27132 Federal Register /Vol. 61, No. 105/Thursday, May 30 ... · PDF file30.05.1996 · 27132 Federal Register/Vol. 61, No. 105/Thursday, May 30, 1996/Rules and Regulations...

27132 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 105 / Thursday, May 30, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONAGENCY

40 CFR Parts 9 and 63

[AD–FRL–5509–1]

RIN 2060–AD95

National Emission Standards forHazardous Air Pollutants; FinalStandards for Hazardous Air PollutantEmissions From the Printing andPublishing Industry

AGENCY: Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA).ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This action promulgatesnational emission standards forhazardous air pollutants (NESHAP)under section 112 of the Clean Air Act(CAA), as amended in 1990 for theprinting and publishing industry. TheNESHAP requires existing and newmajor sources to control emissions usingthe maximum achievable controltechnology (MACT) to controlhazardous air pollutants (HAP). Thestandards were proposed in the FederalRegister on March 14, 1995 (60 FR13664). This Federal Register actionannounces the EPA’s final decisions onthe rule.

The final rule includes organic HAPemission limits for publicationrotogravure, product and packagingrotogravure, and wide-web flexographicprinting. A variety of organic HAP areused as solvents and components ofinks and other materials used byprinters. The HAP emitted by thefacilities covered by this final ruleinclude xylene, toluene, ethylbenzene,methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutylketone, methanol, ethylene glycol, andcertain glycol ethers. All of thesepollutants can cause reversible orirreversible toxic effects followingexposure. The potential toxic effectsinclude eye, nose, throat, and skinirritation; and damage to the heart, liver,kidneys, and blood cells. The final ruleis estimated to reduce baselineemissions of HAP by 31 percent or 6700megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (7400 tonsper year (tpy)).

The emissions reductions achieved bythese standards, combined with theemissions reductions achieved bysimilar standards, will achieve theprimary goal of the CAA, which is to‘‘enhance the quality of the Nation’s airresources so as to promote the publichealth and welfare and productivecapacity of its population’’. The intentof this final regulation is to protect thepublic health by requiring the maximumdegree of reduction in emissions of

organic HAP from new and existingsources, taking into consideration thecost of achieving such emissionreduction, any nonair quality, healthand environmental impacts, and energyrequirements.EFFECTIVE DATE: May 30, 1996.ADDRESSES: Background InformationDocument. The background informationdocument (BID) for the promulgatedstandards may be obtained from the U.S.Department of Commerce, NationalTechnical Information Service,Springfield, Virginia, 22161, telephonenumber (703) 487–4650. Please refer to‘‘National Emission Standards forHazardous Air Pollutants for thePrinting and Publishing Industry—Background Information forPromulgated Standards,’’ EPA–453/R–96–005b. The BID contains (1) asummary of the changes made to thestandards since proposal, and (2) asummary of all the public commentsmade on the proposed standards and theAdministrator’s response to thecomments.

Electronic versions of thepromulgation BID as well as this finalrule are available for download from theEPA’s Technology Transfer Network(TTN), a network of electronic bulletinboards developed and operated by theOffice of Air Quality Planning andStandards. The TTN providesinformation and technology exchange invarious areas of air pollution control.The service is free, except for the costof a phone call. Dial (919) 541–5742 fordata transfer of up to 14,400 bits persecond. If more information on TTN isneeded, contact the systems operator at(919) 541–5384.

Docket. Docket No. A–92–42,containing supporting information usedin developing the promulgatedstandards, is available for publicinspection and copying from 8 a.m. to5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, atthe EPA Air and Radiation Docket andInformation Center, Waterside Mall,Room M–1500, Ground Floor, 401 MStreet, SW, Washington, DC 20460;telephone number (202) 260–7548, FAX(202) 260–4400. A reasonable fee maybe charged for copying.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.David Salman at (919) 541–0859,Emission Standards Division (MD–13),U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,Research Triangle Park, North Carolina27711.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated EntitiesEntities potentially regulated by this

action are those which have thepotential to emit HAP listed in section

112(b) of the CAA in the followingregulated categories and entities:

Category Examples of regulatedentities

Industry ......... Printers, publishers, andmanufacturers of packag-ing, wall and floor cover-ings, house furnishingsand sanitary paper prod-ucts employing rotogravureprinting or wide-web flexo-graphic printing tech-nologies.

This table is not intended to beexhaustive, but rather provides a guidefor readers regarding entities likely to beregulated by this action. This table liststhe types of entities that the EPA is nowaware could potentially be regulated bythis action. Other types of entities notlisted in the table could also beregulated. To determine whether yourfacility is regulated by this action, youshould carefully examine theapplicability criteria in § 63.820 of therule. If you have questions regarding theapplicability of this action to aparticular entity, consult the personlisted in the preceding FOR FURTHERINFORMATION CONTACT section of thispreamble.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,judicial review of NESHAP is availableonly by the filing of a petition for reviewin the U.S. Court of Appeals for theDistrict of Columbia Circuit within 60days of today’s publication of this rule.Under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, therequirements that are the subject oftoday’s notice may not be challengedlater in civil or criminal proceedingsbrought by the EPA to enforce theserequirements.

The information presented in thispreamble is organized as follows:

I. BackgroundA. Regulatory Background and PurposeB. Common Sense Initiative

II. The StandardsIII. Summary of ImpactsIV. Significant Changes to the Proposed

StandardsA. Public ParticipationB. Comments on the Proposed StandardsC. Significant ChangesD. Minor Changes

V. Administrative RequirementsA. DocketB. Paperwork Reduction ActC. Executive Order 12866: Administrative

Designation and Regulatory AnalysisD. Executive Order 12875E. Regulatory Flexibility ActF. Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995G. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA)

27133Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 105 / Thursday, May 30, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

I. Background

A. Regulatory Background and PurposeSection 112 of the CAA requires

control of emissions of HAP to protectpublic health and the environment. Thisfinal regulation will reduce emissions oforganic HAP from rotogravure andwide-web flexographic printingoperations.

In part, section 112 requires thatemission standards be promulgated forall categories of major sources of HAP,and for many categories of small ‘‘area’’sources. The CAA lists 189 HAPbelieved to cause adverse health orenvironmental effects. Major sources aredefined as those that emit or have thepotential to emit at least 10 tons peryear of any single HAP or 25 tons peryear of any combination of HAP.

In the July 16, 1992, Federal Register(57 FR 31576), the EPA published theinitial list of categories of sources slatedfor regulation. This list includes theprinting and publishing category.Emissions standards for the listedsource categories are required to bepromulgated between November 1992and November 2000.

Congress specified that each of thesestandards must require the maximumreduction in emissions of HAP that theEPA determines is achievableconsidering cost, non-air-quality healthand environmental impacts, and energyrequirements. In essence, these MACTstandards ensure that all major sourcesof air toxics achieve the level of controlalready being achieved by the bettercontrolled and lower emitting sources ineach category. This approach creates alevel economic playing field, ensuringthat facilities that employ cleanerprocesses and good emissions controlsare not disadvantaged relative tocompetitors with poorer controls. At thesame time, this approach providesassurance to every citizen, in everycommunity, that any major source oftoxic air pollution located nearby willhave to effectively control its emissions.

All U.S. publication rotogravurefacilities and some product andpackaging rotogravure and wide-webflexographic printing facilities are majorsources of HAP emissions, with thepotential to emit over 23 Mg/yr (25 tpy)of organic HAP, including toluene,xylene, ethylbenzene, methanol, methylethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone,ethylene glycol, and certain glycolethers. All of these pollutants can causereversible or irreversible toxic effectsfollowing exposure. The potential toxiceffects include irritation of the eyes,nose, throat, and skin; and damage tothe heart, liver, kidneys, and bloodcells.

The EPA recognizes that the degree ofadverse effects to health resulting fromthe most significant emissions identifiedcan range from mild to severe. Theextent to which the effects could beexperienced is dependent upon theambient concentrations and exposuretime. The latter is further influenced bysource-specific characteristics such asemission rates and local meteorologicalconditions. Human variability factors,including genetics, age, pre-existinghealth conditions, and lifestyle alsoinfluence the degree to which effects tohealth occur.

The final standards will reduceorganic HAP emissions from rotogravureand wide-web flexographic printingoperations by 6,700 Mg/yr (7,400 tpy)from a baseline level of 21,700 Mg/yr(23,900 tpy). No small firms are at riskof closure as a result of the finalstandards, and there will not be asignificant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities.

B. Common Sense Initiative

On October 17, 1994, theAdministrator established the CommonSense Initiative (CSI) Council inaccordance with the Federal AdvisoryCommittee Act (U.S.C. App. 2, section9(c)) requirements. The CSI addressessix industrial sectors. The Printing CSISubcommittee addresses the Printingand Publishing industry.

The following are the six principles ofthe CSI program, as stated in the‘‘Advisory Committee Charter.’’

1. Regulation. Review existingregulations for opportunities to getbetter environmental results at less cost.Improve new rules through increasedcoordination.

2. Pollution Prevention. Activelypromote pollution prevention as thestandard business practice and a centralethic of environmental protection.

3. Recordkeeping and Reporting.Make it easier to provide, use, andpublicly disseminate relevant pollutionand environmental information.

4. Compliance and Enforcement. Findinnovative ways to assist companiesthat seek to comply and exceed legalrequirements while consistentlyenforcing the law for those that do notachieve compliance.

5. Permitting. Improve permitting sothat it works more efficiently,encourages innovation, and createsmore opportunities for publicparticipation.

6. Environmental Technology. Giveindustry the incentives and flexibility todevelop innovative technologies thatmeet and exceed environmentalstandards while cutting costs.

The Printing CSI Subcommittee metfor the first time just before theproposed rule was published. SeveralSubcommittee members were veryinvolved in the development of theproposed rule. All Subcommitteemembers were made aware of theproposal and copies of the proposalwere provided to all interestedSubcommittee members. Although theSubcommittee did not choose to makereview of the proposed rule one of itsprojects, several Subcommitteemembers did submit comments on theproposed rule. The subcommittee wasprovided with an update on the finalrule at its March 19, 1996 meeting.

Many aspects of the CSI principles arereflected in the final standards. Thealternatives considered in thedevelopment of this regulation,including those alternatives selected asstandards for new and existing printingfacilities, are based on process andemissions data received from over 600printing facilities. The EPA met withindustry and trade groups on numerousoccasions to discuss these data. Inaddition, printers, trade organizations,ink manufacturers, and State and localregulatory authorities commented ondraft versions of the proposed regulationand on the proposed regulation. Twotrade organizations provided extensivecomments. All comments wereconsidered, and a number of changes tothe final rule reflect these comments. Ofmajor concern to industry were theopportunity to comply throughpollution prevention by using low HAPcontent materials, the analytical methodfor HAP content determination, relianceon formulation data for HAP andvolatile matter determination, andflexible compliance demonstrationprovisions that account for differentconfigurations of work stations andprinting presses within a facility.

The regulation allows sources theflexibility to select from various optionsfor compliance. Sources may reduceHAP usage and emissions throughconversion to waterborne, lower HAPsolvent-borne or ultraviolet/electronbeam cure materials. Alternatively,sources may install or upgrade existingcapture and control devices to meet theproposed standard. Finally, sourceshave the option to comply by acombination of lower HAP materialsand capture and control. Facilities mayselect the most cost-effective optionbased on facility specific considerations.

The final rule allows existing facilitiesthree years from the date ofpromulgation to comply. This is themaximum amount of time allowedunder the CAA. This time frame willprovide the greatest opportunity for


developing and adopting low-HAPcontent materials, and provide sufficienttime for facilities that choose to installor upgrade capture and controlequipment.

Included in the final rule are methodsfor determining initial compliance aswell as monitoring, recordkeeping, andreporting requirements. All of thesecomponents are necessary to ensure thatsources will comply with the standardsboth initially and over time. However,the EPA has made every effort tosimplify the requirements in the rule.The EPA has also attempted to maintainconsistency with existing regulations.

Representatives from other interestedEPA offices and programs wereincluded in the regulatory developmentprocess as members of the work group.The work group reviewed andconcurred with the regulation beforeproposal and promulgation. Therefore,the EPA believes that the implicationsto other EPA offices and programs havebeen adequately considered during thedevelopment of the rule.

II. The StandardsThe final rule is applicable to all

existing and new rotogravure and wide-web flexographic facilities that aremajor sources of HAP or are located atplant sites that are major sources ofHAP.

Publication rotogravure facilitiessubject to this rule must limit emissionsof organic HAP to no more than eightpercent of the total volatile matter usedeach month. The emission limitationmay be achieved by capture and controlof at least 92 percent of organic HAPused, by substitution of non-HAPmaterials for organic HAP, or by acombination of capture and controltechnologies and substitution ofmaterials.

Product and packaging rotogravureand wide-web flexographic printingfacilities subject to this rule must limitemissions to no more than five percentof the organic HAP applied each month,or to no more than four percent of themass of inks, coatings, varnishes,adhesives, primers, solvents, reducers,thinners, and other materials appliedeach month, or to no more than 20percent of the solids applied eachmonth, or to an equivalent allowablemass based on the as-applied solidscontents of the materials applied eachmonth.

Section 112(a) of the CAA definesmajor source as a source, or group ofsources, located within a contiguousarea and under common control thatemits or has the potential to emit,considering controls, 9.1 Mg/yr (10 tpy)or more of any individual HAP or 22.7

Mg/yr (25 tpy) or more of anycombination of HAP. Area sources arestationary sources that do not qualify as‘‘major.’’ ‘‘Potential to emit’’ is definedin the section 112 General Provisions(40 CFR 63.2) as ‘‘the maximumcapacity of a stationary source to emita pollutant under its physical oroperational design.’’ Any physical oroperational limitation on the capacity ofthe stationary source to emit a pollutant,including air pollution controlequipment and restrictions on the hoursof operation or on the type or amountof material combusted, stored, orprocessed, shall be treated as part of itsdesign if the limitation or the effect itwould have on emissions is Federallyenforceable.

The EPA notes that in recentdecisions, National Mining Ass’n v.EPA, 59 F.3d 1351 (D.C. Cir. 1995) andChemical Manufacturers Ass’n v. EPA,No. 89–1514, slip op. (D.C. Cir. Sept. 15,1995), the District of Columbia Circuitcourt addressed challenges related tothe EPA’s requirement that a sourcewhich wishes to limit its potential toemit must obtain a federally enforceablelimit for the New Source Review andNESHAP programs. The EPA iscurrently reviewing its Federalenforceability requirements in light ofthese court decisions, and has not yetdecided how it will address this issue.Once the EPA has completed its reviewof the Federal enforceabilityrequirements in all relevant programsincluding the NESHAP program, theEPA will make available in a FederalRegister notice its response to the courtdecisions. In the interim, the EPA hasissued its Interim Policy onEnforceability of Limitations onPotential to Emit (January 22, 1996),which summarizes how certain State-enforceable limits may be recognizedunder this definition pending furtherrulemaking.

To determine the applicability of thisrule to facilities that are within acontiguous area of other HAP-emittingemission sources that are not part of thesource category covered by this rule, theowner or operator must determinewhether the plant site as a whole is amajor source. A formal HAP emissionsinventory must be used to determine iftotal potential HAP emissions from allHAP emission sources at the plant sitemeet the definition of a major source. Ifthe facility commits to HAP usagerestrictions as provided in the rule thatensure potential HAP emissions will bebelow the major source cutoffs, onlysimplified reporting and recordkeepingrequirements apply. A facility may alsolimit its potential to emit through otherappropriate mechanisms that may be

available through the permittingauthority.

Existing major sources may switch toarea source status by obtaining andcomplying with a federally enforceablelimit on their potential to emit prior tothe ‘‘compliance date’’ of the regulation.The ‘‘compliance date’’ for existingsources for this regulation is defined asMay 30, 1999. New major sources arerequired to comply with the NESHAPrequirements upon start-up or thepromulgation date, whichever is later. Afacility that has not obtained federallyenforceable limits on its potential toemit by the compliance date, and thathas not complied with the NESHAPrequirements, will be in violation of theNESHAP. All sources that are majorsources for HAP on the compliance dateor become major sources after thecompliance date are required to complypermanently with the NESHAP toensure that the maximum achievablereductions in toxic emissions areachieved and maintained.

The final standards impose limits onorganic HAP emissions from rotogravureand wide-web flexographic printing.Publication rotogravure facilities mustdemonstrate compliance on a monthlybasis considering all organic HAP usedon publication rotogravure presses andall affiliated equipment, including proofpresses, cylinder and parts cleaners, inkand solvent mixing and storageequipment, and solvent recoveryequipment. Facilities may comply usingcapture and control equipment,substitution of non-HAP solvents forHAP, or a combination of thesemethods.

Product and packaging rotogravureand wide-web flexographic printingfacilities must demonstrate complianceon a monthly basis considering allorganic HAP applied on product andpackaging rotogravure and wide-webflexographic printing presses. Certainpresses which are used primarily forcoating, laminating, or printing usingother technologies than rotogravureprinting and wide-web flexographicprinting may be excluded from theaffected source, subject only tosimplified recordkeeping requirements.Owners or operators of such equipmentwill be subject to the appropriate sourcecategory standard when such a standardis issued.

Product and packaging rotogravureand wide-web flexographic printers maycomply through the use of capture andcontrol equipment, the substitution ofnon-HAP solvents for HAP, or acombination of these methods. Facilitiesmay comply on the basis of organic HAPemissions per mass of solids applied,organic HAP emissions per mass of


materials applied, allowable organicHAP emissions based on the as-appliedsolids content of the materials applied,or overall organic HAP controlefficiency.

III. Summary of ImpactsThese standards will reduce

nationwide emissions of HAP fromrotogravure and wide-web flexographicprinting operations by approximately6700 Mg/yr (7400 tpy) in 1999compared to the emissions that wouldresult in the absence of the standards.These standards will also, to someextent, reduce volatile organiccompounds (VOC) emissions from thosesame operations compared to theemissions that would result in theabsence of the standards. The extent ofthe reduction in VOC emissions cannotbe predicted because of uncertainty overthe extent to which printers will complythrough substitution of water and non-VOC organics for organic HAP. Nosignificant adverse secondary air, water,solid waste, or energy impacts areanticipated from the promulgation ofthese standards.

