National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories: Amendment for Hazardous Air Pollutants Emissions From Magnetic Tape Manufacturing Operations

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final action to amend National

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) From Magnetic

Tape Manufacturing Operations, codified as subpart EE to 40 CFR part

63. The existing standards allow facility owners or operators to leave

a limited number of solvent storage tanks uncontrolled if they control

coating operations at a level greater than the standards otherwise

require. EPA is publishing this final amendment to provide another

compliance option for facility owners and operators. If facility owners

or operators increase the control of hazardous air pollutant (HAP)

emissions from coating operations beyond what the standards otherwise

require, this final amendment gives them the choice of leaving a

limited number of solvent storage tanks and/or a limited number of

pieces of mix preparation equipment uncontrolled. EPA believes this

final amendment will not decrease the stringency of the existing

standards.

DATES: Effective Date. This final rule amendment is effective on June

8, 1999 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments on

this rulemaking by May 10, 1999 or a request for a hearing concerning

the accompanying proposed rule is received by EPA by April 19, 1999. If

EPA receives timely adverse comment or a timely hearing request, EPA

will publish a withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public

that this direct final rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Interested parties may submit comments on this

rulemaking in writing (original and two copies, if possible) to Docket

No. A-91-31 to the following address: Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center (6102), US Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M

Street, S.W., Room 1500, Washington, D.C. 20460. Public comments on

this rulemaking will be accepted until May 10, 1999.

Docket. A docket containing supporting information used in

developing this direct final rule amendment is available for public

inspection and copying at the EPA's docket office located at the above

address in Room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor). The public is

encouraged to phone in advance to review docket materials. Appointments

can be scheduled by phoning the Air Docket Office at (202) 260-7548.

Refer to Docket No. A-91-31. A reasonable fee may be charged for

copying docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Aston, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Policy, Planning, and Standards Group, Emission

Standards Division, Mail Drop 13, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711;

electronic mail address [email protected]; telephone number (919)

541-2363; facsimile number (919) 541-0942.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are publishing this rule amendment

without prior proposal because we consider this to be a

noncontroversial amendment, and we do not expect to receive any adverse

comment. We believe that this change to the previously promulgated rule

will increase compliance flexibility for affected sources without any

adverse environmental consequences. However, in the ``Proposed Rules''

section of this Federal Register publication, we are publishing a

separate document that will serve as the proposal for this amendment,

in the event we receive adverse comment or a hearing request and this

direct final rule is subsequently withdrawn. This final rule amendment

will be effective on June 8, 1999 without further notice, unless we

receive adverse comment on this rulemaking by May 10, 1999 or a request

for a hearing concerning the accompanying proposed rule is received by

EPA by April 19, 1999. If EPA receives timely adverse comment or a

timely hearing request, we will publish a withdrawal in the Federal

Register informing the public that this direct final rule will not take

effect. In that event, we will address all public comments in a

subsequent final rule, based on the proposed rule amendment published

in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of this Federal Register document.

The EPA will not provide further opportunity for public comment on this

action. Any parties interested in commenting on this amendment must do

so at this time.

Regulated entities. Entities potentially regulated by this action

include any facility engaged in the surface coating of magnetic tape.

This includes, but is not limited to, the following magnetic tape

products: audio and video recording tape, computer tape, the magnetic

stripes of media involved in credit cards and toll tickets, bank

transfer ribbons, instrumentation tape, and dictation tape. Regulated

categories and entities are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.--Regulated Categories and Entities

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Entity category Description

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Industrial............................... Any facility that is engaged

in the surface coating of

magnetic tape (SIC 3695 &

2675).

Federal Government: Not affected

State/Local/Tribal Government: Not

affected

------------------------------------------------------------------------

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a

guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this

action. This table lists the types of entities that the EPA is now

aware could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of

entities not listed in the table could also be regulated.

Internet. The text of this Federal Register document is also

available on the EPA's web site on the Internet under recently signed

rules at the following address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/

rules.html. The EPA's Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) homepage on the

Internet also contains a wide range of information on the air toxics

program and many other air pollution programs and issues. The OAR's

homepage address is: http://www.epa.gov/oar/.

