperformancerequiredfinishingcoatingswithoutcompromisingproductsubstitution  \  strategiesforothercomponents. n"   Response:Weagreewiththecommenter,andsuchprovisionswereincludedinthe  $ proposedruletoaddresstheseconcerns.Asstatedintheproposedrule,Section63.4691,an 2& affectedsourcecanopttodemonstratecompliancewiththerequiredemissionlimitsusingany  ( combinationofcomplianceoptions: Youmayapplyanyofthecomplianceoptionslistedin !F* paragraphs(a)through(c)ofthissection.Youmayapplyanyofthecomplianceoptionstoan X#, individualcoatingoperationortomultiplecoatingoperationsasagrouportotheentireaffected $ . source.Youmayusedifferentcomplianceoptionsfordifferentcoatingoperationsoratdifferent &l!0 timesonthesamecoatingoperation. ~'"2  -V(:   XX  2.8.14PollutionControlProjects ha#XX #     Comment:CommenterIVD05statedthatEPAshouldprovideclarifyinglanguage N statingthatprojectsundertakeninordertocomplywiththeMACTruleshould,asamatterof  routine,berecognizedaspollutioncontrolprojects(PCPs).  b   Response:Emissioncontrolprojectsinitiatedbymajorsourcestocomplywiththis t  MACTruledonotrequireEPA,asamatterofroutine,toqualifythisactionasapollution  &  controlproject.Similarly,replacementofanexistingemissionscontrolunitwithanewor 8   differentone(albeitmoreefficientandlesspolluting)orthereconstructionofanexisting   emissionscontrolunitwouldnotautomaticallyqualifyasapollutioncontrolproject. L    InEPAguidance,permittingauthoritiesareallowedtoevaluateemissioncontrolprojects ^  toqualifyasaPCP.Also,permittingauthoritiesmayevaluateanypollutioncontrolprocedures  thatwerereasonablydesignedtoreduceemissionsbutalsoweredesignedtoincreasecapacity, "r decreaseproductioncosts,orimproveproductmarketabilityasaPCP.Generally,beforea  permittingauthorityreviewpendingPCP,itisrequiredthatthesourceprovidedataontheair 6 qualityimpactsandchangestotheemissionsprofileofthesource.APCPmust,onbalance,be H "environmentallybeneficial,"andthepermittingauthoritymustensurethattheprojectwillnot  causeorcontributetoviolationsofotherapplicablerules.  \    XX  2.8.15PermanentTotalEnclosure(PTE) #XX x#   $   Comment:CommenterIVD05statedthattheproposedMACTstandardsproposethe n& useofEPAMethod204todemonstratecompliancewiththeproposedapplicableemission  ( limitationswhenusingaPTEasacapturesystemwithcontroldevices.Theruleshouldnot 2"* explicitlyrequire100percentcaptureefficiency(CE)incapturesystemsbecausethevalueof #, 100percentCEreferencedinEPAMethod204issimplyanassumption.Inaddition,the $F . proposedMACTruleshouldallowtheuseofalternativemethodsfordeterminingCEinpartially X&!0 enclosedsystems. ' #2   Response:Section63.4765oftheruleprovidestheproceduresandtestmethodsfor )l$4 determiningtheemissioncapturesystemefficiency.Theruledoesnotrequire100percent ~*%6 captureefficiency;therulesimplyprovidesanoptionforassuming100percentcapture +0'8 efficiency.Acaptureefficiencyof100percentcanbeassumedifthecapturesystemisdesigned B-(: andoperatedtomeetthePTEcriteriaofMethod204.Youcanuseapartialenclosure(an  enclosurethatdoesnotmeetthePTEcriteria)andcandemonstratethecaptureefficiencyofthe b systemusingthemeasurementproceduresinMethod204(Sections63.4765(bd)).Furthermore, t Section63.4765(e)specificallyallowsyoutouseanalternativeprotocoltodeterminethe & captureefficiencyofthesystem: youmaydeterminecaptureefficiencyusinganyothercapture 8  efficiencyprotocolandtestmethodsthatsatisfythecriteriaofeithertheDQOorLCLapproach    asdescribedinAppendixAtosubpartKKofthispart.  L    XX  2.8.16DeMinimisLevelforHAPThinners/Cleaners #XX #      Comment:CommenterIVD03statedthatcomplianceOption1intheproposedrule ^  shouldallowfordeminimislevelHAPcontainingthinnersandcleanerstobeused.The  commenterarguedthatthezeroHAPthinner/cleanerrequirementincomplianceOption1makes "r thisoptionunachievableformanyfacilitiesthatwouldotherwisemeetitsrequirements.    Response:ComplianceOption2isavailabletoasourcethatusesHAPcontaining 6 thinnersandcleaningmaterialsandcomplieswiththeemissionlimitsunderthatoption. H   XX  2.8.17DeMinimisLevelforHAPCoatings !#XX #   \    Comment:CommenterIVD08requestedthatEPAestablishavolumeexemptionfor " noncompliantcoatingsundercomplianceOption1.Thecommenternotedthereisprecedence  \$ forthisunderthewoodfurnituremanufacturingMACTrule.Thecommenterrecommendedthat n& noncompliant fixativecoatingsbeallowedunderOption1inanamountupto200galper  ( application,nottoexceed1,000galperyear. 2"*   Response:ComplianceOption2isavailabletoasourcethatusesnoncompliant(withthe #, applicableemissionlimit)coatings.ComplianceOption1wasincludedasasimple,straight $F . forwardcomplianceapproachwhichinvolvesallcompliantmaterialsandreducedrecordkeeping X&!0 andreportingrequirements. ' #2   XX   B-(: 2.8.18NewSourceReview(NSR)Requirements h#XX I#     Comment:Onecommenter(IVD08)requestedthatEPAmakeclearinthefinalrule N thattheinstallationanduseofcaptureandcontroltechnology(complianceOption3)isexempt  fromNSRrequirements.AfacilitythatchoosestousecomplianceOption3mightotherwise  b triggerNSRunderthe majormodificationprovisionsoftheAct. t    Response:Weexpectthatsomewoodbuildingproductsfacilitiesimpactedbytodays  &  finalrulewillinstallcaptureandcontroltechnologytocomplywiththefinalHAPcontrol 8   requirements.However,insomeinstances,somecaptureandcontroltechnologymaygenerate   NOxemissionsduringnormaloperations.IfNOxemissionincreasesaregreatenough,theymay L  triggertheneedforpreconstructionpermitsunderthenonattainmentnewsourcereview(NSR) ^  orpreventionofsignificantdeterioration(PSD)program.Duringthedevelopmentoftodays  finalrule,commentersrequestedthatweconsiderprojectsdesignedtocomplywithMACT "r requirementsandreduceHAPemissionstobeapollutioncontrolproject(PCP).Webelievethe  commenterswantstheirprojectsdefinedasPCPwithinthecontextofPSDandNSR,suchthat 6 withtheinstallationofaddoncontrolsmeetingthefinalrulewouldqualifyforanexemption H fromNSR/PSD.    