Implementation of this regulation isexpected to result in nationwide annualcosts (including capital recovery) ofapproximately $40 million beyondbaseline. These costs include $21million per year for publicationrotogravure printers and $19 million peryear for package and productrotogravure and wide-web flexographicprinters. These costs include capitalrecovery over a ten year period,operating costs for newly installed andupgraded capture and control systems,and costs for recordkeeping, reporting,and monitoring. Cost estimates forpublication rotogravure printers remainunchanged from the proposed rule.Estimated costs for package and productrotogravure and wide-web flexographicprinters are $2 million less than thosefor the proposed rule as a result of thefacility-wide definition of affectedsource.

The economic impact analysisconducted before proposal showed thatthe economic impacts from theproposed standards would beinsignificant. Since compliance costsand reporting and recordkeepingburdens have been reduced in the finalrule, the economic impacts of the finalrule are also insignificant.

IV. Significant Changes to the ProposedStandards

A. Public Participation

The standards were proposed and thepreamble was published in the FederalRegister on March 14, 1995 (60 FR

13664). The preamble to the proposedstandards discussed the availability ofthe regulatory text and proposal BID,which described the regulatoryalternatives considered and the impactsof those alternatives. Public commentswere solicited at the time of proposal,and copies of the regulatory text andBID were distributed to interestedparties. Electronic versions of thepreamble, regulation, and BID weremade available to interested parties viathe TTN (see SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATION section of this preamble). Acorrection notice which addressedminor typographical errors waspublished in the Federal Register onApril 3, 1995 (60 FR 16920).

The preamble to the proposedstandards provided the public theopportunity to request a public hearing.However, a public hearing was notrequested. The public comment periodwas from March 14, 1995 to May 30,1995. In all, 117 comment letters werereceived. The comments have beencarefully considered, and changes havebeen made to the proposed standardswhen determined by the Administratorto be appropriate.

B. Comments on the ProposedStandards

Comments on the proposed standardswere received from 117 commenters; thecommenters were comprised of printers,ink manufacturers, State and local airpollution control agencies, tradeorganizations for printers and controlequipment manufacturers, and citizens.A detailed discussion of thesecomments and responses can be foundin the promulgation BID, which isreferred to in the ADDRESSES section ofthis preamble. The discussion ofcomments and responses in the BIDserves as the basis for the revisions thathave been made to the standardsbetween proposal and promulgation.Many of the comment letters containedmultiple comments.

C. Significant ChangesSeveral significant changes have been

made in response to the commentsreceived on the proposed standards. Asummary of the major changes ispresented below.

(1) Incidental Printing and AncillaryPrinting Equipment

The rule affects rotogravure and wide-web flexographic printing operations atmajor sources. Several commentersnoted that this will include facilitiesthat use little or no HAP on rotogravureor wide-web flexographic printingpresses, but are major sources as a resultof activities conducted on other

equipment in other source categories. Inaddition, commenters noted thatequipment that meets the definition ofrotogravure or wide-web flexographicprinting press but conducts only a smallamount of rotogravure or wide-webflexographic printing operations and isprimarily used for coating, laminating,or printing by other processes wouldhave, as proposed, been subject to thestandard.

The first case above can becharacterized as ‘‘incidental printing’’because the total work done onrotogravure and wide-web flexographicprinting presses at the facility isminimal and is incidental to the otheroperations conducted at the facility. Inthe second case above, the equipmentcan be characterized as ‘‘ancillaryprinting equipment’’ because the workbeing done on rotogravure and wide-web flexographic print stations isminimal in comparison to, and ancillaryto, the work being done on other workstations (i.e., coating stations) on thatequipment.

The EPA has considered controlrequirements for incidental printing as aseparate subgroup. Under the rule,product and packaging rotogravure andwide-web flexographic printing affectedsources that apply no more than 500kilograms of materials each month andthat are located at facilities that aremajor sources of HAP are consideredincidental printers. This definitionensures that the total work done onproduct and packaging rotogravure andwide-web flexographic presses at thefacility is minimal and is incidental tothe other operations conducted at thefacility.

The EPA believes it is appropriate notto subject incidental printing operationsto the requirements in § 63.825 thatapply to product and packagingrotogravure and wide-web flexographicprinting. The EPA’s analysis of theMACT floor for product and packagingrotogravure and wide-web flexographicprinting is based on emissions levelsand control techniques at facilitiesprimarily engaged in printing thatgenerally apply more than 500kilograms of material each month onproduct and packaging rotogravure andwide-web flexographic presses. TheEPA has little information on which toestablish a MACT control level forincidental printing. The availableinformation indicates that the MACTfloor for this subgroup is no control.

The final standard includes simplifiedrequirements and does not mandateemission controls for incidentalprinters. Affected sources within thissubgroup are those which apply nomore than 500 kilograms of material


each month or no more than 400kilogams of HAP each month onproduct and packaging rotogravure andwide-web flexographic presses. The 400kilogram of HAP applied per monthalternative threshold has been includedto provide affected sources applyingsomewhat more than 500 kilograms ofmaterial per month with theopportunity to maintain incidentalprinter status if they reduce the HAPcontent of the materials applied so thatthe monthly HAP applied is no morethan would be applied by an affectedsource that applied 500 kilograms ofmaterial per month. Affected sources inthis subgroup would be subject only toinitial notification requirements andrecordkeeping requirements to showthat one of the thresholds is met everymonth.

The type of simplified requirementsincluded in the final standard for thissubgroup of product and packaging orwide-web flexographic sources were notmade available to publicationrotogravure affected sources becauseeach press at a publication rotogravureaffected source would far exceed thethresholds every month. A singlepublication rotogravure press would, infact, be a major source of HAP.

The final standard also permits theowner or operator of a product andpackaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic printing affected source tochoose to exclude ancillary printingequipment from the affected source.This equipment is used primarily forcoating, laminating, or other operationsbesides product and packagingrotogravure and wide-web flexographicprinting. Presses on which five weight-percent or less of the total materialapplied each month is applied byrotogravure or wide-web flexographicprint stations would be subject only toa simplified recordkeeping requirement.The EPA believes it is appropriate toprovide the owner or operator with theoption not to subject these presses to theHAP emission limitations for productand packaging and wide-webflexographic printing in § 63.825because the work being done on therotogravure and wide-web flexographicprint stations on these presses isancillary to the work being done onother work stations (i.e., coatingstations) on these presses. The EPA isseparately establishing MACT for othersource categories, such as the paper andother web coating source category andthe metal coil coating source category,which may be more appropriate for thistype of equipment. Ancillary printingequipment, if excluded from thisstandard, will be subject to the

appropriate source category standardwhen such a standard is issued.

(2) Research and Laboratory EquipmentSeveral comments were received

requesting exemption of research andlaboratory equipment. Commentersnoted that the purpose and operation ofresearch presses are independent oftheir location. One commenter notedthat research and laboratory operationscould be exempted from this standardand a separate standard for theseoperations could be developed.

All research and laboratoryequipment has been excluded from thefinal standard whether or not it iscollocated with production facilities. Inorder to regulate research and laboratoryequipment, it would be necessary todevelop a separate source category asdirected by section 112(c)(7) of the CAAto assure equitable treatment of suchequipment.

(3) Addition of Presses to ExistingAffected Sources

Comments were received concerningtriggering of new source compliancedeadlines as a result of adding newpresses to existing control systems ornew stations to existing presses.Commenters noted that this woulddiscourage replacement andmodification of presses or stations totake advantage of low-HAP materials.

Addition of presses to existingaffected sources will subject the affectedsource to the compliance deadline fornew sources only if the additional pressor presses constitutes a reconstructionof the source, as defined in § 63.2.Additions, replacements, andmodifications to existing sources whichdo not meet the definition ofreconstruction do not alter thecompliance deadline.

(4) Affected Source for Product andPackaging Rotogravure and Wide-webFlexographic Printing Facilities

Comments were received suggestingchanges in the definition of affectedsource at product and packagingrotogravure and wide-web flexographicprinting facilities to simplifycompliance demonstration. Onecommenter stated that a facility-widedefinition of affected source wouldsignificantly cut recordkeepingexpenses.

In response, the final standardconsiders all rotogravure and wide-webflexographic printing equipment at agiven facility as a single affected source.This grouping is more consistent withthe way that the MACT floor wasdetermined and is consistent with otherMACT standards which have grouped

various emission points into a singleaffected source. It is also moreconsistent with the definition of affectedsource for publication rotogravure.

This definition of affected sourcesimplifies reporting and recordkeepingin many cases. In addition, sources mayachieve the required emissionsreductions by considering emissionsfrom the entire affected source,including controlled and uncontrolledpresses. This will allow sources tocomply in the most cost-effective wayand will not require expensive controlequipment for small presses which emitrelatively small amounts of organic HAPif equivalent emissions reductions canbe achieved elsewhere in the affectedsource.

(5) Organic HAP Analysis MethodsNinety-six comments were received

requesting that the EPA acceptformulation data in lieu of requiring theuse of EPA Method 311 to determineorganic HAP content of printingmaterials. Formulation data werepreferred to reduce analytical cost anddelays due to chemical analysis. Somecommenters also suggested variousmodifications to the proposed analyticaltechnique in the interests of improvedaccuracy, consistency with apparatuspresently in operation, and reducedanalytical costs.

The final standard adopts Method311, as revised and promulgated withthe Wood Furniture ManufacturingOperations NESHAP (60 FR 62930), fororganic HAP analysis. Printers and inkmanufacturers have the option ofrelying on formulation data if the datameet specified criteria. In the event ofany discrepancy between formulationdata and the results of EPA Method 311,the results of EPA Method 311 shall bepresumed to govern for all compliancepurposes. In addition, the printer maydetermine the total volatile mattercontent of the material and use thisvalue for the organic HAP content for allcompliance purposes. This option maybe chosen by printers using materials inwhich all, or nearly all, of the volatilematter is organic HAP in order to avoidthe need for a more time-consuminganalytic procedure.

(6) Volatile Matter Analysis MethodsSeveral comments were received

requesting that formulation data beacceptable instead of chemical analysisdata. Commenters noted this wouldgreatly reduce analytical costs.

The final standard allows printers andink manufacturers the option of relyingon formulation data for volatile matterand solids content, in lieu of EPAMethods 24 and 24A. In the event of any


discrepancy between formulation dataand the results of the EPA test methods,the test methods shall be presumed togovern for all compliance purposes.

(7) Compliance Monitoring for CatalyticOxidizers

Nine commenters noted that thetemperature downstream of a catalyticoxidizer was inappropriate for use as amonitoring parameter to indicate HAPdestruction. The commenters noted thatdownstream temperature parametersestablished during performance testingunder normal conditions might not bemaintained during low-load conditions,yet this would not be an indication ofexcess emissions.

The final standard requires owners oroperators using a catalytic oxidizer (thatis, a catalytic incinerator) andmonitoring an operating parameter toensure compliance with the standard tomonitor the temperature immediatelyupstream of the catalyst bed. Therequirement to monitor the temperaturedownstream of the catalyst bed has beeneliminated. Since the operatingparameters are established during a testunder normal operating conditions, adownstream temperature monitoringparameter might be impossible to meetduring periods when organic loading tothe oxidizer was lower than normal.This might have led to exceedanceswhich were not indicative of improperoperating conditions or excessiveemissions.

(8) Additional Compliance Options forProduct and Packaging Rotogravure andWide-web Flexographic PrintingAffected Sources

Several commenters requestedclarification that compliance need onlybe demonstrated by a single procedureappropriate to the source’s compliancestrategy. Several commenters suggestedthat the rule should provide a variety ofcompliance demonstration alternativesto accomodate different aggregations ofwork stations and HAP controlstrategies.

In order to make the complianceoptions consistent with facility-widedefinition of affected source, additionalmeans of demonstrating compliancehave been added to the final rule.Facilities may demonstrate that eachmaterial applied meets either of theorganic HAP thresholds, or that allmaterials on average meet either of theorganic HAP thresholds, or that theorganic HAP emitted is less than theorganic HAP allowed taking thesethresholds into account. In addition,emissions from controlled anduncontrolled presses are aggregated to

determine compliance across the entireaffected source.

The final rule has been expanded toinclude ten procedures under whichcompliance can be demonstrated underdifferent circumstances. Any one of theten procedures can be used. Theseprocedures are consistent with theproposed standards for low HAPmaterials and HAP emission controldevice operation. These proceduresencompass the range of suggestionsmade by the commenters. The newcompliance demonstration proceduresin the final rule are expected to have anegligible impact on HAP emissionscompared to the provisions in theproposed rule.

(9) Capture Efficiency Protocols andTest Methods

Four commenters requested that therule allow the use of alternate captureefficiency test protocols approved by theEPA in lieu of the procedures specifiedin § 52.741.

The final rule includes additionaloptions for capture efficiency tests.Provisions of the proposed rulepertaining to verification of permanenttotal enclosures and temporary totalenclosure capture efficiency testing inaccordance with § 52.741 have beenretained in the final rule. The final rulealso allows, as an alternative, the use ofany capture efficiency protocol and testmethods which satisfy the criteria ofeither the Data Quality Objective orLower Confidence Limit approaches. Anappendix describing these approacheshas been added to the final rule. The useof these alternative approaches isoptional for the owner or operator of theaffected source and the EPA hasdetermined that capture efficiency testssatisfying the criteria of these alternateapproaches will be sufficiently rigorousto ensure compliance with the standard.

(10) Transition from Area Source toMajor Source Status

A commenter requested that aprovision allowing a transition periodfor a newly designated major source tocome into compliance be incorporatedin the rule. The commenter noted thatthe proposed rule had no provisions fora source to make this transition withoutbeing in violation of the standard.

A provision has been added to thefinal rule which provides a mechanismfor owners or operators that have usedthe provisions of § 63.820(a)(2) toestablish the facility as an area source toreestablish the facility as a major source.Such a source must continue to complywith its HAP usage commitments untilit meets all requirements for majorsources.

(11) Definition of ‘‘Month’’

In response to a comment, thedefinition of ‘‘month’’ in the final rulehas been changed to includeprespecified periods of 28 to 35 days.The revised definition will fit betterwith the materials accounting systemsused by some facilities and have little orno effect on the emission reductionachieved by the standard.

(12) Alternatives to Vent Stream FlowRate Monitoring

Seven commenters requestedinclusion of alternative methods forvent stream flow rate monitoring,substitution of flow indicators ratherthan flow meters, or elimination of theflow rate monitoring requirement. Onecommenter recommended that pressinterlocks be permitted as an alternativeto vent stream flow rate monitoring.

The final regulation includesalternatives to the vent stream flow ratemeasurement requirement. Thesealternatives are simpler than therequirements in the proposed rule, butstill ensure that sufficient records willbe generated to show when HAPcontaining vent streams are beingdelivered to a control device and toallow for proper calculation of HAPemissions. Owners or operators ofproduct and packaging rotogravure orwide-web flexographic presses withintermittently-controllable work stationsmay, as alternatives to measuring ventstream flow rate, install flow indicatorson the bypass lines, secure bypass linevalves with locking mechanisms or carseals, continuously monitor bypassvalve position, or equip the press withan interlock preventing operation whenthe control device is bypassed.Sampling lines for gas analyzers andrelief valves needed for safety purposesare not considered bypass lines for thepurposes of these provisions. Pressesthat do not have any intermittently-controllable work stations are notsubject to these provisions.

(13) Provisions for Inclusion of Stand-alone Coating Equipment in AffectedSource

One comment was receivedsuggesting that off-line coaters sharing acommon control device with printingpresses should be included in theaffected source at the discretion of thefacility. It was noted that such aprovision would avoid penalizingfacilities that had tightened up theircontrol systems by tying in othersources of HAP.

Provisions have been added to thefinal rule through which owners oroperators of affected sources may, at


their option, under certain conditions,include stand-alone coating equipmentin the affected source subject to thisstandard. This type of coatingequipment is expected to be covered byone of several MACT standards (e.g.,Paper and Other Web Coating) whichare scheduled to be promulgated in thefuture. Printers choosing this optionmay avoid the difficulty of complyingwith multiple standards in the future.Stand-alone coating equipment mustmeet certain requirements to be eligiblefor inclusion under this provision. To beeligible, stand-alone coating equipmentmust either share a control device witha press included in the affected source,or process the same substrate as a pressincluded in the affected source, or applyone or more of the same solids-containing materials as a press includedin the affected source. If any eligibleequipment is included under thisprovision, all eligible equipment at thefacility must be included.

(14) Addition of Criteria To DetermineWhether Method 25 or Method 25A isAppropriate for Performance Testing

The proposed rule required thatperformance tests employ either Method25 or 25A, as appropriate to theconditions of the site. The final rule hasbeen clarified to specify the conditionsbased on the required or anticipatedorganic volatile matter concentration atthe exhaust from the control device.These conditions are based on guidanceprovided to regional offices and Stateprograms, and clarify the conditionsunder which Method 25A areappropriate. This will reduce theadministrative burden on some sourcesand will not reduce the stringency of therule.

(15) Conditions Under WhichPerformance Test Is To Be Conducted

One commenter recommended testingunder reasonably expected conditionsand a second commenter recommendedtesting under normal conditions insteadof maximum conditions.

The final rule has been madeconsistent with the General Provisionsto require performance testing under‘‘normal operating conditions’’ ratherthan ‘‘maximum capacity.’’ This willresult in establishment of morerepresentative operating parameters andwill not cause an increase in HAPemissions.

(16) Clarification of Reporting andRecordkeeping Requirements

Several comments were receivedrequesting clarification that onlyrecordkeeping and reporting applicableto the specific control strategy employed

were required. One commenter statedthat area sources should be required tosubmit initial notifications so that Stateswould be advised of their operations.

