Commenters wishing to submit proprietary information for consideration must clearly distinguish such information from other comments and clearly label it as CBI. Send submissions containing such proprietary information directly to the following address, and not to the public docket, to ensure that proprietary information is not inadvertently placed in the docket: Attention: Mr. Paul Almodovar, c/o OAQPS Document Control Officer (Room 740B), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 411 W. Chapel Hill Street, Durham, NC 27711. The EPA will disclose information identified as CBI only to the extent allowed by the procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies a submission when it is received by EPA, the information may be made available to the public without further notice to the commenter.

Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Ms. Janet Eck (see ADDRESSES above) at least 2 days in advance of the public hearing. Persons interested in attending the public hearing should also call Ms. Eck (see ADDRESSES above) to verify the time, date, and location of the hearing. The public hearing will provide interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning these proposed emission standards.

Docket. The docket for this regulatory action is A9909. The docket is an organized and complete file of all the information we consider in developing this rule. It is a dynamic file because material is added throughout the rulemaking process. The docketing system allows you to readily identify and find documents so you can participate in rulemaking. Along with the proposed and promulgated standards and their preambles, contents of the docket will serve as the record in case of judicial review (see section 307(d)(7)(A) of the CAA). The regulatory text and other materials related to this rulemaking are available for review in the docket or copies may be mailed on request from the Air Docket by calling (202) 2607548. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket materials.

World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of this proposed rule is also available on the WWW through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a copy of the rule will be posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. If more information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at (919) 5415384.

Plain Language. In compliance with President Clinton's June 1, 1998 Executive Memorandum on plain language in government writing, this preamble is written using plain language. Thus, the use of ``we'' and ``us'' in this document refers to EPA. The use of ``you'' refers to the reader, and may include industry; State, local, and tribal governments; environmental groups; and other interested individuals.

Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated by this action include those listed on the following table.

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but is just a guide to entities likely to be regulated by final action on this proposal. It lists the types of entities that may be regulated, but you should examine the applicability criteria in section II of this preamble and in
[[Page 55333]]
Sec. 63.3290 of the proposed rule to decide whether your facility is likely to be regulated by final action on this proposal. If you have any questions about whether your facility will be subject to the standard, call the person listed in the preceeding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Regulated Entities
Examples of Category SIC NAICS potentially regulated codes codes entities Paper and Other Web Coating.. 2653 322211 Those facilities with 2657 322212 web coating \a\2671 322221 operations\b\ that 2672 322222 coat substrate used \a\2673 322223 in products \a\2674 322224 including, but not 2675 322225 limited to: 2679 322226 corrugated and solid \a\2754 322299 fiber boxes; folding 2761 323111 paperboard boxes, 3074 323116 including sanitary; 3081 325992 flexible packaging 3083 326111 (packing paper and 3291 326112 plastics film, \a\3497 326113 coated and 3861 32613 laminated); pressure 3955 326192 sensitive tape and \a\3996 32791 labels, coated and 332999 laminated paper, not 339944 elsewhere classified (nec); plastics, foil, and coated paper bags; bags: uncoated paper and multiwall; diecut paper and board; converted paper and paperboard products, nec (gift wrap, paper wallpaper, cigarette paper); commercial printing, gravure; manifold business forms; plastic aseptic packaging; unsupported plastics film and sheet; laminated plastics plate, sheet, and profile shapes; abrasive products; laminated aluminum (metal) foil and leaf, flexible packaging; photographic equipment and supplies; carbon paper and inked ribbons; linoleum, asphaltedfelt base, and other hard surface floor coverings. \a\ Facilities in these SIC codes are expected to be primarily covered under the printing and publishing national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP).
\b\ Web coating operations refer to the continuous application of a layer of material across the entire length of the usable substrate to: provide a covering, finish, or protective layer to the substrate; provide adhesion between two substrates for lamination; and where the continuous web substrate is flexible enough to be wound or unwound as rolls.