Electronic Access and Filing Addresses. The official record for

this rulemaking, as well as the public version, has been established

for this rulemaking under Docket No. A-91-31 (including comments and

data submitted electronically). A public version of this record,

including printed, paper versions of electronic comments, which does

not include any information claimed as confidential business

information (CBI), is available for inspection from 8 a.m. to 5:30

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The official

rulemaking record is located at the address listed in the ADDRESSES

section at the beginning of this preamble.

Interested parties may submit comments on this rulemaking

electronically to the EPA's Air and

[[Page 17461]]

Radiation Docket and Information Center at: ``A-and-R-

D[email protected].'' Electronic comments must be submitted as an

ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of

encryption. Comments and data will also be accepted on disks in

WordPerfect in 6.1 file format or ASCII file format. All comments and

data in electronic form must be identified by the docket number (A-91-

31). No CBI should be submitted through electronic mail. Electronic

comments may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.

Outline. The information in this preamble is organized as follows:

I. Authority

II. Background

III. Regulatory Requirements and Performance Standards

A. Original compliance option for solvent storage tanks

B. What information we used to establish the new compliance

option

C. Why we chose to allow the new compliance option

D. How the new compliance option affects you as a manufacturer

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866: ``Significant Regulatory Action

Determination''

B. Regulatory Flexibility

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

E. Docket

F. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental

Partnership

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments

I. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. Authority

The statutory authority for this action is provided by sections

101, 112, 114, 116, and 301 of the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C.

7401, 7412, 7414, 7416, and 7601).

II. Background

On December 15, 1994, we published in the Federal Register the

final rule containing national standards for reducing HAP in facilities

that manufacture magnetic tape (see 59 FR 64580). Since then, a

regulated facility has asked us to consider alternative compliance

options for a narrow aspect of the regulation.

This amendment is very similar to the existing provision at 40 CFR

63.703(c)(4), but adds an optional approach for compliance. The new

approach requires the same enhanced control efficiency for coating

operations as required by the provisions published in 1994. We expect

this amendment to protect the environment as well as the rule published

in 1994, while offering the regulated community more flexibility for

compliance.

III. Regulatory Requirements and Performance Standards

A. Original Compliance Option for Solvent Storage tanks

In the final rule published in 1994, we included a compliance

option for owners or operators of facilities that manufacture magnetic

tape (referred to as operators in the rest of this preamble). It allows

them to leave uncontrolled the emissions from certain solvent storage

tanks in return for better controlling the largest emissions source at

their facilities. Through that alternative compliance provision, we

allow operators to vent emissions from these tanks to the atmosphere,

rather than routing them through a control device. (See 40 CFR

63.703(c)(4)--as published December 15, 1994--for this option.) As

explained in the 1994 preamble, we concluded then that added control at

the coating operations would offset emissions from the uncontrolled

storage tanks (see 59 FR 64590-64592, December 15, 1994.)

B. What Information We Used To Establish the New Compliance Option

Since 1994, we've received detailed technical information from a

facility that manufactures magnetic tape (see Docket No. A-91-31). It

compares estimates for HAP emissions from uncontrolled solvent storage

tanks to those for uncontrolled pieces of mix preparation equipment.

The facility asked us to allow more flexibility in the types of

equipment that can be left uncontrolled in exchange for a higher level

of control of the coating operations at the facility. In evaluating

this request, we've generally compared the amount of HAP emissions that

may be uncontrolled under the 1994 published rule's alternative

provision with those HAP emissions that may be uncontrolled under the

added options in today's rule. For this analysis, we incorporate by

reference our rationale for the existing alternative compliance options

which was included in our preamble for the 1994 published rule.

At magnetic tape manufacturing facilities, solvent storage tanks

and mix preparation equipment are typically covered, even if the

headspace vapors aren't vented to a control device. Emissions from a

given solvent storage tank at a manufacturing facility vary depending

on throughput, tank size, solvents stored in the tanks, and other

factors. Emissions from a given piece of mix preparation equipment vary

for similar reasons, and also vary based on the amount that the

temperature of the mix increases during mixing.