The final rule enumerates the types ofexcess emissions (including operatingparameter exceedences) which must beincluded, as applicable, in the summaryreport. Recordkeeping requirements forincidental printing, ancillary printingequipment, and optional inclusion ofstand-alone coating equipment havebeen added to the final rule.

The requirement for annual reportingof HAP usage by sources using theoptional provisions of this rule toestablish area source status has beeneliminated from the final rule. A lessburdensome requirement that suchsources submit initial notifications hasbeen added to the final rule. This initialnotification will inform theAdministrator that a source is usingthese optional provisions to establisharea source status. The annual reportwas determined to be unnecessarybecause the source is required tomaintain monthly records of HAP usageand to report any 12 month period inwhich the area source commitment isnot met as part of its summary report.

D. Minor ChangesThis section contains a list of several

of the minor changes to the final rule.(1) Revisions to definitions and

phrasing have been made to clarify theregulation.

(2) Variables have been redefined asnecessary to avoid ambiguity, andadditional variables have been definedwhere necessary to explicitly describethe additional compliance optionsavailable in the final rule.

(3) Typographical errors have beencorrected.

(4) The citation of the basis fordelegation of regulatory authority hasbeen corrected.

(5) The summary table in theproposed rule has been eliminated. (TheGeneral Provisions cross reference tablehas been retained and additionalclarifying notes have been added.)

(6) Language has been added to thefinal rule which clarifies that theoptional area source mechanismincluded in the rule does not precludean owner or operator from takingadvantage of other mechanisms whichare available to establish area sourcestatus.

(7) A provision in the proposed rulerequiring owners or operators of affectedsources to obtain part 70 or part 71operating permits has been eliminatedfrom the final rule because thisprovision may have been inadvertentlyinterpreted to require these permits for

sources which used the optionalprovisions of the rule to establish areasource status. Such sources may berequired to obtain such permits, but arenot required to obtain them as a resultof using the optional provision in thisstandard.

(8) The deadline for initialnotification for existing sources hasbeen extended until one year before thecompliance date.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

The Docket is an organized andcomplete file of all the informationconsidered by the EPA in thedevelopment of this rulemaking. TheDocket is a dynamic file, since materialis added throughout the rulemakingdevelopment. The docketing system isintended to allow members of the publicand industries involved to readilyidentify and locate documents so thatthey can effectively participate in therulemaking process. The contents of theDocket, including the BID for theproposed and promulgated standardsand the EPA responses to significantcomments, will serve as the record incase of judicial review (see 42 U.S.C.7607(d)(7)(A)).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Office of Management and Budget(OMB) has approved the informationcollection requirements contained inthis rule under the provisions of thePaperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.3501 et seq., and has assigned OMBcontrol number 2060–0335. The EPA istherefore amending the table ofcurrently approved informationcollection request (ICR) control numbersissued by OMB for various regulations.This amendment updates the table toaccurately display those informationrequirements contained in this finalrule. This display of the OMB controlnumber and its subsequent codificationin the Code of Federal Regulationssatisfies the requirements of thePaperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.3501 et seq.) and OMB’s implementingregulations at 5 CFR part 1320.

The ICR was previously subject topublic notice and comment prior toOMB approval. As a result, the EPAfinds that there is ‘‘good cause’’ undersection 553(b) of the AdministrativeProcedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)) toamend the table in part 9 without priornotice and comment. Due to thetechnical nature of the table, furthernotice and comment would beunnecessary. For the same reasons, theEPA finds that there is good cause under5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).


The information required to becollected by this rule is necessary toidentify the regulated entities who aresubject to the rule and to ensure theircompliance with the rule. Therecordkeeping and reportingrequirements are mandatory and arebeing established under authority ofsection 114 of the CAA. All informationsubmitted to the EPA for which a claimof confidentiality is made will besafeguarded according to the EPApolicies set forth in title 40, part 2,subpart B—Confidentiality of BusinessInformation.

The total annual reporting andrecordkeeping burden for this collectionaveraged over the first three years isestimated to be 89,965 hours per year.The average burden, per respondent, is164 hours per year. The rule requires aninitial one-time notification from eachrespondent and subsequent reports/notification would have to be submittedsemiannually. Respondents operatingcapture systems and control deviceswould also be required to submitnotifications of performance tests,performance test plans and reports ofperformance tests. There would be anestimated 500 respondents to thecollection requirements. This estimateincludes the time needed to reviewinstructions; develop, acquire, install,and utilize technology and systems forthe purposes of collecting, validating,and verifying information, processingand maintaining information, anddisclosing and providing information;adjust the existing methods forcompliance with any previouslyapplicable instructions andrequirements; train personnel to be ableto respond to a collection ofinformation; search data sources;complete and review the collection ofinformation; and transmit or otherwisedisclose the information.

Send comments on the EPA’s need forthis information, the accuracy of theprovided burden estimates, and anysuggested methods for minimizingrespondent burden, including the use ofautomated collection techniques, to theDirector, OPPE Regulatory InformationDivision; U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (2136), 401 M St. SW.,Washington, DC 20460; and to theOffice of Information and RegulatoryAffairs, Office of Management andBudget, 725 17th St. NW, Washington,DC 20503; marked ‘‘Attention: DeskOfficer for EPA.’’ Include the OMBcontrol number in any correspondence.

C. Executive Order 12866:Administrative Designation andRegulatory Analysis

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR51735 (October 4, 1993)), the EPA isrequired to judge whether a regulationis ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject toOMB review and the requirements ofthis executive order to prepare aregulatory impact analysis (RIA). Theorder defines ‘‘significant regulatoryaction’’ as one that is likely to result ina rule that may (1) have an annual effecton the economy of $100 million ormore, or adversely affect in a materialway the economy, a sector of theeconomy, productivity, competition,jobs, the environment, public health orsafety, or State, local, or tribalgovernments or communities, (2) createa serious inconsistency or otherwiseinterfere with an action taken orplanned by another agency, (3)materially alter the budgetary impact ofentitlements, grants, user fees, or loanprograms, or the rights and obligation ofrecipients thereof, or (4) raise novellegal or policy issues arising out of legalmandates, the President’s priorities, orthe principles set forth in the executiveorder.

Pursuant to the terms of ExecutiveOrder 12866, OMB has notified the EPAthat it considers this a ‘‘significantregulatory action’’ within the meaningof the executive order. The EPA hassubmitted this action to OMB forreview. Changes made in response toOMB suggestions or recommendationswill be documented in the publicrecord.

D. Executive Order 12875

To reduce the burden of Federalregulations on States and smallgovernments, the President issuedExecutive Order 12875 on October 26,1993, entitled Enhancing theIntergovernmental Partnership. Inparticular, this executive order isdesigned to require agencies to assessthe effects of regulations that are notrequired by statute and that createmandates upon State, local, or tribalgovernments. Two methods exist forcomplying with the requirements of theexecutive order: (1) Assure that fundsnecessary to pay direct costs ofcompliance with a regulation areprovided, or (2) provide OMB adescription of the communications andconsultations with State/local/tribalgovernments, the nature of theirconcerns, any written submission fromthem, and the EPA’s position supportingthe need to issue the regulation.

The EPA has always been concernedabout the effect of the cost of regulations

on small entities; the EPA has consultedwith and sought input from publicentities to explain costs and burdensthey may incur.

The EPA advised interested parties onJuly 16, 1992 (57 FR 21592), of thecategories considered as major and areasources of HAP, and the printing/publishing (surface coating) industrywas listed as a category of both majorand area sources. The EPA madesignificant effort to hear from all levelsof interest and all segments of therotogravure and wide-web flexographicprinting industry. To facilitatecomments and input, the EPAparticipated in numerous meetings withtrade organizations representing allindustry sectors affected by this rule.Throughout the regulatory developmentprocess, and more specifically, inconsultation meetings, industryrepresentatives from printingcompanies, ink manufacturers, andvarious trade associations were given anopportunity to comment on theproposed regulatory approach and theMACT alternatives being developed.The major topic areas resulting fromthese discussions included industrysegmentation, the determination of theMACT floor, test methods, monitoringprocedures, facility-wide averaging,compliance deadlines, and pollutionprevention. Documentation of allmeetings and public comments can befound in Docket A–92–42.

Representatives of State and local airpollution control agencies participatedin all of the EPA work group meetings,and several State and local agenciessubmitted public comments in responseto the proposed standards.

The EPA has considered the purposeand intent of Executive Order 12875 andhas determined that printing andpublishing NESHAP are needed. Therule is generally required by statuteunder section 112 of the CAA becauseprinting and publishing facilities emitsignificant quantities of air pollutants.Through meetings and consultationsduring project development andproposal, efforts were made to informentities of the costs required to complywith the regulation; in addition,modifications were made to reduce theburden to small entities.

E. Regulatory Flexibility ActThe Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires the EPA toconsider potential impacts of proposedregulations on small business ‘‘entities.’’If a preliminary analysis indicates thata proposed regulation would have asignificant economic impact on 20percent or more of small entities, thena final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis


(RFA) must be prepared. The EPA’sanalysis of these impacts wassummarized in the preamble to theproposed rule (60 FR 13664).

In addition, the EPA has a set ofRegulatory Flexibility Guidelines (RFG),published in April 1992, that require theEPA to conduct a final RFA if any smallbusiness or small entity impacts occurresulting from a rule whose Start ActionNotice (SAN) is approved after the dateof publication of the EPA RFG. The SANfor this rule was approved before thatdate, thus the former RegulatoryFlexibility Act guidelines hold. An RFAwas conducted, however, as part of thelarger economic impact analysis whoseresults were presented in the preambleto the proposed rule. The RFA preparedmeets the EPA RFG as well as theoriginal Regulatory Flexibility ActGuidelines. It also meets the analyticalrequirements of the Small BusinessRegulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of1996.

This analysis found that the proposedrule would not have a significanteconomic impact on a substantialnumber of small entities. No commentswere received on this analysis. Thechanges made in the final rule reducethe cost of achieving and demonstratingcompliance for affected small and largeentities. Therefore, pursuant to theprovisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), I herebycertify that this rule will not have asignificant economic impact on asubstantial number of small businessentities.

F. Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub.L.104–4, establishes requirements forFederal agencies to assess the effects oftheir regulatory actions on State, local,and tribal governments and the privatesector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,the EPA generally must prepare awritten statement including a cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and finalrules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that mayresult in expenditures to State, local,and tribal governments, in the aggregate,or to the private sector, of $100 millionor more in any one year. Beforepromulgating an EPA rule for which awritten statement is needed, section 205of the UMRA generally requires the EPAto identify and consider a reasonablenumber of regulatory alternatives andadopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensomealternative that achieves the objectivesof the rule. The provisions of section205 do not apply when they areinconsistent with applicable law.Moreover, section 205 allows EPA toadopt an alternative other than the least

costly, most cost-effective, or leastburdensome alternative if theAdministrator publishes with the finalrule an explanation why that alternativewas not adopted. Before the EPAestablishes any regulatory requirementsthat may significantly or uniquely affectsmall governments, including tribalgovernments, it must have developedunder section 203 of the UMRA, a smallgovernment agency plan. The plan mustprovide for notifying potentiallyaffected small governments, enablingofficials of affected small governmentsto have meaningful and timely input inthe development of the EPA regulatoryproposals with significant Federalintergovernmental mandates andinforming, educating, and advisingsmall governments on compliance withthe regulatory requirements.

The EPA has determined that theaction promulgated today does notinclude a Federal mandate that mayresult in estimated costs of $100 millionor more in any one year to either State,local, or tribal governments in theaggregate, or to the private sector.Therefore, the requirements of theUMRA do not apply to this action.

G. Small Business RegulatoryEnforcement Fairness Act of 1996(SBREFA)

Pursuant to Subtitle E of SBREFA,this rule, which is nonmajor, wassubmitted to Congress beforepublication in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR parts 9 and63

Environmental protection, Airpollution control, Hazardoussubstances, Reporting andrecordkeeping requirements, Standardfor printing and publishing industry.

Dated: May 15, 1996.Carol M. Browner,Administrator.

For reasons set out in the preamble,title 40, chapter I of the Code of FederalRegulations is amended as follows:

PART 9—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 9continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136–136y;15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2601–2671;21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313(d), 1314,1318, 1321, 1326, 1330, 1342, 1344, 1345(d)and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3CFR, 1971–1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241,242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 300g–1, 300g–2,300g–3, 300g–4, 300g–5, 300g–6, 300j–1,300j–2, 300j–3, 300j–4, 300j–9, 1857 et seq.,6901–6992k, 7401–7671q, 7542, 9601–9657,11023, 11048.

2. Section 9.1 is amended by addinga new entry to the table under theindicated heading in numerical order toread as follows:

§ 9.1 OMB approvals under the PaperworkReduction Act.* * * * *

40 CFR citation OMBcontrol No.

* * * * *National Emission Standards for Hazardous

Air Pollutants for Source Categories 13

* * * * *63.829–63.830 ........................ 2060–0335

* * * * *

3 The ICRs referenced in this section of thetable encompass the applicable general provi-sions contained in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A,which are not independent information collec-tion requirements.

PART 63—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 63continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 101, 112, 114, 116, 183(f)and 301 of the CAA, as amended (42 U.S.C.7401, 7411, 7414, 7416, 7511b(f), 7601).

2. Part 63 is amended by adding anew subpart KK consisting of §§ 63.820through 63.839 to read as follows:

Subpart KK—National Emission Standardsfor the Printing and Publishing IndustrySec.63.820 Applicability.63.821 Designation of affected sources.63.822 Definitions.63.823 Standards: General.63.824 Standards: Publication rotogravure

printing.63.825 Standards: Product and packaging

rotogravure and wide-web flexographicprinting.

63.826 Compliance dates.63.827 Performance test methods.63.828 Monitoring requirements.63.829 Recordkeeping requirements.63.830 Reporting requirements.63.831 Delegation of Authority.63.832—63.839 [Reserved]

Table 1 to Subpart KK—Applicability ofGeneral Provisions to Subpart KK

Appendix A to Subpart KK—Data QualityObjective and Lower Confidence LimitApproaches for Alternative CaptureEfficiency Protocols and Test Methods

Subpart KK—National EmissionStandards for the Printing andPublishing Industry

§ 63.820 Applicability.(a) The provisions of this subpart

apply to:(1) Each new and existing facility that

is a major source of hazardous air


pollutants (HAP), as defined in 40 CFR63.2, at which publication rotogravure,product and packaging rotogravure, orwide-web flexographic printing pressesare operated, and

(2) each new and existing facility atwhich publication rotogravure, productand packaging rotogravure, or wide-webflexographic printing presses areoperated for which the owner oroperator chooses to commit to, andmeets the criteria of paragraphs (a)(2)(i)and (a)(2)(ii) of this section for purposesof establishing the facility to be an areasource with respect to this subpart:

(i) Use less than 9.1 Mg (10 tons) pereach rolling 12-month period of eachHAP at the facility, including materialsused for source categories or purposesother than printing and publishing, and

(ii) Use less than 22.7 Mg (25 tons) pereach rolling 12-month period of anycombination of HAP at the facility,including materials used for sourcecategories or purposes other thanprinting and publishing.

(3) Each facility for which the owneror operator chooses to commit to andmeets the criteria stated in paragraph(a)(2) of this section shall be consideredan area source, and is subject only to theprovisions of § 63.829(d) and§ 63.830(b)(1) of this subpart.

(4) Each facility for which the owneror operator commits to the conditions inparagraph (a)(2) of this section mayexclude material used in routinejanitorial or facility groundsmaintenance, personal uses byemployees or other persons, the use ofproducts for the purpose of maintainingelectric, propane, gasoline and dieselpowered motor vehicles operated by thefacility, and the use of HAP containedin intake water (used for processing ornoncontact cooling) or intake air (usedeither as compressed air or forcombustion).

(5) Each facility for which the owneror operator commits to the conditions inparagraph (a)(2) of this section tobecome an area source, butsubsequently exceeds either of thethresholds in paragraph (a)(2) of thissection for any rolling 12-month period(without first obtaining and complyingwith other limits that keep its potentialto emit HAP below major source levels),shall be considered in violation of itscommitment for that 12-month periodand shall be considered a major sourceof HAP beginning the first month afterthe end of the 12-month period inwhich either of the HAP-use thresholdswas exceeded. As a major source ofHAP, each such facility would besubject to the provisions of this subpartas noted in paragraph (a)(1) of thissection and would no longer be eligible

to use the provisions of paragraph (a)(2)of this section, even if in subsequent 12-month periods the facility uses less HAPthan the thresholds in paragraph (a)(2)of this section.

(6) An owner or operator of anaffected source subject to paragraph(a)(2) of this section who chooses to nolonger be subject to paragraph (a)(2) ofthis section shall notify theAdministrator of such change. If, by nolonger being subject to paragraph (a)(2)of this section, the facility at which theaffected source is located becomes amajor source:

(i) The owner or operator of anexisting source must continue to complywith the HAP usage provisions ofparagraph (a)(2) of this section until thesource is in compliance with allrelevant requirements for existingaffected sources under this subpart;

(ii) The owner or operator of a newsource must continue to comply withthe HAP usage provisions of paragraph(a)(2) of this section until the source isin compliance with all relevantrequirements for new affected sourcesunder this subpart.

(7) Nothing in this paragraph isintended to preclude a facility fromestablishing area source status bylimiting its potential to emit throughother appropriate mechanisms that maybe available through the permittingauthority.

(b) This subpart does not apply toresearch or laboratory equipment.

§ 63.821 Designation of affected sources.(a) The affected sources subject to this

subpart are:(1) All of the publication rotogravure

presses and all affiliated equipment,including proof presses, cylinder andparts cleaners, ink and solvent mixingand storage equipment, and solventrecovery equipment at a facility.