Background Information Document. The Background Information Document (BID) for the proposed standard may be obtained from the TTN; the paper and other web coating docket (A9909); the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Library (MD35), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number (919) 5412777; or the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161, telephone (703) 4874650. Please refer to ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Paper and Other Web CoatingBackground Information for Proposed Standards'' (EPA453/R00002).

Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:
I. What are the subject and purpose of this proposed rule?
II. Does this proposed rule apply to me?
III. What is the proposed emission standard?
IV. When do I show initial compliance with the proposed rule? V. What testing and monitoring must I do?
VI. What notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements must I follow?
VII. What are the environmental, energy, and economic impacts of this proposed rule?
VIII. What is the basis for selecting the level of the proposed standards?
IX. What is the basis for selecting the format of the proposed standards?
X. Administrative requirements

I. What Are the Subject and Purpose of This Proposed Rule?

The CAA requires us to establish standards to control HAP emissions from source categories identified under section 112(c) of the CAA. An initial source category list was published in the Federal Register on July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576). The source category list identifies ``Paper and Other Web Coating (Surface Coating)'' as a source category because it contains major sources. Under the CAA, a major source is defined as ``* * * any stationary source or group of stationary sources located within a contiguous area and under common control that emits or has the potential to emit, considering controls, in the aggregate, 10 tons per year (tpy) or more of any one HAP or 25 tpy or more of any combination of HAP.'' We have estimated that there are over 400 existing paper and other web coating facilities, with approximately 210 estimated to be major sources.

The purpose of the proposed rule is to reduce emissions of HAP from paper and other web coating major sources. The source category is for major sources only. Area sources are not included in this source category and therefore are not subject to the proposed standards. We estimate that annual baseline organic HAP emissions from this source category are approximately 35,000 megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (39,000 tpy). The proposed rule would eliminate approximately 29,000 Mg/yr (32,000 tpy) of these organic HAP emissions (about an 80 percent reduction).

The organic HAP emitted from the paper and other web coating process include toluene, methanol, methyl ethyl ketone, xylenes, phenol, methylene chloride, ethylene glycol, glycol ethers, hexane, methyl isobutyl ketone, cresols and cresylic acid, dimethylformamide, vinyl acetate, formaldehyde, and ethyl benzene. These pollutants can cause reversible or irreversible toxic effects following sufficient exposure. The potential toxic effects include eye, nose, throat, and skin irritation, and blood cell, heart, liver, and kidney damage.

The degree of adverse effects to human health from exposure to HAP can range from mild to severe. The extent and degree to which the human health effects may be experienced are dependent upon (1) The ambient concentration observed in the area (as influenced by emission rates, meteorological conditions, and terrain); (2) the frequency and duration of exposures; (3) characteristics of exposed individuals (genetics, age, preexisting health conditions, and lifestyle), which vary significantly with the population; and (4) pollutantspecific characteristics
[[Page 55334]]
(toxicity, halflife in the environment, bioaccumulation, and persistence).
II. Does This Proposed Rule Apply to Me?

A. What Facilities are subject to This Proposed Rule?

The paper and other web coating source category includes any facility located at a major source and engaged in the coating of paper, plastic film, metallic foil, and other web surfaces. The source category does not include printing operations covered under the printing and publishing national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) (40 CFR part 63, subpart KK). The source category does not include coil coating, i.e., the application of an organic coating to the surface of any metal strip at least 0.15 millimeter (0.006 inch) thick that is packaged in a roll or coil, which is being regulated as a separate source category. Fabric coating is also being regulated as a separate source category. However, we identified facilities in the paper and other web coating source category that also apply coatings to fabric, sometimes on the same coating lines. We are proposing that such coating lines be part of the paper and other web coating source category and not subject to the future fabric coating NESHAP. Paper and other web coating may be simply referred to as ``web coating'' since paper is one of several web substrates in the paper and other web coating source category.

