representative conditions. The commenter provided two examples of
permit language that allow for extensions of testing periods.
    Response: The EPA disagrees with the need to allow for testing
delays and is not revising the proposed language to include the
commenter's recommendation. The compliance calculations in 40 CFR part
63, subparts IIII, MMMM, and PPPP require a facility to use the organic
HAP destruction or removal efficiency (DRE) of the add-on control
device. The standards already require that tests be performed under
representative coating operation operating conditions and under
representative emission capture system and add-on control device
operating conditions, which specifically exclude testing during periods
of startup, shutdown, nonoperation, and malfunction. The EPA currently
does not have sufficient information to define the conditions under
which an extension should be granted, and no additional information was
provided by the commenter. The commenter also provided no additional
information to indicate whether and how the situations described by the
commenter (e.g., significant coating operation changes or product
changes) would alter the DRE of an add-on control device.
    The EPA also notes that the purpose of periodic compliance testing
is to not only demonstrate future compliance, but to also confirm past
compliance. If a facility is planning significant changes that would
prevent testing according to the 5-year schedule, the facility may need
to complete testing earlier so as to demonstrate that the facility was
in compliance under the original configuration. It may be necessary for
the facility to repeat testing under the new configuration to re-
establish new operating limits and efficiency values for the emission
capture and control system.
    Comment: One commenter requested that the EPA revise 40 CFR
63.3093(a) to clarify that facilities in the ALDT source category that
do not use add-on controls to comply with the emission limits in 40 CFR
63.3090 or 63.3091 are not required to comply with the operating limits
for add-on controls and emission capture systems. The commenters
reported that the original language in 40 CFR 63.3093(a) only mentioned
``coating operations without add-on controls'' and this has led to
confusion because many facilities have add-on controls to limit VOC
emissions, but they are not needed to comply with the HAP emission
limits.
    Response: The EPA agrees that this change will avoid confusion and
we will make the change to the language in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
IIII. Other surface coating NESHAP, such as 40 CFR part 63, subparts
MMMM and PPPP, already have language that avoids similar confusion over
the applicability of the operating limits.
4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the ongoing
compliance demonstrations?
    For the reasons explained in the preamble to the proposed rules (84
FR 58963, 58974, and 58983, November 1, 2019), and in the comment
responses above in section IV.E.3 of this preamble, we are finalizing
the periodic testing provisions for 40 CFR part 63, subparts IIII,
MMMM, and PPPP, as proposed. As also described in section IV.E.3 of
this preamble, we are also making changes to each NESHAP to clarify
that testing is only required for add-on control devices and is not
required for emission capture systems. We are also revising 40 CFR
63.3093(a) to clarify that facilities in the ALDT source category are
not required to meet any operating limits for any coating operations
that do not use add-on controls to comply with the emission limits in
40 CFR 63.3090 or 63.3091, as described in section IV.E.3 of this
preamble.

V. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts and Additional
Analyses Conducted

A. What are the affected facilities?

    Currently, we estimate 43 major source facilities are subject to
the ALDT NESHAP and operating in the United

States. The affected source under the NESHAP is the collection of all
coating operations; all storage containers and mixing vessels in which
coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials are stored or mixed; all
manual and automated equipment and containers used for conveying
coatings, thinners, and cleaning materials; and all storage containers
and all manual and automated equipment and containers used for
conveying waste materials generated by a coating operation. A coating
operation is defined as the equipment used to apply coating to a
substrate (coating application) and to dry or cure the coating after
application. A single coating operation always includes at least the
point at which a coating is applied and all subsequent points in the
affected source where organic HAP emissions from that coating occur.
There may be multiple coating operations in an affected source. Coating
application with hand-held nonrefillable aerosol containers, touchup
bottles, touchup markers, marking pens, or pinstriping equipment is not
a coating operation for the purposes of this subpart. The application
of temporary materials such as protective oils and ``travel waxes''
that are designed to be removed from the vehicle before it is delivered
to a retail purchaser is not a coating operation for the purposes of 40
CFR part 61, subpart IIII.
    Currently, we estimate 368 major source facilities are subject to
the MMPP NESHAP and operating in the United States. The affected source
under the NESHAP is the collection of all coating operations; all
storage containers and mixing vessels in which coatings, thinners, and
cleaning materials are stored or mixed; all manual and automated
equipment and containers used for conveying coatings, thinners, and
cleaning materials; and all storage containers and all manual and
automated equipment and containers used for conveying waste materials
generated by a coating operation. A coating operation is defined as the
equipment used to apply cleaning materials to a substrate to prepare it
for coating application (surface preparation) or to remove dried
coating; to apply coating to a substrate (coating application) and to
dry or cure the coating after application; or to clean coating
operation equipment (equipment cleaning). A single coating operation
may include any combination of these types of equipment but always
includes at least the point at which a given quantity of coating or
cleaning material is applied to a given part and all subsequent points
in the affected source where organic HAP are emitted from the specific
quantity of coating or cleaning material on the specific part. There
may be multiple coating operations in an affected source. Coating
application with handheld, non-refillable aerosol containers, touch-up
markers, or marking pens is not a coating operation for the purposes of
40 CFR part 63, subpart MMMM.
    Currently, we estimate 125 major source facilities are subject to
the PPP NESHAP and operating in the United States. The affected source
under the NESHAP is the collection of coating operations; all storage
containers and mixing vessels in which coatings, thinners, and cleaning
materials are stored or mixed; all manual and automated equipment and
containers used for conveying coatings, thinners, and cleaning
materials; and all storage containers and all manual and automated
equipment and containers used for conveying waste materials generated
by a coating operation. A coating operation is defined as the equipment
used to apply cleaning materials to a substrate to prepare it for
coating application (surface preparation) or to remove dried coating;
to apply coating to a substrate (coating application) and to dry or
cure the coating after application; or to clean coating operation
equipment (equipment cleaning). A single coating operation may include
any combination of these types of equipment but always includes at
least the point at which a given quantity of coating or cleaning
material is applied to a given part and all subsequent points in the
affected source where organic HAP are emitted from the specific
quantity of coating or cleaning material on the specific part. There
may be multiple coating operations in an affected source. Coating
application with handheld, non-refillable aerosol containers, touch-up
markers, or marking pens is not a coating operation for the purposes of
40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPP.

B. What are the air quality impacts?

    At the current level of control, estimated emissions of volatile
organic HAP from the 43 facilities in the ALDT source category are
approximately 1,700 tpy. Current estimated emissions of volatile
organic HAP from the 368 facilities in the MMPP source category are
approximately 2,700 tpy. Current estimated emissions of volatile
organic HAP from the 125 facilities in the PPP source category are
approximately 760 tpy.
    The amendments require that all major sources in the ALDT, MMPP,
and PPP source categories comply with the relevant emission standards
at all times, including periods of SSM. We were unable to quantify the
emissions that occur during periods of SSM or the specific emissions
reductions that will occur as a result of this action. However,
eliminating the SSM exemption has the potential to reduce emissions by
requiring facilities to meet the applicable standard at all times and
to minimize SSM periods.
    Indirect or secondary air emissions impacts are impacts that would
result from, for example, the increased electricity, natural gas, or
water usage associated with the operation of control devices (e.g.,
increased secondary emissions of criteria pollutants from power
plants). Energy impacts consist of the electricity and steam needed to
operate control devices and other equipment. The amendments would have
no effect on the energy needs of the affected facilities in any of the
three source categories and will, therefore, have no indirect or
secondary air emissions impacts.

C. What are the cost impacts?

    We estimate that each affected facility in these three source
categories will experience costs as a result of these final amendments
for recordkeeping and reporting. Each facility will experience costs to
read and understand the rule amendments. Costs associated with
eliminating the SSM exemption were estimated as part of the reporting
and recordkeeping costs and include time for re-evaluating previously
developed SSM record systems. Costs associated with the requirement to
electronically submit notifications and semi-annual compliance reports
using CEDRI were estimated as part of the reporting and recordkeeping
costs and include time for becoming familiar with CEDRI and the
reporting template for semi-annual compliance reports. The
recordkeeping and reporting costs are presented in section VI.C of this
preamble.
    We are also finalizing a requirement for performance testing no
less frequently than every 5 years for sources in each source category
using the add-on controls compliance options. We estimate that five
major source facilities subject to the ALDT NESHAP may incur costs to
conduct periodic testing because they are currently using the emission
rate with add-on controls compliance option, and the total cost for all
five facilities subject to the ALDT NESHAP in a single year would be
$95,000. Similarly, we estimate that seven major source facilities
subject to the MMPP NESHAP may incur costs to conduct periodic testing
because they

are currently using the emission rate with add-on controls compliance
option, at a total cost in a single year of $133,000. Finally, we
estimate that three major source facilities subject to the PPP NESHAP
may incur costs to conduct periodic testing because they are currently
using the emission rate with add-on controls compliance option, at a
total cost in a single year of $57,000. These estimates exclude testing
costs for facilities that have add-on controls and are currently
required to perform periodic performance testing as a condition of
their state operating permit. The cost for a facility to conduct a
destruction or removal efficiency performance test using EPA Method 25
or 25A is estimated to be about $19,000. For further information on the
potential costs, see the memorandum titled Estimated Costs/Impacts 40
CFR part 63 Subparts IIII, MMMM, and PPPP Monitoring Review Revisions,
May 2019, in the ALDT Docket, MMPP Docket, and PPP Docket.