(2) All of the product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicprinting presses at a facility plus anyother equipment at that facility whichthe owner or operator chooses toinclude in accordance with paragraph(a)(3) of this section, except

(i) Proof presses, and(ii) Any product and packaging

rotogravure or wide-web flexographicpress which is used primarily forcoating, laminating, or other operationswhich the owner or operator chooses toexclude, provided that

(A) The sum of the total mass of inks,coatings, varnishes, adhesives, primers,solvents, thinners, reducers, and othermaterials applied by the press usingproduct and packaging rotogravure workstations and the total mass of inks,coatings, varnishes, adhesives, primers,

solvents, thinners, reducers, and othermaterials applied by the press usingwide-web flexographic print stations ineach month never exceeds five weight-percent of the total mass of inks,coatings, varnishes, adhesives, primers,solvents, thinners, reducers, and othermaterials applied by the press in thatmonth, including all inboard andoutboard stations, and

(B) The owner or operator maintainsrecords as required in § 63.829(f).

(3) The owner or operator of anaffected source, as defined in paragraph(a)(2) of this section, may elect toinclude in that affected source stand-alone coating equipment subject to thefollowing provisions:

(i) Stand-alone coating equipmentmeeting any of the criteria specified inthis subparagraph is eligible forinclusion:

(A) The stand-alone coatingequipment and one or more product andpackaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic presses are used to applysolids-containing materials to the sameweb or substrate, or

(B) The stand-alone coatingequipment and one or more product andpackaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic presses apply a commonsolids-containing material, or

(C) A common control device is usedto control organic HAP emissions fromthe stand-alone coating equipment andfrom one or more product andpackaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic printing presses;

(ii) All eligible stand-alone coatingequipment located at the facility isincluded in the affected source; and

(iii) No product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicpresses are excluded from the affectedsource under the provisions ofparagraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section.

(b) Each product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicprinting affected source at a facility thatis a major source of HAP, as defined in40 CFR 63.2, that complies with thecriteria of paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2) onand after the applicable compliance dateas specified in § 63.826 of this subpartis subject only to the requirements of§ 63.829(e) and § 63.830(b)(1) of thissubpart.

(1) The owner or operator of thesource applies no more than 500 kg permonth, for every month, of inks,coatings, varnishes, adhesives, primers,solvents, thinners, reducers, and othermaterials on product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicprinting presses, or

(2) The owner or operator of thesource applies no more than 400 kg permonth, for every month, of organic HAP


on product and packaging rotogravureor wide-web flexographic printingpresses.

(c) Each product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicprinting affected source at a facility thatis a major source of HAP, as defined in40 CFR 63.2, that complies with neitherthe criterion of paragraph (b)(1) nor(b)(2) of this section in any month afterthe applicable compliance date asspecified in § 63.826 of this subpart is,starting with that month, subject to allrelevant requirements of this subpartand is no longer eligible to use theprovisions of paragraph (b) of thissection, even if in subsequent monthsthe affected source does comply withthe criteria of paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2)of this section.

§ 63.822 Definitions.

(a) All terms used in this subpart thatare not defined below have the meaninggiven to them in the CAA and in subpartA of this part.

Always-controlled work station meansa work station associated with a dryerfrom which the exhaust is delivered toa control device, with no provision forthe dryer exhaust to bypass the controldevice. Sampling lines for analyzers andrelief valves needed for safety purposesare not considered bypass lines.

Capture efficiency means the fractionof all organic HAP emissions generatedby a process that are delivered to acontrol device, expressed as apercentage.

Capture system means a hood,enclosed room, or other means ofcollecting organic HAP emissions into aclosed-vent system that exhausts to acontrol device.

Car-seal means a seal that is placed ona device that is used to change theposition of a valve or damper (e.g., fromopen to closed) in such a way that theposition of the valve or damper cannotbe changed without breaking the seal.

Certified product data sheet (CPDS)means documentation furnished bysuppliers of inks, coatings, varnishes,adhesives, primers, solvents, and othermaterials or by an outside laboratorythat provides the organic HAP contentof these materials, by weight, measuredusing Method 311 of appendix A of thisPart 63 or an equivalent or alternativemethod (or formulation data as providedin § 63.827(b)) and the solids content ofthese materials, by weight, determinedin accordance with § 63.827(c). Thepurpose of the CPDS is to assist theowner or operator in demonstratingcompliance with the emissionlimitations presented in §§ 63.824–63.825.

Coating operation means theapplication of a uniform layer ofmaterial across the entire width of asubstrate.

Coating station means a work stationon which a coating operation isconducted.

Control device means a device such asa carbon adsorber or oxidizer whichreduces the organic HAP in an exhaustgas by recovery or by destruction.

Control device efficiency means theratio of organic HAP emissionsrecovered or destroyed by a controldevice to the total HAP emissions thatare introduced into the control device,expressed as a percentage.

Day means a 24-consecutive-hourperiod.

Facility means all contiguous oradjoining property that is undercommon ownership or control,including properties that are separatedonly by a road or other public right-of-way.

Flexographic press means an unwindor feed section, a series of individualwork stations, one or more of which isa flexographic print station, any dryers(including interstage dryers andoverhead tunnel dryers) associated withthe work stations, and a rewind, stack,or collection station. The work stationsmay be oriented vertically, horizontally,or around the circumference of a singlelarge impression cylinder. Inboard andoutboard work stations, including thoseemploying any other technology, suchas rotogravure, are included if they arecapable of printing or coating on thesame substrate.

Flexographic print station means awork station on which a flexographicprinting operation is conducted. Aflexographic print station includes aflexographic printing plate which is animage carrier made of rubber or otherelastomeric material. The image (typeand art) to be printed is raised above theprinting plate.

HAP applied means the organic HAPcontent of all inks, coatings, varnishes,adhesives, primers, solvent, and othermaterials applied to a substrate by aproduct and packaging rotogravure orwide-web flexographic printing affectedsource.

HAP used means the organic HAPapplied by a publication rotogravureprinting affected source, including allorganic HAP used for cleaning, partswashing, proof presses, and all organicHAP emitted during tank loading, inkmixing, and storage.

Intermittently-controllable workstation means a work station associatedwith a dryer with provisions for thedryer exhaust to be delivered to ordiverted from a control device

depending on the position of a valve ordamper. Sampling lines for analyzersand relief valves needed for safetypurposes are not considered bypasslines.

Month means a calendar month or aprespecified period of 28 days to 35days.

Never-controlled work station means awork station which is not equippedwith provisions by which anyemissions, including those in theexhaust from any associated dryer, maybe delivered to a control device.

Overall Organic HAP controlefficiency means the total efficiency ofa control system, determined either by:

(1) The product of the captureefficiency and the control deviceefficiency or

(2) A liquid-liquid material balance.Print station means a work station on

which a printing operation isconducted.

Printing operation means theformation of words, designs, andpictures on a substrate other than fabricthrough the application of material tothat substrate.

Product and packaging rotogravureprinting means the production, on arotogravure press, of any printedsubstrate not otherwise defined aspublication rotogravure printing. Thisincludes, but is not limited to, foldingcartons, flexible packaging, labels andwrappers, gift wraps, wall and floorcoverings, upholstery, decorativelaminates, and tissue products.

Proof press means any device usedonly to check the quality of the imageformation of rotogravure cylinders orflexographic plates, which prints onlynon-saleable items.

Publication rotogravure printingmeans the production, on a rotogravurepress, of the following saleable paperproducts:

(1) Catalogues, including mail orderand premium,

(2) Direct mail advertisements,including circulars, letters, pamphlets,cards, and printed envelopes,

(3) Display advertisements, includinggeneral posters, outdoor advertisements,car cards, window posters; counter andfloor displays; point of purchase andother printed display material,

(4) Magazines,(5) Miscellaneous advertisements,

including brochures, pamphlets, catalogsheets, circular folders, announcements,package inserts, book jackets, marketcirculars, magazine inserts, andshopping news,

(6) Newspapers, magazine and comicsupplements for newspapers, andpreprinted newspaper inserts, includinghi-fi and spectacolor rolls and sections,


(7) Periodicals, and(8) Telephone and other directories,

including business reference services.Research or laboratory equipment

means any equipment for which theprimary purpose is to conduct researchand development into new processesand products, where such equipment isoperated under the close supervision oftechnically trained personnel and is notengaged in the manufacture of productsfor commercial sale in commerce,except in a de minimis manner.

Rotogravure press means an unwindor feed section, a series of one or morework stations, one or more of which isa rotogravure print station, any dryersassociated with the work stations, and arewind, stack, or collection section.Inboard and outboard work stationsincluding those employing any othertechnology, such as flexography, areincluded if they are capable of printingor coating on the same substrate.

Rotogravure print station means awork station on which a rotogravureprinting operation is conducted. Arotogravure print station includes arotogravure cylinder and ink supply.The image (type and art) to be printedis etched or engraved below the surfaceof the rotogravure cylinder. On arotogravure cylinder the printing imageconsists of millions of minute cells.

Stand-alone coating equipment meansan unwind or feed section, a series ofone or more coating stations and anyassociated dryers, and a rewind, stack orcollection section that:

Is not part of a product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicpress, and

Is used to conduct one or morecoating operations on a substrate. Stand-alone coating equipment

May or may not process substrate thatis also processed by a product andpackaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic press, apply solids-containing materials that are alsoapplied by a product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicpress, and utilize a control device thatis also utilized by a product andpackaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic press. Stand-alone coatingequipment is sometimes referred to as‘‘off-line’’ coating equipment.

Wide-web flexographic press means aflexographic press capable of printingsubstrates greater than 18 inches inwidth.

Work station means a unit on arotogravure or wide-web flexographicpress where material is deposited ontoa substrate.

(b) The symbols used in equations inthis subpart are defined as follows:

(1) Cahi=the monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP content of solids-containing material, i, expressed as aweight-fraction, kg/kg.

(2) Casi=the monthly average, asapplied, solids content, of solids-containing material, i, expressed as aweight-fraction, kg/kg.

(3) Chi=the organic HAP content of inkor other solids-containing material, i,expressed as a weight-fraction, kg/kg.

(4) Chij=the organic HAP content ofsolvent j, added to solids-containingmaterial i, expressed as a weight-fraction, kg/kg.

(5) Chj=the organic HAP content ofsolvent j, expressed as a weight-fraction,kg/kg.

(6) Ci=the organic volatile matterconcentration in ppm, dry basis, ofcompound i in the vent gas, asdetermined by Method 25 or Method25A.

(7) Csi=the solids content of ink orother material, i, expressed as a weight-fraction, kg/kg.

(8) Cvi=the volatile matter content ofink or other material, i, expressed as aweight-fraction, kg/kg.

(9) E=the organic volatile mattercontrol efficiency of the control device,percent.

(10) F=the organic volatile mattercapture efficiency of the capture system,percent.

(11) Gi=the mass fraction of eachsolids containing material, i, which wasapplied at 20 weight-percent or greatersolids content, on an as-applied basis,kg/kg.

(12) H=the total monthly organic HAPapplied, kg.

(13) Ha=the monthly allowableorganic HAP emissions, kg.

(14) HL=the monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP content of allsolids-containing materials applied atless than 0.04 kg organic HAP per kg ofmaterial applied, kg/kg.

(15) Hs=the monthly average, as-applied, organic HAP to solids ratio, kgorganic HAP/kg solids applied.

(16) Hsi=the as-applied, organic HAPto solids ratio of material i.

(17) L=the mass organic HAPemission rate per mass of solids applied,kg/kg.

(18) MBi=the sum of the mass ofsolids-containing material, i, applied onintermittently-controllable work stationsoperating in bypass mode and the massof solids-containing material, i, appliedon never-controlled work stations, in amonth, kg.

(19) MBj=the sum of the mass ofsolvent, thinner, reducer, diluent, orother non-solids-containing material, j,applied on intermittently-controllablework stations operating in bypass mode

and the mass of solvent, thinner,reducer, diluent, or other non-solids-containing material, j, applied on never-controlled work stations, in a month, kg.

(20) Mci=the sum of the mass ofsolids-containing material, i, applied onintermittently-controllable work stationsoperating in controlled mode and themass of solids-containing material, i,applied on always-controlled workstations, in a month, kg.

(21) Mcj=the sum of the mass ofsolvent, thinner, reducer, diluent, orother non-solids-containing material, j,applied on intermittently-controllablework stations operating in controlledmode and the mass of solvent, thinner,reducer, diluent, or other non-solids-containing material, j, applied onalways-controlled work stations in amonth, kg.

(22) Mf=the total organic volatilematter mass flow rate, kg/h.

(23) Mfi=the organic volatile mattermass flow rate at the inlet to the controldevice, kg/h.

(24) Mfo=the organic volatile mattermass flow rate at the outlet of thecontrol device, kg/h.

(25) Mhu=the mass of organic HAPused in a month, kg.

(26) Mi=the mass of ink or othermaterial, i, applied in a month, kg.

(27) Mij=the mass of solvent, thinner,reducer, diluent, or other non-solids-containing material, j, added to solids-containing material, i, in a month, kg.

(28) Mj=the mass of solvent, thinner,reducer, diluent, or other non-solids-containing material, j, applied in amonth, kg.

(29) MLj=the mass of solvent, thinner,reducer, diluent, or other non-solids-containing material, j, added to solids-containing materials which wereapplied at less than 20 weight-percentsolids content, on an as-applied basis, ina month, kg.

(30) Mvr=the mass of volatile matterrecovered in a month, kg.

(31) Mvu=the mass of volatile matter,including water, used in a month, kg.

(32) MWi=the molecular weight ofcompound i in the vent gas, kg/kg-mol.

(33) n=the number of organiccompounds in the vent gas.

(34) p=the number of different inks,coatings, varnishes, adhesives, primers,and other materials applied in a month.

(35) q=the number of differentsolvents, thinners, reducers, diluents, orother non-solids-containing materialsapplied in a month.

(36) Qsd=the volumetric flow rate ofgases entering or exiting the controldevice, as determined by Method 2,dscm/h.

(37) R=the overall organic HAPcontrol efficiency, percent.


(38) Re=the overall effective organicHAP control efficiency for publicationrotogravure, percent.

(39) Rv=the organic volatile mattercollection and recovery efficiency,percent.

(40) S=the mass organic HAPemission rate per mass of materialapplied, kg/kg.

(41) 0.0416=conversion factor formolar volume, kg-mol/m3(@ 293 K and760 mmHg).

§ 63.823 Standards: General.

Table 1 to this subpart provides crossreferences to the 40 CFR part 63, subpartA, general provisions, indicating theapplicability of the general provisionsrequirements to this subpart KK.

§ 63.824 Standards: Publicationrotogravure printing.

(a) Each owner or operator of anypublication rotogravure printingaffected source that is subject to therequirements of this subpart shallcomply with these requirements on andafter the compliance dates as specifiedin § 63.826 of this subpart.

(b) Each publication rotogravureaffected source shall limit emissions of

organic HAP to no more than eightpercent of the total volatile matter usedeach month. The emission limitationmay be achieved by overall control of atleast 92 percent of organic HAP used, bysubstitution of non-HAP materials fororganic HAP, or by a combination ofcapture and control technologies andsubstitution of materials. Todemonstrate compliance, each owner oroperator shall follow the procedure inparagraph (b)(1) of this section whenemissions from the affected source arecontrolled by a solvent recovery device,the procedure in paragraph (b)(2) of thissection when emissions from theaffected source are controlled by anoxidizer, and the procedure inparagraph (b)(3) of this section when nocontrol device is used.

(1) Each owner or operator using asolvent recovery device to controlemissions shall demonstrate complianceby showing that the HAP emissionlimitation is achieved by following theprocedures in either paragraph (b)(1)(i)or (b)(1)(ii) of this section:

(i) Perform a liquid-liquid materialbalance for each month as follows:

(A) Measure the mass of each ink,coating, varnish adhesive, primer,

solvent, and other material used by theaffected source during the month.

(B) Determine the organic HAPcontent of each ink, coating, varnish,adhesive, primer, solvent and othermaterial used by the affected sourceduring the month following theprocedure in § 63.827(b)(1).

(C) Determine the volatile mattercontent, including water, of each ink,coating, varnish, adhesive, primer,solvent, and other material used by theaffected source during the monthfollowing the procedure in§ 63.827(c)(1).

(D) Install, calibrate, maintain andoperate, according to the manufacturer’sspecifications, a device that indicatesthe cumulative amount of volatilematter recovered by the solvent recoverydevice on a monthly basis. The deviceshall be initially certified by themanufacturer to be accurate to within±2.0 percent.

(E) Measure the amount of volatilematter recovered for the month.

(F) Calculate the overall effectiveorganic HAP control efficiency (Re) forthe month using Equation 1:

RM M M M M

MEqe

vu hu vr hu vu

vu

= ( )− + ( )( )[ ]

100 1/

For the purposes of this calculation, themass fraction of organic HAP present inthe recovered volatile matter is assumedto be equal to the mass fraction oforganic HAP present in the volatilematter used.

(G) The affected source is incompliance for the month, if Re is atleast 92 percent each month.

(ii) Use continuous emissionmonitors, conduct an initialperformance test of capture efficiency,and continuously monitor a site specific

operating parameter to assure captureefficiency as specified in paragraphs(b)(1)(ii)(A) through (b)(1)(ii)(E) of thissection:

(A) Install continuous emissionmonitors to determine the total organicvolatile matter mass flow rate (e.g., bydetermining the concentration of thevent gas in grams per cubic meter, andthe volumetric flow rate in cubic metersper second, such that the total organicvolatile matter mass flow rate in gramsper second can be calculated and

summed) at both the inlet to and theoutlet from the control device, such thatthe percent control efficiency (E) of thecontrol device can be calculated foreach month.

(B) Determine the percent captureefficiency (F) of the capture systemaccording to § 63.827(e).

(C) Calculate the overall effectiveorganic HAP control efficiency (Re)achieved for each month using Equation2.