In1992,weadoptedanexplicitPCPexclusionforelectricutilitysteamgeneratingunits  \  (57FR32314).InaJuly1,1994guidancememorandum,weprovidedguidancetopermitting n" authoritiesontheapprovabilityofPCPexclusionsforsourcecategoriesotherthanelectric  $ utilities.Inthatguidance(availableontheTTN:see PollutionControlProjectsandNew 2& SourceReview(NSR)ApplicabilityfromJohnS.Seitz,Director,OAQPS,toEPARegionalAir  ( DivisionDirectors),weindicatedthataddoncontrolsandfuelswitchestolesspollutionfuels !F* mayqualifyforanexclusionfrommajorNSRasaPCP.Tobeeligibletobeexcludedfrom X#, otherwiseapplicablemajorNSRrequirements,aPCPmust,onbalance,be environmentally $ . beneficial,andthepermittingauthoritymustensurethattheprojectwillnotcauseorcontribute &l!0 toaviolationoftheNAAQSorPSDincrement,oradverselyaffectvisibilityorotherairquality ~'"2 relatedbalues(AQRV)inaClassIarea,andthatoffsettingreductionsaresecuredinthecaseofa (0$4 projectwhichwouldresultinasignificantincreaseofanonattainmentpollutant.Thepermitting B*%6 authoritycanmakethesedeterminationsoutsideofthemajorNSRprocess.The1994guidance +&8 didnotsupercedeexistingNSRrequirements,includingapprovedStateNSRprograms,norvoid -V(: orcreateanexclusionfromanyapplicableminorsourcepreconstructionreviewrequirementsin  anapprovedSIP.AnyminorNSRpermittingrequirementsinaSIPwouldcontinuetoapply, b regardlessofanyexclusionfrommajorNSRthatmightbeapprovedforasourceunderthePCP t exclusionpolicy. &   IntheJuly1,1994guidancememorandum,wespecificallyidentifiedRTOsasan 8  exampleofanaddoncontrolthatisanappropriatecandidateforacasebycaseexclusionfrom    majorNSRasaPCP.WebelievethatthecurrentguidanceonthePCPexclusionadequately  L  providesforthepossibleexemptionfrommajorNSRforPCPresultingfromtodaysproposed ^  rule.Permittingauthoritiesshouldfollowthatguidancetotheextentallowedunderthe   applicableSIPinordertodeterminewhethertheinstallationofanRTOinagivencircumstance "r  qualifiesasaPCP.Projectsthatqualifyfortheexclusionwouldbecoveredunderminorsource   regulationsintheapplicableSIP,andpermittingauthoritieswouldbeexpectedtoprovide 6 adequatesafeguardsagainstNAAQSandincrementviolationsandadverseimpactsonAQRVin H FederalClassIareas.Onlyinthoseareaswherepotentialadverseimpactscannotberesolved  throughtheminorNSRprogramsorothermechanismswouldmajorNSRapply.  \   XX  2.8.19ZeroHAP#XX  # XXԀorNonHAPCoatingRequirements  #XX [ #       Comment:CommentersIVD05,IVD07,andIVD10statedthatthebackground n" informationdocument(BID)forthelargeappliancecoatingNESHAP,SubpartNNNN,indicates  $ (page320)thatfornonHAPcoatingsthesourceisnotrequiredtodeterminethevolume 2& fractionofcoatingsolidsanddensity,ortocalculatetheorganicHAPcontent.Other  ( notification,reporting,andrecordkeepingsectionsofthelargeappliancecoatingNESHAPareto !F* berevisedtobeconsistentwiththeexemption.Thislanguageshouldalsoapplytothewood X#, buildingproducts(surfacecoating)NESHAP.NonHAPcoatingseligibleforthisexemption $ . shouldbedefinedasthosenotexceedingtheOSHAdeminimisthresholdvaluesof1percentand &l!0 0.1percentassuppliedorasappliedifsomeHAPfixativeagentsareallowedforuseasvolume ~'"2 exemptionsasdiscussedinotherpartsofthesecomments. (0$4   Response:Weagreewiththecommenters.CoatingswithHAPcontentsbelow1percent B*%6 fornoncarcinogensand0.1percentforcarcinogensareconsideredtobenonHAPandshouldbe +&8 treatedasnoHAPorzeroHAPcoatingsforcalculationandrecordkeepingpurposes.Wehave -V(: madethesuggestedchangestothefinalrule(see63.4741(a)(1)(i)and63.4741(a)(4)).In  addition,recordkeepingandreportingrequirementsforzeroHAPcoatingshavebeenreducedin b thefinalrule(see63.4710(c)(8)(i),63.4720(a)(5)(ii),and63.4730(c),(c)(2),(f),and(g)). t   XX  2.8.20InitialPerformanceTests #XX #  8    Comment:CommentersIV-D07andIVD10statedthatwhenthewoodbuilding  &  product(surfacecoating)NESHAPgoesintoeffect,utilizingthemostrecenttestdatadescribed 8   inFRpage42405and42406wouldbereasonableifthesourceisanexistingtitleVfacility.   ConductingnewperformancetestingsolelyforMACTwouldberedundant. L    Response:Weagreethatthemostrecenttestdatacanbeusedtoestablishtheoperating ^  limitsrequiredbythisrule,aslongastheprevioustestdatameetstheperformancetest  requirementsdetailedinthefinalrule.However,dependingontheactualtimingofthemost "r recentperformancetest,youwouldneedtodiscusstheneedfornewtestdatawithyour  enforcementauthorityandincludesuchinformationinyourinitialnotification. 6   XX  2.9CONTROLDEVICEOPERATINGLIMITREQUIREMENTS  #XX {#     XX  2.9.1OperatingLimitAveragingPeriod  G#XX (#  H    Comment:Threecommenters(IVD05,IVD07,andIVD10)statedthattheproposed 6" 3-houraverageperiodisnotanadequatetimespantocompensateforvariationsinthe H$ measurementofthecontroldevicemonitoringparameterssuchastemperature.Thecommenters & recommendedthatreadingsberecordedevery15minutesandthenputintoa12hourblock  !\( average. n"*   Response:Theaveragingperiodshouldbeshortenoughtoobservesignificantchangesin # , controldeviceperformance,andtoallowearlydetectionofproblemssothattimelycorrective 2% . actionispossible.Atthesametime,averagingperiodsshouldnotbesoshortthatminor &!0 perturbationsasaresultofnormalvariationsresultinadeviation.Webelievea3hourperiodis 'F#2 asufficientamountoftimetoallowfornormalvariationsincontroldeviceparameterssuchas X)$4  temperature.The3houraverageisconsistentwiththedemonstrationofperformanceduringthe * &6 three1hourperformancetestruns.Furthermore,the3hourperiodisconsistentwithaveraging  timesforothersurfacecoatingruleswithsimilaremissionsourcesandcontroldevices. b   XX  2.9.2ControlDeviceDowntimeAllowance  #XX d#  &   Comment:Threecommenters(IVD05,IVD07,andIVD10)statedthattherule t  shouldhaveacontroldevicedowntimeallowanceappropriateforthecontroltechnology.The  &  proposedruleunder63.4692wouldrequirethatoperatinglimitsforcaptureandcontrol 8   equipmentbeestablishedduringtheperformancetests,andtheowneroroperatormustmeet   theselimitsatalltimesthereafter.Thecommentersclaimedthatthisisnotapractical L  requirementbecauseitdoesnotrecognizetheinherentproblemsassociatedwiththereliabilityof ^  thecontroldeviceasshownbyinformationgatheredbyEPApursuanttodevelopmentofthe  PlywoodandCompositeWoodProducts(PCWP)MACTthatsupportsadowntimeallowance "r forRTOs.ThecommentersstatethattheinherentproblemsassociatedwithRTOtechnology  includethedeteriorationofheattransfermediaovertime,andduetothepresenceofsticky 6 materials,corrosivecompounds,thetrappingoraccumulationofinorganicparticles,frequencyof H bakeoutstomaintainadequatedestructionefficiency,etc.Thecommentersstatetheprocedures  necessarytorespondtotheseissuesandmaintaincontrolefficiencyareoftendisallowedas  \   malfunctions.Thecommentersproposethata0.5%downtimeallowancebeallowedin n" additiontoanydowntimeduetoSSMconditions.  $   Response:TheinformationgatheredbyEPApursuanttotheplywoodandcomposite 2& woodproducts(PCWP)MACThasbeenreviewed.Thefocusofthisinformationwasoncontrol  ( devicesinstalledondryersandpressesinthePCWPindustry(outof72processunitsincludedin !F* thesurveydata,oneunitwasa rotarystranddryer/paintoven.)ThePCWPemissionsources X#, addressedinthesurveydataaredifferent;theyemitparticulatematterandstickymaterials,as $ . notedbythecommenter.Insufficientdataareavailablefromunitscontrollingsurfacecoating &l!0 operationstosupporttheneedforsuchadowntimeexemption.Intheabsenceofsupporting ~'"2 data,thenormisthatanaffectedsourceisrequiredtomeetthelimitsatalltimestheemission (0$4 sourceisoperating.NotethatotherMACTrulesforsurfacecoatingoperations(e.g.,40CFR63 B*%6 subpartKK!NationalEmissionStandardsforthePrintingandPublishingIndustry)thatutilize +&8 regenerativeoxidizers(bothRTOsandRCOs)donotincludesuchadowntimeallowance. -V(: Therefore,nodowntimeallowanceforanycontroltechnologieswereaddedtothewoodbuilding  productssurfacecoatingrule. b   XX  2.9.3OfftheHourMonitoringPeriods  <*#XX *#  &   Comment:Onecommenter(IVD05)statedthatfacilitiesshouldhavetheoptionof t  establishingoffthehourmonitoringperiodsdependingonthetimingoftheshiftchanges,  &  settingsondatacapture/archivingsystems,thesituationsinwhichshiftemployeesspendan 8   amountoftimeattheendoftheshiftpreparingreportsonproduction,andemissioncontrol   equipment. L    Response:Thetimeperiodsforconductingthe3hourblockaveragesarenotdefinite. ^  Thedefinitionof 3hourblockaverageaddedtothefinalrulestatesthatitcanbeanyspecified,  continuous180minutetimeperiod.Thebeginningtimescanvaryaccordingtoanyoftheevents "r referencedabove.Aslongasthe3hourblocksdonotoverlap,affectedsourceshavetheoption  ofchoosingthetimeperiodforthe3hourblockaverage. 