D. What are the economic impacts?

    The economic impact analysis is designed to inform decision makers
about the potential economic consequences of the compliance costs
outlined in section VI.C. of this preamble. To assess the maximum
potential impact, the largest cost expected to be experienced in any
one year is compared to the total sales for the ultimate owner of the
affected facilities to estimate the total burden for each facility.
    For the final revisions to the ALDT NESHAP, the total cost is
estimated to be approximately $113,000 for the 43 affected entities in
the first year of the rule, and an additional $122,000 in testing and
reporting costs for five facilities in the third year of the rule and
every 5 years thereafter. The 43 affected facilities are owned by 14
different parent companies, and the total costs associated with the
final requirements range from 0.000002 to 0.0056 percent of annual
sales revenue per ultimate owner. These costs are not expected to
result in a significant market impact, regardless of whether they are
passed on to the purchaser or absorbed by the firms.
    For the final revisions to the MMPP NESHAP, the total cost is
estimated to be approximately $964,000 for the 368 affected entities in
the first year of the rule, and an additional $172,000 in testing and
reporting costs for seven facilities in the third year of the rule and
every 5 years thereafter. The 368 affected facilities are owned by 265
different parent companies, and the total costs associated with the
final requirements range from 0.000002 to 0.25 percent of annual sales
revenue per ultimate owner. These costs are not expected to result in a
significant market impact, regardless of whether they are passed on to
the purchaser or absorbed by the firms.
    For the final revisions to the PPP NESHAP, the total cost is
estimated to be approximately $327,000 for the 125 affected entities in
the first year of the rule, and an additional $74,000 in testing and
reporting costs for three facilities in the third year of the rule and
every 5 years thereafter. The 125 affected facilities are owned by 94
different parent companies, and the total costs associated with the
final requirements range from 0.000008 to 0.22 percent of annual sales
revenue per ultimate owner. These costs are not expected to result in a
significant market impact, regardless of whether they are passed on to
the purchaser or absorbed by the firms.
    The EPA also prepared a small business screening assessment to
determine whether any of the identified affected entities are small
entities, as defined by the U.S. Small Business Administration. One of
the facilities potentially affected by the final revisions to the ALDT
NESHAP is a small entity. However, the annualized costs associated with
the final requirements is 0.0056 percent of annual sales revenue for
the owner of that facility. Of the facilities potentially affected by
the final revisions to the MMPP NESHAP, 110 are small entities.
However, the annualized costs associated with the final requirements
for the 103 ultimate owners of these 110 affected small entities range
from 0.001 to 0.25 percent of annual sales revenues per ultimate owner.
Of the facilities potentially affected by the final revisions to the
PPP NESHAP, 35 are small entities. However, the annualized costs
associated with the final requirements for the 35 ultimate owners of
these 35 affected small entities range from 0.0009 to 0.22 percent of
annual sales revenues per ultimate owner. Therefore, there are no
significant economic impacts on a substantial number of small entities
from these final amendments.

E. What are the benefits?

    As stated in section V.B. of the November 1, 2019, RTR proposal (84
FR 58986), we were unable to quantify the specific emissions reductions
associated with eliminating the SSM exemption, although this change has
the potential to reduce emissions of volatile organic HAP.
    Because these amendments are not considered economically
significant, as defined by Executive Order 12866, we did not monetize
the benefits of reducing these emissions. This does not mean that there
are no benefits associated with the potential reduction in volatile
organic HAP from this rule.

F. What analysis of environmental justice did we conduct?

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. The order directs
federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by
law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying
and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the
United States.
    To examine the potential for any environmental justice issues that
might be associated with these source categories, we performed a
demographic analysis for each source category, which is an assessment
of risks to individual demographic groups of the populations living
within 5 kilometers (km) and within 50 km of the facilities. In the
analysis, we evaluated the distribution of HAP-related cancer and
noncancer risks from each source category across different demographic
groups within the populations living near facilities.
1. Surface Coating of ALDT
    The results of the demographic analysis for the Surface Coating of
ALDT source category are summarized in Table 5 of this preamble. These
results, for various demographic groups, are based on the estimated
risk from actual emissions levels for the population living within 50
km of the facilities.
    The results of the ALDT source category demographic analysis
indicate that emissions from the source category expose approximately
15,000 people to a cancer risk at or above 1-in-1 million and no one is
exposed to a chronic noncancer HI greater than 1. The overall percent
of the population that is minorities is similar nationally (38 percent)
and for the category population with cancer risk greater than or equal
to 1-in-1 million (40 percent). However, the category population with
cancer risk greater than or equal to 1-in-1 million has a greater
percent Hispanic population (27 percent) as compared to the national
percent Hispanic population (18 percent).

               Table 5--Surface Coating of ALDT Source Category Demographic Risk Analysis Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Population
                                                                                with chronic
                                                                        Population with cancer     noncancer HI
                                                  Nationwide           risk at or  above 1-in-1   above 1 due to
                                                                        million due to surface        surface
                                                                            coating of ALDT         coating of
                                                                                ALDT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Population........................  317,746,049...............  15,000....................               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          White and Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White...................................  62........................  60........................               0
Minority................................  38........................  40........................               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Minority Detail by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
African American........................  12........................  10........................               0
Native American.........................  0.8.......................  0.2.......................               0
Hispanic or Latino......................  18........................  27........................               0
Other and Multiracial...................  7.........................  3.........................               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Income by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below the Poverty Level.................  14........................  19........................               0
Above the Poverty Level.................  86........................  81........................               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Education by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 25 Without High a School Diploma...  14........................  14........................               0
Over 25 With a High School Diploma......  86........................  86........................               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Linguistically Isolated by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linguistically Isolated.................  6.........................  3.........................               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The methodology and the results of the demographic analysis are
presented in a technical report titled Risk and Technology Review--
Analysis of Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near Automobile
and Light-Duty Truck Surface Coating Source Category Operations, in the
ALDT Docket.
2. Surface Coating of MMPP
    The results of the demographic analysis for the Surface Coating of
MMPP source category are summarized in Table 6 of this preamble. These
results, for various demographic groups, are based on the estimated
risk from actual emissions levels for the population living within 50
km of the facilities.
    The results of the MMPP source category demographic analysis
indicate that approximately 18,000 people are exposed to a cancer risk
at or above 1-in-1 million and no one is exposed to a chronic noncancer
HI greater than 1. The percentages of the at-risk population in the
following specific demographic groups are higher than their respective
nationwide percentages: ``White,'' ``Below the Poverty Level,'' and
``Over 25 and Without a High School Diploma.''

               Table 6--Surface Coating of MMPP Source Category Demographic Risk Analysis Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Population
                                                                                with cancer     Population
                                                                                risk at or     with chronic
                                                                                above 1-in-1    noncancer HI
                                                                    Nationwide      million due   above 1 due to
                                                                                to surface        surface
                                                                                coating of      coating of
                                                                                MMPP            MMPP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Population................................................     317,746,049          18,000               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          White and Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White...........................................................              62              75               0
Minority........................................................              38              25               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Minority Detail by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
African American................................................              12              12               0
Native American.................................................             0.8             0.6               0
Hispanic or Latino..............................................              18               9               0

Other and Multiracial...........................................               7               3               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Income by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below the Poverty Level.........................................              14              20               0
Above the Poverty Level.........................................              86              80               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Education by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 25 Without High a School Diploma...........................              14              18               0
Over 25 With a High School Diploma..............................              86              82               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Linguistically Isolated by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linguistically Isolated.........................................               6               3               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The methodology and the results of the demographic analysis are
presented in a technical report titled Risk and Technology Review--
Analysis of Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near the Surface
Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Source Category, in
the MMPP Docket.
3. Surface Coating of PPP
    The results of the demographic analysis for the Surface Coating of
PPP source category are summarized in Table 7 of this preamble. These
results, for various demographic groups, are based on the estimated
risk from actual emissions levels for the population living within 50
km of the facilities.
    The results of the PPP source category demographic analysis
indicate that approximately 500 people are exposed to a cancer risk at
or above 1-in-1 million and no one is exposed to a chronic noncancer HI
greater than 1. The percentages of the at-risk population in the
following specific demographic groups are higher than their respective
nationwide percentages: ``White'' and ``Below the Poverty Level.''

                Table 7--Surface Coating of PPP Source Category Demographic Risk Analysis Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Population
                                                                                with cancer     Population
                                                                                risk at or     with chronic
                                                                    Nationwide     above 1-in-1    noncancer HI
                                                                                million due     above 1 due
                                                                                to surface      to surface
                                                                                coating of PPP  coating of PPP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Population................................................     317,746,049             500               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          White and Minority by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White...........................................................              62              92               0
Minority........................................................              38               8               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Minority Detail by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
African American................................................              12               4               0
Native American.................................................             0.8             0.1               0
Hispanic or Latino..............................................              18               3               0
Other and Multiracial...........................................               7               1               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Income by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below the Poverty Level.........................................              14              19               0
Above the Poverty Level.........................................              86              81               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Education by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 25 Without High a School Diploma...........................              14              14               0
Over 25 With a High School Diploma..............................              86              86               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                       Linguistically Isolated by Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linguistically Isolated.........................................               6               0               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The methodology and the results of the demographic analysis are
presented in a technical report titled Risk and Technology Review--
Analysis of Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near Surface
Coating of Plastic Parts and Products Source Category Operations, in
the PPP Docket.

G. What analysis of children's environmental health did we conduct?

    The EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children.
This action's health and risk assessments are summarized in section
IV.A of this preamble and are further documented in the Residual Risk
Assessment for the Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks
Source Category in Support of the 2020 Risk and Technology Review Final
Rule, Residual Risk Assessment for the Surface Coating of Miscellaneous
Metal Parts and Products Source Category in Support of the 2020 Risk
and Technology Review Final Rule, and Residual Risk Assessment for the
Surface Coating of Plastic Parts and Products Source Category in
Support of the 2020 Risk and Technology Review Final Rule, in the ALDT
Docket, MMPP Docket, and PPP Docket, respectively.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was,
therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    The information collection activities in this rule have been
submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA, as discussed for each
source category covered by this action in sections VI.C.1, 2, and 3 of
this preamble.
1. Surface Coating of ALDT
    The Information Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA
prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 2045.09. You can find a copy
of the ICR in the ALDT Docket for this rule (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2019-0314), and it is briefly summarized here. The information
collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves them.
    As part of the RTR for the ALDT NESHAP, the EPA is not revising the
emission limit requirements. The EPA has revised the SSM provisions of
the rule and is requiring the use of electronic data reporting for
future performance test data submittals, notifications, and reports.
This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR
part 63, subpart IIII. The EPA is finalizing a requirement to conduct
control device performance testing no less frequently than once every 5
years for facilities using the emission rate with add-on controls
compliance option.
    Respondents/affected entities: Facilities performing surface
coating of ALDT.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart IIII).
    Estimated number of respondents: In the 3 years after the
amendments are final, approximately 43 respondents per year will be
subject to the NESHAP and no additional respondents are expected to
become subject to the NESHAP during that period. The EPA estimates that
five facilities will be required to conduct performance testing in the
3 years after the amendments are final.
    Frequency of response: The total number of responses in year 1 is
129 and in year 3 is 15. Year 2 would have no responses.
    Total estimated burden: The average annual burden to the ALDT
surface coating facilities over the 3 years after the amendments are
finalized is estimated to be 410 hours (per year). Burden is defined at
5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: The average annual cost to the ALDT surface
coating facilities is $47,000 in labor costs in the first 3 years after
the amendments are final. The average annual capital and operation and
maintenance (O&M) costs is $32,000.
2. Surface Coating of MMPP
    The ICR document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR
number 2056.08. You can find a copy of the ICR in the MMPP Docket for
this rule (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0312), and it is briefly
summarized here. The information collection requirements are not
enforceable until OMB approves them.
    As part of the RTR for the MMPP NESHAP, the EPA is not revising the
emission limit requirements. The EPA has revised the SSM provisions of
the rule and is requiring the use of electronic data reporting for
future performance test data submittals, notifications, and reports.
This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR
part 63, subpart MMMM. The EPA is finalizing a requirement to conduct
control device performance testing no less frequently than once every 5
years for facilities using the emission rate with add-on controls
compliance option.
    Respondents/affected entities: Facilities performing surface
coating of MMPP.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart MMMM).
    Estimated number of respondents: In the 3 years after the
amendments are