RM M E F M

MEqe

vu hu hu

vu

= ( )− + ( ) ( )[ ]

100100 100

2/ /

(D) Install, calibrate, operate andmaintain the instrumentation necessaryto measure continuously the site-specific operating parameter establishedin accordance with § 63.828(a)(5)whenever a publication rotogravureprinting press is operated.

(E) The affected source is incompliance with the requirement for themonth if Re is at least 92 percent, and

the capture device is operated at anaverage value greater than, or less than(as appropriate) the operating parametervalue established in accordance with§ 63.828(a)(5) for each three-hourperiod.

(2) Each owner or operator using anoxidizer to control emissions shalldemonstrate compliance by showingthat the HAP emission limitation is

achieved by following the procedure ineither paragraph (b)(2)(i) or (b)(2)(ii) ofthis section:

(i) Demonstrate initial compliancethrough performance tests andcontinuing compliance throughcontinuous monitoring as follows:

(A) Determine the oxidizerdestruction efficiency (E) using theprocedure in § 63.827(d).


(B) Determine the capture efficiency(F) using the procedure in § 63.827(e).

(D) Calculate the overall effectiveorganic HAP control efficiency (Re)achieved using Equation 2.

(E) The affected source is in initialcompliance if Re is at least 92 percent.Demonstration of continuingcompliance is achieved by continuousmonitoring of an appropriate oxidizeroperating parameter in accordance with§ 63.828(a)(4), and by continuousmonitoring of an appropriate capturesystem monitoring parameter inaccordance with § 63.828(a)(5). Theaffected source is in continuingcompliance if the capture device isoperated at an average value greaterthan or less than (as appropriate) theoperating parameter value established inaccordance with § 63.828(a)(5), and

(1) if an oxidizer other than a catalyticoxidizer is used, the average combustiontemperature for all three-hour periods isgreater than or equal to the averagecombustion temperature establishedunder § 63.827(d), or

(2) if a catalytic oxidizer is used, theaverage catalyst bed inlet temperaturefor all three-hour periods is greater thanor equal to the average catalyst bed inlettemperature established in accordancewith § 63.827(d).

(ii) Use continuous emissionmonitors, conduct an initialperformance test of capture efficiency,and continuously monitor a site specificoperating parameter to assure captureefficiency in accordance with therequirements of paragraph (b)(1)(ii) ofthis section.

(3) To demonstrate compliancewithout the use of a control device, eachowner or operator shall compare themass of organic HAP used to the mass

of volatile matter used each month, asspecified in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) through(b)(3)(iv) of this section:

(i) Measure the mass of each ink,coating, varnish adhesive, primer,solvent, and other material used in theaffected source during the month,

(ii) Determine the organic HAPcontent of each ink, coating, varnish,adhesive, primer, solvent, and othermaterial used during the monthfollowing the procedure in§ 63.827(b)(1), and

(iii) Determine the volatile mattercontent, including water, of each ink,coating, varnish, adhesive, primer,solvent, and other material used duringthe month following the procedure in§ 63.827(c)(1).

(iv) The affected source is incompliance for the month if the mass oforganic HAP used does not exceed eightpercent of the mass of volatile matterused.

§ 63.825 Standards: Product andpackaging rotogravure and wide-webflexographic printing.

(a) Each owner or operator of anyproduct and packaging rotogravure orwide-web flexographic printing affectedsource that is subject to therequirements of this subpart shallcomply with these requirements on andafter the compliance dates as specifiedin § 63.826 of this subpart.

(b) Each product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicprinting affected source shall limitemissions to no more than five percentof the organic HAP applied for themonth; or to no more than four percentof the mass of inks, coatings, varnishes,adhesives, primers, solvents, reducers,thinners, and other materials applied forthe month; or to no more than 20

percent of the mass of solids applied forthe month; or to a calculated equivalentallowable mass based on the organicHAP and solids contents of the inks,coatings, varnishes, adhesives, primers,solvents, reducers, thinners, and othermaterials applied for the month. Theowner or operator of each product andpackaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic printing affected sourceshall demonstrate compliance with thisstandard by following one of theprocedures in paragraphs (b)(1) through(b)(10) of this section:

(1) Demonstrate that each ink, coating,varnish, adhesive, primer, solvent,diluent, reducer, thinner, and othermaterial applied during the monthcontains no more than 0.04 weight-fraction organic HAP, on an as-purchased basis, as determined inaccordance with § 63.827(b)(2).

(2) Demonstrate that each ink, coating,varnish, adhesive, primer, and othersolids-containing material appliedduring the month contains no more than0.04 weight-fraction organic HAP, on amonthly average as-applied basis asdetermined in accordance withparagraphs (b)(2)(i)–(ii) of this section.The owner or operator shall calculatethe as-applied HAP content of materialswhich are reduced, thinned, or dilutedprior to application, as follows:

(i) Determine the organic HAP contentof each ink, coating, varnish, adhesive,primer, solvent, diluent, reducer,thinner, and other material applied onan as-purchased basis in accordancewith § 63.827(b)(2).

(ii) Calculate the monthly average as-applied organic HAP content, Cahi ofeach ink, coating, varnish, adhesive,primer, and other solids-containingmaterial using Equation 3.

C

C M C M

M M

Eqahi

hi i hij ijj

q

i ijj

q=

+

+

=

=

∑

∑1

1

3

(3)(i) Demonstrate that each ink,coating, varnish, adhesive, primer, andother solids-containing materialapplied, either

(A) Contains no more than 0.04weight-fraction organic HAP on amonthly average as-applied basis, or

(B) Contains no more than 0.20 kg oforganic HAP per kg of solids applied, ona monthly average as-applied basis.

(ii) The owner or operator maydemonstrate compliance in accordance

with paragraphs (b)(3)(ii) (A)–(C) of thissection.

(A) Use the procedures of paragraph(b)(2) of this section to determine whichmaterials meet the requirements ofparagraph (b)(3)(i)(A) of this section,

(B) Determine the as-applied solidscontent following the procedure in§ 63.827(c)(2) of all materials which donot meet the requirements of paragraph(b)(3)(i)(A) of this section. The owner oroperator may calculate the monthly

average as-applied solids content ofmaterials which are reduced, thinned,or diluted prior to application, usingEquation 4, and

CC M

M M

Eqasisi i

i ijj

q=+

=∑

1

4

(C) Calculate the as-applied organicHAP to solids ratio, Hsi, for all materialswhich do not meet the requirements of


paragraph (b)(3)(i)(A) of this section,using Equation 5.

HC

CEqsi

ahi

asi

= 5

(4) Demonstrate that the monthlyaverage as-applied organic HAP content,HL, of all materials applied is less than0.04 kg HAP per kg of material applied,as determined by Equation 6.

H

M C M C

M M

EqL

i hii

p

j hjj

q

ii

p

jj

q=

+

+

= =

= =

∑ ∑

∑ ∑1 1

1 1

6

(5) Demonstrate that the monthlyaverage as-applied organic HAP contenton the basis of solids applied, Hs, is lessthan 0.20 kg HAP per kg solids appliedas determined by Equation 7.

H

M C M C

M C

EqS

i hii

p

j hjj

q

i sii

p=

+= =

=

∑ ∑

∑1 1

1

7

(6) Demonstrate that the total monthlyorganic HAP applied, H, as determinedby Equation 8, is less than thecalculated equivalent allowable organicHAP, Ha, as determined by paragraph (e)of this section.

H M C M C Eqi hii

p

j hjj

q

= += =∑ ∑

1 1

8

(7) Operate a capture system andcontrol device and demonstrate anoverall organic HAP control efficiencyof at least 95 percent for each month. Ifthe affected source operates more thanone capture system or more than onecontrol device, and has only always-controlled work stations, then the owneror operator shall demonstratecompliance in accordance with theprovisions of either paragraph (f) or (h)of this section. If the affected sourceoperates one or more never-controlledwork stations or one or moreintermittently-controllable workstations, then the owner or operatorshall demonstrate compliance inaccordance with the provisions ofparagraph (f) of this section. Otherwise,the owner or operator shall demonstratecompliance in accordance with theprocedure in paragraph (c) of thissection when emissions from theaffected source are controlled by asolvent recovery device or theprocedure in paragraph (d) of thissection when emissions are controlledby an oxidizer.

(8) Operate a capture system andcontrol device and limit the organicHAP emission rate to no more than 0.20kg organic HAP emitted per kg solidsapplied as determined on a monthlyaverage as-applied basis. If the affectedsource operates more than one capturesystem, more than one control device,one or more never-controlled workstations, or one or more intermittently-controllable work stations, then theowner or operator shall demonstratecompliance in accordance with theprovisions of paragraph (f) of thissection. Otherwise, the owner oroperator shall demonstrate compliancefollowing the procedure in paragraph (c)of this section when emissions from theaffected source are controlled by asolvent recovery device or theprocedure in paragraph (d) of thissection when emissions are controlledby an oxidizer.

(9) Operate a capture system andcontrol device and limit the organicHAP emission rate to no more than 0.04kg organic HAP emitted per kg materialapplied as determined on a monthlyaverage as-applied basis. If the affectedsource operates more than one capturesystem, more than one control device,one or more never-controlled workstations, or one or more intermittently-controllable work stations, then theowner or operator shall demonstratecompliance in accordance with theprovisions of paragraph (f) of thissection. Otherwise, the owner oroperator shall demonstrate compliancefollowing the procedure in paragraph (c)of this section when emissions from theaffected source are controlled by asolvent recovery device or theprocedure in paragraph (d) of thissection when emissions are controlledby an oxidizer.

(10) Operate a capture system andcontrol device and limit the monthlyorganic HAP emissions to less than theallowable emissions as calculated inaccordance with paragraph (e) of thissection. If the affected source operatesmore than one capture system, morethan one control device, one or morenever-controlled work stations, or oneor more intermittently-controllable workstations, then the owner or operatorshall demonstrate compliance inaccordance with the provisions ofparagraph (f) of this section. Otherwise,the owner or operator shall demonstratecompliance following the procedure inparagraph (c) of this section whenemissions from the affected source arecontrolled by a solvent recovery deviceor the procedure in paragraph (d) of thissection when emissions are controlledby an oxidizer.

(c) To demonstrate compliance withthe overall organic HAP controlefficiency requirement in § 63.825(b)(7)or the organic HAP emissions limitationrequirements in § 63.825(b)(8)–(10),each owner or operator using a solventrecovery device to control emissionsshall show compliance by following theprocedures in either paragraph (c)(1) or(c)(2) of this section:

(1) Perform a liquid-liquid materialbalance for each and every month asfollows:

(i) Measure the mass of each ink,coating, varnish, adhesive, primer,solvent and other material applied onthe press or group of presses controlledby a common solvent recovery deviceduring the month.

(ii) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, organic HAPemission rate based on material appliedor emission of less than the calculatedallowable organic HAP, determine theorganic HAP content of each ink,coating, varnish, adhesive, primer,solvent, and other material appliedduring the month following theprocedure in § 63.827(b)(2).

(iii) Determine the volatile mattercontent of each ink, coating, varnish,adhesive, primer, solvent, and othermaterial applied during the monthfollowing the procedure in§ 63.827(c)(2).

(iv) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied or emission ofless than the calculated allowableorganic HAP, determine the solidscontent of each ink, coating, varnish,adhesive, primer, solvent, and othermaterial applied during the monthfollowing the procedure in§ 63.827(c)(2).

(v) Install, calibrate, maintain, andoperate according to the manufacturer’sspecifications, a device that indicatesthe cumulative amount of volatilematter recovered by the solvent recoverydevice on a monthly basis. The deviceshall be initially certified by themanufacturer to be accurate to within±2.0 percent.

(vi) Measure the amount of volatilematter recovered for the month.

(vii) Calculate the volatile mattercollection and recovery efficiency, Rv,using Equation 9.

RM

M C M

Eqvvr

i vii

p

jj

q=+

= =∑ ∑

100 9

1 1

(viii) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, organic HAP


emission rate based on material appliedor emission of less than the calculatedallowable organic HAP, calculate the

organic HAP emitted during the month,H, using Equation 10.

HR

C M C M Eqvhi i hij ij

j

q

i

p

= −

+

==∑∑1

10010

11

(ix) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, calculate theorganic HAP emission rate based onsolids applied, L, using Equation 11.

LH

C M

Eq

si ii

p=

=∑

1

11

(x) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on materials applied, calculatethe organic HAP emission rate based onmaterial applied, S, using Equation 12.

SH

M M

Eq

i ijj

q

i

p=

+

==

∑∑11

12

(xi) The affected source is incompliance if

(A) The organic volatile mattercollection and recovery efficiency, Rv, is95 percent or greater, or

(B) The organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, L, is 0.20 kgorganic HAP per kg solids applied orless, or

(C) the organic HAP emission ratebased on material applied, S, is 0.04 kgorganic HAP per kg material applied orless, or

(D) the organic HAP emitted duringthe month, H, is less than the calculatedallowable organic HAP, Ha, asdetermined using paragraph (e) of thissection.

(2) Use continuous emissionmonitors, conduct an initialperformance test of capture efficiency,and continuously monitor a site specificoperating parameter to assure captureefficiency following the procedures inparagraphs (c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(xi) ofthis section:

(i) If demonstrating compliance on thebasis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, organic HAPemission rate based on materialsapplied, or emission of less than thecalculated allowable organic HAP,measure the mass of each ink, coating,varnish, adhesive, primer, solvent, andother material applied on the press orgroup of presses controlled by acommon control device during themonth.

(ii) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, organic HAPemission rate based on material appliedor emission of less than the calculatedallowable organic HAP, determine theorganic HAP content of each ink,coating, varnish, adhesive, primer,solvent, and other material appliedduring the month following theprocedure in § 63.827(b)(2).

(iii) Install continuous emissionmonitors to determine the total organicvolatile matter mass flow rate (e.g., bydetermining the concentration of thevent gas in grams per cubic meter, andthe volumetric flow rate in cubic metersper second, such that the total organicvolatile matter mass flow rate in gramsper second can be calculated and

summed) at both the inlet to and theoutlet from the control device, such thatthe percent control efficiency (E) of thecontrol device can be calculated foreach month.

(iv) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied or emission ofless than the calculated allowableorganic HAP, determine the solidscontent of each ink, coating, varnish,adhesive, primer, solvent, and othermaterial applied during the monthfollowing the procedure in§ 63.827(c)(2).

(v) Install, calibrate, operate andmaintain the instrumentation necessaryto measure continuously the site-specific operating parameter establishedin accordance with § 63.828(a)(5)whenever a product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicprinting press is operated.

(vi) Determine the capture efficiency(F) in accordance with § 63.827(e)–(f).

(vii) Calculate the overall organicHAP control efficiency, (R), achieved foreach month using Equation 13.

REF

Eq=100

13

(viii) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, organic HAPemission rate based on material appliedor emission of less than the calculatedallowable organic HAP, calculate theorganic HAP emitted during the month,H, for each month using Equation 14.

HE F

C M C M Eqhi i hij ijj

q

i

p

= −

+

==∑∑1

100 10014

11

(ix) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, calculate theorganic HAP emission rate based onsolids applied, L, using Equation 15.

LH

C M

Eq

si ii

p=

=∑

1

15

(x) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on materials applied, calculatethe organic HAP emission rate based onmaterial applied, S, using Equation 16.

SH

M M

Eq

i ijj

q

i

p=

+

==

∑∑11

16

(xi) The affected source is incompliance if the capture systemoperating parameter is operated at anaverage value greater than or less than(as appropriate) the operating parameter


value established in accordance with§ 63.828(a)(5) for each three hourperiod, and

(A) The organic volatile mattercollection and recovery efficiency, Rv, is95 percent or greater, or


(C) The organic HAP emission ratebased on material applied, S, is 0.04 kgorganic HAP per kg material applied orless, or

(D) The organic HAP emitted duringthe month, H, is less than the calculatedallowable organic HAP, Ha, asdetermined using paragraph (e) of thissection.

(d) To demonstrate compliance withthe overall organic HAP controlefficiency requirement in § 63.825(b)(7)or the overall organic HAP emission ratelimitation requirements in§ 63.825(b)(8)–(10), each owner oroperator using an oxidizer to controlemissions shall show compliance byfollowing the procedures in eitherparagraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this section:

(1) demonstrate initial compliancethrough performance tests of captureefficiency and control device efficiencyand continuing compliance throughcontinuous monitoring of capturesystem and control device operatingparameters following the procedures inparagraph (d)(1)(i) through (d)(1)(xi) ofthis section:

(i) Determine the oxidizer destructionefficiency (E) using the procedure in§ 63.827(d).

(ii) Determine the capture systemcapture efficiency (F) in accordancewith § 63.827(e)–(f).

(iii) Calculate the overall organic HAPcontrol efficiency, (R), achieved usingEquation 13.

(iv) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, organic HAPemission rate based on materialsapplied or emission of less than thecalculated allowable organic HAP,measure the mass of each ink, coating,varnish, adhesive, primer, solvent, andother material applied on the press orgroup of presses controlled by acommon solvent recovery device duringthe month.

(v) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, organic HAPemission rate based on material appliedor emission of less than the calculatedallowable organic HAP, determine theorganic HAP content of each ink,coating, varnish, adhesive, primer,solvent, and other material appliedduring the month following theprocedure in § 63.827(b)(2).

(vi) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied or emission ofless than the calculated allowableorganic HAP, determine the solidscontent of each ink, coating, varnish,adhesive, primer, solvent, and othermaterial applied during the monthfollowing the procedure in§ 63.827(c)(2).

(vii) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, organic HAPemission rate based on material appliedor emission of less than the calculatedallowable organic HAP, calculate theorganic HAP emitted during the month,H, for each month using Equation 14.

(viii) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied, calculate theorganic HAP emission rate based onsolids applied, L, for each month usingEquation 15.

(ix) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on materials applied, calculatethe organic HAP emission rate based onmaterial applied, S, using Equation 16.