6   XX  2.9.4ControlDeviceBypassRequirements  .#XX .#     Comment:Twocommenters(IVD07andIVD10)statedthatatmanysurfacecoating H  operations,ownersandoperatorsmayusecompliantcoatingsforcertainapplicationsin " conjunctionwithcoatingsthatcontainHAPineitheranupstreamordownstreamoperation.The  \$ commentersrequestedthatoperatingflexibilitybewrittenintotheruletoallowtheowneror n& operatortobypassthermaloxidizerswhen compliantcoatingsareused.  (   Response:Weagreewiththecommentersand,asproposed,theruleprovidedforsuch 2"* operatingflexibility.Anaffectedsourcecouldopttodemonstratecompliancewiththerequired #, emissionlimitsusinganycombinationofcomplianceoptions.Wehaveclarifiedlanguageinthe $F . finalruletoaddresstheseconcerns.Thefinalruleincludesexplicitrequirementsthatapplyto X&!0 theuseofbypasslinesoncontrolled(emphasisadded)coatingoperations(seeSection ' #2 63.4763(d)).Thelanguageassurescontinuouscompliancewiththeapplicableemissionlimitat )l$4 thosesourceselectingtoconductcoatingoperationsthatrequireacaptureandcontroldevice ~*%6 system(e.g.,Option3)or,alternatively,conductcoatingoperationsthatdonotrequireaddon +0'8 controls(e.g.,compliantcoatingoperations). B-(: Ї  XX  2.9.5TerminologyConsistencywithOtherMACTStandards  5#XX 5#     Comment:Onecommenter(IVD08)notedthat,historically,theEPAhasdifferentiated N controldeviceexceedancesorexcursionsfromSSMeventsinotherMACTstandards(e.g.,wood  furnituremanufacturing).Intheproposedrule,EPAusestheterm deviationsinplaceof  b  exceedancesor excursions,anddefines deviationstoincludeSSMevents.Thecommenter t  believedthattheswitchinterminologyintheproposedrulecreatesinconsistenciesbetweenthe  &  ruleandotherexistingMACTstandards. 8     Response:Wedonotagreewiththecommenterthatthedefinitionof deviationisthe   sameasthepreviousdefinitionsusedforexceedanceand/orexcursion.ForallNESHAP,we L  useaconsistentapproachforassuringcontinuouscompliancewiththerelevantstandards ^  applicabletoasource.EachNESHAPrequiresthataffectedsourceownersandoperators  monitor,record,andreportanytimearequirementorobligationestablishedbytheNESHAPis "r notmet.Thisincludesstartup,shutdown,ormalfunction,whetherornotsuchfailureisallowed  byaNESHAP.Thisrequirementappliestoallaffectedsources. 6   Theterm deviationisexplicitlydefinedtomeananyinstanceinwhichanaffected H sourcesubjecttothissubpartoranowneroroperatorofsuchasourcefailstomeetanyofthe  following:(1)anyrequirementorobligationestablishedbythissubpart,including,butnot  \  limitedto,anyemissionlimitation(includinganyoperatinglimit)orworkpracticestandard;(2) n" anytermorconditionthatisadoptedtoimplementanapplicablerequirementinthissubpartand  $ thatisincludedintheoperatingpermitforanyaffectedsourcerequiredtoobtainsuchapermit; 2& or(3)anyemissionlimitation(includinganyoperatinglimit)orworkpracticestandardinthis  ( subpartduringstartup,shutdown,ormalfunction,whetherornotsuchfailureispermittedbythe !F* rule.AgivendeviationisnotnecessarilyaviolationoftheNESHAP.TheEPAortheagency X#, withdelegatedauthoritytoimplementandenforcetherulemakesadeterminationifadeviation $ . isaviolationoftheNESHAP. &l!0   ~'"2 & &     XX  2.9.6ConsistencywithTitleVRequirements  'A#XX A#     Comment:Threecommenters(IVD05,IVD07andIVD10)statedthatforfacilities N complyingwithOption3providedundertheproposedrule(i.e.,compliancebasedonan  emissionratewithaddoncontrols),theoperatinglimitrequirementsneedtobeconsistentwith  b '&@thedeviationreportingrequirementsfortitleVpermittedfacilities(40CFRPart70orPart71). t  Thecommentersrecommendedthatatimeelementbeestablishedtodefineamalfunctionor  &  deviationundertherule. 8     Response:Becausethisisanenforcementissue,questionsconcerningatimeelement   definitionformalfunctionordeviationshouldbedirectedtotheoperatingtitleVpermit L  authority.Werecommendthatyoubeasspecificaspossiblewhendocumentinganddefining ^  malfunctionsaspartofyourstartup,shutdown,andmalfunctionplan.Agivendeviationisnot  necessarilyaviolationoftheNESHAP.TheEPAortheagencywithdelegatedauthorityto "r implementandenforcetherulemakesadeterminationifadeviationisaviolationofthe  NESHAP. 6   XX  2.10STARTUP,SHUTDOWN,ANDMALFUNCTION(SSM) opG#XX F#     XX  2.10.1SSMPeriodsinComplianceAveragingCalculations opG#XX G#  H    Comment:Twocommenters(IVD07andIVD10)statedthattheproposedruledoes 6" notspecifyhowtoaccountforequipmentstartups,shutdowns,ormalfunctionsinthecalculation H$ ofthe3-houraveragesusedtodeterminecompliancewithoperatinglimitsforaddoncontrol & devices.Thecommenterssuggestedthattherulespecifythattheoperatingdatacollectedwhen  !\( thecontroldeviceis notreceivingemissionsnotbeincludedinthe3houraverage n"* calculations.Otherwise,thecommentersclaimed,situationswillariseinwhichtheonlywayto # , avoidaviolationoftheapplicableoperatinglimitwillbetoshutdownthecoatinglinefora 2% . periodwhileoperatingthecontroldeviceatitsnormaloperatingconditions(i.e.,operating &!0 conditionsestablishedduringtheperformancetest). 'F#2   Response:Weagreewiththecommenterandhaveincludedlanguageintherule X)$4 excludingmonitoringdatafromthe3houraveragecalculationthatwasgeneratedduringperiods * &6 whenthecontroldevicewasnotreceivingemissions. ,l'8 Ї&   XX' XX'  2.10.20  AddressingControlDeviceBypassSystemRequirementsinSSM(#(# M0  0(#(#Plan opM#XX }M# (#(# + X XM+  Comment:Onecommenter(IVD05)statedthattheproposedrules'nMԀmonitoring b requirementsforsituationsinwhichemissionsbypassthecontroldeviceshouldbeaddressedin  theSSMplan.Thecommenterstatedthat,ataminimum,theserequirementsareunnecessary & v andmaybeproblematicifcompliancewiththemcreatescontradictionswiththeSSMplan.      