final, approximately 368 respondents per year will be subject to the
NESHAP and no additional respondents are expected to become subject to
the NESHAP during that period.
    Frequency of response: The total number of responses in year 1 is
1,104 and in year 3 is 21. Year 2 would have no responses.
    Total estimated burden: The average annual burden to the MMPP
surface coating facilities over the 3 years after the amendments are
final is estimated to be 2,930 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5
CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: The average annual cost to the MMPP surface
coating facilities is $334,000 in labor costs in the first 3 years
after the amendments are final. The average annual capital and O&M cost
is $44,000.
3. Surface Coating of PPP
    The ICR document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR
number 2044.09. You can find a copy of the ICR in the PPP Docket for
this rule (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0313), and it is briefly
summarized here. The information collection requirements are not
enforceable until OMB approves them.
    As part of the RTR for the PPP NESHAP, the EPA is not revising the
emission limit requirements. The EPA has revised the SSM provisions of
the rule and is requiring the use of electronic data reporting for
future performance test data submittals, notifications, and reports.
This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR
part 63, subpart PPPP. The EPA is finalizing a requirement to conduct
control device performance testing no less frequently than once every 5
years for facilities using the emission rate with add-on controls
compliance option.
    Respondents/affected entities: Facilities performing surface
coating of PPP.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart PPPP).
    Estimated number of respondents: In the 3 years after the
amendments are final, approximately 125 respondents per year will be
subject to the NESHAP and no additional respondents are expected to
become subject to the NESHAP during that period.
    Frequency of response: The total number of responses in year 1 is
375 and in year 3 is nine. Year 2 would have no responses.
    Total estimated burden: The average annual burden to the PPP
surface coating facilities over the 3 years after the amendments are
final is estimated to be 1,007 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5
CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: The average annual cost to the PPP surface
coating facilities is $115,000 in labor costs in the first 3 years
after the amendments are final. The average annual capital and O&M cost
is $19,000.
    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
related to the NESHAP for Surface Coating of Large Appliances; NESHAP
for Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles; and
NESHAP for Surface Coating of Metal Furniture. OMB has previously
approved the information collection activities contained in the
existing regulations and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0457 for
NESHAP for Surface Coating of Large Appliances; 2060-0522 for NESHAP
for Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles; and
2060-0518 for NESHAP for Surface Coating of Metal Furniture. This
notice only finalizes technical corrections to these standards and does
not impact the reporting or recordkeeping requirements.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB
approves the ICRs, the Agency will announce that approval in the
Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to
display the OMB control number for the approved information collection
activities contained in the final rule.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. The
economic impact associated with the requirements in this action for the
affected small entities is described in section V.D. of this preamble.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes
no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the
private sector.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. No tribal facilities are known to be engaged in
any of the industries that would be affected by this action (ALDT
surface coating, MMPP surface coating, and PPP surface coating). Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children. This action's health and risk assessments are contained in
sections III.A and C, IV.A.1 and 2, IV.B.1 and 2, and IV.C.1 and 2 of
this preamble and are further documented in the Residual Risk
Assessment for the Surface Coating of ALDT Source Category in Support
of the 2020 Risk and Technology Review Final Rule, Residual Risk
Assessment for the Surface Coating of MMPP Source Category in Support
of the 2020 Risk and Technology Review Final Rule, and Residual Risk
Assessment for the Surface Coating of PPP Source Category in Support of
the 2020 Risk and Technology Review Final Rule, in the ALDT Docket,
MMPP Docket, and PPP Docket, respectively.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
Part 51

    This rulemaking involves technical standards. The EPA conducted
searches for the MACT standards through the Enhanced National Standards
Systems Network Database managed by the American National Standards
Institute. We also contacted VCS organizations and accessed and
searched their databases. During the EPA's VCS search, if the title or
abstract (if provided) of the

VCS described technical sampling and analytical procedures that are
similar to the EPA's reference method, the EPA reviewed it as a
potential equivalent method. The EPA is finalizing, as proposed,
addition of methods to the ALDT NESHAP, the MMPP NESHAP, and the PPP
NESHAP, as discussed in this section VI.J.
    The EPA is amending the ALDT NESHAP, the MMPP NESHAP, and the PPP
NESHAP to provide owners and operators with the option of using two new
methods. We are adding EPA Method 18 of appendix A to 40 CFR part 60,
``Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas
Chromatography,'' to measure and subtract methane emissions from
measured total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon. We are also
amending each of these NESHAP to incorporate by reference ASTM D2369-10
(Reapproved 2015)\e\, ``Standard Test Method for Volatile Content of
Coatings,'' into these three NESHAP as an alternative to EPA Method 24
for the determination of the volatile matter content in surface
coatings. ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\ is a test method that
allows for more accurate results for multi-component chemical resistant
coatings.
    We are amending the MMPP NESHAP and the PPP NESHAP to incorporate
by reference ASTM D2111-10 (Reapproved 2015), ``Standard Test Methods
for Specific Gravity and Density of Halogenated Organic Solvents and
Their Admixtures,'' as an alternative to ASTM D1475-13. ASTM D2111-10
(Reapproved 2015) is a test method that allows measurement of specific
gravity at different temperatures that are chosen by the analyst.
    We are amending all three NESHAP to update ASTM D1475-98
(Reapproved 2003), ``Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products,'' by incorporating by reference
ASTM D1475-13, ``Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid Coatings,
Inks, and Related Products.'' This test method covers the measurement
of the density of paints, inks, varnishes, lacquers, and components
thereof, other than pigments, when in fluid form.
    We are amending the ALDT NESHAP and the MMPP NESHAP to update ASTM
D2697-86 (Reapproved 1998), ``Standard Test Method for Volume
Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings,'' by incorporating
by reference ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014), which is the updated
version of the previously approved method, and to update ASTM D6093-97
(Reapproved 2003), ``Standard Test Method for Percent Volume
Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using Helium Gas
Pycnometer,'' by incorporating by reference ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved
2016), which is the updated version of the previously approved method.
ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014) is a test method that can be used to
determine the volume of nonvolatile matter in clear and pigmented
coatings, and ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved 2016) is a test method that can
be used to determine the percent volume of nonvolatile matter in clear
and pigmented coatings.
    We are amending the ALDT NESHAP to update ASTM D5066-91 (Reapproved
2001), ``Standard Test Method for Determination of the Transfer
Efficiency Under Production Conditions for Spray Application of
Automotive Paints-Weight Basis,'' by incorporating by reference ASTM
D5066-91 (Reapproved 2017), which is the updated version of the
previously approved method. This test method covers procedures for
determination of the transfer efficiency (using a weight method) under
production conditions for in-plant spray application of automotive
paints as outlined in Section 18 of EPA 450/3-88-018.
    We are amending the ALDT NESHAP and the MMPP NESHAP to update ASTM
D5965-02, ``Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Coating
Powders,'' by incorporating by reference ASTM D5965-02 (Reapproved
2013), which is the updated version of the previously approved method.
These test methods cover three procedures for determining the specific
gravity (see definition) of coating powders, i.e., Test Method A--For
Testing Coating Powders, Excluding Metallics; Test Method B--For Tests
Requiring Greater Precision than Test Method A, Including Metallics,
Using Helium Pycnometry; and Test Method C--For Theoretical Calculation
Based on Raw Material.
    We are amending the ALDT NESHAP to update ASTM D6266-00a,
``Standard Test Method for Determining the Amount of Volatile Organic
Compound (VOC) Released from Waterborne Automotive Coatings and
Available for Removal in a VOC Control Device (Abatement),'' by
incorporating by reference ASTM D6266-00a (Reapproved 2017), which is
the updated version of the previously approved method. This test method
describes the determination of the amount of VOC released from applied
waterborne automotive coatings that is available for delivery to a VOC
control device. The determination is accomplished by measuring the
weight loss of a freshly coated test panel subject to evaporation or
drying and by analysis of the VOC or water content in the coating.
    The ASTM standards are available from ASTM International 100 Barr
Harbor Drive, Post Office Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.
See https://www.astm.org/.
    The EPA is amending the ALDT NESHAP to incorporate by reference
EPA-450/3-88-018 ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic
Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' for use in 40 CFR 63.3130(c), 63.3161(d), and (g),
63.3165(e), and appendix A to subpart IIII of part 63. This protocol
determines the daily VOC emission rate (pounds of VOC per gallon of
coating solids deposited) for a complete ALDT topcoat operation and is
available in the ALDT Docket. The protocol is designed for uses in
cases where topcoat emission limit is stated in units of pounds of VOC
per gallon of solids deposited, compliance is demonstrated each day,
and entire topcoat operation is treated as a single entity. The
protocol uses the number of square feet coated on each vehicle in each
booth with each coating as the basis for the daily weighting of
individual transfer efficiency and bake oven exhaust control values.
The method is intended to apply to primary coatings for new ALDT
bodies, body parts for new ALDT, and other parts that are coated along
with these bodies or body parts. It can also be downloaded from the
EPA's website at the National Service Center for Environmental
Publications, just access the following website at https://nepis.epa.gov and search either the title or document number.
    The EPA decided not to include certain other VCS; these methods are
impractical as alternatives because of the lack of equivalency,
documentation, validation date, and other important technical and
policy considerations. The search and review results have been
documented and are in the memoranda titled Voluntary Consensus Standard
Results for NESHAP RTR: Surface Coating of Automobile and Light-Duty
Trucks, June 2019, Voluntary Consensus Standard Results for NESHAP RTR:
Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts, June 2019, and Voluntary
Consensus Standard Results for NESHAP RTR: Surface Coating of Plastic
Parts and Products, June 2019, in the ALDT Docket, MMPP Docket, and the
PPP Docket, respectively.
    The revised regulatory text contains references to ANSI/ASME PTC
19.10-

1981 (Sec.  63.3166) and ASTM D5087-02 (Sec.  63.3165 and appendix A to
subpart IIII). Both of these standards were previously approved for
these sections. That approval continues without change.
    Under 40 CFR 63.7(f) and 40 CFR 63.8(f) of subpart A of the General
Provisions, a source may apply to the EPA for permission to use
alternative test methods or alternative monitoring requirements in
place of any required testing methods, performance specifications, or
procedures in the final rule or any amendments.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
This action increases the level of environmental protection for all
affected populations. The results of this evaluation are contained in
section IV.A of this preamble and the technical reports titled Risk and
Technology Review--Analysis of Demographic Factors for Populations
Living Near Automobile and Light-Duty truck Surface Coating Category
Operations, March 2019, Risk and Technology Review--Analysis of
Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near the Surface Coating of
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Source Category, May 2019, and
Risk and Technology Review--Analysis of Demographic Factors for
Populations Living Near Surface Coating of Plastic Parts and Products
Source Category Operations, April 2019, available in the ALDT Docket,
MMPP Docket, and the PPP Docket, respectively.