(x) Install, calibrate, operate andmaintain the instrumentation necessaryto measure continuously the site-specific operating parametersestablished in accordance with§ 63.828(a)(4)–(5) whenever a productand packaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic press is operating.

(xi) The affected source is incompliance, if the oxidizer is operatedsuch that the average operatingparameter value is greater than theoperating parameter value established inaccordance with § 63.828(a)(4) for eachthree-hour period, and the capturesystem operating parameter is operatedat an average value greater than or lessthan (as appropriate) the operating

parameter value established inaccordance with § 63.828(a)(5) for eachthree hour period, and

(A) The overall organic HAP controlefficiency, R, is 95 percent or greater, or


(C) The organic HAP emission ratebased on material applied, S, is 0.04 kgorganic HAP per kg material applied orless, or

(D) The organic HAP emitted duringthe month, H, is less than the calculatedallowable organic HAP, Ha, asdetermined using paragraph (e) of thissection.

(2) Use continuous emissionmonitors, conduct an initialperformance test of capture efficiency,and continuously monitor a site specificoperating parameter to assure captureefficiency. Compliance shall bedemonstrated in accordance with therequirements of paragraph (c)(2) of thissection.

(e) Owners or operators may calculatethe monthly allowable HAP emissions,Ha, for demonstrating compliance inaccordance with paragraph (b)(6),(c)(1)(xi)(D), (c)(2)(xi)(D), or (d)(1)(xi)(D)of this section as follows:

(1) Determine the as-purchased massof each ink, coating, varnish, adhesive,primer, and other solids-containingmaterial applied each month, Mi.

(2) Determine the as-purchased solidscontent of each ink, coating, varnish,adhesive, primer, and other solids-containing material applied each month,in accordance with § 63.827(c)(2), Csi.

(3) Determine the as-purchased massfraction of each ink, coating, varnish,adhesive, primer, and other solids-containing material which was appliedat 20 weight-percent or greater solidscontent, on an as-applied basis, Gi.

(4) Determine the total mass of eachsolvent, diluent, thinner, or reduceradded to materials which were appliedat less than 20 weight-percent solidscontent, on an as-applied basis, eachmonth, MLj.

(5) Calculate the monthly allowableHAP emissions, Ha, using Equation 17.

H M G C M G M Eqa i i sii

p

i ii

p

Ljj

q

=

+ −( ) +

= = =

∑ ∑ ∑0 20 0 04 1 171 1 1

. .

(f) Owners or operators of product andpackaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic printing presses shall

demonstrate compliance according tothe procedures in paragraphs (f)(1)through (f)(7) of this section if the

affected source operates more than onecapture system, more than one controldevice, one or more never-controlled


work stations, or one or moreintermittently-controllable workstations.

(1) The owner or operator of eachsolvent recovery system used to controlone or more product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicpresses for which the owner or operatorchooses to comply by means of a liquid-liquid mass balance shall determine theorganic HAP emissions for those pressescontrolled by that solvent recoverysystem either

(i) in accordance with paragraphs(c)(1)(i)–(iii) and (c)(1)(v)–(viii) of thissection if the presses controlled by thatsolvent recovery system have onlyalways-controlled work stations, or

(ii) in accordance with paragraphs(c)(1)(ii)–(iii), (c)(1)(v)–(vi), and (g) ofthis section if the presses controlled bythat solvent recovery system have one ormore never-controlled or intermittently-controllable work stations.

(2) The owner or operator of eachsolvent recovery system used to controlone or more product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicpresses, for which the owner or operatorchooses to comply by means of aninitial test of capture efficiency,continuous emission monitoring of thecontrol device, and continuousmonitoring of a capture systemoperating parameter, shall

(i) For each capture system deliveringemissions to that solvent recoverysystem, monitor an operating parameterestablished in accordance with§ 63.828(a)(5) to assure capture systemefficiency, and

(ii) Determine the organic HAPemissions for those presses served byeach capture system deliveringemissions to that solvent recoverysystem either

(A) In accordance with paragraphs(c)(2)(i)–(iii) and (c)(2)(v)–(viii) of thissection if the presses served by thatcapture system have only always-controlled work stations, or

(B) In accordance with paragraphs(c)(2)(ii)–(iii), (c)(2)(v)–(vii), and (g) ofthis section if the presses served by thatcapture system have one or more never-controlled or intermittently-controllablework stations.

(3) The owner or operator of eachoxidizer used to control emissions fromone or more product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicpresses choosing to demonstratecompliance through performance testsof capture efficiency and control deviceefficiency and continuing compliancethrough continuous monitoring ofcapture system and control deviceoperating parameters, shall

(i) Monitor an operating parameterestablished in accordance with§ 63.828(a)(4) to assure control deviceefficiency, and

(ii) For each capture system deliveringemissions to that oxidizer, monitor anoperating parameter established inaccordance with § 63.828(a)(5) to assurecapture efficiency, and

(iii) Determine the organic HAPemissions for those presses served byeach capture system deliveringemissions to that oxidizer either

(A) In accordance with paragraphs(d)(1)(i)–(v) and (d)(1)(vii) of this sectionif the presses served by that capturesystem have only always-controlledwork stations, or

(B) In accordance with paragraphs(d)(1)(i)–(iii), (d)(1)(v), and (g) of thissection if the presses served by thatcapture system have one or more never-controlled or intermittently-controllablework stations.

(4) The owner or operator of eachoxidizer used to control emissions fromone or more product and packagingrotogravure or wide-web flexographicpresses choosing to demonstratecompliance through an initial captureefficiency test, continuous emissionmonitoring of the control device andcontinuous monitoring of a capturesystem operating parameter, shall

(i) For each capture system deliveringemissions to that oxidizer, monitor anoperating parameter established inaccordance with § 63.828(a)(5) to assurecapture efficiency, and

(ii) Determine the organic HAPemissions for those presses served byeach capture system deliveringemissions to that oxidizer either

(A) In accordance with paragraphs(c)(2)(i)–(iii) and (c)(2)(v)–(viii) of thissection if the presses served by thatcapture system have only always-controlled work stations, or

(B) In accordance with paragraphs(c)(2)(ii)–(iii), (c)(2)(v)–(vii), and (g) ofthis section if the presses served by thatcapture system have one or more never-controlled or intermittently-controllablework stations.

(5) The owner or operator of one ormore uncontrolled product andpackaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic printing presses shalldetermine the organic HAP applied onthose presses using Equation 8. Theorganic HAP emitted from anuncontrolled press is equal to theorganic HAP applied on that press.

(6) If demonstrating compliance onthe basis of organic HAP emission ratebased on solids applied or emission ofless than the calculated allowableorganic HAP, the owner or operatorshall determine the solids content of

each ink, coating, varnish, adhesive,primer, solvent and other materialapplied during the month following theprocedure in § 63.827(c)(2).

(7) The owner or operator shalldetermine the organic HAP emissionsfor the affected source for the month bysumming all organic HAP emissionscalculated according to paragraphs(f)(1), (f)(2)(ii), (f)(3)(iii), (f)(4)(ii), and(f)(5) of this section. The affected sourceis in compliance for the month, if alloperating parameters required to bemonitored under paragraphs (f)(2)–(4) ofthis section were maintained at theappropriate values, and

(i) The total mass of organic HAPemitted by the affected source was notmore than four percent of the total massof inks, coatings, varnishes, adhesives,primers, solvents, diluents, reducers,thinners and other materials applied bythe affected source, or

(ii) The total mass of organic HAPemitted by the affected source was notmore than 20 percent of the total massof solids applied by the affected source,or

(iii) The total mass of organic HAPemitted by the affected source was notmore than the equivalent allowableorganic HAP emissions for the affectedsource, Ha, calculated in accordancewith paragraph (e) of this section, or

(iv) The total mass of organic HAPemitted by the affected source was notmore than five percent of the total massof organic HAP applied by the affectedsource. The total mass of organic HAPapplied by the affected source in themonth shall be determined by the owneror operator using Equation 8.

(g) Owners or operators determiningorganic HAP emissions from a press orgroup of presses having one or morenever-controlled or intermittently-controllable work stations and using theprocedures specified in paragraphs(f)(1)(ii), (f)(2)(ii)(B), (f)(3)(iii)(B), or(f)(4)(ii)(B) of this section shall for thatpress or group of presses:

(1) Determine the sum of the mass ofall inks, coatings, varnishes, adhesives,primers, and other solids-containingmaterials which are applied onintermittently-controllable work stationsin bypass mode and the mass of all inks,coatings, varnishes, adhesives, primers,and other solids-containing materialswhich are applied on never-controlledwork stations during the month, MBi.

(2) Determine the sum of the mass ofall solvents, reducers, thinners, andother diluents which are applied onintermittently-controllable work stationsin bypass mode and the mass of allsolvents, reducers, thinners, and otherdiluents which are applied on never-


controlled work stations during themonth, MBj.

(3) Determine the sum of the mass ofall inks, coatings, varnishes, adhesives,primers, and other solids-containingmaterials which are applied onintermittently-controllable work stationsin controlled mode and the mass of allinks, coatings, varnishes, adhesives,primers, and other solids-containing

materials which are applied on always-controlled work stations during themonth, MBj.

(4) Determine the sum of the mass ofall solvents, reducers, thinners, andother diluents which are applied onintermittently-controllable work stationsin controlled mode and the mass of allsolvents, reducers, thinners, and otherdiluents which are applied on always-

controlled work stations during themonth, MCj.

(5) For each press or group of pressesfor which the owner or operator uses theprovisions of paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of thissection, the owner or operator shallcalculate the organic HAP emittedduring the month using Equation 18.

H M C M CM

M C M

M C M C EqCi hi Cj hjj

q

i

pvr

Ci vi Cjj

q

i

p Bi hii

p

Bj hjj

q

= +

−+

+ +

==

==

= =∑∑

∑∑∑ ∑

11

11

1 1

1 18

(6) For each press or group of pressesfor which the owner or operator uses theprovisions of paragraphs (f)(2)(ii)(B),

(f)(3)(iii)(B), or (f)(4)(ii)(B) of thissection, the owner or operator shall

calculate the organic HAP emittedduring the month using Equation (19).

H M C M CE F

M C M C EqCi hi Cj hjj

q

i

p

Bi hii

p

Bj hjj

q

= +

−

+ +

== = =

∑∑ ∑ ∑11 1 1

1100 100

19

(h) If the affected source operatesmore than one capture system or morethan one control device, and has nonever-controlled work stations and nointermittently-controllable workstations, then the affected source is incompliance with the 95 percent overallorganic HAP control efficiencyrequirement for the month if for eachpress or group of presses controlled bya common control device:

(1) The volatile matter collection andrecovery efficiency, Rv, as determinedby paragraphs (c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(iii), and(c)(1)(v)–(vii) of this section is equal toor greater than 95 percent, or

(2) The overall organic HAP controlefficiency as determined by paragraphs(c)(2)(iii) and (c)(2)(v)–(vii) of thissection for each press or group ofpresses served by that control deviceand a common capture system is equalto or greater than 95 percent and theaverage capture system operatingparameter value for each capture systemserving that control device is greaterthan or less than (as appropriate) theoperating parameter value establishedfor that capture system in accordancewith § 63.828(a)(5) for each three hourperiod, or

(3) The overall organic HAP controlefficiency as determined by paragraphs(d)(1)(i)–(iii) and (d)(1)(x) of this sectionfor each press or group of presses servedby that control device and a commoncapture system is equal to or greaterthan 95 percent, the oxidizer is operated

such that the average operatingparameter value is greater than theoperating parameter value established inaccordance with § 63.828(a)(4) for eachthree hour period, and the averagecapture system operating parametervalue for each capture system servingthat control device is greater than or lessthan (as appropriate) the operatingparameter value established for thatcapture system in accordance with§ 63.828(a)(5) for each three hourperiod.

§ 63.826 Compliance dates.(a) The compliance date for an owner

or operator of an existing affected sourcesubject to the provisions of this subpartis May 30, 1999.

(b) The compliance date for an owneror operator of a new affected sourcesubject to the provisions of this subpartis immediately upon start-up of theaffected source, or May 30, 1996,whichever is later.

(c) Affected sources which haveundergone reconstruction are subject tothe requirements for new affectedsources. The costs associated with thepurchase and installation of airpollution control equipment are notconsidered in determining whether theaffected source has been reconstructed.Additionally, the costs of retrofittingand replacement of equipment that isinstalled specifically to comply withthis subpart are not consideredreconstruction costs.

§ 63.827 Performance test methods.(a) An owner or operator using a

control device to comply with therequirements of §§ 63.824–63.825 is notrequired to conduct an initialperformance test to demonstratecompliance if one or more of the criteriain paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) of thissection are met:

(1) A control device that is inoperation prior to May 30, 1996, doesnot need to be tested if

(i) It is equipped with continuousemission monitors for determining inletand outlet total organic volatile matterconcentration, and capture efficiencyhas been determined in accordance withthe requirements of this subpart, suchthat an overall HAP control efficiencycan be calculated, and

(ii) The continuous emission monitorsare used to demonstrate continuouscompliance in accordance with§ 63.828, or

(2) The owner or operator has met therequirements of either § 63.7(e)(2)(iv) or§ 63.7(h), or

(3) The control device is a solventrecovery system and the owner oroperator chooses to comply by means ofa monthly liquid-liquid materialbalance.

(b) Determination of the organic HAPcontent of inks, coatings, varnishes,adhesives, primers, solvents, thinners,reducers, diluents, and other materialsfor the purpose of meeting therequirements of § 63.824 shall be


conducted according to paragraph (b)(1)of this section. Determination of theorganic HAP content of inks, coatings,varnishes, adhesives, primers, solvents,thinners, reducers, diluents, and othermaterials for the purpose of meeting therequirements of § 63.825 shall beconducted according to paragraph (b)(2)of this section.

(1) Each owner or operator of apublication rotogravure facility shalldetermine the organic HAP weight-fraction of each ink, coating, varnish,adhesive, primer, solvent, and othermaterial used in a publicationrotogravure affected source by followingone of the procedures in paragraphs(b)(1)(i) through (b)(1)(iii) of thissection:

(i) The owner or operator may test thematerial in accordance with Method 311of appendix A of this Part 63. TheMethod 311 determination may beperformed by the manufacturer of thematerial and the results provided to theowner or operator. If these valuescannot be determined using Method311, the owner or operator shall submitan alternative technique for determiningtheir values for approval by theAdministrator. The recovery efficiencyof the technique must be determined forall of the target organic HAP and acorrection factor, if necessary, must bedetermined and applied.

(ii) The owner or operator maydetermine the volatile matter content ofthe material in accordance with§ 63.827(c)(1) and use this value for theorganic HAP content for all compliancepurposes.

(iii) The owner or operator may,except as noted in paragraph (b)(1)(iv) ofthis section, rely on formulation dataprovided by the manufacturer of thematerial on a CPDS if

(A) The manufacturer has included inthe organic HAP content determinationall HAP present at a level greater than0.1 percent in any raw material used,weighted by the mass fraction of eachraw material used in the material, and

(B) The manufacturer has determinedthe HAP content of each raw materialpresent in the formulation by Method311 of appendix A of this part 63, or byan alternate method approved by theAdministrator, or by reliance on a CPDSfrom a raw material supplier preparedin accordance with § 63.827(b)(1)(iii)(A).

(iv) In the event of any inconsistencybetween the Method 311 of appendix Aof this part 63 test data and formulationdata, that is, if the Method 311 testvalue is higher, the Method 311 test datashall govern, unless after consultation,an owner or operator demonstrates tothe satisfaction of the enforcement

authority that the formulation data arecorrect.

(2) Each owner or operator of aproduct and packaging rotogravure orwide-web flexographic printing facilityshall determine the organic HAP weightfraction of each ink, coating, varnish,adhesive, primer, solvent, thinner,reducer, diluent, and other materialapplied by following one of theprocedures in paragraphs (b)(2)(i)through (b)(2)(iii) of this section:

(i) The owner or operator may test thematerial in accordance with Method 311of appendix A of this part 63. TheMethod 311 determination may beperformed by the manufacturer of thematerial and the results provided to theowner or operator. If these valuescannot be determined using Method311, the owner or operator shall submitan alternative technique for determiningtheir values for approval by theAdministrator. The recovery efficiencyof the technique must be determined forall of the target organic HAP and acorrection factor, if necessary, must bedetermined and applied.

(ii) The owner or operator maydetermine the volatile matter content ofthe material in accordance with§ 63.827(c)(2) and use this value for theorganic HAP content for all compliancepurposes.

(iii) The owner or operator may,except as noted in paragraph (b)(2)(iv) ofthis section, rely on formulation dataprovided by the manufacturer of thematerial on a CPDS if

(A) The manufacturer has included inthe organic HAP content determination,all organic HAP present at a levelgreater than 0.1 percent in any rawmaterial used, weighted by the massfraction of each raw material used in thematerial, and

(B) The manufacturer has determinedthe organic HAP content of each rawmaterial present in the formulation byMethod 311 of appendix A of this part63, or, by an alternate method approvedby the Administrator, or, by reliance ona CPDS from a raw material supplierprepared in accordance with§ 63.827(b)(2)(iii)(A).

(iv) In the event of any inconsistencybetween the Method 311 of appendix Aof this part 63 test data and a facility’sformulation data, that is, if the Method311 test value is higher, the Method 311test data shall govern, unless afterconsultation, an owner or operatordemonstrates to the satisfaction of theenforcement authority that theformulation data are correct.

(c) Determination by the owner oroperator of the volatile matter content ofinks, coatings, varnishes, adhesives,primers, solvents, reducers, thinners,

diluents, and other materials used forthe purpose of meeting the requirementsof § 63.824 shall be conducted accordingto paragraph (c)(1) of this section.Determination by the owner or operatorof the volatile matter and solids contentof inks, coatings, varnishes, adhesives,primers, solvents, reducers, thinners,diluents, and other materials applied forthe purpose of meeting the requirementsof § 63.825 shall be conducted accordingto paragraph (c)(2) of this section.