The facility's detailed technical information estimates their

maximum potential emissions under process constraints in the milling

operations. The facility's solvent storage tanks and mix preparation

equipment have varying characteristics, including capacity. Their

largest tanks and mix preparation equipement are 20,000 gallons and

1200 gallons, respectively. The solvent storage tanks have fixed roofs

with conservation vents, so the facility used standard calculations for

these tanks to estimate emissions. For solvent recovery tanks, they

believed this method may not be appropriate because they maintain most

tanks at nearly constant levels with a mechanical weir. However, we

don't know of a better way to calculate emissions for these tanks, so

we'd use the same method unless rigorous monitoring ensured a constant

level of liquid in the tank. Therefore, we decided to include tanks

from the solvent recovery unit in our evaluation of the data.

The facility estimated emissions for their mix preparation

equipment using our calculation methods for batch processes, which we

believe is appropriate for this application. In developing the

regulations, we estimated emissions from the entire mix preparation

operation. But their method estimates emissions for pieces of mix

equipment, which requires more detailed information than we had while

developing the regulations. At the same time, we believe this

facility's solvent storage tanks and mix preparation equipment are

representative of the tanks and equipment used by the rest of the

regulated magnetic tape industry, so we used their data to analyze the

requested alternative compliance approach.

C. Why We Chose To Allow the New Compliance Option

The 1994 published rule restricts the capacity of the solvent

storage tanks we allowed to be uncontrolled to 20,000 gallons each but

doesn't restrict other parameters that affect emissions. Therefore, we

believe it's reasonable to use the highest emitting tanks in this

comparison if they don't exceed the capacity restriction. For the

magnetic tape manufacturing facility we studied, we found the maximum

potential HAP emissions from a solvent storage tank and from a piece of

mix preparation

[[Page 17462]]

equipment were 1.6 tons/yr (tpy) and 1.9 tpy, respectively.

Because maximum emissions are similar, we believe it's reasonable

for facility operators to leave uncontrolled some mix preparation

equipment and some solvent storage tanks, if they better control their

coating operations. But they must leave fewer pieces of mix preparation

equipment uncontrolled because the maximum emissions from mix

preparation equipment are greater than those from solvent storage

tanks. Also, some tanks had emissions as low as 0.01 tpy, whereas the

lowest level for mix preparation equipment was 0.1 tpy. Based on all

the data, it's reasonable to allow manufacturers to leave uncontrolled

half as many pieces of mix preparation equipment as of solvent storage

tanks. This 2-to-1 ratio makes up for the wider range of HAP emissions

in the tanks.

As noted above, the 1994 published rule's alternative compliance

approach limits the capacity of solvent storage tanks that can be left

uncontrolled. Our amendment also uses a capacity limit of 1,200 gallons

for each piece of mix preparation equipment that can be left

uncontrolled. We believe the equipment at this facility is

representative of equipment in the industry. In any case, limiting

maximum capacity makes sure the size of uncontrolled mix preparation

equipment is no larger than the size used for the estimates supporting

this amendment.

D. How the New Compliance Option Affects You as a Manufacturer

Today's final rule amendment affects you if, as a facility owner or

operator, you choose to increase the overall control efficiency of your

coating operations for magnetic tape. As the final rule was published

in 1994, 40 CFR 63.703(c) allowed you to leave HAP solvent storage

tanks uncontrolled if you increase the overall control efficiency of

your coating operations. Under today's final rule amendment, you may

still leave uncontrolled 10, 15, or 20 tanks in exchange for

controlling your coating operations to an overall efficiency of 97, 98,

or 99 percent, respectively. Under today's amendment, however, you may

leave uncontrolled one piece of mix preparation equipment in exchange

for two solvent storage tanks left uncontrolled under the 1994 rule.

For example, you could leave uncontrolled six solvent storage tanks and

two pieces of mix preparation equipment if you achieve an overall

efficiency of 97 percent--instead of 10 solvent storage tanks. See the

amendment to 40 CFR 63.703(c)(4) for combinations you may use to comply

with the new alternative provisions.

We believe this amendment will limit HAP emissions from facilities

that manufacture magnetic tape at least as much as provisions in the

1994 rule. Furthermore, the amendment will give you more flexibility to

meet the regulation. We don't expect our amendment to pose any problems

for enforcement or permitting because it's essentially similar to the

1994 rule, which affected facilities are following now. We expect

you'll like this amendment because you may be able to save money and

other resources, compared to the compliance approaches under the 1994

rule. Also, if you decide not to follow the amended provisions, they

won't burden you--they merely give you another option, and the

regulation is otherwise virtually unchanged.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866: ``Significant Regulatory Action

Determination'

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) the

Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''

and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review

and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines

``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a

rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or

adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public

health or safety in State, local, or tribal governments or communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an

action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grants,

user fees, or loan programs of the rights and obligations of recipients

thereof; or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in

the Executive Order.

Because the annualized cost of this final rule amendment would be

significantly less than $100 million and would not meet any of the

other criteria specified in the Executive Order, it has been determined

that this action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the

terms of Executive Order 12866, and is therefore not subject to OMB

review.

Executive Order 12866 also encourages agencies to provide a

meaningful public comment period, and suggests that in most cases the

comment period should be 60 days. However, in consideration of the very

limited scope of this amendment, the EPA considers 30 days to be

sufficient in providing a meaningful public comment period for this

rulemaking.

B. Regulatory Flexibility

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency

to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to

notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies

that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental

jurisdictions. The EPA determined that this amendment to the Magnetic

Tape Manufacturing Operations does not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities. The EPA has also determined that

is not necessary to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis in

connection with this action.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

This amendment does not include or create any information

collection activities subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, and

therefore no information collection request (ICR) will be submitted to

OMB for review in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44

U.S.C. 3501, et seq.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public

Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the

effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal

governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA

generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit

analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that

may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in

the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any

one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement

is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify

and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt

the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205

do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,

section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least

costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the

[[Page 17463]]

Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that

alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory

requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small

governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under

section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must

provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling

officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely

input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant

Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and

advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory

requirements.

As noted above, this amendment is of very narrow scope, and

provides a compliance alternative very similar to one already available

in the promulgated regulation. The EPA has determined that this action

contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or

uniquely affect small governments. EPA has also determined that this

action does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in

expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal

governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one year.

Thus, today's action is not subject to the requirements of sections 202

and 205 of the UMRA.

E. Docket

The docket includes an organized and complete file of all the

information upon which EPA relied in taking this direct final action.

The docketing system is intended to allow members of the public and

industries involved to readily identify and locate documents so that

they can effectively participate in the rulemaking process. Along with

the proposed and promulgated standards and their preambles, the

contents of the docket, except for certain interagency documents, will

serve as the record for judicial review. (See CAA section

307(d)(7)(A).)

F. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership

Under Executive Order 12875, the EPA may not issue a regulation

that is not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a

State, local or tribal government, unless the Federal government

provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs

incurred by those governments, or EPA consults with those governments.

If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to

provide to the Office of Management and Budget a description of the

extent of the EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected

State, local and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns,

copies of any written communications from the governments, and a

statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition,

Executive Order 12875 requires the EPA to develop an effective process

permitting elected officials and other representatives of State, local

and tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the

development of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded

mandates.''

Today's action does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal

governments. The amendments to the rule do not impose any new or

additional enforceable duties on these entities. Accordingly, the

requirements of section 1(a) of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to

this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental

Health Risks and Safety Risks

Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that the EPA determines

(1) economically significant as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) the

environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule has a

disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets

both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or

safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the

planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and

reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

This amendment to the National Emissions Standards for Magnetic

Tape Manufacturing Operations is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled

Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not an economically

significant regulatory action as defined by E.O. 12866, and it does not

address an environmental health or safety risk that would have a

disproportionate effect on children.

H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With Indian

Tribal Governments

Under Executive Order 13084, the EPA may not issue a regulation

that is not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects

the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes

substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the

Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct

compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults

with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order

13084 requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget,

in a separate identified section of the preamble to the rule, a

description of the extent of the EPA's prior consultation with

representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature

of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the

regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires the EPA to

develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other

representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful

and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters

that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''

This amendment to National Emissions Standards for Magnetic Tape

Manufacturing Operations does not significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of Indian tribal governments. The amendments to the rule do

not impose any new or additional enforceable duties on these entities.

Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084

do not apply to this action.

I. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, the EPA submitted a report

containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,

the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller general of the

General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's

Federal Register. This action to amend the currently effective rule is

not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Under section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act (NTTA), Public Law 104-113 (March 7, 1996), the EPA is

required to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory and

procurement activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with

applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards

are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,

sampling procedures, business practices, etc.) which are adopted by

voluntary consensus standard bodies. Where available and potentially

applicable voluntary consensus standards are not used by the EPA, the

NTTA requires the Agency to provide

[[Page 17464]]

Congress, through OMB, an explanation of the reasons for not using such

standards. This action does not put forth any technical standards;

therefore, consideration of voluntary consensus standards was not

required.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Coating operation,

Hazardous air pollutant, Magnetic tape manufacturing, Mix preparation

equipment, Solvent storage tank.

Dated: April 1, 1999.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

Chapter I, Part 63 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended

as follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS

FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

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

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

Subpart EE--National Emission Standards for Magnetic Tape

Manufacturing Operations

2. Section 63.703 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(4) (i), (ii)

and (iii) to read as follows:

Sec. 63.703 Standards.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(4) In lieu of controlling HAP emissions from each solvent storage

tank and piece of mix preparation equipment to the level required by

paragraph (c)(1) of this section, an owner or operator of an affected

source may elect to comply with one of the options set forth in

paragraph (c)(4)(i), (ii) or (iii) of this section.

(i) Control HAP emissions from all coating operations by an overall

HAP control efficiency of at least 97 percent in lieu of either:

(A) Controlling up to 10 HAP solvent storage tanks that do not

exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(B) Controlling 1 piece of mix preparation equipment that does not

exceed 1,200 gallons in capacity and up to 8 HAP solvent storage tanks

that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(C) Controlling up to 2 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 6 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(D) Controlling up to 3 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 4 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(E) Controlling up to 4 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 2 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(F) Controlling up to 5 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity.

(ii) Control HAP emissions from all coating operations by an

overall HAP control efficiency of at least 98 percent in lieu of

either:

(A) Controlling up to 15 HAP solvent storage tanks that do not

exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(B) Controlling 1 piece of mix preparation equipment that does not

exceed 1,200 gallons in capacity and up to 13 HAP solvent storage tanks

that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(C) Controlling up to 2 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 11 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(D) Controlling up to 3 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 9 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(E) Controlling up to 4 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 7 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(F) Controlling up to 5 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 5 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(G) Controlling up to 6 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 3 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(H) Controlling up to 7 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 1 HAP solvent

storage tank that does not exceed 20,000 gallons in capacity.

(iii) Control HAP emissions from all coating operations by an

overall HAP control efficiency of at least 99 percent in lieu of

either:

(A) Controlling up to 20 HAP solvent storage tanks that do not

exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(B) Controlling 1 piece of mix preparation equipment that does not

exceed 1,200 gallons in capacity and up to 18 HAP solvent storage tanks

that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(C) Controlling up to 2 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 16 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(D) Controlling up to 3 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 14 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(E) Controlling up to 4 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 12 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(F) Controlling up to 5 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 10 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(G) Controlling up to 6 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 8 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(H) Controlling up to 7 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 6 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(I) Controlling up to 8 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 4 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(J) Controlling up to 9 pieces of mix preparation equipment that do

not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity and up to 2 HAP solvent

storage tanks that do not exceed 20,000 gallons each in capacity; or

(K) Controlling up to 10 pieces of mix preparation equipment that

do not exceed 1,200 gallons each in capacity.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 99-8779 Filed 4-8-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P