The proposed rule applies to you if you own or operate any web coating lines at a facility that is a major source of HAP emissions. This means that the coating lines at a major source would be subject to the proposed standard without regard to the relative proportion of HAP emissions from the web coating lines to total HAP emissions at the source.

If your facility is a nonmajor (area) source, i.e., actual and potential annual emissions are less than 10 tons of any single HAP and less than 25 tons of all HAP combined, you would not be subject to this proposed rule.

If your facility is a major source, you would be required to meet the proposed emission limits for all the web coating lines at your facility. We have defined a web to be a continuous substrate (e.g., paper, plastic film, foil) that is capable of being rolled at any point during the coating process. We have defined a web coating line to be any number of work stations, of which one or more applies a layer of coating material along the length of a continuous web substrate, and any associated drying equipment between an unwind (or feed station) and a rewind (or cutting station). Printing presses subject to the printing and publishing NESHAP are not web coating lines.

B. What Is the Affected Source?

We define an affected source as a stationary source, group of stationary sources, or part of a stationary source to which a specific NESHAP applies. Within a source category, we select the specific emission sources (emission points or groupings of emission points) that will make up the affected source for that category. To select these emission sources, we mainly consider the constituent HAP and quantity emitted from individual or groups of emission points.

For the paper and other web coating NESHAP, the affected source is proposed to be the collection of all the web coating lines at a facility. We are not proposing requirements for operations related to coating line and parts cleaning, coating mixing and storage, film formation, and wastewater.

Coating lines and equipment that are not in the source category, and thus, not in the affected source, include those that perform both coating and printing and comply with the national emission standards for the printing and publishing industry; those that coat coil, even if only part of the time, and therefore, are in the coil coating source category; and those that coat only fabric and are in the fabric coating, printing, and dyeing source category (but if both fabric and other web coating is performed on a coating line, the line is included in the paper and other web coating affected source).

Many industrial facilities perform both coating and printing operations. Within the printing industry, the product and packaging rotogravure and wideweb flexographic industry segment (that includes the flexible packaging industry as a major subsector) does the most coating, with material use distributed almost equally between inks and other types of coatings. Printing operations are covered under the NESHAP for the printing and publishing industry. The printing and publishing NESHAP also includes an option for facilities that perform both printing and coating to include certain coating operations. Therefore, many facilities that could potentially be subject to the proposed NESHAP for the paper and other web coating industry may have coating lines already subject to the printing and publishing NESHAP. Such web coating lines included in compliance demonstrations under the printing and publishing NESHAP are not subject to this standard. A detailed discussion of the printing and publishing industry is included in the BID for that industry (Docket No. A9242, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Printing and Publishing IndustryBackground Information for Proposed Standards (EPA453/R95 002a)).
III. What Is the Proposed Emission Standard?

A. Proposed Limits

In the proposed rule, you would be able to choose any one of three options to limit organic HAP emissions at existing and new sources and meet the allowable level. The HAP emission limits are based on emission capture and control technology that can reduce total organic HAP emissions by 95 percent at existing sources and 98 percent at new sources. The emission limits reflect this level of control by limiting organic HAP emissions to no more than 5 percent and 2 percent of the organic HAP applied each month at existing and new sources, respectively; and by limiting emissions based on the weight of the solids part of your coating or the weight of your total coating. As discussed in section VIII of this preamble, we believe expressing emission limits in this way is appropriately based on the maximum achievable control technology (MACT) level of control and offers flexibility to reduce emissions through the use of control technology, pollution prevention, or a combination of the two.

The three HAP emission limits proposed for existing sources are: (1) Limit emissions to no more than 5 percent of the organic HAP applied for the month; (2) limit the total amount of organic HAP in your coatings, or the total amount of organic HAP emitted, to no more than 20 weight percent of the total solids applied to web substrates in a month; or (3) limit the total amount of organic HAP in your coatings, or the total amount of organic HAP emitted, to no more than 4 weight percent of the total mass of coating material applied to the web substrate in a month.