(1) Each owner or operator of apublication rotogravure facility shalldetermine the volatile matter weight-fraction of each ink, coating, varnish,adhesive, primer, solvent, reducer,thinner, diluent, and other materialused using Method 24A of 40 CFR part60, appendix A. The Method 24Adetermination may be performed by themanufacturer of the material and theresults provided to the owner oroperator. If these values cannot bedetermined using Method 24A, theowner or operator shall submit analternative technique for determiningtheir values for approval by theAdministrator. The owner or operatormay rely on formulation data, subject tothe provisions of paragraph (c)(3) of thissection.

(2) Each owner or operator of aproduct and packaging rotogravure orwide-web flexographic printing facilityshall determine the volatile matter andsolids weight-fraction of each ink,coating, varnish, adhesive, primer,solvent, reducer, thinner, diluent, andother material applied using Method 24of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. TheMethod 24 determination may beperformed by the manufacturer of thematerial and the results provided to theowner or operator. If these valuescannot be determined using Method 24,the owner or operator shall submit analternative technique for determiningtheir values for approval by theAdministrator. The owner or operatormay rely on formulation data, subject tothe provisions of paragraph (c)(3) of thissection.

(3) Owners or operators maydetermine the volatile matter content ofmaterials based on formulation data,and may rely on volatile matter contentdata provided by material suppliers. Inthe event of any inconsistency betweenthe formulation data and the results ofTest Methods 24 or 24A of 40 CFR part60, appendix A, the applicable testmethod shall govern, unless afterconsultation, the owner or operator candemonstrate to the satisfaction of theenforcement agency that the formulationdata are correct.

(d) A performance test of a controldevice to determine destruction


efficiency for the purpose of meeting therequirements of §§ 63.824–63.825 shallbe conducted by the owner or operatorin accordance with the following:

(1) An initial performance test toestablish the destruction efficiency of anoxidizer and the associated combustionzone temperature for a thermal oxidizerand the associated catalyst bed inlettemperature for a catalytic oxidizer shallbe conducted and the data reduced inaccordance with the following referencemethods and procedures:

(i) Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part 60,appendix A is used for sample andvelocity traverses to determine samplinglocations.

(ii) Method 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D of 40 CFRpart 60, appendix A is used todetermine gas volumetric flow rate.

(iii) Method 3 of 40 CFR part 60,appendix A is used for gas analysis todetermine dry molecular weight.

(iv) Method 4 of 40 CFR part 60,appendix A is used to determine stackgas moisture.

(v) Methods 2, 2A, 3, and 4 of 40 CFRpart 60, appendix A shall be performed,as applicable, at least twice during eachtest period.

(vi) Method 25 of 40 CFR part 60,Appendix A, shall be used to determineorganic volatile matter concentration,except as provided in paragraphs(d)(1)(vi)(A)–(C) of this section. Theowner or operator shall submit notice ofthe intended test method to theAdministrator for approval along withnotice of the performance test requiredunder § 63.7(c). The owner or operatormay use Method 25A of 40 CFR part 60,appendix A, if

(A) An exhaust gas organic volatilematter concentration of 50 parts permillion by volume (ppmv) or less isrequired to comply with the standardsof §§ 63.824–63.825, or

(B) The organic volatile matterconcentration at the inlet to the controlsystem and the required level of controlare such to result in exhaust gas organicvolatile matter concentrations of 50ppmv or less, or

(C) Because of the high efficiency ofthe control device, the anticipatedorganic volatile matter concentration atthe control device exhaust is 50 ppmvor less, regardless of inlet concentration.

(vii) Each performance test shallconsist of three separate runs; each runconducted for at least one hour underthe conditions that exist when theaffected source is operating undernormal operating conditions. For thepurpose of determining organic volatilematter concentrations and mass flowrates, the average of results of all runsshall apply.

(viii) Organic volatile matter massflow rates shall be determined usingEquation 20:

M Q C MW Eqf sd i ii

n

=

[ ] [ ]=

−∑1

60 0416 10 20.

(ix) Emission control device efficiencyshall be determined using Equation 21:

EM M

MEqfi fo

fi

=−

21

(2) The owner or operator shall recordsuch process information as may benecessary to determine the conditions ofthe performance test. Operations duringperiods of start-up, shutdown, andmalfunction shall not constituterepresentative conditions for thepurpose of a performance test.

(3) For the purpose of determining thevalue of the oxidizer operatingparameter that will demonstratecontinuing compliance, the time-weighted average of the values recordedduring the performance test shall becomputed. For an oxidizer other thancatalytic oxidizer, the owner or operatorshall establish as the operatingparameter the minimum combustiontemperature. For a catalytic oxidizer, theowner or operator shall establish as theoperating parameter the minimum gastemperature upstream of the catalystbed. These minimum temperatures arethe operating parameter values thatdemonstrate continuing compliancewith the requirements of §§ 63.824–63.825.

(e) A performance test to determinethe capture efficiency of each capturesystem venting organic emissions to acontrol device for the purpose of

meeting the requirements of§§ 63.824(b)(1)(ii), 63.824(b)(2),63.825(c)(2), 63.825(d)(1)–(2),63.825(f)(2)–(4), or 63.825(h)(2)–(3) shallbe conducted by the owner or operatorin accordance with the following:

(1) For permanent total enclosures,capture efficiency shall be assumed as100 percent. Procedure T—Criteria forand Verification of a Permanent orTemporary Total Enclosure as found inappendix B to § 52.741 of part 52 of thischapter shall be used to confirm that anenclosure meets the requirements forpermanent total enclosure.

(2) For temporary total enclosures, thecapture efficiency shall be determinedaccording to the protocol specified in§ 52.741(a)(4)(iii)(B) of part 52 of thischapter. The owner or operator mayexclude never-controlled work stationsfrom such capture efficiencydeterminations.

(f) As an alternative to the proceduresspecified in § 63.827(e) an owner oroperator required to conduct a captureefficiency test may use any captureefficiency protocol and test methodsthat satisfy the criteria of either the DataQuality Objective (DQO) or the LowerConfidence Limit (LCL) approach asdescribed in Appendix A of thissubpart. The owner or operator mayexclude never-controlled work stationsfrom such capture efficiencydeterminations.

§ 63.828 Monitoring requirements.

(a) Following the date on which theinitial performance test of a controldevice is completed, to demonstratecontinuing compliance with thestandard, the owner or operator shallmonitor and inspect each control devicerequired to comply with §§ 63.824–63.825 to ensure proper operation andmaintenance by implementing theapplicable requirements in paragraph(a)(1) through (a)(5) of this section.

(1) Owners or operators of productand packaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic presses withintermittently-controllable work stationsshall follow one of the procedures inparagraphs (a)(1)(i) through (a)(1)(iv) ofthis section for each dryer associatedwith such a work station:

(i) Install, calibrate, maintain, andoperate according to the manufacturer’sspecifications a flow control positionindicator that provides a recordindicating whether the exhaust streamfrom the dryer was directed to thecontrol device or was diverted from thecontrol device. The time and flowcontrol position must be recorded atleast once per hour, as well as everytime the flow direction is changed. Theflow control position indicator shall beinstalled at the entrance to any bypassline that could divert the exhaust streamaway from the control device to theatmosphere.


(ii) Secure any bypass line valve inthe closed position with a car-seal or alock-and-key type configuration; avisual inspection of the seal or closuremechanism shall be performed at leastonce every month to ensure that thevalve or damper is maintained in theclosed position and the exhaust streamis not diverted through the bypass line.

(iii) Ensure that any bypass line valveor damper is in the closed positionthrough continuous monitoring of valveposition. The monitoring system shallbe inspected at least once every monthto ensure that it is functioning properly.

(iv) Use an automatic shutdownsystem in which the press is stoppedwhen flow is diverted away from thecontrol device to any bypass line. Theautomatic system shall be inspected atleast once every month to ensure that itis functioning properly.

(2) Compliance monitoring shall besubject to the provisions of paragraphs(a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii) of this section, asapplicable.

(i) All continuous emission monitorsshall comply with performancespecifications (PS) 8 or 9 of 40 CFR part60, appendix B, as appropriate. Therequirements of Appendix F of 40 CFRpart 60 shall also be followed. Inconducting the quarterly audits requiredby appendix F, owners or operatorsmust challenge the monitors withcompounds representative of thegaseous emission stream beingcontrolled.

(ii) All temperature monitoringequipment shall be installed, calibrated,maintained, and operated according tomanufacturers specifications. Thecalibration of the chart recorder, datalogger, or temperature indicator shall beverified every three months; or the chartrecorder, data logger, or temperatureindicator shall be replaced. Thereplacement shall be done either if theowner or operator chooses not toperform the calibration, or if theequipment cannot be calibratedproperly.

(3) An owner or operator complyingwith §§ 63.824–63.825 throughcontinuous emission monitoring of acontrol device shall install, calibrate,operate, and maintain continuousemission monitors to measure the totalorganic volatile matter concentration atboth the control device inlet and theoutlet.

(4) An owner or operator complyingwith the requirements of §§ 63.824–63.825 through the use of an oxidizerand demonstrating continuouscompliance through monitoring of anoxidizer operating parameter shall:

(i) For an oxidizer other than acatalytic oxidizer, install, calibrate,

operate, and maintain a temperaturemonitoring device equipped with acontinuous recorder. The device shallhave an accuracy of ±1 percent of thetemperature being monitored in °C or ±1°C, whichever is greater. Thethermocouple or temperature sensorshall be installed in the combustionchamber at a location in the combustionzone.

(ii) For a catalytic oxidizer, install,calibrate, operate, and maintain atemperature monitoring deviceequipped with a continuous recorder.The device shall be capable ofmonitoring temperature with anaccuracy of ±1 percent of thetemperature being monitored in °C or ±1°C, whichever is greater. Thethermocouple or temperature sensorshall be installed in the vent stream atthe nearest feasible point to the catalystbed inlet.

(5) An owner or operator complyingwith the requirements of §§ 63.824–63.825 through the use of a controldevice and demonstrating continuouscompliance by monitoring an operatingparameter to ensure that the captureefficiency measured during the initialcompliance test is maintained, shall:

(i) Submit to the Administrator withthe compliance status report required by§ 63.9(h) of the General Provisions, aplan that

(A) Identifies the operating parameterto be monitored to ensure that thecapture efficiency measured during theinitial compliance test is maintained,

(B) Discusses why this parameter isappropriate for demonstrating ongoingcompliance, and

(C) Identifies the specific monitoringprocedures;

(ii) Set the operating parameter value,or range of values, that demonstratecompliance with §§ 63.824–63.825, and

(iii) Conduct monitoring inaccordance with the plan submitted tothe Administrator unless commentsreceived from the Administrator requirean alternate monitoring scheme.

(b) Any excursion from the requiredoperating parameters which aremonitored in accordance withparagraphs (a)(4) and (a)(5) of thissection, unless otherwise excused, shallbe considered a violation of theemission standard.

§ 63.829 Recordkeeping requirements.(a) The recordkeeping provisions of

40 CFR part 63 subpart A of this partthat apply and those that do not applyto owners and operators of affectedsources subject to this subpart are listedin Table 1 of this subpart.

(b) Each owner or operator of anaffected source subject to this subpart

shall maintain the records specified inparagraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) of thissection on a monthly basis inaccordance with the requirements of§ 63.10(b)(1) of this part:

(1) Records specified in § 63.10(b)(2)of this part, of all measurements neededto demonstrate compliance with thisstandard, such as continuous emissionmonitor data, control device andcapture system operating parameterdata, material usage, HAP usage, volatilematter usage, and solids usage thatsupport data that the source is requiredto report.

(2) Records specified in § 63.10(b)(3)of this part for each applicabilitydetermination performed by the owneror operator in accordance with therequirements of § 63.820(a) of thissubpart, and

(3) Records specified in § 63.10(c) ofthis part for each continuous monitoringsystem operated by the owner oroperator in accordance with therequirements of § 63.828(a) of thissubpart.

(c) Each owner or operator of anaffected source subject to this subpartshall maintain records of all liquid-liquid material balances performed inaccordance with the requirements of§§ 63.824–63.825 of this subpart. Therecords shall be maintained inaccordance with the requirements of§ 63.10(b) of this part.

(d) The owner or operator of eachfacility which commits to the criteria of§ 63.820(a)(2) shall maintain records ofall required measurements andcalculations needed to demonstratecompliance with these criteria,including the mass of all HAPcontaining materials used and the massfraction of HAP present in each HAPcontaining material used, on a monthlybasis.

(e) The owner or operator of eachfacility which meets the limits andcriteria of § 63.821(b)(1) shall maintainrecords as required in paragraph (e)(1)of this section. The owner or operator ofeach facility which meets the limits andcriteria of § 63.821(b)(2) shall maintainrecords as required in paragraph (e)(2)of this section. Owners or operatorsshall maintain these records for fiveyears, and upon request, submit them tothe Administrator.

(1) For each facility which meets thecriteria of § 63.821(b)(1), the owner oroperator shall maintain records of thetotal volume of each material applied onproduct and packaging rotogravure orwide-web flexographic printing pressesduring each month.

(2) For each facility which meets thecriteria of § 63.821(b)(2), the owner oroperator shall maintain records of the


total volume and organic HAP contentof each material applied on product andpackaging rotogravure or wide-webflexographic printing presses duringeach month.

(f) The owner or operator choosing toexclude from an affected source, aproduct and packaging rotogravure orwide-web flexographic press whichmeets the limits and criteria of§ 63.821(a)(2)(ii)(A) shall maintain therecords specified in paragraphs (f)(1)and (f)(2) of this section for five yearsand submit them to the Administratorupon request:

(1) The total mass of each materialapplied each month on the press,including all inboard and outboardstations, and

(2) The total mass of each materialapplied each month on the press byproduct and packaging rotogravure orwide-web flexographic printingoperations.

§ 63.830 Reporting requirements.(a) The reporting provisions of 40 CFR

part 63 subpart A of this part that applyand those that do not apply to ownersand operators of affected sources subjectto this subpart are listed in Table 1 ofthis subpart.

(b) Each owner or operator of anaffected source subject to this subpartshall submit the reports specified inparagraphs (b)(1) through (b)(6) of thissection to the Administrator:

(1) An initial notification required in§ 63.9(b).

(i) Initial notifications for existingsources shall be submitted no later thanone year before the compliance datespecified in § 63.826(a).

(ii) Initial notifications for new andreconstructed sources shall besubmitted as required by § 63.9(b).

(iii) For the purpose of this subpart,a Title V or part 70 permit application

may be used in lieu of the initialnotification required under § 63.9(b),provided the same information iscontained in the permit application asrequired by § 63.9(b), and the State towhich the permit application has beensubmitted has an approved operatingpermit program under part 70 of thischapter and has received delegation ofauthority from the EPA.

(iv) Permit applications shall besubmitted by the same due dates asthose specified for the initialnotifications.

(2) A Notification of PerformanceTests specified in § 63.7 and § 63.9(e) ofthis part. This notification, and the site-specific test plan required under§ 63.7(c)(2) shall identify the operatingparameter to be monitored to ensurethat the capture efficiency measuredduring the performance test ismaintained. The operating parameteridentified in the site-specific test planshall be considered to be approvedunless explicitly disapproved, or unlesscomments received from theAdministrator require monitoring of analternate parameter.

(3) A Notification of ComplianceStatus specified in § 63.9(h) of this part.

(4) Performance test reports specifiedin § 63.10(d)(2) of this part.

(5) Start-up, shutdown, andmalfunction reports specified in§ 63.10(d)(5) of this part, except that theprovisions in subpart A pertaining tostart-ups, shutdowns, and malfunctionsdo not apply unless a control device isused to comply with this subpart.

(i) If actions taken by an owner oroperator during a start-up, shutdown, ormalfunction of an affected source(including actions taken to correct amalfunction) are not completelyconsistent with the procedures specifiedin the source’s start-up, shutdown, andmalfunction plan specified in

§ 63.6(e)(3) of this part, the owner oroperator shall state such information inthe report. The start-up, shutdown, ormalfunction report shall consist of aletter containing the name, title, andsignature of the responsible official whois certifying its accuracy, that shall besubmitted to the Administrator.

(ii) Separate start-up, shutdown, ormalfunction reports are not required ifthe information is included in the reportspecified in paragraph (b)(6) of thissection.

(6) A summary report specified in§ 63.10(e)(3) of this part shall besubmitted on a semi-annual basis (i.e.,once every six-month period). Inaddition to a report of operatingparameter exceedances as required by§ 63.10(e)(3)(i), the summary reportshall include, as applicable:

(i) Exceedances of the standards in§§ 63.824–63.825.

(ii) Exceedances of either of thecriteria of § 63.820(a)(2).

(iii) Exceedances of the criterion of§ 63.821(b)(1) and the criterion of§ 63.821(b)(2) in the same month.

(iv) Exceedances of the criterion of§ 63.821(a)(2)(ii)(A).

§ 63.831 Delegation of authority.

(a) In delegating implementation andenforcement authority to a State under40 CFR part 63 subpart E of this part,the authorities contained in paragraph(b) of this section shall be retained bythe Administrator and not transferred toa State.

(b) Authority which will not bedelegated to States: § 63.827(b),approval of alternate test method fororganic HAP content determination;§ 63.827(c), approval of alternate testmethod for volatile matterdetermination.

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART KK.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART KK

General provisions reference Applicable to subpart KK Comment

§ 63.1(a)(1)–(a)(4) .......................... Yes.§ 63.1(a)(5) ..................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.1(a)(6)–(a)(8) .......................... No.§ 63.1(a)(9) ..................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.1(a)(10)–(a)(14) ...................... Yes.§ 63.1(b)(1) ..................................... No .................................................. Subpart KK specifies applicability.§ 63.1(b)(2)–(b)(3) .......................... Yes.§ 63.1(c)(1) ..................................... Yes.§ 63.1(c)(2) ..................................... No .................................................. Area sources are not subject to subpart KK.§ 63.1(c)(3) ..................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.1(c)(4) ..................................... Yes.§ 63.1(c)(5) ..................................... No.§ 63.1(d) ......................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.1(e) ......................................... Yes.§ 63.2 .............................................. Yes ................................................. Additional definitions in subpart KK.§ 63.3(a)–(c) ................................... Yes.§ 63.4(a)(1)–(a)(3) .......................... Yes.§ 63.4(a)(4) ..................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.