Response:OwnersandoperatorselectingtousecomplianceOption3(compliancebased  :  ontheapplicableemissionlimitwithaddoncontrols)arerequiredtocontinuouslymonitor L  operationoftheaddoncontroldevice,andwhereequippedwithabypassline,toassurethatthe   bypasslineisclosedandsecured.However,theremaybetimeswhenthebypasslineisopen, `  suchasacoatinglineorcontroldevicemalfunction.Inthosecases,thecorrectiveactionsare r  addressedbythefacilitysSSMplan.However,theremaybetimeswhentheowneroroperator $ intendsforthebypassvalvetobeopenbecausecontinuousoperationofthecontroldeviceisnot 6 neededinorderforthefacilitytocomplywiththeapplicableemissionlimit.Forexample,the  coatinglinemightbeusedtocoatproductswithanoncompliantcoating(i.e.,coatingwith J organicHAPcontentgreaterthantheapplicableemissionlimit),andothertimesbeusedtocoat \ productswithacompliantcoating(i.e.,zeroorloworganicHAPcontentcoatingthatmeetsthe  applicableemissionlimit).Inthelattercase,theoperatormayprefertobypassthecontroldevice  p! tolowerannualexpensesassociatedwithoperatingtheairpollutioncontrolsystem.This # situationisnotamalfunctionandwouldnotbeaddressedinthefacilitysSSMplan. 4%   Thefinalruleincludesexplicitrequirementsthatapplytotheuseofbypasslineson F ' controlled(emphasisadded)coatingoperations(see63.4763(d)).Thelanguageassures !) continuouscompliancewiththeapplicableemissionlimitatthosesourceselectingtoconduct  #Z+ coatingoperationsthatrequireacaptureandcontroldevicesystem(e.g.,Option3)or, l$- alternatively,conductcoatingoperationsthatdonotrequireaddoncontrols(e.g.,compliant %!/ coatingoperations).Theserequirementincludedinthefinalruledonotcontradictthegeneral 0'"1 requirementsforSSMofthecoatingoperationortheairpollutioncontroldevice. (#3  ,(9   XX  2.10.3InclusionofSSMinDefinitionof Deviation opZ#XX qZ#     Comment:Onecommenter(IVD08)statedthatthedefinitionfor deviationusedin N theproposedrulespecificallyincludesperiodsofSSMeventhoughtheseperiodsarealready  exemptedfromcomplianceundertherule.Thecommenterstatedthatthedefinitionof  b  deviationusedfortheruleshouldberevisedtoexcludeSSMperiodsbecauseeventsthatoccur t  duringadeviationandeventsthatoccurduringanSSMperiodaredifferenttypesofevents.The  &  commenterstatedthatthesetwotypesofeventscanbeaddressedinthesamecompliancereport 8   aslongastheinformationisinseparatesections.     Response:ForallNESHAP,weuseaconsistentapproachforassuringcontinuous L  compliancewiththerelevantstandardsapplicabletoasource.EachNESHAPrequiresthat ^  facilityownersandoperatorsmonitor,record,andreportanytimearequirementorobligation  establishedbytheNESHAPisnotmet.Thisincludesstartup,shutdown,ormalfunction, "r whetherornotsuchfailureisallowedbyaNESHAP.Thisrequirementappliestoallaffected  sources. 6   Theterm deviationisexplicitlydefinedtomeananyinstanceinwhichanaffected H sourcesubjecttothissubpartoranowneroroperatorofsuchasourcefailstomeetanyofthe  following:(1)anyrequirementorobligationestablishedbythissubpart,including,butnot  \  limitedto,anyemissionlimitation(includinganyoperatinglimit)orworkpracticestandard;(2) n" anytermorconditionthatisadoptedtoimplementanapplicablerequirementinthissubpartand  $ thatisincludedintheoperatingpermitforanyaffectedsourcerequiredtoobtainsuchapermit; 2& or(3)anyemissionlimitation(includinganyoperatinglimit)orworkpracticestandardinthis  ( subpartduringstartup,shutdown,ormalfunction,whetherornotsuchfailureispermittedbythe !F* rule.AgivendeviationisnotnecessarilyaviolationoftheNESHAP.TheEPAortheagency X#, withdelegatedauthoritytoimplementandenforcetherulemakesadeterminationifadeviation $ . isaviolationoftheNESHAP. &l!0   PeriodsofSSMforawoodbuildingproductscoatingoperationarenotexemptedfrom ~'"2 compliancewiththeNESHAP.Werecognizethatairemissionsfromanyprocesscanvary (0$4 duringprocessstartupsandshutdownsandwhenthereisanequipmentfailure,processupset,or B*%6 othertypeofmalfunction.Wealsobelievethat,toareasonableextent,manyoftheseeventscan +&8 beanticipatedandcorrectiveactionsimplementedthatwillreduceairemissions.Therefore,asa -V(: generalprovisionforallNESHAPsourcecategories,werequireunder63.6(e)thatownersand  operatorsdevelopandimplementawrittenSSMplanthatdescribestheproceduresforoperating b andmaintainingthesourceduringSSMeventsandthecorrectiveactionsthatwillbetaken t duringaprocessorairpollutioncontrolequipmentmalfunction.AssuminganacceptableSSM & planisinplaceforafacility,compliancewiththeNESHAPduringSSMperiodsisdetermined 8  bywhethertheowneroroperatorimplementedtheappropriateactionsnecessarytomeetthe    applicablerequirementsspecifiedin63.6(e)(3).WeconsiderSSMeventstobedeviationsto  L  assurethatownersandoperatorscontinuouslycomplywiththerelevantstandardsin63.6(e)(3). ^    TominimizereportingrequirementsassociatedwithSSMeventstotheextentpossible,   weallowownersandoperatorstoincludeinformationintheirsemiannualcompliancereportson "r  thoseSSMeventsduringwhichactionstakenwereconsistentwiththeirSSMplan.Aseparate   reportforaparticularSSMeventisrequiredonlyifactionstakenwerenotconsistentwiththe 6 SSMplan. H   XX'` XX'  2.10.40  UseofEnvironmentalManagementSystemstoMeetSSMPlan \(#(# bm0  0(#(#Requirements heUm#XX m#  p(#(# + X` X.m+  Comment:Twocommenters(IVD07andIVD10)statedthatfacilitiesusing  EnvironmentalManagementSystems(EMS)willalreadyhaveinplacestandardoperating  p! proceduresthatincludedetailedoperatingconditionspertainingtoSSMconditions.Forthese # sources,thecommentersrequestedthattheruleallowtheworkpracticesdescribedinanEMSto 4% meettherequirementsfortheSSMplan. F '   Response:Section63.6(e)oftheNESHAPGeneralProvisionsin40CFR63SubpartA !) allowsownersandoperatorstouseastandardoperatingproceduresmanual,anOSHAplan,or  #Z+ anotherplantosatisfytherequirementtoprepareandmaintainanSSMplan,providedthe l$- existingplanincludesalloftheinformationrequiredfortheSSMplanbytheapplicable %!/ NESHAP. 0'"1  ,(9   XX  2.11RECORDKEEPINGANDREPORTING her#XX r#     XX  2.11.1DuplicationofRecordkeepingRequirements heYs#XX :s#  N   Comment:Severalcommenters(IVD05,IVD06,andIVD07)supportedthe <  streamliningoftherulesrecordkeepingrequirementstoavoidoverlapandduplicationwith N  otherMACTrules.TheyrecommendedcombiningtherecordsthatduplicateotherAct   requirements.Inparticular,theystatedthattherecordkeepingandmonitoringrequirementsin  b  theproposedruleduplicaterequirementsfortitleVpermitsforVOCstandards. t     Response:TitleVoftheActestablishestheminimumrequirementsforStateoperating &  permitprograms.UndertitleV,sourcessubjecttoaNESHAPmustalsohaveanapproved 8  permittooperatethatmeetstherequirementsin40CFRpart70.However,manysourcesthat   arenotsubjecttoaNESHAParerequiredtohaveanapprovedoperatingpermitthatmeetsthe L requirementsin40CFRpart70.Indevelopingthewoodbuildingproducts(surfacecoating) ^ NESHAP,werecognizethepotentialforregulatoryoverlapofthisrulewithcertainrequirements  forsourcessubjecttothetitleVpermittingrequirements.Therefore,therecordkeeping "r requirementsintherulewereselectedtofulfillallobligationswemustmeetunderSection112  yet,tothemaximumextentpracticableandconsistentwithActprovisions,avoidduplicationor 6 overlapwithrecordkeepingrequirementsundertitleV.Althoughtheseprovisionsaddressmany H  