The three HAP emission limits proposed for new sources are: (1) Limit emissions to no more than 2 percent of the organic HAP applied for the month; (2) limit the total amount of organic HAP in your coatings, or the total amount of organic HAP emitted, to no more than 8 weight percent of the total solids applied to web substrates in a month; or (3) limit the total amount of organic HAP in your coatings, or the total amount of organic HAP emitted, to no more than 1.6 weight percent of the
[[Page 55335]]
total mass of coating material applied to the web substrate in a month.

In submitting comments, please specify whether the comment pertains to one or all of the emission limitation options of the proposed standard. We will further evaluate the proposed standard based on our review of public comments and other information we may receive. The final rule may reflect any one of the proposed options to limit organic HAP emissions, a combination of the proposed options, or all three options.

The General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) would also apply to you. The General Provisions codify procedures and criteria we use to carry out all part 63 NESHAP promulgated under the CAA. The General Provisions contain administrative procedures, preconstruction review procedures, and procedures for conducting compliancerelated activities such as notifications, recordkeeping and reporting, performance testing, and monitoring. The proposed rule refers to individual sections of the General Provisions that we believe will be of particular interest to you. However, unless specifically overridden in table 1 of the proposed rule, all of the General Provisions requirements would apply to you.

B. Interaction With Other Regulations

You may be subject to both the paper and other web coating NESHAP and other future or existing rules, such as new source performance standards (NSPS) and State rules requiring reasonably available control technology limits on volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions. You must comply with all rules. Duplicative recordkeeping and reporting requirements and differences in emission limitations may be resolved through your title V permit.

C. What Pollutants Are Limited by This Proposal?

Today's proposed rule would limit total organic HAP emissions from coating lines. We did not identify inorganic HAP as pollutants emitted by this source category.
IV. When Do I Show Initial Compliance With the Proposed Rule?

Existing sources would have to comply with the final rule no later than 3 years after the effective date of the final rule. The effective date is the date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. New or reconstructed sources would have to comply upon start up of the affected source or the effective date of the final rule, whichever is later. Details of compliance requirements can be found in the General Provisions, as outlined in table 1 of the proposed rule.

Before your initial compliance demonstration, you would choose one of the three emission limit options for your affected source. In your initial compliance certification, you would notify the Administrator of your choice, and after that you would monitor and report compliance results accordingly. If you decide to change to another emission limitation option, you are also required to notify the Administrator, as with other changes at the facility, discussed in section VI. V. What Testing and Monitoring Must I Do?

In addition to the specific testing and monitoring requirements specified below for the affected source, the proposed rule adopts the testing requirements specified in Sec. 63.7 and specifies that performance tests at existing sources must be conducted by the compliance date.

A. Test Methods and Procedures

You may comply with the proposed standards by applying materials meeting the organic HAP emission rate limits, by using capture and control equipment to reduce organic HAP emissions by 95 percent at existing sources and by 98 percent at new sources, or by using a combination of low organic HAP materials and capture and control equipment to meet the organic HAP emission rate limits.

If you demonstrate compliance based on the coating materials applied on your coating lines, you must determine the organic HAP content of materials applied. To make this determination, you may either use EPA Method 311 of appendix A of 40 CFR part 63, use an alternative method for determining the organic HAP content (but only after obtaining EPA approval), or use the volatile organic content of the coating materials applied as the value for the organic HAP content. The volatile organic content must be determined by EPA Method 24 of appendix A of 40 CFR part 60 (or an approved alternative method). If you are demonstrating compliance by applying coating materials that meet the emission limit based on coating solids applied, the solids content of the materials must be determined using EPA Method 24. You may rely on manufacturer's data to determine the organic HAP content or volatile matter and solids content when these data are equivalent to those obtained from Method 311 (or an approved alternative method) and Method 24 (or an approved alternative method), respectively. You must also determine the mass of each coating material applied using company records. You must calculate the organic HAP content and mass of all coating materials applied on the coating lines for each monthly period. However, only changes in a material formulation would require a redetermination of total organic HAP weight fraction for that material. To demonstrate compliance, you must calculate the average mass of organic HAP in coating materials applied and show that it is less than the organic HAP emission limits specified.