L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surface coating of
automobiles and light-duty trucks, Surface coating of miscellaneous
metal parts and products, Surface coating of plastic parts and
products.

    Dated: March 11, 2020.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR
part 63 as follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart A--General Provisions

0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by:
0
a. Removing paragraph (h)(12);
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (h)(13) through (115) as paragraphs (h)(12)
through (114);
0
c. Revising newly redesignated paragraphs (h)(12), (20), (25), (28),
(29), (65), (75), (77), (78), and (80);
0
d. Redesignating paragraphs (n)(1) through (24) as paragraphs (n)(2)
through (25); and
0
e. Adding new paragraph (n)(1).

    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  63.14  Incorporations by reference

* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (12) ASTM D1475-13, Standard Test Method for Density of Liquid
Coatings, Inks, and Related Products, approved November 1, 2013, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec.  63.3151(b), 63.3941(b) and (c), 63.3951(c),
63.4141(b) and (c), 63.4551(c), 63.4741(b) and (c), 63.4751(c), and
63.4941(b) and (c).
* * * * *
    (20) ASTM D2111-10 (Reapproved 2015), Standard Test Methods for
Specific Gravity and Density of Halogenated Organic Solvents and Their
Admixtures, approved June 1, 2015, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
63.3951(c), 63.4141(b) and (c), 63.4551(c), and 63.4741(a).
* * * * *
    (25) ASTM D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\, Standard Test Method for
Volatile Content of Coatings, approved June 1, 2015, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec.  63.3151(a), 63.3961(j), 63.4141(a) and (b), 63.4161(h),
63.4321(e), 63.4341(e), 63.4351(d), 63.4541(a), 63.4561(j), 63.4741(a),
63.4941(a) and (b), and 63.4961(j).
* * * * *
    (28) ASTM D2697-86 (Reapproved 1998), Standard Test Method for
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings, IBR approved
for Sec. Sec.  63.3521(b), and 63.5160(c).
    (29) ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014), Standard Test Method for
Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings, approved July
1, 2014, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  63.3161(f), 63.3941(b),
63.4141(b), 63.4741(a) and (b), and 63.4941(b).
* * * * *
    (65) ASTM D5066-91 (Reapproved 2017), Standard Test Method for
Determination of the Transfer Efficiency Under Production Conditions
for Spray Application of Automotive Paints-Weight Basis, approved June
1, 2017, IBR approved for Sec.  63.3161(g).
* * * * *
    (75) ASTM D5965-02 (Reapproved 2013), Standard Test Methods for
Specific Gravity of Coating Powders, approved June 1, 2013, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec.  63.3151(b) and 63.3951(c).
* * * * *
    (77) ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved 2003), Standard Test Method for
Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using
a Helium Gas Pycnometer, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  63.3521 and
63.5160(c).
    (78) ASTM D6093-97 (Reapproved 2016), Standard Test Method for
Percent Volume Nonvolatile Matter in Clear or Pigmented Coatings Using
a Helium Gas Pycnometer, approved December 1, 2016, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec.  63.3161(f), 63.3941(b), 63.4141(b), 63.4741(a) and (b), and
63.4941(b).
* * * * *
    (80) ASTM D6266-00a (Reapproved 2017), Standard Test Method for
Determining the Amount of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Released from
Waterborne Automotive Coatings and Available for Removal in a VOC
Control Device (Abatement), approved July 1, 2017, IBR approved for
Sec.  63.3165(e).
* * * * *
    (n) * * *
    (1) EPA-450/3-88-018, Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile
Organic Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck
Topcoat Operations, December 1988, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
63.3130(c), 63.3161(d) and (g), 63.3165(e), and appendix A to subpart
IIII.
* * * * *

Subpart IIII--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks

0
3. Section 63.3092 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.3092  How must I control emissions from my electrodeposition
primer system if I want to comply with the combined primer-surfacer,
topcoat, final repair, glass bonding primer, and glass bonding adhesive
emission limit?

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) 0.10 percent by weight of any organic HAP in table 5 of this
subpart.
* * * * *

0
4. Section 63.3093 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to
read as follows:

Sec.  63.3093  What operating limits must I meet?

    (a) You are not required to meet any operating limits for any
coating operation(s) without add-on controls, nor are you required to
meet operating limits for any coating operation(s) that do not utilize
emission capture systems and add-on controls to comply with the
emission limits in Sec.  63.3090 or Sec.  63.3091.
    (b) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, for any
controlled coating operation(s), you must meet the operating limits
specified in table 1 to this subpart. These operating limits apply to
the emission capture and add-on control systems on the coating
operation(s) for which you use this option, and you must establish the
operating limits during performance tests according to the requirements
in Sec.  63.3167. You must meet the operating limits at all times after
you establish them.
* * * * *

0
5. Section 63.3100 is amended by revising paragraphs (b), (d), and (f)
to read as follows:

Sec.  63.3100  What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?

* * * * *
    (b) Before January 5, 2021, the coating operations must be in
compliance with the operating limits for emission capture systems and
add-on control devices required by Sec.  63.3093 at all times except
during periods of SSM. On and after January 5, 2021, the coating
operations must be in compliance with the operating limits for emission
capture systems and add-on control devices required by Sec.  63.3093 at
all times.
* * * * *
    (d) Before January 5, 2021, you must always operate and maintain
your affected source including all air pollution control and monitoring
equipment you use for purposes of complying with this subpart according
to the provisions in Sec.  63.6(e)(1)(i). On and after January 5, 2021,
at all times, the owner or operator must operate and maintain any
affected source, including associated air pollution control equipment
and monitoring equipment, in a manner consistent with safety and good
air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions. The general
duty to minimize emissions does not require the owner or operator to
make any further efforts to reduce emissions if levels required by the
applicable standard have been achieved. Determination of whether a
source is operating in compliance with operation and maintenance
requirements will be based on information available to the
Administrator that may include, but is not limited to, monitoring
results, review of operation and maintenance procedures, review of
operation and maintenance records, and inspection of the affected
source.
* * * * *
    (f) Before January 5, 2021, if your affected source uses emission
capture systems and add-on control devices, you must develop a written
startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan (SSMP) according to the
provisions in Sec.  63.6(e)(3). The SSMP must address startup,
shutdown, and corrective actions in the event of a malfunction of the
emission capture system or the add-on control devices. On and after
January 5, 2021, the SSMP is not required.

0
6. Section 63.3120 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(4), (a)(5) introductory text, (a)(5)(iv);
0
b. Adding paragraph (a)(5)(v);
0
c. Revising paragraphs (a)(6) introductory text and (a)(6)(iii), (vi)
through (viii), (x), (xiii), and (xiv);
0
d. Adding paragraph (a)(6)(xv);
0
e. Revising paragraphs (a)(7) introductory text and (a)(7)(i) and
(iii);
0
f. Adding paragraph (a)(7)(iv);
0
g. Revising paragraphs (a)(8) introductory text, (a)(8)(ii), (v)
through (vii), (ix), and (xii), (a)(9) introductory text, (a)(9)(i) and
(ii), and (c) introductory text; and
0
h. Adding paragraphs (d) through (h).

    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  63.3120  What reports must I submit?

    (a) * * *
    (4) No deviations. If there were no deviations from the emission
limits, operating limits, or work practices in Sec. Sec.  63.3090,
63.3091, 63.3092, 63.3093, and 63.3094 that apply to you, the
semiannual compliance report must include a statement that there were
no deviations from the applicable emission limitations during the
reporting period. If you used control devices to comply with the
emission limits, and there were no periods during which the CPMS were
out of control as specified in Sec.  63.8(c)(7), the semiannual
compliance report must include a statement that there were no periods
during which the CPMS were out of control during the reporting period.
    (5) Deviations: adhesive, sealer, and deadener. Before January 5,
2021, if there was a deviation from the applicable emission limits in
Sec.  63.3090(c) and (d) or Sec.  63.3091(c) and (d), the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(5)(i)
through (iv) of this section. On and after January 5, 2021, if there
was a deviation from the applicable emission limits in Sec.  63.3090(c)
and (d) or Sec.  63.3091(c) and (d), the semiannual compliance report
must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through (v) of
this section.
* * * * *
    (iv) The reason for the deviation (including unknown cause, if
applicable).
    (v) On and after January 5, 2021, the number of deviations and, for
each deviation, a list of the affected source or equipment, an estimate
of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over the applicable
emission limit in Sec.  63.3090(c) and (d) or Sec.  63.3091(c) and (d),
and a description of the method used to estimate the emissions.
    (6) Deviations: combined electrodeposition primer, primer-surfacer,
topcoat, final repair, glass bonding primer and glass bonding adhesive,
or combined primer-surfacer, topcoat, final repair, glass bonding
primer, and glass bonding adhesive plus all coatings and thinners,
except for deadener materials and for adhesive and sealer materials
that are not components of glass bonding systems, used in coating
operations added to the affected source pursuant to Sec.  63.3082(c).
Before January 5, 2021, if there was a deviation from the applicable
emission limits in Sec.  63.3090(a) or (b) or Sec.  63.3091(a) or (b)
or the applicable operating limit(s) in table 1 to this subpart, the
semiannual compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs
(a)(6)(i) through (xiv) of this section. On and after January 5, 2021,
if there was a deviation from the applicable emission limits in Sec.
63.3090(a) or (b) or Sec.  63.3091(a) or (b) or the applicable
operating limit(s) in table 1 to this subpart, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(6)(i)
through (xv) of this section.
* * * * *