potentialoverlapsituationsthatcanbeanticipated,specialoruniquesitespecificsituationsdo " stillexistinwhichasurfacecoatingoperationissubjecttorequirementsunderboththe  \$ NESHAPandtitleV. n&   WhenevertheinformationrequiredbyatitleVpermitisthesameasthatrequiredbythe  ( NESHAP,duplicaterecordsarenotrequired.Thesameistrueforreportingrequirementsin 2"* whichtheinformationneededisthesame. #,   XX  2.11.2RecordsandReportingforZeroHAPCoatings or|#XX |#  X&!0   Comment:Fourcommenters(IVD05,IVD06,IVD07,andIVD10)requestedthat 'F#2 lessburdensomereportingrequirementsbeaddedtotheruletoexemptzeroHAPcoatings. X)$4 ConsistentwiththelargeappliancecoatingNESHAP,theruleshouldnotrequirecalculationsof * &6 theHAPcontentandrecordsorreportsofthevolumefractionofcoatingsolidsanddensityorthe ,l'8 organicHAPcontent.Thecommentersbelievedthatkeepingpurchasereceiptsfor1yearis  sufficienttodemonstratecompliance. b   Response:Weagreewiththecommentersandhavemadelanguagechangesinthefinal t ruletoreducethecalculation,reporting,andrecordkeepingrequirementsforzeroHAPcoatings & (seeresponsetocomment2.8.19). 8    AstothecommentontherecordretentionperiodsrequiredbytheruleforzeroHAP    coatings,theminimumrecordretentionperiodsrequiredforallsourcecategoryNESHAPare  L  specifiedintheGeneralProvisionsspecifiedin40CFR63SubpartA.Anowneroroperatoris ^  requiredtoretainallrecordsforatleast5yearsfollowingthedateofeachoccurrence,   measurement,maintenance,correctiveaction,report,orrecord.Therecordsforthemostrecent "r  2yearsmustberetainedonsite;recordsfortheremaining3yearsmayberetainedoffsitebut   muststillbereadilyavailableforreview.Thefilescanberetainedonmicrofilm,microfiche,a 6 computer,ormagneticdisks.Therearenospecialcircumstancesthatjustifyshorteningthese H minimumrecordretentionperiodsforthewoodbuildingproductssurfacecoatingsource  category.  \ &   XX  2.11.3InitialNotificationRequirements ord#XX E#   \    Comment:Onecommenter(IVD08)requestedthatthefinalruleexemptfacilitiesfrom " theinitialnotificationrequirementiftheyhavealreadysubmittedaninitialnotificationforthe  \$ Part1applicationunderSection112(j). n& 'n6  Response:TheGeneralProvisionsspecifiedin40CFR63SubpartAapplytoall  ( NESHAPsourcecategoriesinPart63.Under63.9(b),theowneroroperatorofafacility 2"* subjecttoaNESHAPforagivensourcecategorymustsubmitaninitial,writtennotificationto #, theEPAwithintheapplicabletimeperiodidentifyingthefacilityandthespecificNESHAP $F . subparttowhichthefacilityissubject.Inthiscase,theowneroroperatorofafacilitywithwood X&!0 buildingproductssurfacecoatingoperationssubjecttotheNESHAPisrequiredtoprepareand ' #2 submitaninitialnotification.Section112(j)oftheActrequiresownersandoperatorsofmajor )l$4 sourceswithinasourcecategorytoapplyforatitleVpermitshouldtheEPAfailtopromulgate ~*%6 emissionstandardsforthatsourcecategorybythedatespecifiedintheregulatoryschedule +0'8 establishedthroughSection112(e)oftheAct.Theapplicationrequirementsarespecifiedunder B-(: 40CFR63SubpartB.AlthoughtheSubpartBapplicationrequirementsincludesomeofthe  sameinformationrequiredfortheSubpartAinitialnotification(e.g.,facilityname,address,brief b descriptionofsource),thetwodocumentsservedifferentadministrativepurposesunderthe t NESHAPprogram.Therefore,itisnotappropriatetoprovideanexemptionasrequestedbythe & commenterinthefinalrule. 8    XX  2.11.4RecordkeepingforFacilitiesSubjecttoMultipleEmissionLimits ԍ#XX #   L    Comment:Onecommenter(IVD17)requestedthatrecordkeepingrequirementsfor   affectedsourcescoatingmultipleproductscoveredbytwoormoresubcategoriesbereduced. L  Theproposedrulerequiresrecordsdemonstratingcompliancewitheachapplicablelimitforall ^  products.Thisrequirementcanbesimplifiedbyallowingfacilitiestoaveragetheemissionlimits  foreachquarterbasedonthepreviousquartersactualproductionorcoatingusage. "r   Response:Assummarizedinresponse2.3.7,theprojectdatabasedoesnotsupportthe  optionofallowingsourcestochooseoneemissionlimitbasedontheamountofcoatingusedina 6 certainsubcategory.Anypotentiallyaffectedsourcewilleitherchoosetokeeprecordsforall H applicablesourcecategoriesandcomplywitheachlimitseparatelyorchoosetocomplywiththe  emissionlimitthatisthemoststringent.  \    Allowingfacilitiestoaveragetheemissionlimitsforeach3monthperiodbasedonthe n" previousmonthsactualproductionorcoatingusageisnotappropriateforthecompliance  $ determinations.Foragivencoatingoperation,productionratesandcoatingusageverylikelydo 2& notremainconstantfrommonthtomonth.Instead,weexpectthatproductionratesandcoating  ( usageformostwoodbuildingproductssurfacecoatingoperationsvaryeachmonthduetoa !F* varietyofsitespecificfactors.Thesefactorsincludemonthlyvariationsinthetypesandsizesof X#, productsmade(e.g.,thedimensionsofwoodwindowsmanufacturedandcoatedvaries $ . dependingonconsumerordersandinventoryneeds),theproductionratesoftheseproducts(e.g., &l!0 thenumbersofeachproductcoatedchangeduetoscheduledandunscheduledsuspensionof ~'"2 coatingoperationsbecauseofholidays,facilitywideshutdowns,orproductionlinemaintenance (0$4 orrepairs),andproductspecifications(e.g.,differentcolorproductsareofferedforsalerequiring B*%6  coatingswithdifferentformulation,orsomeversionsofaproductlinearesoldcoatedwitha +&8 primeronly).Thus,toreliablydeterminetheactualorganicHAPemissionsfromagivencoating  operationrequirestherecordingofthenecessarydataonacontinuousbasis. b   XX  2.12EMISSIONLIMITUNITS A#XX "#  &   XX  2.12.1UseofCoatingSolidsVolumeforEmissionLimits ؙ#XX #  t    Comment:Manycommenters(IVD03,IVD05,IVD06,IVD07,andIVD10)  b  recommendedthattheformatoftheemissionlimitstandardsbechangedtopoundsofVHAPper t   poundofsolidsinsteadoftheproposedemissionformatofmassofcoatingpersolidvolume. &  Thecommentersexplainedthatallindustryreportabledataareonaweightbasis(lb)orwet 8  volumebasis(gal).Useofanotherformatrequiresanadditionalcalculationandincreases   chanceforerror.CommenterIVD07addedthatEPAsreasonsfornotusingthelbVHAP/lb L solidsformatinthelargeappliancecoatingNESHAParenotapplicabletothewoodbuilding ^ productsindustrybecause(1)averagedrycoatingfilmthicknessesarenotconstant(requirements  rangefrom0.1milto3.0mil),and(2)useofmassofsolidsinthedenominatordoesnotpenalize "r operationsusinglowerdensitypigmentcoatingsandprovidesanadvantagetousersofhigh  densitycoatings.Thecommenterprovidedexamplecalculationstocomparebothformatsfor 6 threetypesofformulations. H    Response:Indevelopingtheproposedrule,wedecidedtheemissionlimitswouldbe " expressedinunitsofmassoforganicHAPpervolumeofcoatingsolids.Theperformancebased  \$ natureofthisformatgivesflexibilityincomplyingwiththeemissionlimits.Wespecifically n& selectedvolumeofcoatingsolidsasacomponentoftheemissionlimittonormalizetherateof  ( organicHAPemissionsacrossallsizesandtypesoffacilitieswithinasubcategory.Volumeof 2"* coatingsolidsusedisdirectlyrelatedtothesurfaceareacoatedand,therefore,providesan #, equitablebasisforallofthecoatingoperationssubjecttoagivensubcategoryemissionlimit, $F . regardlessofanydifferencesincoatingdensities.Inselectingtheformatfortheemissionlimit, X&!0 weconsideredusingmassoforganicHAPinthecoatingpermassofcoatingsolids.Although ' #2 werecognizethatthemassofthesolidsinacoatingissimplertodeterminethanthevolumeof )l$4 solids,amajordisadvantagetousingthisformattoestablishairemissionlimitsisthattheweight ~*%6  ofanequalvolumeofsolidsvariesdependingonthepigmentsandotheradditivesinthecoating. +0'8 AnemissionlimitexpressedasmassoforganicHAPpermassofcoatingsolidspotentially  wouldallowsomecoatingstoemitmoreorganicHAPthanothercoatingsonaperunitbasis. b    Weaddressedcoatingthicknessvariationsaswellasothercoatingparametervariations t betweendifferenttypesofwoodbuildingproductsbyestablishingseparatesubcategoriesof & woodbuildingproductsbasedonproductshavingsimilarcoatingandperformancerequirements. 8  Afterselectionofthesesubcategories,wethendevelopedindividualemissionlimitvalues    specificallyforeachsubcategorybasedonthecoatingdatawecollectedforthesubcategory.In  L  general,withineachofthesubcategorieswebelievethatmanufacturersusecoatingswithsimilar ^  formulationandapplicationrequirements.Forexample,allmanufacturersofwoodframe   windowsapplysimilartypesofprimersandfinishcoatings.Giventhatweareestablishing "r  emissionlimitsindividuallyforeachsubcategoryandthatthefacilitieswithineachsubcategory   sharesimilarcoatingrequirements,webelievethatitisappropriatetocontinuetousevolumeof 6 coatingsolidsasacomponentoftheemissionlimitsestablishedfortherule.Therefore,the H emissionlimitsinthefinalruleareexpressedintermsofmassoforganicHAPinthecoatingper  volumeofcoatingsolids.  \   XX  2.12.2Expressionof ZeroHAPEmissionLimits #XX #       Comment:Onecommenter(IVD03)statedthattheHAPemissionlimitsforcertain n" subcategoriesareexpressedintheproposedruleas 0.00HAPlevels.Compliancewithan  $ emissionlimitexpressedinsuchtermsisimpracticalbecauseHAPdetectioncapabilities 2& improvecontinuallyanddeminimiscontaminationfromunexpectedsourceispossibleevenina  ( coatingthatisazeroHAPcoatinginitsformulation.ThecommenteralsostatedthatzeroHAP !F* coatingsshouldbedefinedasthosenotexceedingtheOSHAdeminimisthresholdvaluesof X#, 1percentand0.1percentassuppliedorapplied. $ .   Response:TheresultsofourMACTflooranalysisshowthatMACTforsome &l!0 subcategorysourcesisuseofcoatingswithformulationsthatcontainverylowamountsof ~'"2 organicHAP.Werecognizethatwiththetestmethodsandlaboratoryinstrumentationavailable (0$4 today,verylowtraceamountsofspecificorganiccompoundscanbedetectedandquantifiedina B*%6 testsample.Therefore,wehaveaddedaprovisiontothefinalrulethatcoatingswithHAP +&8 contentsbelow1percentfornoncarcinogensand0.1percentforcarcinogensareconsideredtobe -V(: nonHAPandshouldbereportedasnoHAP.Toshowthattheemissionlimitsexpressedin  metricunitsaregreaterthanabsolutezeroandareconsistentwiththeaccuracylevelsassociated b withtheEnglishunits,themetricunitsoftheHAPemissionlimitshavebeenchangedfromkg/L t solidstog/Lsolids. &   XX  2.12.3UseofSignificantDigitsforEmissionLimits #XX b#       Comment:Onecommenter(IVD03)statedthatEPAshouldexpresstheMACTfloor 8   limitstotwosignificantdigits,nottotwodecimalplaces,atthevaluejustifiedbythedatabase.     Response:Wedevelopedindividualemissionlimitvaluesspecificallyforeach L  subcategorybasedonthecoatingdatawecollectedforthesubcategory.Theemissionlimitfor ^  eachsubcategorywasthenroundeduptotwodecimalplaces(usingEnglishunits).    Weagreethattheemissionlimitsshouldbeconsistentamongbothtypesofemission "r units.Thefinalruleincludesachangefromkg/Lsolidstog/Lsolidstomakethemetricunits  consistentwiththerequiredaccuracyoftheEnglishunits.Theemissionlimitsareexpressedto 6 twodecimalplacesforEnglishunitsandtothenearestintegerformetricunits(e.g.,1.53lbs H HAP/galsolids(183gHAP/litersolids)).    XX  2.12.4UseofMetricUnitsinEmissionLimitComplianceEquations #XX e#  n"   Comment:Manycommenters(IVD03,IVD05,IVD07andIVD10)opposedthe  \$ useofmetricunitsincomplianceequations.Reasonscitedbycommentersfortheiroppositionto n& usingmetricunitsincluded(1)Americansingeneraldonotunderstandmetricmeasurements;  ( (2)thewoodbuildingproductsindustrykeepsmeasurementdatainEnglishunits,andhavingto 2"* convertthesedatatometricunitswillleadtomistakesanddiscrepanciesinreporting;and #, (3)usingtheroundedmetricequivalentssetstheMACTflooratalevelbelowthetruefloor. $F . Alternatively,themetricequivalentsintheproposedruleneedtolistanadditionalsignificant X&!0 digitbecausetheproposalhasthemathematicaleffectofroundingdowntheEnglishunitslisted ' #2 parenthetically. )l$4   Response:Formanyyears,EPAhasroutinelyusedmetricunitstoexpresstheambient ~*%6 airqualityandairemissionstandardsestablishedbyitsrulemakings.Insomecases,wehave +0'8 chosentoexpressagivenstandardinbothmetricandEnglishunits.Forthisrule,theemission B-(: limitvaluesforeachsubcategoryareexpressedinEnglishunitsandanequivalentvalueinmetric  units. b   Thecommentersareincorrectinstatingthattheroundedmetricequivalentssetthe t MACTflooratalevelbelowthe truefloor.Indevelopingandselectingtheemissionlimit & levelsforeachofthesubcategories,thedataweusedfortheMACTfloordeterminationwere 8  expressedintheEnglishunits.Aftertheemissionlimitvalueswereselected,wethenconverted    theEnglishunitvaluestotheapproximatelyequivalentmetricunitvaluesbymultiplyingthe  L  Englishunitvaluebytheappropriateconversionfactorsandroundingtheanswertotwodecimal ^  places.     Theruledoesnotrequireanowneroroperatorwhoalreadymaintainsthefacilitys "r  coatingrecordsinEnglishunitstoconvertthesedatatometricunitsforthepurposeof   determiningcompliancewiththerule.Becauseeachsubcategoryemissionlimitvalueis 6 explicitlystatedintheruleinEnglishunitsandinmetricunits,thefacilityowneroroperatormay H chooseeitherofthevaluestouseforthecompliancedemonstration.    XX  2.12.5RoundingofComplianceCalculationValues #XX #  n   Comment:Onecommenter(IVD05)statedthattheruleshouldspecifywhether  \  compliancedemonstrationcalculationsaretoberoundedortruncatedtothenumberofdecimal n" placesspecifiedfortheapplicableemissionlimit.IfMethod311isused,thecompliance  $ procedurespecifiedintheproposedruleindicatesthatthevalueofthetotalmassfractionof 2& organicHAPdeterminedusingMethod311istobetruncatedtothreedecimalplaces.The  ( commenterrequestedthatEPAexplicitlyindicatethatenforcementwillbedemonstratedusing !F* resultsofthecalculationstruncatedtothreedigitsafterthedecimal. X#,   Response:Method311isthereferencetestmethodforEPAanalysisofHAPcompounds $ . inpaintsandcoatingsbydirectinjectionintoagaschromatograph.Themethodisusedto &l!0 determinethemassfractionofindividualHAPcompoundsinagivenpaint,coating,orrelated ~'"2 testmaterial.Method311isoneofseveraltestmethodsanowneroroperatormayelecttouse (0$4 underthewoodbuildingproductssurfacecoatingNESHAPtodeterminethemassfractionof B*%6 organicHAPineachcoating,thinner,andcleaningmaterialusedforacoatingoperation.In +&8 applyingMethod311tothecompliancedeterminationsfortheNESHAP,wespecifyintherule -V(: (see63.4741(a)(1)(11))thattheindividualHAPcompoundmassfractionsdeterminedusing  Method311firstbesummedtoobtainatotalmassfractionoforganicHAPinthetestedcoating, b thinner,orcleaningmaterial,andthatthisanswerthenbetruncatedtothreeplacesafterthe t decimalpoint.TheresultingtotalmassfractionorganicHAPvalueisoneofthemanyinput & valuessubsequentlyusedforthecompliancecalculationstodeterminetheoverallcoating 8  operationorganicHAPemissionratevaluethatiscomparedwiththeapplicableemissionlimit.      Weagreethattheemissionlimitsshouldhaveatleasttwosignificantdigits.Thefinal  L  ruleincludesachangefromkg/Lsolidstog/L.Compliancewiththeapplicableemissionlimitis ^  determinedbythecalculatedvalueforthecoatingoperationorganicHAPemissionraterounded   totwodecimalplaceswhenusingEnglishunitsorthenearestintegerwhenusingmetricunits, "r  g/Lsolids.   & b  XX  2.13DEFINITIONS s{#XX \#  H   XX  2.13.1Definitionof BuildingProducts s #XX #  6   Comment:Threecommenters(IVD05,IVD06,andIVD07)notedthatanumberof  productsbasedonagriculturalfiber,cementbinders,andplasticbinderssharethesameStandard 6 'bHMIndustrialClassification/NorthAmericanIndustryClassificationSystem(SIC/NAICS)codeas H  productscoveredbytheproposedrule.Unlessthedefinitionof buildingproductsisrevised, " plantscoatingtheseothertypesofproductswillbesubjecttocasebycaseMACT  \$ determinations.Thedefinitionsneedtospecifythatagriculturalfiber,cementbondedfiber,and n& woodplasticcompositebasedproductsmeetingspecificSIC/NAICScodesareexempt.  (   Response:AfacilitysSICorNAICScodeisnotoneoftheconditionsusedtodetermine 2"* applicabilityoftheruletoawoodbuildingproductsurfacecoatingoperation.Oneofthe #, conditionsthatisusedtodetermineruleapplicabilityisthewoodorwoodfibercontentofthe $F . buildingproductsmanufacturedatafacility.Thisapplicabilityconditionappliestocomposite X&!0 buildingproductsregardlessoftheothertypesofmaterialstheproductscontain.Eventhough ' #2 theproductsmentionedbythecommentersharethesameSIC/NAICScodesastraditionalwood )l$4 buildingproducts,iftheproductdoesnotcontain50percentwoodorwoodfiber(excludingany ~*%6 glasscomponents),itisnotconsideredtobeawoodbuildingproduct. +0'8  B-(:   XX  2.13.2Definitionof TotalVolatileHydrocarbon s#XX m#     Comment:Threecommenters(IVD05,IVD06,andIVD07)opposedusingthe N definitionof totalvolatilehydrocarbon(TVH)asthetotalamountofnonaqueousvolatile  organicmatterdeterminedaccordingtocertainmethods,withTVHsubstitutedforVOC.The  b commentersdidnotbelieveMethods204and204Athrough204Fwerethecorrectmethodsfor t  determiningTVH.  &    Response:Wedonotagreewiththecommentersconcernandbelievethedefinitionfor 8   totalvolatilehydrocarbon(TVH)isappropriatefortheintendeduseinthetestmethods.   Methods204AthroughFarethecorrectmethodsfordeterminingcaptureefficiency.Allof L  thesemethodsrelyontheuseofaflameionizationanalyzer(FIA)astheanalyticaltechnique. ^  Thisruledoesnotchangeormodifythemethodsexcepttochangetheterminologyofthe  compoundsmeasuredbythe(FIA)from VOCto TVH. "r   Iftheconcernisnotregardingtheterminologybut,infact,isabeliefthatMethods204A  throughFarenottheappropriatemethodsfordeterminingcaptureefficiency(orwishtomodify 6 themethodsinsomeway),theowner/operatorcanapplyfortheuseofanalternativemethod H undertheprovisionsof63.4765(e).  &   XX  2.13.3 FacilityUsedInterchangeablywithSource sn#XX O#  n"   Comment:Threecommenters(IVD05,IVD06,andIVD07)suggestedthattherule  \$ definetheterm facilitybecausethewordisusedinterchangeablywith source. n& 'n@  Response:WerecentlypromulgatedrevisionstotheGeneralProvisionsin40CFR63  ( SubpartAthatareapplicabletoalloftheindividualsourcecategoryNESHAP.Theserevisions 2"* includedrevisedlanguagetoaddressconfusionwiththeuseoftermssuchas facility, source, #, and affectedsourceintherules.Theterm affectedsourcewasrevisedtomean the $F . collectionofequipment,activities,orbothwithasinglecontinuousareaandundercommon X&!0 control.Inthefinalrule,wecorrectedalloftherulelanguagetobeconsistentwiththe ' #2 revisionsintheNESHAPGeneralProvisions.Inparticular,wereplacedtheterm facilitythat )l$4 wasusedintheproposedrulewitheithertheterm sourceor affectedsourceasappropriateto ~*%6 beconsistentwithmeaningsintheamendedNESHAPGeneralProvisiondefinitions. +0'8  B-(:   XX  2.13.4UndefinedTerms sm#XX N#     Comment:Onecommenter(IVD11)statedthatdefinitionsfortheterms millwork, N  sheathing,and solventblendsshouldbeaddedtothefinalrule.    Response:Wehaveaddedanewdefinitiontothefinalrule: Millworkmeanslumber  b thathasbeenremanufacturedintoawoodbuildingproductorcomponentsuchasdoor,window, t  orstaircaseparts,ordecorativetrim.Webelievetheterm solventblendsasdescribedin  &  Tables5and6intheruleiseasilyunderstood.Theterm sheathingisassociatedwithoneof 8   theenduseapplicationsforfiberboardproducts,andsuchproductsarenotcoveredbythefinal   rule(seecomment/response2.2.3).Therefore,wehavenotdefinedtheterms solventblendsor L   sheathinginthefinalrule. ^    XX  2.14MISCELLANEOUSCOMMENTS s#XX #  "r   XX  2.14.1CatalyticOxidizerInspectionandMaintenancePlanRequirements s#XX o#   e  Comment:Severalcommentswerereceived(commentersIVD07andIVD10) ^ regardingtheproposedinspectionandmaintenanceplanrequirementsforcatalyticoxidizers  under63.4767(b)(4).Thecommentersstatedthattherequirementforperiodicallyadjustingthe "r airtofuelratioshouldberemovedfromtheproposedinspectionandmaintenanceplan   requirementsbecauseithasnoperformancebenefit.Thecommentersalsostatedthatthephrase 6"  consistentwiththemanufacturersrecommendationshouldberemovedfromproposed H$ inspectionandmaintenanceplanrequirementsbecause,accordingtothecommenters,the & manufacturersofthisequipmenthavenotstayedinbusinesssufficientlylongtobeabletomake  !\( recommendations.Finally,thecommentersstatedthatthecatalysttestproceduresshouldbe n"* workedoutbetweenthefacilityandthecatalysttestprovider,notthemanufacturerorsupplieras # , specifiedintheproposedinspectionandmaintenanceplanrequirements. 2% .   Response:Theruledoesnotrequireanowneroroperatortouseacatalyticoxidizer.The &!0 requirementsforcatalyticoxidizersundertheruleapplyonlytothoseownersandoperatorsthat 'F#2 electtocomplywiththeruleusingcomplianceOption3(compliancebasedontheapplicable X)$4 emissionratewithaddoncontrols)andalsochoosetouseacatalyticoxidizerastheaddon * &6 controldevice.Also,ownersandoperatorsthatcomplywiththeruleusingOption3arenot ,l'8 limitedtousingcatalyticoxidizers.Anowneroroperatormayselectfromavarietyofcontrol  devicetypesthatremoveordestroytheorganicsinacapturedgasstreamasbestsuitedtomeet b thetechnicalrequirementsofthefacilityoperationsandthepreferencesofthefacilityowneror t operator. &   Wedisagreewiththeassertionbycommentersthatmanufacturersofcatalyticoxidizers 8  havenotbeeninbusinesslongenoughtorecommendinspectionandmaintenanceprocedures.    Catalyticoxidationisaprovenorganicemissioncontroltechnology.Ithasbeenusedsuccessfully  L  inmanyindustrialapplicationstocontrolorganicemissionsincapturedgasstreams.These ^  applicationsincludeemissionsourceswithcapturedgasstreamcharacteristicssimilartothose   thatcouldbepresentinacapturedgasstreamfromwoodbuildingproductsurfacecoating "r  operations.Catalyticoxidizermanufacturersandthecatalystsuppliershavethetechnical   expertiseandfieldexperiencetoproperlyassistthefacilityownersoroperatorindesigning, 6 operating,andmaintainingacatalystoxidizerforagivenapplication. H   Wereviewedallrequirementsforcatalyticoxidizersintheproposedruleandparticularly  theprovisionsfortheinspectionandmaintenanceplanforwhichwereceivedcomments.The  \ purposeoftheinspectionandmaintenanceplanistohelpassurethatthecatalyticoxidizer n continuestobeoperatedattheconditionsthatwillachieveorexceedtheemissiondestruction    efficiencyforthecontroldevicedemonstratedbytheperformancetest.Aregularinspectionand 2" maintenanceprogramisessentialforearlydetectionofpotentialcontroldevicemalfunctionsor $ unusualoperatingconditionssothatthepropercorrectiveactionscanbetakeninatimelymanner. F& Basedonourreview,wedecidedthattworevisionstotherulerequirementsfortheinspectionand X ( maintenanceplanwerewarranted.Weconcludedthatarequirementforperiodicadjustmentof ! * theairtofuelratioisnotneededtoassurecomplianceofacatalyticoxidizer.Wehaveremoved #l, therequirementforperiodicallyadjustingtheairtofuelratiointheinspectionandmaintenance ~$. planfromthefinalrule.Wealsoagreethatthecatalysttestprovidersshouldbeconsultedwhile %0!0 determiningcatalysttestprocedurestofollowduringtheperformancetest. B'"2   XX  2.14.2ErrorsinFederalRegisterProposalNotice s#XX #  *V%6   Comment:Onecommenter(IVD11)identifiedthefollowingerrorsinthetextandtables +&8 oftheproposedpreambleandruleaspublishedintheFederalRegisternoticeonJune21,2002 -V(: (67FR424000):(1)underthepreambledescriptiontotheemissionlimitsforcompliance  Option1onPage42406oftheproposedrule,thesecondoccurrenceoftheword coatingshould b be cleaning;(2)inTable3,theword andshouldfollowitem2.a.forclarity;(3)inTable3, t thereferenceto63.4768(f)(1)and63.4768(f)(2)shouldbeto63.4768(g)(1)and & 63.4768(g)(2),respectively,foritem5.a.1ofthetable;(4)inTable3,thereferenceto 8  63.4747(e)shouldbeto63.4767(f)initem6.a.ofthetable;(5)inTable3,thereferenceto    $63.4768(f)shouldbeto63.4768(g)initem6.a.i.ofthetable;(6)inTable3,thereferenceto  L  63.4767(g)shouldbeto63.4767(d)initem7.a.ofthetable(inaddition,thisitemshouldbe ^  followedbytheword andforclarity);(7)inTable3,thereferenceto63.4768(g)shouldbeto   63.4768(f)initem7.a.i.ofthetable;(8)item7.b.Table3statesthattheaveragepressuredrop "r  mustnotfallbelowthelimitestablishedaccordingto63.4767(g),whereas63.4767(e)states   thatthispressuredropmustbeamaximum(thisitemshouldstatethatthepressuredropmustnot 6  exceedthelimitestablishedaccordingto63.4767(e),andtheword aboveinitem7.b.iii. H shouldbechangedto below);and(9)inTable3,thereferenceto63.4768(g)shouldbeto  63.4768(f)initem7.b.i.ofthetable.  \   Response:Forthosecommentsrelatedtothespecificregulatorylanguageintheproposed n rule,wecorrectedallofthelanguageandcitationerrorsidentifiedbythecommenterthatwere    relevanttothelanguageinthefinalrule. 2"   $ ` ` @Thispageintentionallyleftblank. `      8XXdXXd8XaXXXXXe*p dddd dd ZYX%X%p, td ,ktd ,td ,ktd ,att +  >YYYY+ W>#XXXXa@#@  TECHNICALREPORTDATA  Jj @ (PleasereadInstructionsonreversebeforecompleting) OYYY>&,L  W YYYY O1.REPORTNO. ~ ЀEPA453/R03003 8YYY'&YYY 82. ~  =YYYY*&YYY =3.RECIPIENT'SACCESSIONNO. QYYB&~   YYYY Q4.TITLEANDSUBTITLE   ! $XX!0  NationalEmissionStandardsforHazardousAirPollutantsfor 2  WoodBuildingProducts(SurfaceCoating)!Background   InformationforFinalStandards  PP 0  SummaryofPublicCommentsandResponses XYYYE6  PPYQQYY X% X$XW %5.REPORTDATE  ЀJanuary2003 C9&2  YYY C .YYY S s .6.PERFORMINGORGANIZATIONCODE    QYYB&c   YYY Q7.AUTHOR(S) , L  ЀH.LynnDail,ESD:CG =YYY* YY =8.PERFORMINGORGANIZATIONREPORTNO. , L   QYYB&   YYY Q9.PERFORMINGORGANIZATIONNAMEANDADDRESS (H  ЀEmissionStandardsDivision   ЀOfficeofAirQualityPlanningandStandards   ЀU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency t ЀResearchTrianglePark,NC27711 NYYY;,VvQQ0YY N10.PROGRAMELEMENTNO. (H   C9&   YYY C .YYY  .11.CONTRACT/GRANTNO. y Ѐ68D01079 QYYB&!  YYY Q12.SPONSORINGAGENCYNAMEANDADDRESS  ЀOfficeofAirandRadiation Rr  ЀU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency 4T! ЀWashington,DC20460 NYYY;,6"6YY N13.TYPEOFREPORTANDPERIODCOVERED # ЀFinal(8/02!1/03) C9&Rr$  YYY C .YYY >^$ .14.SPONSORINGAGENCYCODE %  UYYYB&Nn&  YYY U15.SUPPLEMENTARYNOTES '  UYYYB&Jj(  YYY U16.ABSTRACT ) ! $XX!0  OnJune21,2002,theU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)proposednationalemissionstandards Ff* forhazardousairpollutants(NESHAP)forwoodbuildingproducts(surfacecoating)(67FR34548)under (H+ authorityofSection112oftheCleanAirAct(Act).Publiccommentswerereceivedfrom21sources  *, consistingmainlyofwoodbuildingproductsmanufacturers,coatingmanufacturers,variousindustrytrade  - associations,andGovernmentagencies.Allofthecommentsthatweresubmittedandtheresponsesto . thesecommentsaresummarizedinthisdocument.Thissummaryisthebasisfortherevisionsmadetothe / standardsbetweenproposalandpromulgation. _YYYL00%%  YYY _% X$X%17.@ssKEYWORDSANDDOCUMENTANALYSIS QYYB& &1  YYY Qa.@   DESCRIPTORS 9YY*!<2YY 9b.IDENTIFIERS/OPENENDEDTERMS 9YYY&!<3YY 9c.COSATIField/Group NYY?#!<4  YYY gNЀAirpollution 2"R 5 ЀCarbonadsorber #4!6 ЀCoating #"7 ЀMonitoring $"8 ЀThermaloxidizers %#9 ЀVolatileorganiccompounds &$: ЀWoodbuildingproducts ~'%;  9YY*`(&<YY 9AirPollutionControl 2"R = Flatwood #4!> HazardousAirPollutants #"? NESHAP $"@ SurfaceCoating %#A WoodBuildingProducts 9YYY&&$BYY 9 PYYY?#2"R C g YYY P18.DISTRIBUTIONSTATEMENT )'D ̀ReleaseUnlimited JYY;,>+^)Foo:YYY J19.SECURITYCLASS(Report) )'G ЀUnclassified 9YYY&\*|(HYY 921.NO.OFPAGES )'I Ѐ  103  @6#\*|(J  YYY @ ,YYY H+h)J ,20.SECURITYCLASS(Page) +)K ЀUnclassified 9YYYY&X,x*LYYY 922.PRICE3)'+)M    YYYY 3XaXXX EPAForm22201(Rev.477)  ` PREVIOUSEDITIONISOBSOLETE  6.V,N #XXXXaط#TRP$'3 Letter LandscapeX3' Letter'3 Letter Landscape3'TXXXX'0#X4XX'AYk) xdE1A  30#X4X0#X4X3#XX!#XX  UnitedStates0 0 OfficeofAirQualityPlanningandStandards0#0202PublicationNo.EPA453/R03003#XX"#XX#2#2   EnvironmentalProtection0 0 AirQualityStrategiesandStandardsDivision0#02020@##2#20@#/2/20@#/2/20@#/2/20@#/2/2January2003P#2#2   Agency0 0 ResearchTrianglePark,NCG0202 AYk) xdE1A#XX##      0  #