If you use an emission capture and control system to comply with the proposed standard, you must demonstrate that the overall control efficiency reduces total organic emissions by at least 95 percent at existing sources and 98 percent at new sources. Alternatively, you may use capture and control equipment in combination with low organic HAP materials and demonstrate you meet the organic HAP emission limit specified. To comply using the combined approach, you must determine the overall control efficiency of the equipment and the organic HAP and solids content of the materials applied. These values must be determined for each monthly period.

The overall control efficiency for a capture and control system would be demonstrated based on emission capture and reduction efficiency. To determine the capture efficiency, you would either verify the presence of a permanent total enclosure using EPA Method 204 of 40 CFR part 51, appendix M, in which case you could assume 100 percent capture; or use EPA Method 204A through F, or Appendix A of 40 CFR part 63, Subpart KK, to measure capture efficiency.

You must determine the emission reduction efficiency of a control device by conducting a performance test or using a continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS). If you use CEMS, you must determine the inlet and outlet concentration to calculate the control efficiency. The CEMS must comply with performance specification 8 or 9 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.

If you conduct a performance test, we are proposing that the removal efficiency of a control device be determined based on three runs, each run lasting 1 hour. Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used for selection of the sampling sites. Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used to determine the gas volumetric flow rate. Method 3, 3A or 3B, of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used for gas
[[Page 55336]]
analysis to determine dry molecular weight. Method 4 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used to determine stack moisture. Method 25 or 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, must be used to determine organic volatile matter concentration. Alternatively, any other test method or data that have been validated according to the applicable procedures in Method 301 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A, may be used if approved by the Administrator.

If you use a solvent recovery system, you may alternatively determine the overall control efficiency using a liquidliquid material balance. If you demonstrate compliance with the material balance, you must measure the amount of all materials applied during each month and determine the volatile matter content of these materials. You must also measure the amount of volatile matter recovered by the solvent recovery system during the month and calculate the overall solvent recovery efficiency.

The test methods we propose to require, as discussed above, are existing EPA methods that are familiar to the industry, readily available, and appropriate to the device or the parameter being measured. The tests selected are expected to establish adequately whether the facility is complying with the standard.

B. Monitoring Requirements

According to paragraph (a)(3) of section 114 of the CAA, monitoring of stationary sources is required to determine the compliance status of the sources, and whether compliance is continuous or intermittent. For affected sources complying with the proposed standard with capture and control systems, initial compliance is determined through an initial performance test and ongoing compliance through continuous monitoring. We are proposing the parameters to be monitored for certain types of control devices now used in the industry. You must set the values of these parameters that correspond to compliance with the proposed standard during your initial performance test. These values are your ``operating limits.'' If future monitoring shows that capture and control equipment is operating outside the range of values established during the initial performance test, then you are deviating from the operating limits.

If you use a capture and control system to meet the proposed standard, you are required to submit a plan identifying the operating limit and monitoring procedures for the capture system. You must monitor in accordance with your plan unless we require an alternate monitoring procedure.

If you use a thermal or catalytic oxidizer, you must monitor temperature using a continuous parameter monitoring system. If you use a thermal oxidizer, you must establish the average combustion temperature recorded during the performance test as the operating limit. If you use a catalytic oxidizer, you must establish as the operating limits the average gas temperatures recorded during the performance test both upstream and downstream of the catalyst bed. The timeweighted average of the values recorded during the performance test shall be computed to establish the parameter value(s). For catalytic oxidizers, temperature monitors are placed immediately before and after the catalyst bed. For thermal oxidizers, the temperature monitor is placed in the firebox or in the duct immediately downstream of the firebox before any substantial heat exchange occurs.