TABLE 1 TO SUBPART KK.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART KK—Continued

General provisions reference Applicable to subpart KK Comment

§ 63.4(a)(5) ..................................... Yes.§ 63.4(b–c) ...................................... Yes.§ 63.5(a)(1)–(a)(2) .......................... Yes.§ 63.5(b)(1) ..................................... Yes.§ 63.5(b)(2) ..................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.5(b)(3)–(b)(6) .......................... Yes.§ 63.5(c) .......................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.5(d) ......................................... Yes.§ 63.5(e) ......................................... Yes.§ 63.5(f) .......................................... Yes.§ 63.6(a) ......................................... Yes.§ 63.6(b)(1)–(b)(5) .......................... Yes.§ 63.6(b)(6) ..................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.6(b)(7) ..................................... Yes.§ 63.6(c)(1)–(c)(2) ........................... Yes.§ 63.6(c)(3)–(c)(4) ........................... No .................................................. Sections reserved.§ 63.6(c)(5) ..................................... Yes.§ 63.6(d) ......................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.6(e) ......................................... Yes ................................................. Provisions pertaining to start-ups, shutdowns, malfunctions, and CMS

do not apply unless an add-on control system is used.§ 63.6(f) .......................................... Yes.§ 63.6(g) ......................................... Yes.§ 63.6(h) ......................................... No .................................................. Subpart KK does not require COMS.§ 63.6(i)(1)–(i)(14) ........................... Yes.§ 63.6(i)(15) .................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.6(i)(16) .................................... Yes.§ 63.6(j) ........................................... Yes.§ 63.7 .............................................. Yes.§ 63.8(a)(1)–(a)(2) .......................... Yes.§ 63.8(a)(3) ..................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.8(a)(4) ..................................... No .................................................. Subpart KK specifies the use of solvent recovery devices or oxidizers.§ 63.8(b) ......................................... Yes.§ 63.8(c)(1)–(3) ............................... Yes.§ 63.8(c)(4) ..................................... No .................................................. Subpart KK specifies CMS sampling requirements.§ 63.8(c)(5) ..................................... No .................................................. Subpart KK does not require COMS.§ 63.8(c)(6)–(c)(8) ........................... Yes ................................................. Provisions for COMS are not applicable.§ 63.8(d)–(f) .................................... Yes.§ 63.8(g) ......................................... No .................................................. Subpart KK specifies CMS data reduction requirements.§ 63.9(a) ......................................... Yes.§ 63.9(b)(1) ..................................... Yes.§ 63.9(b)(2) ..................................... Yes ................................................. Initial notification submission date extended.§ 63.9(b)(3)–(b)(5) .......................... Yes.§ 63.9(c)–(e) ................................... Yes.§ 63.9(f) .......................................... No .................................................. Subpart KK does not require opacity and visible emissions observa-

tions.§ 63.9(g) ......................................... Yes ................................................. Provisions for COMS are not applicable.§ 63.9(h)(1)–(h)(3) .......................... Yes.§ 63.9(h)(4) ..................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.9(h)(5)–(h)(6) .......................... Yes.§ 63.9(i) ........................................... Yes.§ 63.9(j) ........................................... Yes.§ 63.10(a) ....................................... Yes.§ 63.10(b)(1)–(b)(3) ........................ Yes.§ 63.10(c)(1) ................................... Yes.§ 63.10(c)(2)–(c)(4) ......................... No .................................................. Sections reserved.§ 63.10(c)(5)–(c)(8) ......................... Yes.§ 63.10(c)(9) ................................... No .................................................. Section reserved.§ 63.10(c)(10)–(c)(15) ..................... Yes.§ 63.10(d)(1)–(d)(2) ........................ Yes.§ 63.10(d)(3) ................................... No .................................................. Subpart KK does not require opacity and visible emissions observa-

tions.§ 63.10(d)(4)–(d)(5) ........................ Yes.§ 63.10(e) ....................................... Yes ................................................. Provisions for COMS are not applicable.§ 63.10(f) ........................................ Yes.§ 63.11 ............................................ No .................................................. Subpart KK specifies the use of solvent recovery devices or oxidizers.§ 63.12 ............................................ Yes.§ 63.13 ............................................ Yes.§ 63.14 ............................................ Yes.§ 63.15 ............................................ Yes.


Appendix A to Subpart KK—Data QualityObjective and Lower Confidence LimitApproaches for Alternative CaptureEfficiency Protocols and Test Methods

1. Introduction1.1 Alternative capture efficiency (CE)

protocols and test methods that satisfy thecriteria of either the data quality objective(DQO) approach or the lower confidencelimit (LCL) approach are acceptable under§ 63.827(f). The general criteria for alternativeCE protocols and test methods to qualifyunder either the DQO or LCL approach aredescribed in section 2. The DQO approachand criteria specific to the DQO approach aredescribed in section 3. The LCL approachand criteria specific to the LCL approach aredescribed in section 4. The recommendedreporting for alternative CE protocols and testmethods are presented in section 5. Therecommended recordkeeping for alternativeCE protocols and test methods are presentedin section 6.

1.2 Although the Procedures L, G.1, G.2,F.1, and F.2 in § 52.741 of part 52 weredeveloped for TTE and BE testing, the sameprocedures can also be used in an alternativeCE protocol. For example, a traditionalliquid/gas mass balance CE protocol couldemploy Procedure L to measure liquid VOCinput and Procedure G.1 to measure capturedVOC.

2. General Criteria for DQO and LCLApproaches

2.1 The following general criteria must bemet for an alternative capture efficiency

protocol and test methods to qualify underthe DQO or LCL approach.

2.2 An alternative CE protocol mustconsist of at least three valid test runs. Eachtest run must be at least 20 minutes long. Notest run can be longer than 24 hours.

2.3 All test runs must be separate andindependent. For example, liquid VOC inputand output must be determinedindependently for each run. The final liquidVOC sample from one run cannot be theinitial sample for another run. In addition,liquid input for an entire day cannot beapportioned among test runs based onproduction.

2.4 Composite liquid samples cannot beused to obtain an ‘‘average composition’’ fora test run. For example, separate initial andfinal coating samples must be taken andanalyzed for each run; initial and finalsamples cannot be combined prior to analysisto derive an ‘‘average composition’’ for thetest run.

2.5 All individual test runs that result ina CE of greater than 105 percent are invalidand must be discarded.

2.6 If the source can demonstrate to theregulatory agency that a test run should notbe considered due to an identified testing oranalysis error such as spillage of part of thesample during shipping or an upset orimproper operating conditions that is notconsidered part of normal operation then thetest result for that individual test run may bediscarded. This limited exception allowssources to discard as ‘‘outliers’’ certainindividual test runs without replacing themwith a valid test run as long as the facility

has at least three valid test runs to use whencalculating its DQO or LCL. This exceptionis limited solely to test runs involving thetypes of errors identified above.

2.7 All valid test runs that are conductedmust be included in the average CEdetermination. The individual test run CEresults and average CE results cannot betruncated (i.e., 105 percent cannot bereported as 100+ percent) for purposes ofmeeting general or specific criteria for eitherthe DQO or the LCL. If the DQO is satisfiedand the average CE is greater than 100, then100 percent CE must be considered the resultof the test.

2.8 Alternative test methods formeasuring VOC concentration must includea three-point calibration of the gas analysisinstrument in the expected concentrationrange.

3. Data Quality Objective Approach

3.1 The purpose of the DQO is to allowsources to use alternative CE protocols andtest methods while ensuring reasonableprecision consistent with pertinentrequirements of the Clean Air Act. Inaddition to the general criteria described insection 2, the specific DQO criterion is thatthe width of the two-sided 95 percentconfidence interval of the mean measuredvalue must be less than or equal to 10 percentof the mean measured value (see Figure 1).This ensures that 95 percent of the time,when the DQO is met, the actual CE valuewill be ±5 percent of the mean measuredvalue (assuming that the test protocol isunbiased).

3.2 The DQO calculation is made asfollows using Equations 1 and 2:

Pa

xEq

avg

= 100 1

at s

nEq= 0 975 2.

Where:a=distance from the average measured CE

value to the endpoints of the 95-percent(two-sided) confidence interval for themeasured value.

n=number of valid test runs.P=DQO indicator statistic, distance from the

average measured CE value to theendpoints of the 95-percent (two-sided)confidence interval, expressed as apercent of the average measured CEvalue.

s=sample standard deviation.t0.975=t-value at the 95-percent confidence

level (see Table 1).xavg=average measured CE value (calculated

from all valid test runs).xi=the CE value calculated from the ith test

run.


Number of valid test runs, n t0.975 t0.90

Number ofvalid testruns, n

t0.975 t0.90

1 or 2 ......................................................................................................... N/A N/A 12 2.201 1.3633 ................................................................................................................. 4.303 1.886 13 2.179 1.3564 ................................................................................................................. 3.182 1.638 14 2.160 1.3505 ................................................................................................................. 2.776 1.533 15 2.145 1.3456 ................................................................................................................. 2.571 1.476 16 2.131 1.3417 ................................................................................................................. 2.447 1.440 17 2.120 1.3378 ................................................................................................................. 2.365 1.415 18 2.110 1.3339 ................................................................................................................. 2.306 1.397 19 2.101 1.33010 ............................................................................................................... 2.262 1.383 20 2.093 1.3281 ................................................................................................................. 12.228 1.372 21 2.086 1.325

Table 1.—T-Values

3.3 The sample standard deviation andaverage CE value are calculated usingEquations 3 and 4 as follows:

s

x x

nEq

i avgi

n

=

−( )−

=∑

2

1

0 5

13

.

x

x

nEqavg

ii

n

= =∑

1 4

3.4 The DQO criteria are achieved whenall of the general criteria in section 2 areachieved and P ≤5 percent (i.e., the specificDQO criterion is achieved). In order to meetthis objective, facilities may have to conductmore than three test runs. Examples ofcalculating P, given a finite number of testruns, are shown below. (For purposes of thisexample it is assumed that all of the generalcriteria are met.)

3.5 Facility A conducted a CE test usinga traditional liquid/gas mass balance andsubmitted the following results and thecalculations shown in Equations 5 and 6:

Run CE

1 ........................................................ 96.12 ........................................................ 105.03 ........................................................ 101.2

Therefore:n=3t0.975=4.30xavg=100.8s=4.51

an

Eq=( ) ( )

=4.30 4.51

11 20 5.


P Eq= =11 2

100 8100 1111 6

.

..

3.6 Since the facility did not meet thespecific DQO criterion, they ran three moretest runs.

Run CE

4 ........................................................ 93.25 ........................................................ 96.26 ........................................................ 87.6

3.7 The calculations for Runs 1–6 aremade as follows using Equations 7 and 8:n=6t0.975=2.57xavg=96.6s=6.11

a Eq=( ) ( )

=2 57 6 11

66 41 7

. ..

P Eq= =6 41

96 6100 6 64 8

.

..

3.8 The facility still did not meet thespecific DQO criterion. They ran three moretest runs with the following results:

Run CE

7 ........................................................ 92.98 ........................................................ 98.39 ........................................................ 91.0

3.9 The calculations for Runs 1–9 aremade as follows using Equations 9 and 10:n=9t0.975=2.31xavg=95.7s=5.33

a Eq=( ) ( )

=2 31 5 33

94.10 9

. .

P Eq= =4.10

95 7100 4.28 10

.3.10 Based on these results, the specific

DQO criterion is satisfied. Since all of thegeneral criteria were also satisfied, theaverage CE from the nine test runs can beused to determine compliance.

4. Lower Confidence Limit Approach

4.1 The purpose of the LCL approach isto provide sources, that may be performingmuch better than their applicable regulatory

requirement, a screening option by whichthey can demonstrate compliance. Theapproach uses less precise methods andavoids additional test runs which mightotherwise be needed to meet the specificDQO criterion while still being assured ofcorrectly demonstrating compliance. It isdesigned to reduce ‘‘false positive’’ or socalled ‘‘Type II errors’’ which mayerroneously indicate compliance where morevariable test methods are employed. Becauseit encourages CE performance greater thanthat required in exchange for reducedcompliance demonstration burden, thesources that successfully use the LCLapproach could produce emission reductionsbeyond allowable emissions. Thus, it couldprovide additional benefits to theenvironment as well.

4.2 The LCL approach compares the 80percent (two-sided) LCL for the meanmeasured CE value to the applicable CEregulatory requirement. In addition to thegeneral criteria described in section 2, thespecific LCL criteria are that either the LCLbe greater than or equal to the applicable CEregulatory requirement or that the specificDQO criterion is met. A more detaileddescription of the LCL approach follows:

4.3 A source conducts an initial series ofat least three runs. The owner or operatormay choose to conduct additional test runsduring the initial test if desired.

4.4 If all of the general criteria are metand the specific DQO criterion is met, thenthe average CE value is used to determinecompliance.

4.5 If the data meet all of the generalcriteria, but do not meet the specific DQOcriterion; and the average CE, using all validtest runs, is above 100 percent then the testsequence cannot be used to calculate theLCL. At this point the facility has the optionof (a) conducting more test runs in hopes ofmeeting the DQO or of bringing the averageCE for all test runs below 100 percent so theLCL can be used or (b) discarding allprevious test data and retesting.

4.6 The purpose of the requirement inSection 4.5 is to protect against protocols andtest methods which may be inherently biasedhigh. This is important because it isimpossible to have an actual CE greater than100 percent and the LCL approach only looksat the lower end variability of the test results.This is different from the DQO which allowsaverage CE values up to 105 percent becausethe DQO sets both upper and lower limits ontest variability.

4.7 If at any point during testing theresults meet the DQO, the average CE can beused for demonstrating compliance with theapplicable regulatory requirement. Similarly,if the average CE is below 100 percent thenthe LCL can be used for demonstratingcompliance with the applicable regulatoryrequirement without regard to the DQO.

4.8 The LCL is calculated at a 80 percent(two-sided) confidence level as follows usingEquation 11:

LC xt s

nEqavg1

0 90 11= − .

Where:LC1=LCL at a 80 percent (two-sided)

confidence level.n=number of valid test runs.s=sample standard deviation.t0.90=t-value at the 80-percent (two-sided)

confidence level (see Table 3–1).xavg=average measured CE value (calculated

from all valid test runs).4.9 The resulting LC1 is compared to the

applicable CE regulatory requirement. If LC1

exceeds (i.e., is higher than) the applicableregulatory requirement, then a facility is ininitial compliance. However, if the LC1 isbelow the CE requirement, then the facilitymust conduct additional test runs. After thispoint the test results will be evaluated notonly looking at the LCL, but also the DQO of±5 percent of the mean at a 95 percentconfidence level. If the test results with theadditional test runs meet the DQO before theLCL exceeds the applicable CE regulatoryrequirement, then the average CE value willbe compared to the applicable CE regulatoryrequirement for determination of compliance.

4.10 If there is no specific CE requirementin the applicable regulation, then theapplicable CE regulatory requirement isdetermined based on the applicableregulation and an acceptable destructionefficiency test. If the applicable regulationrequires daily compliance and the latest CEcompliance demonstration was made usingthe LCL approach, then the calculated LC1

will be the highest CE value which a facilityis allowed to claim until another CEdemonstration test is conducted. This lastrequirement is necessary to assure bothsufficiently reliable test results in allcircumstances and the potentialenvironmental benefits referenced above.

4.11 An example of calculating the LCL isshown below. Facility B’s applicableregulatory requirement is 85 percent CE.Facility B conducted a CE test using atraditional liquid/gas mass balance andsubmitted the following results and thecalculation shown in Equation 12:

Run CE

1 ........................................................ 94.22 ........................................................ 97.63 ........................................................ 90.5

Therefore:n=3t0.90=1.886xavg=94.1s=3.55

LC Eq1 94.11 886 3 55

390 23 12= −

( ) ( )=

. ..


4.12 Since the LC1 of 90.23 percent isabove the applicable regulatory requirementof 85 percent then the facility is incompliance. The facility must continue toaccept the LC1 of 90.23 percent as its CEvalue until a new series of valid tests isconducted. (The data generated by Facility Bdo not meet the specific DQO criterion.)

5. Recommended Reporting for AlternativeCE Protocols

5.1 If a facility chooses to use alternativeCE protocols and test methods that satisfyeither the DQO or LCL and the additionalcriteria in section 4., the followinginformation should be submitted with each

test report to the appropriate regulatoryagency:

1. A copy of all alternative test methods,including any changes to the EPA referencemethods, QA/QC procedures and calibrationprocedures.

2. A table with information on each liquidsample, including the sample identification,where and when the sample was taken, andthe VOC content of the sample;

3. The coating usage for each test run (forprotocols in which the liquid VOC input isto be determined);

4. The quantity of captured VOC measuredfor each test run;

5. The CE calculations and results for eachtest run;

6. The DQO or LCL calculations andresults; and

7. The QA/QC results, includinginformation on calibrations (e.g., how oftenthe instruments were calibrated, thecalibration results, and information oncalibration gases, if applicable).

6. Recommended Recordkeeping forAlternative CE Protocols.

6.1 A record should be kept at the facilityof all raw data recorded during the test in asuitable form for submittal to the appropriateregulatory authority upon request.

[FR Doc. 96–13084 Filed 5–29–96; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

27132 Federal Register /Vol. 61, No. 105/Thursday, May 30 ... · PDF file30.05.1996 · 27132 Federal Register/Vol. 61, No. 105/Thursday, May 30, 1996/Rules and Regulations...

Documents