    (iii) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture system
or add-on control devices used to control emissions from these
operations started and stopped.
* * * * *
    (vi) Before January 5, 2021, the date and time that each CPMS was
inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks. On and
after January 5, 2021, for each instance that the CPMS was inoperative,
except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks, the date, time, and
duration that the CPMS was inoperative; the cause (including unknown
cause) for the CPMS being inoperative; and descriptions of corrective
actions taken.
    (vii) Before January 5, 2021, the date and time period that each
CPMS was out of control, including the information in Sec.  63.8(c)(8).
On and after January 5, 2021, for each instance that the CPMS was out
of control, as specified in Sec.  63.8(c)(7), the date, time, and
duration that the CPMS was out-of-control; the cause (including unknown
cause) for the CPMS being out-of-control; and descriptions of
corrective actions taken.
    (viii) Before January 5, 2021, The date and time period of each
deviation from an operating limit in table 1 to this subpart; date and
time period of each bypass of an add-on control device; and whether
each deviation occurred during a period of SSM or during another
period. On and after January 5, 2021, the date, time, and duration of
each deviation from an operating limit in table 1 to this subpart; and
the date, time, and duration of each bypass of an add-on control
device.
* * * * *
    (x) Before January 5, 2021, a breakdown of the total duration of
the deviations from each operating limit in table 1 to this subpart and
bypasses of each add-on control device during the semiannual reporting
period into those that were due to startup, shutdown, control equipment
problems, process problems, other known causes, and other unknown
causes. On and after January 5, 2021, a breakdown of the total duration
of the deviations from each operating limit in table 1 to this subpart
and bypasses of each add-on control device during the semiannual
reporting period into those that were due to control equipment
problems, process problems, other known causes, and other unknown
causes.
* * * * *
    (xiii) Before January 5, 2021, for each deviation from the work
practice standards a description of the deviation, the date and time
period of the deviation, and the actions you took to correct the
deviation. On and after January 5, 2021, for deviations from the work
practice standards, the number of deviations, and, for each deviation,
the information in paragraphs (a)(6)(xiii)(A) and (B) of this section.
    (A) A description of the deviation, the date, time, and duration of
the deviation; and the actions you took to minimize emissions in
accordance with Sec.  63.3100(d).
    (B) A list of the affected sources or equipment for which a
deviation occurred, the cause of the deviation (including unknown
cause, if applicable), and any corrective actions taken to return the
affected unit to its normal or usual manner of operation.
    (xiv) Before January 5, 2021, a statement of the cause of each
deviation. On and after January 5, 2021, for deviations from an
emission limitation in Sec.  63.3090(a) or (b) or Sec.  63.3091(a) or
(b) or operating limit in table 1 of this subpart, a statement of the
cause of each deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
    (xv) On and after January 5, 2021, for each deviation from an
emission limitation in Sec.  63.3090(a) or (b), or Sec.  63.3091(a) or
(b), or operating limit in table 1 to this subpart, a list of the
affected sources or equipment for which a deviation occurred, an
estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over any
emission limit in Sec.  63.3090(a) or (b) or Sec.  63.3091(a) or (b),
and a description of the method used to estimate the emissions.
    (7) Deviations: Separate electrodeposition primer organic HAP
content limit. Before January 5, 2021, if you used the separate
electrodeposition primer organic HAP content limits in Sec.
63.3092(a), and there was a deviation from these limits, the semiannual
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(7)(i)
through (iii) of this section. On and after January 5, 2021, if you
used the separate electrodeposition primer organic HAP content limits
in Sec.  63.3092(a), and there was a deviation from these limits, the
semiannual compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs
(a)(7)(i) through (iv) of this section.
    (i) Identification of each material used that deviated from the
emission limit, and the date, time, and duration each was used.
* * * * *
    (iii) A statement of the cause of each deviation (including unknown
case, if applicable).
    (iv) On and after January 5, 2021, the number of deviations, a list
of the affected source or equipment, an estimate of the quantity of
each regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit in Sec.
63.3092(a), and a description of the method used to estimate the
emissions.
    (8) Deviations: Separate electrodeposition primer bake oven capture
and control limitations. Before January 5, 2021, if you used the
separate electrodeposition primer bake oven capture and control
limitations in Sec.  63.3092(b), and there was a deviation from the
limitations in Sec.  63.3092(b) or the applicable operating limit in
table 1 to this subpart, the semiannual compliance report must contain
the information in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) through (xii) of this section.
On and after January 5, 2021, if you used the separate
electrodeposition primer bake oven capture and control limitations in
Sec.  63.3092(b), and there was a deviation from the limitations in
Sec.  63.3092(b) or the applicable operating limit in table 1 to this
subpart, the semiannual compliance report must contain the information
in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) through (xiv) of this section.
* * * * *
    (ii) The date and time that each malfunction of the capture systems
or control devices used to control emissions from the electrodeposition
primer bake oven started and stopped.
* * * * *
    (v) Before January 5, 2021, the date and time that each CPMS was
inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks. On and
after January 5, 2021, for each instance that the CPMS was inoperative,
except for zero (low-level) and high-level checks, the date, time, and
duration that the CPMS was inoperative; the cause (including unknown
cause) for the CPMS being inoperative; and descriptions of corrective
actions taken.
    (vi) Before January 5, 2021, the date, time, and duration that each
CPMS was out of control, including the information in Sec.  63.8(c)(8).
On and after January 5, 2021, for each instance that the CPMS was out
of control, as specified in Sec.  63.8(c)(7), the date, time, and
duration that the CPMS was out-of-control; the cause (including unknown
cause) for the CPMS being out-of-control; and descriptions of
corrective actions taken.
    (vii) Before January 5, 2021, the date and time period of each
deviation from an operating limit in table 1 to this subpart; date and
time period of each bypass of an add-on control device; and whether
each deviation occurred during a period of SSM or during another
period. On and after January 5, 2021, the date, time, and duration of
each deviation from an operating limit in table 1 to this subpart; and
the date,

time, and duration of each bypass of an add-on control device.
* * * * *
    (ix) Before January 5, 2021, a breakdown of the total duration of
the deviations from each operating limit in table 1 to this subpart and
bypasses of each add-on control device during the semiannual reporting
period into those that were due to startup, shutdown, control equipment
problems, process problems, other known causes, and other unknown
causes. On and after January 5, 2021, a breakdown of the total duration
of the deviations from each operating limit in table 1 to this subpart
and bypasses of each add-on control device during the semiannual
reporting period into those that were due to control equipment
problems, process problems, other known causes, and other unknown
causes.
* * * * *
    (xii) A statement of the cause of each deviation (including unknown
cause, if applicable).
    (9) Deviations: Work practice plans. Before January 5, 2021, if
there was a deviation from an applicable work practice plan developed
in accordance with Sec.  63.3094(b) or (c), the semiannual compliance
report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(9)(i) through
(iii) of this section. On and after January 5, 2021, if there were
deviations from an applicable work practice plan developed in
accordance with Sec.  63.3094(b) or (c), the semiannual compliance
report must contain the number of deviations, and, for each deviation,
the information in paragraphs (a)(9)(i) through (iii) of this section.
    (i) Before January 5, 2021, the time period during which each
deviation occurred. On and after January 5, 2021, the date, time, and
duration of the deviation.
    (ii) Before January 5, 2021, the nature of each deviation. On and
after January 5, 2021, the nature of the deviation, including a list of
the affected sources or equipment for which the deviation occurred, and
the cause of the deviation (including unknown cause, if applicable).
* * * * *
    (c) SSM reports. Before January 5, 2021, if you used add-on control
devices and you had a SSM during the semiannual reporting period, you
must submit the reports specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this
section. On and after January 5, 2021, the reports specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section are not required.
* * * * *
    (d) Performance test reports. On and after January 5, 2021, you
must submit the results of the performance test required in paragraph
(b) of this section following the procedure specified in paragraphs
(d)(1) through (3) of this section.
    (1) For data collected using test methods supported by the EPA's
Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the EPA's ERT website
(https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert) at the time of the test, you must submit the
results of the performance test to the EPA via the Compliance and
Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI). (CEDRI can be accessed
through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/)).
Performance test data must be submitted in a file format generated
through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file format
consistent with the extensible markup language (XML) schema listed on
the EPA's ERT website.
    (2) For data collected using test methods that are not supported by
the EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the
test, you must submit the results of the performance test to the
Administrator at the appropriate address listed in Sec.  63.13, unless
the Administrator agrees to or specifies an alternate reporting method.
    (3) If you claim that some of the performance test information
being submitted under paragraph (c)(1) of this section is Confidential
Business Information (CBI), you must submit a complete file generated
through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file
consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT website,
including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact disc, flash
drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium to the EPA. The
electronic medium must be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/
OAPQS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy
Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same ERT or
alternate file with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA via
the EPA's CDX as described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
    (e) Initial notification reports. On and after January 5, 2021, the
owner or operator shall submit the initial notifications required in
Sec.  63.9(b) and the notification of compliance status required in
Sec. Sec.  63.9(h) and 63.3110(c) to the EPA via the CEDRI. The CEDRI
interface can be accessed through the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov/).
The owner or operator must upload to CEDRI an electronic copy of each
applicable notification in portable document format (PDF). The
applicable notification must be submitted by the deadline specified in
this subpart, regardless of the method in which the reports are
submitted. Owners or operators who claim that some of the information
required to be submitted via CEDRI is CBI shall submit a complete
report generated using the appropriate form in CEDRI or an alternate
electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's
CEDRI website, including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact
disc, flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium to
the EPA. The electronic medium shall be clearly marked as CBI and
mailed to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader,
Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC
27703. The same file with the CBI omitted shall be submitted to the EPA
via the EPA's CDX as described earlier in this paragraph.
    (f) Semiannual compliance reports. On and after January 5, 2021, or
once the reporting template has been available on the CEDRI website for
1 year, whichever date is later, the owner or operator shall submit the
semiannual compliance report required in paragraph (a) of this section
to the EPA via the CEDRI. The CEDRI interface can be accessed through
the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov/). The owner or operator must use
the appropriate electronic template on the CEDRI Web for this subpart
or an alternate electronic file format consistent with the XML schema
listed on the CEDRI website (https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/compliance-and-emissions-data-reporting-interface-cedri).
If the reporting form for the semiannual compliance report specific to
this subpart is not available in CEDRI at the time that the report is
due, you must submit the report to the Administrator at the appropriate
addresses listed in Sec.  63.13. Once the form has been available in
CEDRI for 1 year, you must begin submitting all subsequent reports via
CEDRI. The reports must be submitted by the deadlines specified in this
subpart, regardless of the method in which the reports are submitted.
Owners or operators who claim that some of the information required to
be submitted via CEDRI is CBI shall submit a complete report generated
using the appropriate form in CEDRI or an alternate electronic file
consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's CEDRI website,
including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact disc, flash
drive, or other commonly used

electronic storage medium to the EPA. The electronic medium shall be
clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office,
Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old
Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file with the CBI omitted shall be
submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as described earlier in this
paragraph.
    (g) Reporting during EPA system outages. If you are required to
electronically submit a report through the CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, and
due to a planned or actual outage of either the EPA's CEDRI or CDX
systems within the period of time beginning 5 business days prior to
the date that the submission is due, you will be or are precluded from
accessing CEDRI or CDX and submitting a required report within the time
prescribed, you may assert a claim of the EPA system outage for failure
to timely comply with the reporting requirement. You must submit
notification to the Administrator in writing as soon as possible
following the date you first knew, or through due diligence should have
known, that the event may cause or caused a delay in reporting. You
must provide to the Administrator a written description identifying the
date, time and length of the outage; a rationale for attributing the
delay in reporting beyond the regulatory deadline to the EPA system
outage; describe the measures taken or to be taken to minimize the
delay in reporting; and identify a date by which you propose to report,
or if you have already met the reporting requirement at the time of the
notification, the date you reported. In any circumstance, the report
must be submitted electronically as soon as possible after the outage
is resolved. The decision to accept the claim of the EPA system outage
and allow an extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the
discretion of the Administrator.
    (h) Reporting during force majeure events. If you are required to
electronically submit a report through CEDRI in the EPA's CDX and a
force majeure event is about to occur, occurs, or has occurred or there
are lingering effects from such an event within the period of time
beginning 5 business days prior to the date the submission is due, the
owner or operator may assert a claim of force majeure for failure to
timely comply with the reporting requirement. For the purposes of this
section, a force majeure event is defined as an event that will be or
has been caused by circumstances beyond the control of the affected
facility, its contractors, or any entity controlled by the affected
facility that prevents you from complying with the requirement to
submit a report electronically within the time period prescribed.
Examples of such events are acts of nature (e.g., hurricanes,
earthquakes, or floods), acts of war or terrorism, or equipment failure
or safety hazard beyond the control of the affected facility (e.g.,
large scale power outage). If you intend to assert a claim of force
majeure, you must submit notification to the Administrator in writing
as soon as possible following the date you first knew, or through due
diligence should have known, that the event may cause or caused a delay
in reporting. You must provide to the Administrator a written
description of the force majeure event and a rationale for attributing
the delay in reporting beyond the regulatory deadline to the force
majeure event; describe the measures taken or to be taken to minimize
the delay in reporting; and identify a date by which you propose to
report, or if you have already met the reporting requirement at the
time of the notification, the date you reported. In any circumstance,
the reporting must occur as soon as possible after the force majeure
event occurs. The decision to accept the claim of force majeure and
allow an extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the
discretion of the Administrator.

0
7. Section 63.3130 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(4) and (5),
(g), and (h) and adding paragraph (p) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.3130  What records must I keep?

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) A record of the calculation of the organic HAP emission rate
for electrodeposition primer, primer-surfacer, topcoat, final repair,
glass bonding primer, and glass bonding adhesive plus all coatings and
thinners, except for deadener materials and for adhesive and sealer
materials that are not components of glass bonding systems, used in
coating operations added to the affected source pursuant to Sec.
63.3082(c) for each month if subject to the emission limit of Sec.
63.3090(a) or Sec.  63.3091(a). This record must include all raw data,
algorithms, and intermediate calculations. If the guidelines presented
in ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound
Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat Operations,''
EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14), are
used, you must keep records of all data input to this protocol. If
these data are maintained as electronic files, the electronic files, as
well as any paper copies must be maintained. These data must be
provided to the permitting authority on request on paper, and in (if
calculations are done electronically) electronic form.
    (5) A record of the calculation of the organic HAP emission rate
for primer-surfacer, topcoat, final repair, glass bonding primer, and
glass bonding adhesive plus all coatings and thinners, except for
deadener materials and for adhesive and sealer materials that are not
components of glass bonding systems, used in coating operations added
to the affected source pursuant to Sec.  63.3082(c) for each month if
subject to the emission limit of Sec.  63.3090(b) or Sec.  63.3091(b),
and a record of the weight fraction of each organic HAP in each
material added to the electrodeposition primer system if subject to the
limitations of Sec.  63.3092(a). This record must include all raw data,
algorithms, and intermediate calculations. If the guidelines presented
in ``Protocol for Determining Daily Volatile Organic Compound Emission
Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat Operations,'' EPA-450/
3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14) are used, you
must keep records of all data input to this protocol. If these data are
maintained as electronic files, the electronic files, as well as any
paper copies must be maintained. These data must be provided to the
permitting authority on request on paper, and in (if calculations are
done electronically) electronic form.
* * * * *
    (g) Before January 5, 2021, a record of the date, time, and
duration of each deviation, and for each deviation, a record of whether
the deviation occurred during a period of SSM. On and after January 5,
2021, for each deviation from an emission limitation, operating limit,
or work practice plan reported under Sec.  63.3120(a)(5) through (9), a
record of the information specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (4) of
this section, as applicable.
    (1) The date, time, and duration of the deviation, and for each
deviation, the information as reported under Sec.  63.3120(a)(5)
through (9).
    (2) A list of the affected sources or equipment for which the
deviation occurred and the cause of the deviation, as reported under
Sec.  63.3120(a)(5) through (9).
    (3) An estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted
over any applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.3090(a) through (d) or
Sec.  63.3091(a) through (d) or any applicable operating limit in table
1 to this subpart, and a description of the method used to calculate
the estimate, as reported under Sec.  63.3120(a)(5) through (9).

    (4) A record of actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance
with Sec.  63.3100(d) and any corrective actions taken to return the
affected unit to its normal or usual manner of operation.
    (h) Before January 5, 2021, the records required by Sec.
63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to SSM. On and after January 5,
2021, the provisions of this paragraph no longer apply.
* * * * *
    (p) On and after January 5, 2021, any records required to be
maintained by this subpart that are submitted electronically via the
EPA's CEDRI may be maintained in electronic format. This ability to
maintain electronic copies does not affect the requirement for
facilities to make records, data, and reports available upon request to
a delegated air agency or the EPA as part of an on-site compliance
evaluation.

0
8. Section 63.3131 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.3131  In what form and for how long must I keep my records?

    (a) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review according to Sec.  63.10(b)(1). Where
appropriate, the records may be maintained as electronic spreadsheets
or as a database. On and after January 5, 2021, any records required to
be maintained by this subpart that are submitted electronically via the
EPA's CEDRI may be maintained in electronic format. This ability to
maintain electronic copies does not affect the requirement for
facilities to make records, data, and reports available upon request to
a delegated air agency or the EPA as part of an on-site compliance
evaluation.
* * * * *

0
9. Section 63.3151 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(2)
and (4), and (b) to read as follows.

Sec.  63.3151  How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limitations?

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Count each organic HAP in table 5 to this subpart that is
present at 0.1 percent by mass or more and at 1.0 percent by mass or
more for other compounds. For example, if toluene (not listed in table
5 to this subpart) is measured to be 0.5 percent of the material by
mass, you do not have to count it. Express the mass fraction of each
organic HAP you count as a value truncated to four places after the
decimal point (e.g., 0.3791).
* * * * *
    (2) EPA Method 24 (appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60). For coatings,
you may use EPA Method 24 to determine the mass fraction of nonaqueous
volatile matter and use that value as a substitute for mass fraction of
organic HAP. As an alternative to using EPA Method 24, you may use ASTM
D2369-10 (Reapproved 2015)\e\ (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14).
* * * * *
    (4) Information from the supplier or manufacturer of the material.
You may rely on information other than that generated by the test
methods specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section,
such as manufacturer's formulation data, if it represents each organic
HAP in table 5 to this subpart that is present at 0.1 percent by mass
or more and at 1.0 percent by mass or more for other compounds. For
example, if toluene (not listed in table 5 of this subpart) is 0.5
percent of the material by mass, you do not have to count it. If there
is a disagreement between such information and results of a test
conducted according to paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section,
then the test method results will take precedence, unless after
consultation, the facility demonstrates to the satisfaction of the
enforcement authority that the facility's data are correct.
* * * * *
    (b) Determine the density of each material used. Determine the
density of each material used during the compliance period from test
results using ASTM D1475-13 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14) or for powder coatings, test method A or test method B of ASTM
D5965-02 (Reapproved 2013) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14), or information from the supplier or manufacturer of the
material. If there is disagreement between ASTM D1475-13 test results
or ASTM D5965-02 (Reapproved 2013), test method A or test method B test
results and the supplier's or manufacturer's information, the test
results will take precedence unless after consultation, the facility
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the enforcement authority that the
facility's data are correct.
* * * * *

0
10. Section 63.3160 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.3160  By what date must I conduct initial performance tests
and other initial compliance demonstrations?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) All emission capture systems, add-on control devices, and CPMS
must be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance
date specified in Sec.  63.3083. You must conduct an initial
performance test of each capture system and add-on control device
according to the procedures in Sec. Sec.  63.3164 through 63.3166 and
establish the operating limits required by Sec.  63.3093 no later than
the compliance date specified in Sec.  63.3083.
* * * * *

0
11. Section 63.3161 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (d), (f)(1),
(g), and (k)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.3161  How do I demonstrate initial compliance?

    (a) You must meet all of the requirements of this section to
demonstrate initial compliance. To demonstrate initial compliance, the
organic HAP emissions from the combined electrodeposition primer,
primer-surfacer, topcoat, final repair, glass bonding primer, and glass
bonding adhesive operations plus all coatings and thinners, except for
deadener materials and for adhesive and sealer materials that are not
components of glass bonding systems, used in coating operations added
to the affected source pursuant to Sec.  63.3082(c) must meet the
applicable emission limitation in Sec.  63.3090(a) or Sec.  63.3091(a)
and the applicable operating limits and work practice standards in
Sec. Sec.  63.3093 and 63.3094.
* * * * *
    (d) Compliance with emission limits. You must follow the procedures
in paragraphs (e) through (o) of this section to demonstrate compliance
with the applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.3090(a) or Sec.
63.3091(a). You may also use the guidelines presented in ``Protocol for
Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound Emission Rate of
Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat Operations'' EPA-450/3-88-018
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14), in making this
demonstration.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) ASTM Method D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014) or ASTM Method D6093-97
(Reapproved 2016). You may use ASTM D2697-03 (Reapproved 2014)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14), or ASTM D6093-97
(Reapproved 2016) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14), to
determine the volume fraction of coating solids for each coating.
Divide the nonvolatile volume percent obtained with the methods by 100
to calculate volume fraction of coating solids.
* * * * *
    (g) Determine the transfer efficiency for each coating. You must
determine the transfer efficiency for each primer-

surfacer and topcoat coating, and for all coatings, except for deadener
and for adhesive and sealer that are not components of glass bonding
systems, used in coating operations added to the affected source
pursuant to Sec.  63.3082(c) using ASTM D5066-91 (Reapproved 2017)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14) or the guidelines
presented in ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic
Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14). You may conduct transfer efficiency testing on representative
coatings and for representative spray booths as described in ``Protocol
for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound Emission Rate of
Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018.
You may assume 100-percent transfer efficiency for electrodeposition
primer coatings, glass bonding primers, and glass bonding adhesives.
For final repair coatings, you may assume 40-percent transfer
efficiency for air atomized spray and 55-percent transfer efficiency
for electrostatic spray and high volume, low pressure spray. For
blackout, chip resistant edge primer, interior color, in-line repair,
lower body anti-chip coatings, or underbody anti-chip coatings, you may
assume 40-percent transfer efficiency for air atomized spray, 55-
percent transfer efficiency for electrostatic spray and high volume-low
pressure spray, and 80-percent transfer efficiency for airless spray.
* * * * *
    (k) * * *
    (3) Determine the mass fraction of volatile organic matter for each
coating and thinner used in the coating operation controlled by the
solvent recovery system during the month, kg volatile organic matter
per kg coating. You may determine the volatile organic matter mass
fraction using EPA Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7, or an EPA
approved alternative method, or you may use information provided by the
manufacturer or supplier of the coating. In the event of any
inconsistency between information provided by the manufacturer or
supplier and the results of EPA Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A-7, or an approved alternative method, the test method results will
govern unless after consultation, the facility demonstrates to the
satisfaction of the enforcement authority that the facility's data are
correct.
* * * * *

0
12. Section 63.3163 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraph (c) introductory text, adding paragraph (c)(3), and revising
paragraphs (f) and (h) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.3163  How do I conduct periodic performance tests and
demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limitations?

* * * * *
    (c) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each operating
limit required by Sec.  63.3093 that applies to you, as specified in
table 1 to this subpart, and you must conduct performance tests as
specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
    (3) Except for solvent recovery systems for which you conduct
liquid-liquid material balances according to Sec.  63.3161(k) for
controlled coating operations, you must conduct periodic performance
tests of add-on controls and establish the operating limits required by
Sec.  63.3093 within 5 years following the previous performance test.
You must conduct the first periodic performance test before July 8,
2023, unless you are already required to complete periodic performance
tests as a requirement of renewing your facility's operating permit
under 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71 and have conducted a performance
test on or after July 8, 2022. Thereafter you must conduct a
performance test no later than 5 years following the previous
performance test. Operating limits must be confirmed or reestablished
during each performance test. For any control device for which you are
using the catalytic oxidizer control option at Sec.  63.3167(b) and
following the catalyst maintenance procedures in Sec.  63.3167(b)(6),
you are not required to conduct periodic control device performance
testing as specified by this paragraph. For any control device for
which instruments are used to continuously measure organic compound
emissions, you are not required to conduct periodic control device
performance testing as specified by this paragraph. The requirements of
this paragraph do not apply to measuring emission capture system
efficiency.
* * * * *
    (f) If there were no deviations from the emission limitations,
submit a statement as part of the semiannual compliance report that you
were in compliance with the emission limitations during the reporting
period because the organic HAP emission rate for each compliance period
was less than or equal to the applicable emission limit in Sec.
63.3090(a) or Sec.  63.3091(a), Sec.  63.3090(b) or Sec.  63.3091(b),
or Sec.  63.3092(a) or Sec.  63.3092(b), you achieved the operating
limits required by Sec.  63.3093, and you achieved the work practice
standards required by Sec.  63.3094 during each compliance period.
* * * * *
    (h) Before January 5, 2021, consistent with Sec. Sec.  63.6(e) and
63.7(e)(1), deviations that occur during a period of SSM of the
emission capture system, add-on control device, or coating operation
that may affect emission capture or control device efficiency are not
violations if you demonstrate to the Administrator's satisfaction that
you were operating in accordance with Sec.  63.6(e)(1). The
Administrator will determine whether deviations that occur during a
period you identify as a SSM are violations according to the provisions
in Sec.  63.6(e). On and after January 5, 2021, the provisions of this
paragraph no longer apply.
* * * * *

0
13. Section 63.3164 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory
text and (a)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.3164  What are the general requirements for performance tests?

    (a) You must conduct each applicable performance test required by
Sec. Sec.  63.3160, 63.3163, and 63.3171 according to the requirements
in Sec.  63.7(e)(1) and under the conditions in this section unless you
obtain a waiver of the performance test according to the provisions in
Sec.  63.7(h).
    (1) Representative coating operation operating conditions. You must
conduct the performance test under representative operating conditions
for the coating operation. Before January 5, 2021, operations during
periods of SSM, and during periods of nonoperation do not constitute
representative conditions. You must record the process information that
is necessary to document operating conditions during the test and
explain why the conditions represent normal operation. On and after
January 5, 2021, operations during periods of startup, shutdown, or
nonoperation do not constitute representative conditions for purposes
of conducting a performance test. The owner or operator may not conduct
performance tests during periods of malfunction. You must record the
process information that is necessary to document operating conditions
during the test and explain why the conditions represent normal
operation. Upon request, you must make available to the Administrator
such records as may be

necessary to determine the conditions of performance tests.
* * * * *

0
14. Section 63.3165 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraphs (e) introductory text, the definition of
``Wvocc,i'' in Equation 6 of paragraph (e)(2), the
definition of ``Wvocc,i'' in Equation 7 of paragraph (e)(3),
and the definition of ``Ws,i'' in Equation 8 of paragraph
(e)(4) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.3165  How do I determine the emission capture system
efficiency?

    You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to
determine capture efficiency as part of the performance test required
by Sec. Sec.  63.3160 and 63.3163. For purposes of this subpart, a
spray booth air seal is not considered a natural draft opening in a PTE
or a temporary total enclosure provided you demonstrate that the
direction of air movement across the interface between the spray booth
air seal and the spray booth is into the spray booth. For purposes of
this subpart, a bake oven air seal is not considered a natural draft
opening in a PTE or a temporary total enclosure provided you
demonstrate that the direction of air movement across the interface
between the bake oven air seal and the bake oven is into the bake oven.
You may use lightweight strips of fabric or paper, or smoke tubes to
make such demonstrations as part of showing that your capture system is
a PTE or conducting a capture efficiency test using a temporary total
enclosure. You cannot count air flowing from a spray booth air seal
into a spray booth as air flowing through a natural draft opening into
a PTE or into a temporary total enclosure unless you elect to treat
that spray booth air seal as a natural draft opening. You cannot count
air flowing from a bake oven air seal into a bake oven as air flowing
through a natural draft opening into a PTE or into a temporary total
enclosure unless you elect to treat that bake oven air seal as a
natural draft opening.
* * * * *
    (e) Panel testing to determine the capture efficiency of flash-off
or bake oven emissions. You may conduct panel testing to determine the
capture efficiency of flash-off or bake oven emissions using ASTM
D5087-02 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14), ASTM D6266-00a
(Reapproved 2017) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14), or the
guidelines presented in ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile
Organic Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck
Topcoat Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec.  63.14). You may conduct panel testing on representative coatings
as described in ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic
Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018. The results of these panel testing
procedures are in units of mass of VOC per volume of coating solids
deposited and must be converted to a percent value for use in this
subpart. If you panel test representative coatings, then you may
convert the panel test result for each representative coating either to
a unique percent capture efficiency for each coating grouped with that
representative coating by using coating specific values for the volume
of coating solids deposited per volume of coating used, mass of VOC per
volume of coating, volume fraction solids, transfer efficiency, density
and mass fraction VOC in Equations 4 through 6 of this section; or to a
composite percent capture efficiency for the group of coatings by using
composite values for the group of coatings for the volume of coating
solids deposited per volume of coating used and for the mass of VOC per
volume of coating, and average values for the group of coatings for
volume fraction solids, transfer efficiency, density and mass fraction
VOC in Equations 4 through 6 of this section. If you panel test each
coating, then you must convert the panel test result for each coating
to a unique percent capture efficiency for that coating by using
coating specific values for the volume of coating solids deposited per
volume of coating used, mass of VOC per volume of coating, volume
fraction solids, transfer efficiency, density, and mass fraction VOC in
Equations 4 through 6 of this section. Panel test results expressed in
units of mass of VOC per volume of coating solids deposited must be
converted to percent capture efficiency using Equation 4 of this
section. An alternative for using panel test results expressed in units
of mass of VOC per mass of coating solids deposited is presented in
paragraph (e)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *

Wvocc,i = Mass fraction of VOC in coating, i, or average
mass fraction of VOC for the group of coatings, including coating,
i, kg VOC per kg coating, determined by EPA Method 24 (appendix A-7
to 40 CFR part 60) or the guidelines for combining analytical VOC
content and formulation solvent content presented in Section 9 of
``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound
Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14).

    (3) * * *

Wvocc,i = Mass fraction of VOC in coating, i, or average
mass fraction of VOC for the group of coatings, including coating,
i, kg VOC per kg coating, determined by EPA Method 24 (appendix A-7
to 40 CFR part 60) or the guidelines for combining analytical VOC
content and formulation solvent content presented in Section 9 of
``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound
Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14).

    (4) * * *

Ws, i = Mass fraction of coating solids for coating, i,
or average mass fraction of coating solids for the group of coatings
including coating, i, kg coating solids per kg coating, determined
by EPA Method 24 (appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60) or the guidelines
for combining analytical VOC content and formulation solvent content
presented in ``Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic
Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Topcoat
Operations,'' EPA-450/3-88-018 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
63.14).

* * * * *

0
15. Section 63.3166 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) and (b) introductory text, and adding
paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.3166  How do I determine the add-on control device emission
destruction or removal efficiency?

    You must use the procedures and test methods in this section to
determine the add-on control device emission destruction or removal
efficiency as part of the performance test required by Sec.  63.3160,
Sec.  63.3163, or Sec.  63.3171. You must conduct three test runs as
specified in Sec.  63.7(e)(3), and each test run must last at least 1
hour.
    (a) * * *
    (1) Use EPA Method 1 or 1A of appendix A-1 to 40 CFR part 60, as
appropriate, to select sampling sites and velocity traverse points.
    (2) Use EPA Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, or 2F of appendix A-1, or 2G of
appendix A-2 to 40 CFR part 60, as appropriate, to measure gas
volumetric flow rate.
    (3) Use EPA Method 3, 3A, or 3B of appendix A-2 to 40 CFR part 60,
as appropriate, for gas analysis to determine dry molecular weight. The
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14),
may be used as an alternative to EPA Method 3B.

    (4) Use EPA Method 4 of appendix A-3 to 40 CFR part 60 to determine
stack gas moisture.
* * * * *
    (b) Measure total gaseous organic mass emissions as carbon at the
inlet and outlet of the add-on control device simultaneously, using
either EPA Method 25 or 25A of appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part 60, as
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section. You must
use the same method for both the inlet and outlet measurements.
* * * * *
    (4) You may use EPA Method 18 of appendix A-6 to 40 CFR part 60 to
subtract methane emissions from measured total gaseous organic mass
emissions as carbon.
* * * * *

0
16. Section 63.3167 is amended by revising the section heading, the
introductory text, and paragraph (f)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.3167  How do I establish the add-on control device operating
limits during performance tests?

    During the performance tests required by Sec. Sec.  63.3160,
63.3163, and 63.3171 (and described in Sec. Sec.  63.3164 and 63.3166),
you must establish the operating limits required by Sec.  63.3093
according to this section, unless you have received approval for
alternative monitoring and operating limits under Sec.  63.8(f) as
specified in Sec.  63.3093.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) During the capture efficiency determination required by
Sec. Sec.  63.3160 and 63.3163 and described in Sec. Sec.  63.3164 and
63.3165, you must monitor and record either the gas volumetric flow
rate or the duct static pressure for each separate capture device in
your emission capture system at least once every 15 minutes during each
of the three test runs at a point in the duct between the capture
device and the add-on control device inlet.
* * * * *

0
17. Section 63.3168 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4) through
(7) and (c)(3) introductory text to read as follows:

Sec.  63.3168  What are the requirements for continuous parameter
monitoring system installation, operation, and maintenance?

    (a) * * *
    (4) You must maintain the CPMS at all times in accordance with
Sec.  63.3100(d) and have readily available necessary parts for routine
repairs of the monitoring equipment.
    (5) Before January 5, 2021, you must operate the CPMS and collect
emission capture system and add-on control device parameter data at all
times that a controlled coating operation is operating, except during
monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, and required quality
assurance or control activities (including, if applicable, calibration
checks and required zero and span adjustments). On and after January 5,
2021, you must operate the CPMS and collect emission capture system and
add-on control device parameter data at all times that a controlled
coating operation is operating in accordance with Sec.  63.3100(d).
    (6) Before January 5, 2021, you must not use emission capture
system or add-on control device parameter data recorded during
monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, out-of-control periods, or
required quality assurance or control activities when calculating data
averages. You must use all the data collected during all other periods
in calculating the data averages for determining compliance with the
emission capture system and add-on control device operating limits. On
and after January 5, 2021, startups and shutdowns are normal operation
for this source category. Emissions from these activities are to be
included when determining if the standards specified in Sec. Sec.
63.3090, 63.3091, 63.3092, 63.4292, and 63.4293 are being attained. You
must not use emission capture system or add-on control device parameter
data recorded during monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, out-
of-control periods, or required quality assurance or control activities
when calculating data averages. You must use all the data collected
during all other periods in calculating the data averages for
determining compliance with the emission capture system and add-on
control device operating limits.
    (7) A monitoring malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not
reasonably preventable failure of the CPMS to provide valid data.
Monitoring failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or
careless operation are not malfunctions. Before January 5, 2021, any
period for which the monitoring system is out of control and data are
not available for required calculations is a deviation from the
monitoring requirements. On and after January 5, 2021, except for
periods of required quality assurance or control activities, any period
during which the CPMS fails to operate and record data continuously as
required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section, or generates data that
cannot be included in calculating averages as specified in this
paragraph (a)(7) constitutes a deviation from the monitoring
requirements.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) For all thermal oxidizers and catalytic oxidizers, you must
meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) and (c)(3)(i)
through (vii) of this section for each gas temperature monitoring
device. For the purposes of this paragraph (c)(3), a thermocouple is
part of the temperature sensor.
* * * * *

0
18. Section 63.3171 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (e)(3) to
read as follows:

Sec.  63.3171  How do I demonstrate initial compliance?

    (a) You must meet all of the requirements of this section to
demonstrate initial compliance. To demonstrate initial compliance, the
organic HAP emissions from the combined primer-surfacer, topcoat, final
repair, glass bonding primer, and glass bonding adhesive operations
plus all coatings and thinners, except for deadener materials and for
adhesive and sealer materials that are not components of glass bonding
systems, used in coating operations added to the affected source
pursuant to Sec.  63.3082(c) must meet the applicable emission
limitation in Sec.  63.3090(b) or Sec.  63.3091(b); the organic HAP
emissions from the electrodeposition primer operation must meet the
applicable emissions limitations in Sec.  63.3092(a) or (b); and you
must meet the applicable operating limits and work practice standards
in Sec. Sec.  63.3093 and 63.3094.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) Information from the supplier or manufacturer of the material.
You may rely on information other than that generated by the test
methods specified in paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this section, such as
manufacturer's formulation data, if it represents each organic HAP in
Table 5 to this subpart that is present at 0.1 percent by mass, and at
1.0 percent by mass or more for other compounds. If there is a
disagreement between such information and results of a test conducted
according to paragraph (e)(1) or (2) of this section, then the test
method results will take precedence unless after consultation, the
facility demonstrates to the satisfaction of the enforcement authority
that the facility's data are correct.
* * * * *

0
19. Section 63.3176 is amended by revising the definition of
``Deviation'' to read as follows:

Sec.  63.3176  What definitions apply to this subpart?

* * * * *
    Deviation means:
    (1) Before January 5, 2021, any instance in which an affected
source subject to this subpart or an owner or operator of such a
source:
    (i) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart including but not limited to any emission limit, operating
limit, or work practice standard;
    (ii) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to
obtain such a permit; or
    (iii) Fails to meet any emission limit or operating limit or work
practice standard in this subpart during SSM, regardless of whether or
not such failure is permitted by this subpart; and
    (2) On and after January 5, 2021, any instance in which an affected
source subject to this subpart or an owner or operator of such a
source:
    (i) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart including but not limited to any emission limit, operating
limit, or work practice standard; or
    (ii) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to
obtain such a permit.
* * * * *

0
20. Table 2 to subpart IIII of part 63 is revised to read as follows:

       Table 2 to Subpart IIII of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart IIII of Part 63
      You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements according to the following table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Applicable to subpart
               Citation                        Subject                    IIII                 Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   63.1(a)(1)-(12)...............  General Applicability..  Yes....................
Sec.   63.1(b)(1)-(3)................  Initial Applicability    Yes....................  Applicability to
                                        Determination.                                    subpart IIII is also
                                                                                specified in Sec.
                                                                                63.3081.
Sec.   63.1(c)(1)....................  Applicability After      Yes....................
                                        Standard Established.
Sec.   63.1(c)(2)....................  Applicability of Permit  No.....................  Area sources are not
                                        Program for Area                                  subject to subpart
                                        Sources.                                          IIII.
Sec.   63.1(c)(5)....................  Extensions and           Yes....................
                                        Notifications.
Sec.   63.1(e).......................  Applicability of Permit  Yes....................
                                        Program Before
                                        Relevant Standard is
                                        Set.
Sec.   63.2..........................  Definitions............  Yes....................  Additional definitions
                                                                                are specified in Sec.
                                                                                63.3176.
Sec.   63.3..........................  Units and Abbreviations  Yes....................
Sec.   63.4(a)(1)-(2)................  Prohibited Activities..  Yes....................
Sec.   63.4(b)-(c)...................  Circumvention/           Yes....................
                                        Fragmentation.
Sec.   63.5(a).......................  Preconstruction Review   Yes....................
                                        Applicability.
Sec.   63.5(b)(1), (3), (4), (6).....  Requirements for         Yes....................
                                        Existing, Newly
                                        Constructed, and
                                        Reconstructed Sources.
Sec.   63.5(d)(1)(i)-(ii)(F),          Application for          Yes....................
 (d)(1)(ii)(H), (d)(1)(ii)(J),          Approval of
 (d)(1)(iii), (d)(2)-(4).               Construction/
                                        Reconstruction.
Sec.   63.5(e).......................  Approval of              Yes....................
                                        Construction/
                                        Reconstruction.
Sec.   63.5(f).......................  Approval of              Yes....................
                                        Construction/
                                        Reconstruction Based
                                        on Prior State Review.
Sec.   63.6(a).......................  Compliance With          Yes....................
                                        Standards and
                                        Maintenance
                                        Requirements--Applicab
                                        ility.
Sec.   63.6(b)(1)-(5), (b)(7)........  Compliance Dates for     Yes....................  Section 63.3083
                                        New and Reconstructed                             specifies the
                                        Sources.                                          compliance dates.
Sec.   63.6(c)(1), (2), (5)..........  Compliance Dates for     Yes....................  Section 63.3083
                                        Existing Sources.                                 specifies the
                                                                                compliance dates.
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(i)-(ii)............  Operation and            Yes before January 5,    See Sec.   63.3100(d)
                                        Maintenance.             2021. No on and after    for general duty
                                                                 January 5, 2021.         requirement.
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(iii)...............  Operation and            Yes....................
                                        Maintenance.
Sec.   63.6(e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(iii)-     SSMP...................  Yes before January 5,    .......................
 (ix).                                                           2021. No on and after
                                                                 January 5, 2021.
Sec.   63.6(f)(1)....................  Compliance Except        Yes before January 5,    .......................
                                        During SSM.              2021. No on and after
                                                                 January 5, 2021.
Sec.   63.6(f)(2)-(3)................  Methods for Determining  Yes....................
                                        Compliance.
Sec.   63.6(g).......................  Use of an Alternative    Yes....................
                                        Standard.
Sec.   63.6(h).......................  Compliance With Opacity/ No.....................  Subpart IIII does not
                                        Visible Emission                                  establish opacity
                                        Standards.                                        standards and does not
                                                                                require continuous
                                                                                opacity monitoring
                                                                                systems (COMS).
Sec.   63.6(i)(1)-(14), (16).........  Extension of Compliance  Yes....................
63.6(j)..............................  Presidential Compliance  Yes....................
                                        Exemption.

Sec.   63.7(a)(1)....................  Performance Test         Yes....................  Applies to all affected
                                        Requirements--Applicab                            sources. Additional
                                        ility.                                            requirements for
                                                                                performance testing
                                                                                are specified in Sec.
                                                                                Sec.   63.3164 and
                                                                                63.3166.
Sec.   63.7(a)(2) except (a)(2)(i)-    Performance Test         Yes....................  Applies only to
 (viii).                                Requirements--Dates.                              performance tests for
                                                                                capture system and