If you use a solvent recovery system, you must conduct monthly mass balances or operate continuous emission monitors as described in the performance test section.

If you use a combination of capture and control devices and lowHAP materials, you are required to monitor the parameters of the capture and control devices as indicated above. In addition, you must record data on the HAP and solids content of the materials applied to determine the HAP emission rate as described in the performance test section.

The proposed rule specifies the types of parameters that must be monitored for common types of control devices: temperature monitoring for oxidizers and either continuous emission monitor systems or mass balance measurements for solvent recovery. These parameters were selected because they are good indicators of control device performance, and because continuous parameter monitoring
instrumentation is available at a reasonable cost. You must install, calibrate, maintain, and operate all monitoring equipment as specified in the proposed rule. If you use control devices other than those identified in the proposed standard, you must submit the operating parameters to be monitored to the Administrator for approval. You could be approved, on a casebycase basis, to monitor parameters not specifically listed in the proposed standards. The authority to approve the parameters to be monitored is retained by the Administrator and is not delegated.
VI. What Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements Must I Follow?

The proposed rule requires you to comply with notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements, generally as described in the General Provisions (see table 1 of the proposed rule) and specifically as designed to support demonstration of compliance with this proposed rule. We believe that these requirements are necessary and sufficient to ensure that you comply with the requirements in the proposed subpart JJJJ.

A. Initial Notification

If the NESHAP apply to you, you must send an initial notification to the EPA Regional Office in the region where your facility is located and to your State agency. If you have an existing source, you must submit the initial notification no later than 1 year before the required compliance date for the standard. If you have a new or reconstructed source, you must submit the notification no later than 120 days after either the date of initial startup or the effective date of the final rule, whichever is later.

The Initial Notification Report notifies us and your State agency that you have an existing facility that is subject to the proposed standard or that you have constructed a new facility. Thus, it allows you and the Federal or State enforcement agency to plan for compliance activities. The General Provisions for NESHAP specifies the information you must include in the initial notification and other reporting requirements for new or reconstructed sources.

B. Notification of Performance Tests

If the NESHAP apply to you, you will have several options for demonstrating compliance. If you demonstrate compliance by using a capture and control system to reduce emissions of HAP, you must conduct a performance test as described above. Prior to conducting the performance test, you must notify us or the delegated State or local agency at least 60 calendar days before the performance test is scheduled to begin, as indicated in the General Provisions for NESHAP. C. Notification of Compliance Status

You are required to send a notice of compliance status within 180 days after the compliance date as specified in the General Provisions for NESHAP. This report must include your compliance certification, the results of any performance tests and monitoring, and a description of how you will demonstrate continuing compliance.

[[Page 55337]]

The notification of compliance status must specifically identify whether lowHAP materials, emission capture and control systems, or a combination of lowHAP materials and capture and control systems were used to comply with this regulation. For capture and control systems, it must also identify the operating limits established during the performance test. Specific reporting requirements are dependent upon how you choose to comply with the proposed rule.

D. Recordkeeping Requirements

To comply with the proposed standard based on organic HAP content or organic HAP emissions on a weight basis, records must be maintained of the organic HAP, volatile organic content and solids content of each coating applied, and the amount of each coating applied on paper and other web coating lines each month.

If capture and control technology is used, you are required to keep records of the equipment monitoring parameter measurements specified in the proposed rule that are discussed in section V above. You must also develop a startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan. You would have to make the plan available for inspection if the Administrator requests to see it. It would stay in your records for the life of the affected source or until the source no longer must meet the standard in the proposed rule.

E. Periodic Reports

Each reporting year is divided into two semiannual reporting periods. If no deviations occur during a semiannual reporting period, you would submit a semiannual compliance report stating that the affected source has been in compliance. A deviation is any instance in which you fail to meet any requirement or obligation of the proposed standard or any term or condition adopted to meet the proposed standard. The following semiannual compliance reports would be required under this proposal when deviations occur: