[Federal Register: July 11, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 133)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 46027-46088]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11jy02-24]                         


[[Page 46027]]

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

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Part 63



National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Printing, 
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles; Proposed Rule


[[Page 46028]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[FRL-7237-1]
RIN 2060-AG98

 
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: 
Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes national emission standards for hazardous 
air pollutants (NESHAP) for fabric and other textile coating, printing, 
slashing, dyeing, and finishing operations, pursuant to section 112(d) 
of the Clean Air Act (CAA). This action also revises the title of the 
source category. The Printing, Coating and Dyeing of Fabrics source 
category was included in the initial list of categories of hazardous 
air pollutants (HAP), published in the Federal Register on July 16, 
1992. This action changes the title of the source category to Printing, 
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles, to clarify the 
applicability of the proposed NESHAP to HAP-emitting operations 
performed on textile substrates including, but not limited to, fabric.
    The EPA has estimated that there are approximately 135 major source 
facilities in the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other 
Textiles source category. The principal HAP emitted by these affected 
sources include toluene, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), methanol, xylenes, 
methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK), methylene chloride, n-hexane, 
trichloroethylene, and n,n-dimethyl formamide. Secondary HAP emitted 
include 1,1,1-trichloroethane, naphthalene, ethyl benzene, glycol 
ethers (ethylene glycol), biphenyl, and styrene.
    Exposure to these substances has been demonstrated to cause adverse 
health effects such as irritation of the eye, lung, and mucous 
membranes, effects on the central nervous system, and damage to the 
liver. The EPA has classified two of the HAP as probable or possible 
human carcinogens. In general, these adverse health effect findings 
have only been shown with concentrations higher than those typically in 
the ambient air. The proposed standards would reduce nationwide HAP 
emissions from major sources by approximately 60 percent. The reduction 
in HAP emissions would be achieved by requiring all fabric and other 
textiles coating, printing, slashing, dyeing, and finishing operations 
at major sources to meet the HAP emission standards reflecting the 
application of the maximum achievable control technology (MACT). 
Emission reductions achieved by these standards, when combined with the 
emission reductions achieved by other similar standards, would protect 
and enhance the quality of the Nation's air resources so as to promote 
the public health and welfare, protect the environment, and achieve a 
primary goal of the CAA.

DATES: Comments. Submit comments on or before September 9, 2002.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a 
public hearing, they should do so by July 31, 2002. If requested, a 
public hearing will be held within approximately 30 days following 
publication of this document in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments. By U.S. Postal Service, send comments (in 
duplicate if possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
Center (6102), Attention Docket Number A-97-51, U.S. EPA, 1200 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. In person or by 
courier, deliver comments (in duplicate if possible) to: Air and 
Radiation Docket and Information Center (6102), Attention Docket Number 
A-97-51, U.S. EPA, 501 M Street, SW., Room M-1500, Washington, DC 
20460. The EPA requests a separate copy also be sent to the contact 
person listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at the 
new EPA facility complex in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. You 
should contact Ms. Janet Eck, Coatings and Consumer Products Group 
(C539-03), Emission Standards Division, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle 
Park, NC 27711, telephone number (919) 541-7946, to request to speak at 
a public hearing or to find out if a hearing will be held.
    Docket. Docket No. A-97-51 contains supporting information used in 
developing the proposed standards. The docket is located at the U.S. 
EPA, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460 in Room M-1500, Waterside 
Mall (ground floor), and may be inspected from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Vinson Hellwig, Coatings and 
Consumer Products Group (C539-03), Emission Standards Division, U.S. 
EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number (919) 541-2317; 
facsimile number (919) 541-5689; electronic mail (e-mail) address: 
hellwig.vinson@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments. Comments and data may be submitted 
by e-mail to: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. Electronic comments must be 
submitted as an ASCII file to avoid the use of special characters and 
encryption problems and will also be accepted on disks in 
WordPerfect file format. All comments and data submitted in 
electronic form must note the docket number: A-97-51. No confidential 
business information (CBI) should be submitted by e-mail. Electronic 
comments may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.
    Commenters wishing to submit proprietary information for 
consideration must clearly distinguish such information from other 
comments and clearly label it as CBI. Send submissions containing such 
proprietary information directly to the following address, and not to 
the public docket, to ensure that proprietary information is not 
inadvertently placed in the docket: Mr. Vinson Hellwig, c/o OAQPS 
Document Control Officer (C404-02), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, 
NC 27711. The EPA will disclose information identified as CBI only to 
the extent allowed by the procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. If no 
claim of confidentiality accompanies a submission when it is received 
by EPA, the information may be made available to the public without 
further notice to the commenter.
    Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or 
inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Ms. 
Janet Eck, Coatings and Consumer Products Group (C539-03), Emission 
Standards Division, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; 
telephone number (919) 541-7946 at least 2 days in advance of the 
public hearing. Persons interested in attending the public hearing 
should also contact Ms. Eck to verify the time, date, and location of 
the hearing. The public hearing will provide interested parties the 
opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning these 
proposed emission standards.
    Docket. The docket is an organized and complete file of all the 
information considered by EPA in the development of this rulemaking. 
The docket is a dynamic file because material is added throughout the 
rulemaking process. 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

[[Page 46029]]

will serve as the record in the case of judicial review. (See section 
307(d)(7)(A) of the CAA.) The regulatory text and other materials 
related to this rulemaking are available for review in the docket or 
copies may be mailed on request from the Air and Radiation Docket and 
Information Center by calling (202) 260-7548. A reasonable fee may be 
charged for copying docket materials.
    WorldWide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of the proposed rule will also be available on the 
WWW through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature 
by the EPA Administrator, a copy of the proposed rule will be posted on 
the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated 
rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and 
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. If more 
information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at 
(919) 541-5384.
    Regulated Entities. The proposed source category definition 
includes sources that engage in the coating, printing, slashing, 
dyeing, or finishing of any fabric or other textile. In general, 
sources that engage in fabric and other textiles coating, printing, 
slashing, dyeing, or finishing operations are covered under the North 
American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes listed in the 
following table. However, sources classified under other NAICS codes 
may be subject to the proposed standards if they meet the applicability 
criteria. Not all sources classified under the NAICS codes in the 
following table will be subject to the proposed standards because some 
of the classifications cover products outside the scope of the NESHAP 
for printing, coating and dyeing of fabrics and other textiles.

                Table 1.--Categories and Entities Potentially Regulated by the Proposed Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     NAICS Code                                        NAICS product description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
31321...............................................  Broadwoven Fabric Mills
31322...............................................  Narrow Fabric Mills and Schiffli Machine Embroidery
313241..............................................  Weft Knit Fabric Mills
313311..............................................  Broadwoven Fabric Finishing Mills
313312..............................................  Textile and Fabric Finishing (except Broadwoven Fabric)
                                                       Mills
313320..............................................  Fabric Coating Mills
314110..............................................  Carpet and Rug Mills
326220..............................................  Rubber and Plastics Hoses and Belting and Manufacturing
339991..............................................  Gasket, Packing, and Sealing Device Manufacturing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. To determine whether your operation is regulated by this 
action, you should examine the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.4281 
of the proposed rule. If you have any questions regarding the 
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person 
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as 
follows:

I. Background
    A. What is the source of authority for development of NESHAP?
    B. What criteria are used in the development of NESHAP?
    C. What are the health effects associated with HAP emissions 
from coating, printing, slashing, dyeing, and finishing operations?
II. Summary of the Proposed Rule
    A. What source categories and subcategories are affected by the 
proposed rule?
    B. What is the relationship to other rules?
    C. What are the primary sources of emissions and what are the 
emissions?
    D. What is the affected source?
    E. What are the emission limits, operating limits, and other 
standards?
    F. What are the testing and initial compliance requirements?
    G. What are the continuous compliance provisions?
    H. What are the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements?
III. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Standards
    A. How did we select the source category and subcategories?
    B. How did we select the regulated pollutants?
    C. How did we select the affected source?
    D. How did we determine the basis and level of the proposed 
standards for existing and new or reconstructed sources?
    E. How did we select the format of the proposed standards?
    F. How did we select the testing and initial compliance 
requirements?
    G. How did we select the continuous compliance requirements?
    H. How did we select the notification, recordkeeping, and 
reporting requirements?
    I. How did we select the compliance date?
IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts
    A. What are the air impacts?
    B. What are the cost impacts?
    C. What are the economic impacts?
    D. What are the non-air health, environmental, and energy 
impacts?
V. Administrative Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
    C. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    D. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    E. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    G. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 
U.S.C. 601, et seq.
    H. Paperwork Reduction Act
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. Background

A. What Is the Source of Authority for Development of NESHAP?

    Section 112 of the CAA requires us to list categories and 
subcategories of major sources and area sources of HAP and to establish 
NESHAP for the listed source categories and subcategories. The 
Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics source category was listed on 
July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576) under the Surface Coating Processes 
industry group. As has been noted previously in this preamble, today's 
action changes the title of the source category to Printing, Coating, 
and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles.
    Major sources of HAP are those that have the potential to emit 
greater than 10 tons per year (tpy) of any one HAP or 25 tpy of any 
combination of HAP.

[[Page 46030]]

B. What Criteria Are Used in the Development of NESHAP?

    Section 112 of the CAA requires that we establish NESHAP for the 
control of HAP from both new and existing major sources. The CAA 
requires the NESHAP to reflect the maximum degree of reduction in 
emissions of HAP that is achievable. This level of control is commonly 
referred to as the MACT.
    The MACT floor is the minimum control level allowed for NESHAP and 
is defined under section 112(d)(3) of the CAA. In essence, the MACT 
floor ensures that the standard is set at a level that assures that all 
major sources achieve the level of control already achieved by the 
better-controlled and lower-emitting sources in each source category or 
subcategory. For new sources, the MACT standards cannot be less 
stringent than the emission control that is achieved in practice by the 
best-controlled similar source. The MACT standards for existing sources 
can be less stringent than standards for new sources, but they cannot 
be less stringent than the average emission limitation achieved by the 
best-performing 12 percent of existing sources in the category or 
subcategory (or the best-performing five sources for categories or 
subcategories with fewer than 30 sources).
    In developing MACT, we also consider control options that are more 
stringent than the floor. We may establish standards more stringent 
than the floor based on the consideration of the cost of achieving the 
emissions reductions, any non-air health and environmental impacts, and 
energy requirements.

C. What Are the Health Effects Associated With HAP Emissions From 
Coating, Printing, Slashing, Dyeing, and Finishing Operations?

    The HAP emitted from coating, printing, slashing, dyeing, and 
finishing operations include toluene, MEK, methanol, xylenes, MIBK, 
methylene chloride, n-hexane, trichloroethylene, and n,n-
dimethylformamide. These compounds account for about 81 percent of the 
nationwide HAP emissions from this source category. The HAP that would 
be controlled with the proposed rule are associated with a variety of 
adverse health effects. These adverse health effects include chronic 
health disorders (e.g., irritation of the eyes, lungs, and mucous 
membranes, effects on the central nervous system, and damage to the 
heart and liver) and acute health disorders (e.g., respiratory 
irritation and central nervous system effects such as drowsiness, 
headache, and nausea). The EPA has classified two of the HAP (methylene 
chloride and naphthalene) as probable or possible human carcinogens.
    We do not have the type of current detailed data on each of the 
facilities covered by the emission standards for this source category, 
and the people living around the affected facilities, that would be 
necessary to conduct an analysis to determine the actual population 
exposures to the HAP emitted from these affected facilities and 
potential for resultant health effects. Therefore, we do not know the 
extent to which the adverse health effects described above occur in the 
populations surrounding these affected facilities. However, to the 
extent the adverse effects do occur, the proposed rule would reduce 
emissions and subsequent exposures.

II. Summary of the Proposed Rule

A. What Source Categories and Subcategories Are Affected by the 
Proposed Rrule?

    The proposed rule would apply to you if you own or operate a fabric 
or other textile coating, printing, slashing, dyeing, or finishing 
operation or group of such operations that is a major source, or is 
located at a major source, or is part of a major source of HAP 
emissions, whether or not you manufacture the substrate. The coating, 
printing, slashing, dyeing, or finishing operations themselves are not 
required to be major sources of HAP emissions in order for them to be 
covered by the proposed rule. As long as some part of the facility 
where the operations are located (e.g., a process boiler or 
manufacturing operations associated with production of the final 
product) causes it to be a major source, the coating, printing, 
slashing, dyeing, and finishing operations would be subject to the 
standards.
    Any major HAP-emitting facility that performs coating, printing, 
slashing, dyeing, or finishing of fabric or other textiles is in this 
source category. As defined in the proposed rule, fabric or other 
textiles includes, but is not limited to, yarn, fiber, cord, thread, 
fabric and textile products, tents, roofing, soft baggage, marine 
fabric, drapery linings, flexible hoses, hot-air balloons, and awnings. 
The source category includes three subcategories (coating and printing, 
slashing, and dyeing and finishing) as described in the following 
paragraphs.
    The coating and printing subcategory encompasses coating activities 
and equipment used to apply semi-liquid coating material to one or both 
sides of a textile web substrate. Once the coating is dried (and cured, 
if necessary) it bonds with the substrate to form a continuous solid 
film for decorative, protective, or functional purposes. Similarly, the 
coating and printing subcategory includes printing activities and 
equipment used to apply color and patterns to textile substrates, 
usually in the form of a paste. After application of the printing 
material, the substrate is treated with steam, heat, or chemicals to 
fix the color. If you coat fabric or other textiles and any other 
substrate on a coating line, then that line would be subject to the 
proposed rule unless it is specifically exempted in another NESHAP. We 
currently plan to provide such an exemption in the tire cord production 
NESHAP for tire cord coating lines that occasionally coat fabric. 
Another exemption is planned for the paper and other web coating NESHAP 
for lines that coat medical tape or duct tape.
    The slashing subcategory includes the yarn preparation process 
performed on warp yarn prior to weaving. Slashing is the application of 
a chemical solution (known as sizing) to a yarn in a water solution 
followed by squeezing and drying.
    The dyeing and finishing subcategory includes the equipment and 
operations involved in two separate but related processes that are both 
performed at some sources, while only one or the other is performed at 
other sources. Dyes and finishes are applied to yarn, fiber, cord, 
thread, or fabric in aqueous solutions and then dried. Dyeing is the 
application of color to the whole body of a textile substrate. 
Finishing is a process performed after dyeing that improves the 
appearance and/or usefulness of a textile substrate.
    You would not be subject to the proposed rule if your coating, 
printing, slashing, dyeing, or finishing operation is located at an 
area source. An area source of HAP is any facility that has the 
potential to emit HAP but is not a major source. You may establish area 
source status by limiting the source's potential to emit HAP through 
appropriate mechanisms available through your permitting authority.
    Exclusions from the source category include coating, printing, 
slashing, dyeing or finishing at sources using only coating, printing, 
slashing, dyeing, finishing, thinning, and cleaning materials that 
contain no organic HAP; coating, printing, slashing, dyeing, or 
finishing that occurs at research or laboratory facilities or that is 
part of janitorial, building, and facility maintenance operations; and 
coating, printing, slashing, dyeing, or finishing

[[Page 46031]]

used by an affected source and not for commerce, unless organic HAP 
emissions from the facility that performs coating, printing, slashing, 
dyeing, or finishing operations are as high as the specified major 
source HAP emissions.

B. What Is the Relationship to Other Rules?

    Affected sources subject to the proposed rule may also be subject 
to other rules. We specifically request comments on how monitoring, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements can be consolidated for 
sources that are subject to more than one rule.
    New Source Performance Standards--40 CFR part 60, subpart VVV. The 
new source performance standards (NSPS) for polymeric coating of 
supporting substrates apply to affected facilities that apply 
elastomers, polymers, or prepolymers to a supporting web other than 
paper, plastic film, metallic foil, or metal coil and that began 
construction, reconstruction, or modification after April 30, 1987. The 
pollutants regulated are volatile organic compounds (VOC). The affected 
facility is each coating operation and any onsite coating mix 
preparation equipment used to prepare coatings for the polymeric 
coating of the affected substrate. Emissions of VOC from the coating 
operation must be reduced by at least 90 percent or a total enclosure 
must be installed around the coating operation vented to an add-on 
control device that is at least 95 percent efficient. Depending on 
criteria in the NSPS, VOC emissions from onsite coating mix preparation 
equipment must be vented to a 95 percent efficient add-on control 
device or each piece of mix preparation equipment must be covered.
    The proposed requirements for coating operations differ from the 
NSPS in three ways. First, the ``affected source'' for the proposed 
rule is defined broadly as the collection of all of the coating and 
printing operations and associated processes at the facility, whereas 
the ``affected facility'' for the NSPS is defined narrowly as each 
individual coating operation. The proposed NESHAP's broader definition 
of an affected source allows averaging across coating and printing 
lines for compliance purposes. Second, the proposed rule regulates 
organic HAP. While most organic HAP emitted from coating and printing 
operations are VOC, some VOC are not listed as HAP, and, therefore, the 
NSPS regulates a broader range of pollutants than the proposed NESHAP. 
Third, the HAP emission limitations in the proposed rule are in terms 
of an overall control efficiency (OCE) with an alternative weight 
fraction of solids applied emission rate limit based on the amount of 
coating solids used at the affected source. The VOC limitations in the 
NSPS are emission reduction standards; there is not an emission rate 
option based on the amount of coating solids used. Because of the 
differences between the two rules, compliance with either rule cannot 
be deemed compliance with the other. A coating or printing operation 
that meets the applicability requirements of both rules must comply 
with both. Overlapping reporting, recordkeeping, and monitoring 
requirements may be resolved through your title V permit.
    Future national emission standards for the surface coating of paper 
and other web products. The paper and other web coating NESHAP were 
proposed September 13, 2000 (65 FR 55332). If you operate a coating 
line(s) that applies coatings both to paper and other web and to fabric 
and other textile substrates on the same line, then the coating line(s) 
is subject to the proposed printing, coating, and dyeing of fabrics and 
other textiles NESHAP. The only exceptions are where the paper and 
other web substrate being coated is medical tape or duct tape or where 
fabric is being laminated to a paper or other web substrate, and these 
exceptions will be specified in the paper and other web NESHAP.
    Future national emission standards for tire manufacturing. The EPA 
has identified affected sources in the tire manufacturing source 
category that coat tire cord and that also sometimes apply coatings to 
textile cord used in the production of belts and hoses. If the source 
is subject to the tire manufacturing NESHAP, it is not subject to the 
proposed printing, coating, and dyeing of fabrics and other textiles 
NESHAP.

C. What Are the Primary Sources of Emissions and What Are the 
Emissions?

    HAP emission sources. Coating and printing material application and 
curing are the largest contributors of HAP emissions at coating and 
printing affected sources. For example, based on the responses to a 
survey of the coating industry, the portion of total affected source 
HAP emissions attributed to coating application and curing is estimated 
to be approximately 95 percent. Other operations and activities that 
may create HAP emissions associated with coating/printing include 
storage tanks, substrate preparation, coating and printing material 
mixing/thinning operations, parts and equipment cleaning, and waste and 
wastewater operations.
    The primary source of HAP emissions from slashing is methanol from 
polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) size, typically applied to synthetics (although 
it adheres to and is used for natural fibers as well). The methanol is 
present in the PVA size as a contaminant and is not needed for the 
slashing process. The methanol emissions can arise either from the size 
cooking operation and/or from the application or slashing process--the 
distribution is unclear, although it will depend upon the temperature 
at which the size is cooked, the cooking time, and how often mixing 
containers (cookers) are opened.
    The sources of HAP emissions from dyeing are the HAP constituents 
that are contained in dyestuffs and auxiliary chemicals as purchased. 
The HAP constituents are needed to impart certain desirable 
characteristics to the dyed substrate (e.g., certain colors can only be 
attained through the use of HAP-containing dyestuffs or auxiliaries.) 
No HAP are known to be added by the users. The fraction of HAP 
contained in dye materials that is emitted to the atmosphere is 
generally estimated to range from zero to 10 percent, although a few 
sources report from 19 percent to as much as 100 percent emitted. The 
fraction of HAP in dye materials emitted to the atmosphere depends on 
the characteristics of the specific HAP constituents and the pressures 
and temperatures that the HAP are exposed to in the dyeing process 
operations. Most HAP constituents are believed to be rinsed from the 
substrate before the substrate is dried, because drying a substrate 
with unattached dye would adversely affect the quality of the dyed 
product.
    The sources of HAP emissions from finishing are the HAP 
constituents that are contained in finishing materials as purchased, 
i.e., as delivered to the affected source, before alteration. As is the 
case with dyeing, the HAP constituents are needed to impart certain 
desirable characteristics to the finished substrate (e.g., a resin 
finish containing HAP might be applied to a cotton/polyester blend for 
durable press and dimensional stability). No HAP are known to be added 
by the users. In finishing, unlike in dyeing, the fraction of HAP 
contained in finishes that is emitted to the atmosphere is generally 
assumed to be 100 percent with the exception of HAP that cross-link to 
the fiber, such as formaldehyde. This is because finished textiles are 
generally dried and cured at relatively high temperatures over 300 
degrees Fahrenheit.

[[Page 46032]]

    Organic HAP. Available emission data collected during the 
development of the proposed NESHAP show that the primary organic HAP 
emitted from coating and printing include toluene, MEK, hexane, and 
n,n-dimethylformamide. These compounds account for approximately 92 
percent of this subcategory's nationwide organic HAP emissions. Other 
significant organic HAP identified include MIBK, hexane, and methylene 
chloride.
    Available emission data collected during the development of the 
proposed NESHAP show that the organic HAP emitted from slashing is 
methanol. Methanol accounts for almost 100 percent of this 
subcategory's nationwide organic HAP emissions.
    Based on emission data reported in survey responses collected 
during the development of the proposed NESHAP, methanol, glycol ether, 
and ethylene glycol are the primary HAP emitted from textile dyeing and 
finishing operations. These HAP account for approximately 82 percent of 
this subcategory's nationwide HAP emissions. Other significant organic 
HAP identified include formaldehyde, toluene and styrene.
    Inorganic HAP. Based on information reported in survey responses 
during the development of the proposed NESHAP, inorganic HAP, including 
chromium, cobalt, hydrogen chloride, lead, manganese compounds and 
nickel, are components of some coatings, dyes, and finishes used by 
this source category. Inorganic HAP are not likely to be emitted 
because of the application techniques used.

D. What Is the Affected Source?

    We define an affected source as a stationary source, a group of 
stationary sources, or part of a stationary source to which a specific 
emission standard applies. The proposed standards define the affected 
source for each subcategory as the collection of all equipment 
associated with the coating and printing, the slashing, or the dyeing 
and finishing performed on a textile substrate. For the purpose of 
defining the affected source, the textile substrate includes staple 
fibers and filaments suitable for conversion to or use as yarns, or for 
the preparation of woven, knit, or nonwoven fabrics; yarns made from 
natural or manufactured fibers; fabrics and other manufactured products 
made from staple fibers and filaments and from yarn; and garments and 
other articles fabricated from fibers, yarns, or fabrics. Also for each 
subcategory, the specific regulated materials are defined. Regulated 
materials are the HAP-containing materials that are the source of HAP 
emissions limited by the requirements of the proposed NESHAP.
    The affected source for the coating and printing subcategory 
includes: all web coating and printing equipment used to apply cleaning 
materials to a substrate to prepare it for coating or printing material 
application, to apply coating or printing materials to a substrate and 
to dry or cure the coating or printing materials after application by 
exposure to heat or radiation (coating or printing material drying or 
curing), or to clean coating/printing operation equipment; all storage 
containers and mixing vessels in which regulated materials are stored 
or mixed; all manual and automated equipment and containers used for 
conveying regulated materials; all storage containers and all manual 
and automated equipment and containers used for conveying waste 
materials generated by a coating or printing operation; and all manual 
and automated equipment, structures, and devices used to convey, treat, 
or dispose of wastewater streams or residuals. Coating or printing 
material drying or curing at ambient conditions is not drying or curing 
for the purpose of the proposed standards. The regulated materials for 
the coating and printing subcategory are the coating, printing, 
thinning and cleaning materials used in the affected source.
    The affected source for the slashing subcategory includes: all 
slashing equipment used to apply and dry size on warp yarn; all storage 
containers and mixing vessels in which regulated materials are stored 
or mixed; all manual and automated equipment and containers used for 
conveying regulated materials; all storage containers and all manual 
and automated equipment and containers used for conveying waste 
materials generated by a slashing operation; and all manual and 
automated equipment, structures, and devices used to convey, treat, or 
dispose of wastewater streams or residuals. The regulated materials for 
the slashing subcategory are the slashing materials used in the 
affected source.
    The affected source for the dyeing and finishing subcategory 
includes: all dyeing and finishing equipment used to apply dyeing or 
finishing materials, to fix dyeing materials to the substrate, to rinse 
the textile substrate, to dry or cure the dyeing or finishing 
materials, or to clean dyeing/finishing operation equipment; all 
storage containers and mixing vessels in which regulated materials are 
stored or mixed; all manual and automated equipment and containers used 
for conveying regulated materials; all storage containers and all 
manual and automated equipment and containers used for conveying waste 
materials generated by a dyeing or finishing operation; and all manual 
and automated equipment, structures, and devices used to convey, treat, 
or dispose of wastewater streams or residuals. The regulated materials 
for the dyeing and finishing subcategory are the dyeing, finishing, and 
cleaning materials used in the affected source.

E. What Are the Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and Other Standards?

    We are proposing standards that would limit organic HAP emissions 
from coating, printing, slashing, dyeing, and finishing operations. The 
proposed standards include emission limits, operating limits, and work 
practice standards. Emission limits are being proposed for the coating 
and printing, slashing, and dyeing and finishing subcategories. 
Operating limits and work practice standards are being proposed for the 
coating and printing subcategory.
    Emission limits. In the coating and printing subcategory, we are 
proposing to limit organic HAP emissions to the atmosphere from each 
new and reconstructed affected source to one of the following three 
specified levels: (1) At least a 98 percent organic HAP OCE (OCE 
limit); (2) no more than 0.08 kilograms (kg) organic HAP/kg of coating 
solids used (0.08 pound (lb) organic HAP/lb of coating solids used) 
during each monthly compliance period (emission rate limit); or (3) if 
you are using an oxidizer to control organic HAP emissions, operate the 
oxidizer such that an outlet organic HAP concentration of no greater 
than 20 parts per million by volume (ppmv) on a dry basis is achieved 
and the efficiency of the capture system is 100 percent (outlet 
concentration limit). The proposed HAP emission limits for each 
existing affected source are: (1) To achieve at least a 97 percent OCE 
limit; (2) an emission rate limit of no more than 0.12 kg organic HAP/
kg of coating solids used (0.12 lb organic HAP/lb of coating solids 
used) in each monthly compliance period; or (3) if you are using an 
oxidizer to control organic HAP emissions, operate the oxidizer to 
achieve the outlet concentration limit of no greater than 20 ppmv on a 
dry basis and the efficiency of the capture system is 100 percent.
    You may choose from several compliance options in the proposed rule 
to achieve the coating and printing emission limits. You could comply 
through a pollution prevention approach by applying regulated materials 
that meet the emission rate

[[Page 46033]]

limits, either individually (compliant material option) or collectively 
(emission rate without add-on controls option), during each monthly 
compliance period. Second, you could use a capture system and add-on 
control device to meet either the applicable organic HAP OCE limit or 
emission rate limit. Third, you could use a 100 percent efficient 
capture system and an oxidizer that reduces organic HAP emissions to no 
more than 20 ppmv.
    In the slashing subcategory, we are proposing to require each new, 
reconstructed and existing affected source to emit no organic HAP. This 
is not an absolute zero HAP limit since the compliance procedures 
specify that to determine organic HAP emissions, you would count only 
organic HAP present in the materials you use at 0.1 percent by mass or 
more for OSHA-defined carcinogens as specified in 29 CFR 
1910.1200(d)(4) and at 1 percent or more for other organic HAP 
compounds. To comply with the slashing organic HAP emission limits, you 
must apply only materials that individually meet the standard during 
each monthly compliance period.
    In the dyeing and finishing subcategory, we are proposing to limit 
organic HAP emissions from each new, reconstructed and existing 
affected source that conducts dyeing operations only or both dyeing and 
finishing operations to no more than 0.016 kg organic HAP per kg of 
dyeing material used (0.016 lb organic HAP per lb of dyeing material 
used) for each monthly compliance period. You could comply with the 
dyeing and finishing organic HAP emission rate by applying materials 
that meet the emission rate, either individually or collectively, 
during each monthly compliance period. Each new, reconstructed and 
existing affected source that conducts only finishing operations is 
required to emit no organic HAP. This is not an absolute zero HAP limit 
since the compliance procedures specify that to determine organic HAP 
emissions, you would count only organic HAP that are present in the 
materials you use at 0.1 percent by mass or more for Occupational 
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)-defined carcinogens as 
specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(d)(4) and at 1 percent or more for other 
organic HAP compounds.
    Operating limits. If you reduce emissions from coating or printing 
operations by using a capture system and add-on control device (other 
than a solvent recovery system for which you conduct a liquid-liquid 
material balance), the proposed operating limits would apply to you. 
These limits are site-specific parameter limits that you determine 
during the initial performance test of the system. For capture systems 
that are not permanent total enclosures (PTE), you would establish 
average volumetric flow rates or duct static pressure limits for each 
capture device (or enclosure) in each capture system. For capture 
systems that are PTE, you would establish limits on average facial 
velocity or pressure drop across openings in the enclosure.
    For thermal oxidizers, you would monitor the combustion 
temperature. For catalytic oxidizers, you would either monitor the 
temperature immediately before and after the catalyst bed, or you would 
monitor the temperature before the catalyst bed and prepare and 
implement an inspection and maintenance plan that includes periodic 
catalyst activity checks. For carbon adsorbers for which you do not 
conduct a liquid-liquid material balance, you would monitor the carbon 
bed temperature and the amount of steam or nitrogen used to desorb the 
bed. For condensers, you would monitor the outlet gas temperature from 
the condenser. For concentrators, you would monitor the temperature in 
the desorption gas stream and the pressure drop across the zeolite 
wheel or rotary carbon bed.
    The site-specific parameter limits that you establish must reflect 
operation of the capture system and add-on control devices during a 
performance test that demonstrates achievement of the emission limits 
during representative operating conditions.
    Work practice standards. If you use an emission capture system and 
add-on control device for compliance, you would be required to develop 
and implement a work practice plan to minimize organic HAP emissions 
from mixing operations, storage tanks and other containers, and 
handling operations for coating, printing, thinning, cleaning, and 
waste materials.
    Operations during startup, shutdown, or malfunction. If you use a 
capture system and add-on control device for compliance, you would be 
required to develop and operate according to a startup, shutdown, and 
malfunction plan (SSMP) during periods of startup, shutdown, or 
malfunction of the capture system and add-on control device.
    General Provisions. The General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart 
A) would also apply to you as indicated in the proposed rule. The 
General Provisions codify certain procedures and criteria for all 40 
CFR part 63 NESHAP. The General Provisions contain administrative 
procedures, preconstruction review procedures for new sources, and 
procedures for conducting compliance-related activities such as 
notifications, reporting and recordkeeping, performance testing, and 
monitoring. The proposed rule refers to individual sections of the 
General Provisions to emphasize key sections that are relevant. 
However, unless specifically overridden in the proposed rule, all of 
the applicable General Provisions requirements would apply to you.

F. What Are the Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements?

    Compliance dates. Existing affected sources would have to be in 
compliance with the final standards no later than [DATE 3 YEARS AFTER 
PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. New and 
reconstructed affected sources would have to be in compliance upon 
startup of the affected source or by the [DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE 
FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], whichever is later. The effective 
date is the date on which the final rule is published in the Federal 
Register.
    The proposed initial compliance period begins on the compliance 
date and ends on the last day of the first full month following the 
compliance date; except for new and reconstructed sources required to 
conduct performance tests, the initial compliance period ends on the 
last day of the first full month following the performance test if the 
performance test is conducted later than the compliance date (the 
proposed rule allows the test to be conducted up to 180 days later).
    Being ``in compliance'' means that the owner or operator of the 
affected source meets the requirements to achieve the emission 
limitations during the initial compliance period. At the end of the 
initial compliance period, the owner or operator would use the data and 
records generated to determine whether or not the affected source is in 
compliance with the organic HAP emission limit and other applicable 
requirements for that period. If the affected source does not meet the 
emission limit and other applicable requirements, it is out of 
compliance for the entire initial compliance period.
    Emission limits. With the exception of the slashing emission limit, 
there are several proposed options for complying with the proposed 
emission limits, and the testing and initial compliance requirements 
vary accordingly. You would be able to use different compliance options 
for different coating, printing, dyeing, and finishing operations in 
the affected source for

[[Page 46034]]

each subcategory and also for the same operation at different times.
    Compliance based on materials used in the affected source. If you 
demonstrate compliance with the proposed coating and printing emission 
limits based on the materials used, you would determine the mass of 
organic HAP and the mass fraction of solids in all materials used 
during the month of the initial compliance period. You would be 
required to demonstrate either that the organic HAP content of each 
coating and printing material meets the applicable emission limit and 
that you use no organic HAP-containing thinning or cleaning materials 
(compliant material option); or that the total mass of organic HAP in 
all coating, printing, thinning, and cleaning materials used divided by 
the total mass of solids in coating and printing materials used meets 
the applicable emission limit (emission rate without add-on controls 
option).
    The compliant material option is a pollution prevention option that 
allows you to easily demonstrate compliance by using low-HAP or non-HAP 
coating and printing materials. If you use coating and printing 
materials that, based on their organic HAP content, individually meet 
the kg (lb) organic HAP emitted per kg (lb) solids used levels in the 
applicable emission limits and you use non-HAP thinners and other 
additives and cleaning materials, this compliance option is available 
to you. For this option, we have minimized recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements. You can demonstrate compliance by using readily available 
purchase records containing manufacturer's formulation data to 
determine the organic HAP content of each coating, printing, or other 
material and the amount of each material used. You would not need to 
perform any detailed emission rate calculations.
    To demonstrate compliance with the compliant material option, you 
would demonstrate that the organic HAP content of each coating and 
printing material meets the applicable emission limit in Table 1 to the 
proposed subpart, and that you used no organic HAP-containing thinning 
or cleaning materials. For example, if you are using the compliant 
materials option for your existing source, you would demonstrate that: 
(1) Each coating and printing material used has an organic HAP content 
no greater than 0.12 kg (0.12 lb) organic HAP per kg (lb) solids used, 
(2) and that you used no organic HAP-containing thinning or cleaning 
materials. Note that ``no organic HAP'' is not intended to mean 
absolute zero. Materials that contain ``no organic HAP'' should be 
interpreted to mean materials that contain organic HAP levels below the 
levels specified in Sec. 63.4341(e) of the proposed rule, which are 
typical reporting levels. These typical reporting levels only count 
organic HAP that are present at 0.1 percent or more by mass for OSHA-
defined carcinogens and at 1.0 percent or more by mass for other 
compounds.
    To determine the mass fraction of organic HAP in coating, printing, 
thinning, and cleaning materials and the mass fraction of solids in 
coating and printing materials, you could rely on manufacturer's 
formulation data. You would not be required to perform tests or 
analysis of the material if formulation data are available. 
Alternatively, you could use results from the test methods listed 
below. You may also use alternative test methods provided you get EPA 
approval in accordance with the NESHAP General Provisions, 40 CFR 
63.7(f). However, if there is any inconsistency between the test method 
results (either EPA's or an approved alternative) and manufacturer's 
data, the test method results would prevail for compliance and 
enforcement purposes.
     For mass fraction of organic HAP, you would use Method 311 
of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A;
     The proposed rule would allow you to use nonaqueous 
volatile matter as a surrogate for organic HAP, which would include all 
organic HAP plus all other organic compounds, and excluding water. If 
you choose this option, you would use Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A; and
     For mass fraction of solids, you would use Method 24 of 40 
CFR part 60, appendix A.
    The emission rate without add-on controls option is a pollution 
prevention option where you can demonstrate compliance based on the 
organic HAP contained in the mix of coating, printing, thinning, and 
cleaning materials you use. This option allows you the flexibility to 
use some individual coating or printing materials that do not 
individually meet the emission limit if you use other low-HAP or non-
HAP coating or printing materials such that overall emissions from the 
affected source during the compliance period meet the emission limit.
    To demonstrate initial compliance with the emission rate limit 
without add-on controls option, you would be required to:
     Determine the quantity of each coating, printing, 
thinning, and cleaning material you used.
     Calculate the mass of organic HAP in each coating, 
printing, thinning, and cleaning material using the same types of data 
and methods previously described for the compliant material option.
     Determine the mass fraction of solids for each coating and 
printing material you used using the same types of data or methods 
described for the compliant material option.
     Calculate the total mass of organic HAP in all materials 
used and total mass of solids for all coating and printing materials 
used. You may subtract from the total mass of organic HAP the amount 
contained in waste materials you send to a hazardous waste treatment, 
storage, and disposal facility regulated under 40 CFR part 262, 264, 
265, or 266.
     Calculate the ratio of the total mass of organic HAP to 
the total mass of solids for the materials used.
     Record the calculations and results and include them in 
your Notification of Compliance Status.
    Note that if you choose to use this option for a particular 
coating/printing operation or group of operations rather than for an 
entire affected source, you would calculate the organic HAP emission 
rate using just the materials used in that operation or group. You 
would need to separately demonstrate compliance for all other 
operations in the affected source.
    To demonstrate compliance with the proposed slashing emission 
limits, you must use the compliant material option and demonstrate that 
each slashing material used during the initial compliance period 
contains no organic HAP. As was noted regarding thinning or cleaning 
materials used in coating/printing operations, ``no organic HAP'' is 
not intended to mean absolute zero. Materials that contain ``no organic 
HAP'' should be interpreted to mean materials that contain organic HAP 
levels below the levels specified in Sec. 63.4341(e) of the proposed 
rule, which are typical reporting levels.
    To demonstrate compliance with the proposed dyeing and finishing 
emission limits, you would be required to demonstrate either that the 
organic HAP content of each dyeing, finishing and cleaning material 
meets the applicable emission limit (compliant material option) or that 
the total mass of organic HAP in all dyeing, finishing and cleaning 
materials used divided by the total mass of dyeing, finishing and 
cleaning materials used meets the applicable emission limit (emission 
rate without add-on controls option).
    As previously described for coating/printing operations, the 
compliant material option is a pollution prevention option that allows 
you to

[[Page 46035]]

easily demonstrate compliance by using low-HAP or non-HAP dyeing, 
finishing and cleaning materials. To demonstrate compliance with the 
compliant material option, you would demonstrate that the organic HAP 
content of each dyeing, finishing, and cleaning material meets the 
applicable emission limit in Table 1 to the proposed subpart. To 
determine the mass of organic HAP in dyeing, finishing and cleaning 
materials, you may rely on manufacturer's formulation data. You would 
not be required to perform tests or analysis of the material if 
formulation data are available. Alternatively, you could use results 
from the test methods listed below. You may also use alternative test 
methods provided you get EPA approval in accordance with the NESHAP 
General Provisions, 40 CFR 63.7(f). However, if there is any 
inconsistency between the test method results (either EPA's or an 
approved alternative) and manufacturer's data, the test method results 
would prevail for compliance and enforcement purposes.
     For mass fraction of organic HAP, you would use Method 311 
of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A;
     The proposed rule would allow you to use nonaqueous 
volatile matter as a surrogate for organic HAP, which would include all 
organic HAP plus all other organic compounds, and excluding water. If 
you choose this option, you would use Method 24 of 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A.
    Again as previously described for coating/printing operations, the 
emission rate without add-on controls option is a pollution prevention 
option where you can demonstrate compliance based on the organic HAP 
contained in the mix of dyeing, finishing, and cleaning materials you 
use. This option allows you more flexibility that the compliant 
material option, but requires the calculation of the emission rate each 
month. To demonstrate initial compliance with the emission rate without 
add-on controls option, you would be required to:
     Determine the mass of each dyeing, finishing and cleaning 
material you used.
     Calculate the mass of organic HAP in each dyeing, 
finishing and cleaning material.
     Calculate the total mass of organic HAP in all materials 
and the total mass of all materials used for the compliance period. You 
may subtract from the total mass of organic HAP the amount contained in 
waste materials you send to a hazardous waste treatment, storage, and 
disposal facility regulated under 40 CFR part 262, 264, 265, or 266.
     Calculate the ratio of the total mass of organic HAP in 
the materials used to the total mass of materials used.
     Record the calculations and results and include them in 
your Notification of Compliance Status.
    Note that if you choose to use this option for a particular dyeing/
finishing operation or group of operations rather than for an entire 
affected source, you would calculate the organic HAP emission rate 
using just the materials used in that operation or group. You would 
need to separately demonstrate compliance for all other operations in 
the affected source.
    Compliance based on using a capture system and add-on control 
device for coating and printing operations. If you use a capture system 
and add-on control device on a coating/printing operation, other than a 
solvent recovery system for which you conduct a liquid-liquid material 
balance, you would determine the capture and control efficiencies of 
the equipment or the oxidizer outlet organic HAP concentration. For the 
organic HAP emission rate limit, you also would determine the mass 
fraction of organic HAP and the mass fraction of solids in all 
materials used during the month of the initial compliance period. You 
would be required to demonstrate either that the organic HAP OCE is 
greater than or equal to the applicable organic HAP OCE limit, that the 
oxidizer outlet organic HAP concentration is no greater than 20 ppmv on 
a dry basis and the efficiency of the capture system is 100 percent, or 
that the capture and control system reduces organic HAP emissions to a 
level no greater than the applicable emission rate limit.
    If you use a solvent recovery system for which you conduct a 
liquid-liquid material balance, you would be required to demonstrate 
either that the organic HAP OCE determined by material balance during 
the month of the initial compliance period is greater than or equal to 
the applicable organic HAP OCE limit or that the solvent recovery 
system reduces organic HAP emissions to a level no greater than the 
applicable emission rate limit.
    The proposed testing and initial compliance requirements associated 
with determining the OCE of the capture system and add-on control 
device are summarized in the following paragraphs.
    If you use a capture system and add-on control device, other than a 
solvent recovery system for which you conduct material balances, you 
would be required to conduct an initial performance test to determine 
the capture and control efficiencies of the equipment (or the capture 
efficiency of the capture system and the oxidizer outlet organic HAP 
concentration) and to establish operating limits to be achieved on a 
continuous basis. The performance test would have to be completed no 
later than the compliance date for existing sources and 180 days after 
the compliance date for new and reconstructed sources. If you are 
demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission rate limit with 
add-on controls, you would need to schedule the performance test in 
time to obtain the results for use in calculating your emission rate 
for the month of the initial compliance period.
    You would determine both the efficiency of the capture system and 
either the organic HAP emission reduction efficiency of the add-on 
control device or the outlet organic HAP concentration of the oxidizer. 
To determine the capture efficiency, you would either verify the 
presence of a PTE using EPA Method 204 of 40 CFR part 51, appendix M 
(and all materials must be applied and dried or cured within the 
enclosure); or use one of three protocols in proposed Sec. 63.4365 to 
measure capture efficiency. If you have a PTE and all regulated 
materials are applied and dried or cured within the enclosure and you 
route all exhaust gases from the enclosure to an add-on control device, 
then you would assume 100 percent capture. To demonstrate compliance 
with the oxidizer outlet organic HAP concentration limit, 100 percent 
capture is required.
    To determine the organic HAP emission reduction efficiency of the 
add-on control device, you would conduct measurements of the inlet and 
outlet gas streams. Only the outlet gas stream would be measured to 
determine outlet concentration. The performance test would consist of 
three runs, each run lasting 1 hour, using the following EPA Methods in 
40 CFR part 60, appendix A:
     Method 1 or 1A for selection of the sampling sites.
     Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G to determine the gas 
volumetric flow rate.
     Method 3, 3A, or 3B for gas analysis to determine dry 
molecular weight. You may also use as an alternative to Method 3B, the 
manual method for measuring the oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon 
monoxide content of exhaust gas in ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981.
     Method 4 to determine stack moisture.
     Method 25 or 25A to determine organic volatile matter 
concentration. You would use Method 25A to demonstrate compliance with 
the oxidizer outlet organic HAP

[[Page 46036]]

concentration limit because the limit is less than 50 ppmw. 
Alternatively, any other test method or data that have been validated 
according to the applicable procedures in Method 301 of 40 CFR part 63, 
appendix A, and approved by the Administrator, could be used.
    If you use a solvent recovery system, you could determine the OCE 
using a liquid-liquid material balance instead of conducting an initial 
performance test. If you use the material balance alternative, you 
would be required to measure the amount of all materials used during 
the month of the initial compliance period and determine the total 
volatile matter contained in these materials. You would also measure 
the amount of volatile matter recovered by the solvent recovery system 
during the compliance period. Then you would compare the amount 
recovered to the amount used to determine the OCE. You would record the 
calculations and results and include them in your Notification of 
Compliance Status.
    Additional proposed testing and initial compliance requirements 
associated with demonstrating compliance using the emission rate with 
add-on controls option are as follows:
     Determine the mass fraction of organic HAP in each 
coating, printing, thinning, and cleaning material used and the mass 
fraction of solids in coating and printing materials used during the 
month of the initial compliance period, as described previously in 
``Compliance based on materials used in the affected source.''
     Calculate the total mass of organic HAP in all materials 
and total mass of solids for all coating and printing materials. You 
may subtract from the total mass of organic HAP the amount contained in 
waste materials you send to a hazardous waste treatment, storage, and 
disposal facility regulated under 40 CFR part 262, 264, 265, or 266.
     Calculate the organic HAP emission reductions from the 
controlled coating or printing operations using the capture and control 
efficiencies determined during the performance test or the materials 
balance for the month and the total mass of organic HAP in materials 
used in controlled coating and printing operations.
     Calculate the ratio of the total mass of HAP emissions to 
the total mass of solids for the materials used during the month of the 
initial compliance period.
     Record the calculations and results and include them in 
your Notification of Compliance Status.
     Develop and implement a work practice plan to minimize 
emissions from storage, mixing, and handling of organic HAP-containing 
materials.
    Operating limits. As mentioned above, you would establish operating 
limits as part of the initial performance test of a capture system and 
add-on control device, other than a solvent recovery system for which 
you conduct liquid-liquid material balances. The operating limits are 
the minimum or maximum (as applicable) values achieved for capture 
systems and add-on control devices during the performance test, 
conducted under representative conditions, that demonstrated compliance 
with the emission limits.
    The proposed rule specifies the parameters to monitor for the types 
of emission control systems commonly used in the industry. You would be 
required to install, calibrate, maintain, and continuously operate all 
monitoring equipment according to the manufacturer's specifications and 
ensure that the continuous parameter monitoring systems (CPMS) meet the 
requirements in Sec. 63.4374 of the proposed rule. If you use add-on 
control devices other than those identified in the proposed rule, you 
would submit the operating parameters to be monitored to the 
Administrator for approval. The authority to approve the parameters to 
be monitored is retained by EPA and is not delegated to States.
    If you use a thermal or catalytic oxidizer, you would continuously 
monitor the appropriate temperature and record it at least every 15 
minutes. For thermal oxidizers, the temperature monitor is placed in 
the firebox or in the duct immediately downstream of the firebox before 
any substantial heat exchange occurs. The operating limit would be the 
average temperature measured during the performance test, and for each 
consecutive 3-hour period the average temperature would have to be at 
or above this limit. For catalytic oxidizers, temperature monitors are 
placed immediately before and after the catalyst bed. The operating 
limits would be the average temperature just before the catalyst bed 
and the average temperature difference across the catalyst bed during 
the performance test. For each 3-hour period, the average temperature 
and the average temperature difference would have to be at or above 
these limits. Alternatively, you would be allowed to meet only the 
temperature limit before the catalyst bed if you develop and implement 
an inspection and maintenance plan that includes periodic catalyst 
activity checks.
    If you use a carbon adsorber and do not conduct liquid-liquid 
material balances to demonstrate compliance, you would monitor the 
carbon bed temperature after each regeneration and the total amount of 
steam or nitrogen used to desorb the bed for each regeneration. The 
operating limits would be the carbon bed temperature (not to be 
exceeded) and the amount of steam or nitrogen used for desorption (to 
be met as a minimum).
    If you use a condenser and do not conduct liquid-liquid material 
balances to demonstrate compliance, you would monitor the outlet gas 
temperature to ensure that the air stream is being cooled to a low 
enough temperature. The operating limit would be the average condenser 
outlet gas temperature measured during the performance test, and for 
each consecutive 3-hour period the average temperature would have to be 
at or below this limit.
    If you use a concentrator, you would monitor the desorption 
concentrate stream gas temperature and the pressure drop of the dilute 
stream across the concentrator. These values would be recorded at least 
once every 15 minutes. The operating limits would be the average 
temperature (to be met as a minimum) and the average pressure drop (not 
to be exceeded) measured during the performance test.
    For each capture system that is not a PTE, you would establish 
operating limits for gas volumetric flow rate or duct static pressure 
for each enclosure or capture device. The operating limit would be the 
average volumetric flow rate or duct static pressure during the 
performance test to be met as a minimum. For each capture system that 
is a PTE, the operating limit would require the average facial velocity 
of air through all natural draft openings to be at least 200 feet per 
minute or the pressure drop across the enclosure to be at least 0.007 
inch water.
    Work practices. If you use a capture system and add-on control 
device for compliance, you would be required to develop and implement 
on an ongoing basis a work practice plan for minimizing organic HAP 
emissions to the atmosphere from storage, mixing, material handling, 
and waste handling operations. This plan would include a description of 
all steps taken to minimize emissions from these sources (e.g., using 
closed storage containers, practices to minimize emissions during 
filling and transfer of contents from containers, using spill 
minimization techniques, placing solvent-laden cloths in closed 
containers immediately after use, etc.). You would have to make the 
plan available for inspection if the Administrator requests to see it.
    Operations during startup, shutdown, or malfunction. If you use a 
capture

[[Page 46037]]

system and add-on control device for compliance, you would be required 
to develop and operate according to a SSMP during periods of startup, 
shutdown, or malfunction of the capture system and add-on control 
device.

G. What Are the Continuous Compliance Provisions?

    Emission limits. If you demonstrate compliance with the proposed 
emission limits for slashing based on the materials used (compliant 
material option), you would demonstrate continuous compliance if, for 
each monthly compliance period, the organic HAP content of each 
slashing material used meets the emission limits. You would use 
manufacturer's data to demonstrate compliance each month as you did for 
the initial compliance period.
    If you demonstrate compliance with the proposed emission limits for 
coating and printing based on the materials used, you would demonstrate 
continuous compliance if, for each monthly compliance period, either 
you use only coating and printing materials that meet the applicable 
emission limit and only non-HAP thinning and cleaning materials 
(compliant material option); or that the ratio of total mass of organic 
HAP to total mass of solids in coating and printing materials used is 
less than or equal to the emission limits (emission rate without add-on 
controls option). You would follow the same procedures for calculating 
the organic HAP to coating and printing solids ratio that you used for 
the initial compliance period.
    If you demonstrate compliance with the proposed emission limits for 
dyeing and finishing based on the materials used, you would demonstrate 
continuous compliance if, for each monthly compliance period, either 
the organic HAP content of each dyeing, finishing and cleaning material 
meets the applicable emission limit (compliant material option) or the 
total mass of organic HAP in all dyeing, finishing and cleaning 
materials used divided by the total mass of dyeing, finishing and 
cleaning materials used meets the applicable emission limit (emission 
rate without add-on controls option). You would follow the same 
procedures for determining the mass of organic HAP in all materials 
used during the month that you used for the initial compliance period.
    For each coating or printing operation on which you use a capture 
system and add-on control device, other than solvent recovery for which 
you conduct a liquid-liquid material balance, the continuous parameter 
monitoring results for each month would affect your compliance 
determination. If the monitoring results indicate no deviations from 
the operating limits and there were no bypasses of the add-on control 
device, you would assume the capture system and add-on control device 
are achieving the same emission reduction as they did during the 
performance test in which the operating limits were established. If you 
are demonstrating compliance with either the organic HAP OCE option or 
the emission rate with add-on controls option, you would then apply the 
OCE to the total mass of organic HAP in materials used in controlled 
coating or printing operations to determine the monthly mass of organic 
HAP emissions from those operations. If there were any deviations from 
the operating limits during the month or any bypasses of the add-on 
control device, you would account for them in the calculation of the 
applicable emission rate by assuming the capture system and add-on 
control device were achieving zero emission reduction during the 
periods of deviation.
    For each coating and printing operation on which you use a solvent 
recovery system and conduct a liquid-liquid material balance each 
month, you would use the liquid-liquid material balance to determine 
the emission rate. You would be required to measure the amount of all 
materials used during each month and determine the volatile matter 
content of these materials. You would also measure the amount of 
volatile matter recovered by the solvent recovery system during the 
month and calculate the weight percent of organic HAP used that was 
emitted to determine compliance with the organic HAP OCE option. If you 
are complying with the emission rate with add-on controls option, you 
would apply the OCE to the total mass of organic HAP in the materials 
used to determine total organic HAP emissions as input to the 
compliance demonstration.
    Operating limits. If you use an emission capture system and add-on 
control device, the proposed rule would require you to achieve on a 
continuous basis the operating limits you establish during the 
performance test. If the continuous monitoring shows that the capture 
system and add-on control device are operating outside the range of 
values established during the performance test, you have deviated from 
the established operating limits.
    If you operate a capture system and add-on control device with 
bypass lines that could allow emissions to bypass the add-on control 
device, you would have to demonstrate that organic HAP emissions 
collected by the capture system are routed to the add-on control device 
by monitoring for potential bypass of the add-on control device. You 
may choose from the following four monitoring procedures:
     Flow control position indicator to provide a record of 
whether the exhaust stream is directed to the add-on control device;
     Car-seal or lock-and-key valve closures to secure the 
bypass line valve in the closed position when the add-on control device 
is operating;
     Valve closure continuous monitoring to ensure any bypass 
line valve or damper is closed when the add-on control device is 
operating; or
     Automatic shutdown system to stop the coating or printing 
operation when flow is diverted from the add-on control device.
    A deviation would occur for any period of time the bypass 
monitoring procedures indicate that emissions are not routed to the 
add-on control device.
    Work practices. If you use an emission capture system and add-on 
control device for compliance, you would be required to implement on an 
ongoing basis the work practice plan you developed during the initial 
compliance period. If you did not develop a plan for reducing organic 
HAP emissions or you do not implement the plan, this would be a 
deviation from the work practice standard.
    Operations during startup, shutdown, and malfunction. If you use a 
capture system and add-on control device for compliance, you would be 
required to develop and operate according to a SSMP during periods of 
startup, shutdown, and malfunction of the capture system and add-on 
control device.

H. What Are the Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting 
Requirements?

    You would be required to comply with the applicable requirements in 
the NESHAP General Provisions, subpart A of 40 CFR part 63, as 
described in the proposed rule. The General Provisions notification 
requirements include: initial notifications, notification of 
performance test if you are complying using a capture system and add-on 
control device, notification of compliance status, and additional 
notifications required for affected sources with continuous monitoring 
systems. The General Provisions also require certain records and 
periodic reports.
    Initial notifications. If you own or operate an existing affected 
source, you would be required to send a notification

[[Page 46038]]

to the EPA Regional Office in the region where your affected source is 
located and to your State agency no later than [DATE 1 YEAR FROM DATE 
OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. For new and 
reconstructed sources, you would send the notification within 120 days 
after the date of initial startup or [DATE 120 DAYS FROM DATE OF 
PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], whichever is 
later. The report notifies us and your State agency that you have an 
existing affected source that is subject to the proposed standards, or 
that you have constructed a new affected source. Thus, it allows you 
and the permitting authority to plan for compliance activities. You 
would also need to send a notification of planned construction or 
reconstruction of a source that would be subject to the proposed rule 
and apply for approval to construct or reconstruct.
    Notification of performance test. If you demonstrate compliance by 
using a capture system and add-on control device for which you do not 
conduct a liquid-liquid material balance, you would conduct a 
performance test. The performance test would be required no later than 
the compliance date for an existing affected source. For a new or 
reconstructed affected source, the performance test would be required 
no later than 180 days after initial startup or [180 DAYS FROM DATE OF 
PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], whichever is 
later. You must notify us (or the delegated State or local agency) at 
least 60 calendar days before the performance test is scheduled to 
begin and submit a report of the performance test results no later than 
60 days after the test.
    Notification of compliance status. You would send us a Notification 
of Compliance Status within 30 days after the end of the initial 
compliance period. In the notification, you would certify whether each 
affected source has complied with the proposed standards, identify the 
option(s) you used to demonstrate initial compliance, summarize the 
data and calculations supporting the compliance demonstration, and 
provide information on any deviations from the emission limits, 
operating limits, or other requirements.
    If you elect to comply by using a capture system and add-on control 
device for which you conduct performance tests, you must provide the 
results of the tests. Your notification would also include the measured 
range of each monitored parameter, the operating limits established 
during the performance test, and information showing whether the source 
has complied with its operating limits during the initial compliance 
period.
    Recordkeeping requirements. You would be required to keep records 
of reported information and all other information necessary to document 
compliance with the proposed rule for 5 years. As required under the 
General Provisions, records for the 2 most recent years must be kept 
on-site; the other 3 years' records may be kept off-site. Records 
pertaining to the design and operation of the emission control and 
monitoring equipment must be kept for the life of the equipment.
    You would need to keep all documentation supporting initial 
notifications and notifications of compliance status.
    If your affected source is complying with the slashing emission 
limits, you would need to keep records of the organic HAP content of 
each slashing material as purchased.
    Depending on the compliance option that you choose for your 
affected source complying with the dyeing and finishing or coating and 
printing emission limits, you would need to keep records of the 
following:
     Organic HAP content, volatile matter content, coating and 
printing materials solids content, and quantity of the dyeing, 
finishing, coating, printing, thinning, and cleaning materials used 
during each compliance period.
     For the emission rate (with or without add-on controls) 
compliance options, calculations of your emission rate for each 
compliance period.
    If your affected source is in the coating and printing subcategory 
and you demonstrate compliance by using a capture system and add-on 
control device, you would also need to keep records of the following:
     All required measurements, calculations, and supporting 
documentation needed to demonstrate compliance with the standards.
     All results of performance tests and parameter monitoring.
     All information necessary to demonstrate conformance with 
your plan for minimizing emissions from mixing, storage, and waste 
handling operations.
     All information necessary to demonstrate conformance with 
the affected source's SSMP when the plan procedures are followed.
     The occurrence and duration of each startup, shutdown, or 
malfunction of the emission capture system and add-on control device.
     Actions taken during startup, shutdown, and malfunction 
that are different from the procedures specified in the affected 
source's SSMP.
     Each period during which a CPMS is malfunctioning or 
inoperative (including out-of-control periods).
    The proposed rule would require you to collect and keep records 
according to certain minimum data requirements for the CPMS. Failure to 
collect and keep the specified minimum data would be a deviation that 
is separate from any emission limits, operating limits, or work 
practice standards.
    Deviations, as determined from these records, would need to be 
recorded and also reported. A deviation is any instance when any 
requirement or obligation established by the proposed rule including, 
but not limited to, the emission limits, operating limits, and work 
practice standards, is not met.
    If you use a capture system and add-on control device to reduce 
organic HAP emissions, you would have to make your SSMP available for 
inspection if the Administrator requests to see it. The plan would stay 
in your records for the life of the affected source or until the source 
is no longer subject to the proposed standards. If you revise the plan, 
you would need to keep the previous superseded versions on record for 5 
years following the revision.
    Periodic reports. Each reporting year is divided into two 
semiannual reporting periods. If no deviations occur during a 
semiannual reporting period, you would submit a semiannual report 
stating that the affected source has been in continuous compliance. If 
deviations occur, you would include them in the report as follows:
     Report each deviation from the emission limit.
     Report each deviation from the work practice standards if 
you use an emission capture system and add-on control device.
     If you use an emission capture system and add-on control 
device other than a solvent recovery system for which you conduct 
liquid-liquid material balances, report each deviation from an 
operating limit and each time a bypass line diverts emissions from the 
add-on control device to the atmosphere.
     Report other specific information on the periods of time 
the deviations occurred.
    You would also have to include in each semiannual report an 
identification of the compliance option(s) you used for each affected 
source and any time periods when you changed to another compliance 
option.
    Other reports. You would be required to submit reports for periods 
of startup, shutdown, or malfunction of the capture

[[Page 46039]]

system and add-on control device. If the procedures you follow during 
any startup, shutdown, or malfunction are inconsistent with your SSMP, 
you would report those procedures with your semiannual reports in 
addition to immediate reports required by 40 CFR 63.10(d)(5)(ii).
    Electronic reporting option. Comments are invited on the option of 
voluntary electronic reporting for all reporting requirements in the 
proposed rule. The option would allow the use of the Internet to meet 
the reporting requirements of the proposed rule. You would be allowed 
to choose the option to submit all reports electronically in lieu of 
filing written reports. The electronic records submittals would need to 
include all the information that otherwise would be submitted in 
written reports. The electronic submittals would be via electronic data 
interchange and would use Data Exchange Templates (DET). The DET or 
electronic forms will be used to ``tag'' data elements, which will 
allow reporting of the information to EPA. You would submit the 
electronic forms through EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX). We would 
supply the required data elements, and you would be responsible for 
submitting the data appropriately ``tagged.'' If the rule were 
delegated to State, local or tribal agencies for implementation and 
enforcement, EPA would coordinate with the delegated agencies to 
provide them with either the electronic information or a hard copy of 
the required report.
    Under this proposed electronic reporting option, it would be 
necessary to establish: (1) That an electronic document was sent (or 
not sent); (2) when the document was sent; (3) by whom the document was 
sent, and including both the individual who sent it and the identity of 
the entity the individual is authorized to represent; (4) when the 
document was received; (5) that the document was not altered from the 
time it was sent to the time it was received; and (6) the contents of 
the document sent.
    Specifically, we request comment on the concept of electronic 
reporting, advantages to the regulated community by reducing reporting 
burdens; cost or cost savings; advantages or disadvantages to State/
local/tribal agencies; and difficulties to be overcome in the 
implementation of electronic reporting.

III. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Standards

A. How did We Select The Source Category and Subcategories?

    Printing, coating, and dyeing of fabrics (changed by today's action 
to printing, coating, and dyeing of fabrics and other textiles) is a 
source category that is on the list of source categories to be 
regulated because it contains major sources which emit or have the 
potential to emit at least 10 tons of any one HAP or at least 25 tons 
of any combination of HAP annually. The proposed rule would control HAP 
emissions from both new and existing major sources. Area sources are 
not being regulated under the proposed rule.
    Printing, coating, and dyeing of fabrics as described in the 
initial listing includes any affected source engaged in those 
activities. We also have found that slashing and finishing operations 
in printing, coating and dyeing sources have the potential to emit 
major source levels of organic HAP. We use the product lists contained 
in the NAICS code descriptions to describe the vast array of products 
composed of or containing fabric, textiles, yarn, fiber, cord, or 
thread that has been coated, printed, slashed, dyed or finished.
    We intend the source category to include sources for which fabric 
and other textiles coating, printing, slashing, dyeing and finishing is 
either their principal activity or an integral part of a production 
process that is the principal activity. Many coating, printing, 
slashing, dyeing and finishing operations are located at plant sites 
that are dedicated to these activities. However, some are located at 
sites for which some other activity is principal, such as production of 
sheets and towels or rubber belt manufacturing. Collocated coating, 
printing, slashing, dyeing and finishing operations comparable to the 
types and sizes of the dedicated affected sources, in terms of the 
affected operation and applicable emission control techniques, are 
included in the source category.
    The source category does not include research or laboratory 
facilities; janitorial, building, and facility maintenance operations; 
coating, printing, slashing, dyeing, or finishing operations in which 
no organic HAP-containing materials are used; or coating, printing, 
slashing, dyeing or finishing used by a facility and not for commerce, 
unless organic HAP emissions from the coating, printing, slashing, 
dyeing or finishing operations are at major source levels.
    Subcategory selection. The statute gives us discretion to determine 
if and how to subcategorize. Once the floor has been determined for new 
or reconstructed and existing affected sources for a source category or 
subcategory, we must set MACT standards that are no less stringent than 
the MACT floor. Such standards must then be met by all sources within 
the source category or subcategory. A subcategory is a group of similar 
sources within a given source category. As part of the regulatory 
development process, we evaluate the similarities and differences 
between industry segments or groups of affected sources comprising a 
source category. In establishing subcategories, we consider factors 
such as process operations (type of process, raw materials, chemistry/
formulation data, associated equipment, and final products); emission 
characteristics (amount and type of HAP); add-on control device 
applicability; and opportunities for pollution prevention. We may also 
consider existing rules or guidance from States and other regulatory 
agencies in determining subcategories.
    After reviewing survey responses from the industry, facility site 
visit reports, and information received from stakeholder meetings, we 
found that the printing, coating, and dyeing of fabrics and other 
textiles source category may be grouped into three subcategories with 
differing material application and performance requirements, emission 
characteristics, applicable add-on emission controls and pollution 
prevention opportunities. The three subcategories are: (1) Coating and 
printing, (2) slashing, and (3) dyeing and finishing. The following 
paragraphs include descriptions of each subcategory.
    Coating and printing subcategory. The coating and printing 
subcategory includes affected sources that apply coatings to or print 
textile substrates. The coating and printing manufacturing processes, 
HAP emissions, and types of controls in use sufficiently set them apart 
from the other processes that are used in the manufacture of textile 
products to warrant a subcategory. Coating is a web coating operation, 
and the physical operations and most sources performing coating are 
separate and distinct from the other textile operations. Many coating 
operations are subject to State reasonably available control technology 
requirements or to the polymeric coating of supporting substrates NSPS 
(40 CFR part 60, subpart VVV) and have installed emission control 
systems for VOC. Since a number of the VOC emitted from

[[Page 46040]]

coating operations are also organic HAP (e.g., toluene, MEK, xylene, 
and methanol), the VOC emission control systems in place are also 
effective for controlling organic HAP emissions. Printing is a web 
process very similar to coating and uses some of the same equipment. 
The application and drying of printing materials and the organic HAP 
emission sources are identical or nearly identical to coating, and, 
therefore, the control options and limits for coating would be 
applicable to printing as well.
    Coating is a specialized chemical finishing technique designed to 
produce textiles to meet high performance requirements, e.g., for end 
products such as tents, roofing, soft baggage, marine fabric, drapery 
linings, flexible hoses, hot-air balloons, and awnings. Coatings 
generally impart elasticity to substrates, as well as resistance to one 
or more elements such as abrasion, water, chemicals, heat, fire, and 
oil. The substrate itself provides strength (such as tear strength) and 
can include wovens, nonwovens, knits, yarn, cord, and thread, although 
woven fabrics are most commonly used.
    Printing is the application of color to a substrate in a design or 
pattern. In some cases, the printing material is chemically the same as 
coating material only thinned to a lower viscosity. There are typically 
four types of printing, including rotary screen, engraved roller, flat-
bed screen, and heat transfer. Rotary screen and engraved roller 
closely resemble coating and use principally the same type of equipment 
as coating. Flat-bed screen is typically not a high production 
technique and does not emit large quantities of HAP over a period of 
time given the limits of production. Heat transfer emits little or no 
HAP in the transfer of the print to the substrate.
    Both the substrates coated and printed as well as the coatings 
themselves vary. A number of different substrates can be coated 
including rayon, nylon, polyester, cotton, and blends. Coating 
chemicals used vary depending on end use of the coated substrate. 
Examples of coating chemicals include vinyl, urethane, silicone, and 
styrene-butadiene rubber. The polymer can be bought in various forms 
such as chunks, blocks, chips, pellets or fine powder. However, besides 
the polymer resins, several other chemicals can also be included in the 
prepared coating. These include plasticizers to increase pliability 
(e.g., fatty acids, alcohols), solvents to disperse solids and adjust 
viscosity (e.g., toluene, xylene, N,N-dimethylformamide, and MEK), 
pigments, curing agents, and fillers (e.g., carbon black and teflon). 
Rubber coating materials are frequently compounded in the facility 
performing the coating. Manmade fibers coated with epoxy or phenolic 
resins are often not immediately cured following application, but are 
first laid in a mold and then cured under pressure to form a composite 
structure.
    The coating or printing process generally is made up of the 
following unit operations: mixing the coating or printing materials 
(including the solvents), conditioning the substrate, applying the 
coating or printing materials to the substrate, evaporating the solvent 
in a drying oven and sometimes curing or vulcanizing by exposure to 
heat, and cleaning coating or printing operation equipment. A coating 
or printing operation with coating or printing material drying or 
curing at ambient conditions is not coating or printing for the purpose 
of the proposed subpart. Therefore, a coating or printing operation 
that does not dry or cure the applied coating or printing material by 
exposure to heat is not subject to the requirements of the proposed 
subpart.
    The application processes used by affected sources in the industry 
are similar in that they use continuous web coating techniques, but 
they include several types of coating and substrates. The coating 
industry treats coating as a surface applied coating in which a 
distinct layer of coating is applied to the textile surface.
    Slashing subcategory. The slashing subcategory includes affected 
sources that perform slashing operations. The slashing equipment, 
emission characteristics, and opportunities for pollution prevention in 
the industry are distinct from those in the rest of the fabric and 
other textiles coating, printing, and dyeing source category, 
warranting a separate subcategory.
    Slashing is a yarn preparation process performed on warp yarn prior 
to weaving. Warp yarns need to sustain their elongation and flexibility 
during the weaving process, which necessitates the slashing process. In 
the slashing process, large rolls (beams) of warp yarn are passed 
through a size box containing the aqueous sizing compound. Squeeze 
rolls remove excess solution and the yarn then passes through a drying 
unit that usually consists of steam filled dry cans (rollers) or an 
oven and then through a series of separator bars to prevent the ends 
from sticking together. After the separation process, the warp is then 
wound onto the loom beam. Some mills perform desizing. During the 
desizing step, at the end of the textile process, most of the sizing 
(slashing material) is removed from the textile by washing and the 
sizing is present in the wastewater.
    The objectives of slashing are to strengthen, smooth the outer 
surface, and lubricate the yarn. The chemical nature of the size 
applied is dependent on the yarn substrate and the type of weaving 
being used. The three main types of size currently used are natural 
products (starch), fully synthetic products (e.g., PVA), and 
semisynthetic blends (e.g., modified starches and carboxymethyl 
cellulose (CMC)).
    When starch or modified starch is the sizing compound, there is 
water but no HAP emitted from the slashing process. Starch is used 
principally on cotton, but does not work well on synthetic fibers. 
Also, starch is not more widely used and is not a good substitute for 
synthetic sizing because of water pollution concerns. Starch greatly 
increases the biological oxygen demand and cannot be partially 
recycled.
    The PVA and CMC are typically recycled when possible to reduce 
water treatment and water pollution. The CMC is not as widely used as 
starch and PVA because of the cost of the material. The CMC is not as 
effective in the slashing process on cotton and synthetic textiles as 
starch, modified starches, or PVA, respectively.
    The primary source of HAP emissions from slashing is methanol from 
PVA size, typically applied to synthetics (although it adheres to and 
is used for natural fibers as well). The methanol is present in the PVA 
size as a contaminant and is not needed for the slashing process. The 
methanol emissions can arise either from the size cooking operation 
and/or from the application or slashing process; the distribution is 
unclear, although it will depend upon the temperature at which the size 
is cooked, the cooking time, and how often mixing containers (cookers) 
are opened. These processes are not presently regulated by Federal, 
State or local agencies, and there are no known HAP emission capture or 
add-on control systems in use on size cooking or slashing processes. 
However, information submitted to us from suppliers representing 
approximately 74 percent of the domestic market for PVA indicate that 
PVA with less than 1 percent methanol is readily available, and these 
suppliers are now changing their production to supply the lower HAP 
material.
    Dyeing and finishing subcategory. The dyeing and finishing 
subcategory includes affected sources that perform dyeing and/or 
finishing operations. The process operations, materials and the organic 
HAP emissions sufficiently set these processes apart from the other

[[Page 46041]]

processes that are used in the manufacture of textile products to 
warrant a subcategory. Dyeing and finishing processes both use various 
types of aqueous materials, the choice of which depends on the type of 
substrate and the desired properties in the end product. Many affected 
sources perform both dyeing and finishing and use some common equipment 
(e.g., tenter frames) for unit operations in both processes. In some 
cases, the finishes are applied to the substrate wet from the dyeing 
process, and no drying is done until after the finish application. No 
add-on organic HAP emission controls are known to be in use on dyeing 
processes and very few on finishing processes. The few add-on emission 
controls used on finishing processes were installed to control opacity 
and are not effective at controlling organic HAP emissions. The 
similarities of process operation equipment, sources of organic HAP 
emissions (many of which are fugitive), absence of add-on HAP emission 
controls and opportunities for pollution prevention in the dyeing and 
finishing industry lend these operations well to subcategorization for 
the purpose of determining emission limits.
    Dyeing is the application of color to the whole body of a textile 
material with some degree of color fastness. Textiles are dyed using 
continuous and batch processes, and dyeing may take place at any of 
several stages in the manufacturing process (i.e., prior to fiber 
extrusion, fiber in staple form, yarn, fabric, garment). Most of the 
dyeing is done in finishing departments of basic manufacturing sources, 
although there are also several commission dyehouses. From an 
environmental perspective, dyeing has typically been viewed as a 
wastewater issue due to large quantities of water, chemicals, and 
auxiliaries (such as salt) used.
    Dyeing is essentially a mass transfer process where the dye 
diffuses in solution, adsorbs onto the fiber surface, and finally, 
within the fiber. Dyeing is complicated by the fact that there are many 
sources of color variations, such as dyes, substrate, preparation of 
substrate, dyeing auxiliaries used, and water. Processing variables 
such as time, temperature, and dye liquor ratio (lbs of dyebath to lbs 
of cloth) also affect dyeing results. There are hundreds of dyes within 
several dye classes, each of which exhibits different results when 
applied to different types of substrates.
    Various types of dyeing machines are used for both continuous and 
batch processes. Every dye system has different characteristics in 
terms of factors such as versatility, cost, tension of substrate, use 
of carriers and weight limitations. Dyeing systems can be aqueous, 
nonaqueous (inorganic solvents), or use sublimation (thermosal, heat 
transfer). Hydrophilic fibers such as cotton, rayon, wool, and silk are 
typically easier to dye as compared with hydrophobic fibers such as 
acetate, polyesters, polyamides, and polyacrylonotriles.
    The four basic steps in the dyeing process are: dissolving or 
dispersing dye, diffusing dye onto the fiber surface, absorbing dye 
onto the fiber surface, and diffusing dye into the fiber. Batch dyeing 
involves moving the dye liquor through the goods or moving the goods 
through the dye liquor. The substrate is immersed in the dyebath during 
the entire period of dyeing. In batch dyeing, a certain amount of 
substrate, usually 220 to 2,200 lbs, is loaded onto a dyeing machine 
and is brought to equilibrium or near equilibrium with a solution 
containing the dye. Once immersed in the dye bath, because the dyes 
have an affinity for the fibers, the dye molecules leave the dye 
solution and enter the fibers over a period of minutes to hours.
    Auxiliary chemicals and controlled dyebath conditions (mainly 
temperature) accelerate and optimize the action. The dye is fixed in 
the fiber using heat and/or chemicals after which the substrate is 
washed to remove unfixed dyes and chemicals. There is a trend to use 
lower liquor ratios (lbs of dyebath to lbs of cloth) in batch dyeing, 
which lends benefits such as faster heating/cooling and less waste. 
Batch equipment can usually be purchased as atmospheric (operated below 
212 degrees Fahrenheit) or pressurized (operated to about 280 degrees 
Fahrenheit) machines. Most batch dyeing is being done using pressurized 
machines, although some sources use atmospheric machines, especially 
for dyeing. Atmospheric dyeing might be required for fleeces and 
stretch fabrics, such as Lycra, which typically cannot be 
dyed using jet equipment. Dyeing processes in pressurized machines 
release no organic HAP emissions to the atmosphere since the process is 
totally enclosed, and the pressure is released at the end of the dyeing 
process by cooling the dye bath which is subsequently drained before 
opening the dyeing machine. However, in some cases, the drying of the 
pressure-dyed substrate releases HAP emissions.
    Continuous processes typically consist of dye application, dye 
fixation with chemicals or heat, and washing. Almost all continuous 
dyeing is done at atmospheric pressure. Continuous dyeing is usually 
used for long runs of polyester/cotton fabrics and involves immersing 
fabrics in a relatively concentrated dyebath for short periods. 
Substrate is fed continuously into a dye range at speeds usually 
between 540 and 2,690 feet per minute, and a concentrated solution of 
dyes and chemicals (held in pads) is moved evenly and uniformly to the 
goods with thorough penetration. A pad mangle helps apply pressure to 
squeeze dye solution into the fabric, and the dye is usually diffused 
or fixed by heating in a steamer or oven. Dye fixation on fiber occurs 
much more rapidly in continuous dyeing as compared to batch dyeing. 
After fabrics are dyed, they are dried in ovens or tenter frames after 
washing to remove un-reacted chemical or loose dye. A substrate that is 
processed through atmospheric batch dyeing is not dried at the dye 
range; it is sent to finishing and may be finished wet or dry.
    Various classes of dyes can be used, e.g., disperse for synthetics 
and direct for cellulosics. Dyes used in the textile industry are 
mostly synthetic and are derived from coal tar and petroleum-based 
derivatives. Dyes are sold as powders, granules, pastes, liquid 
dispersions, and solutions. Not only are dyes applied in different 
ways, they also impart color using different mechanisms. Dyes can be 
classified according to chemical constitution or method of application. 
Dyestuffs can work on principles of electrostatic bonding, covalent 
bonding, or physical entrapment. For example, acid dyes work through 
the mechanism of electrostatic bonding, whereas disperse dyes work by 
physical entrapment. Different dye classes exhibit different affinities 
depending on the type of fiber, although even dyes within the same 
classes can show wide affinity variations. They also exhibit different 
properties such as their fastness under end use conditions (e.g., 
light, laundering, or dry cleaning).
    Various combinations of chemical auxiliaries and process conditions 
(temperature and pressure) may be used to better fix the dye on the 
textile or impart specific characteristics. For example, a dye bath may 
contain the dyestuffs along with appropriate auxiliaries such as 
wetting agents and also specific chemicals such as acetic acid or 
sodium hydroxide. The use of higher temperatures and superatmospheric 
pressures have reduced the need for dye carriers (chemical accelerants) 
that were required at lower temperatures for the use of disperse dyes 
on synthetic substrates, such as polyester.
    The sources of HAP emissions from dyeing are the HAP constituents 
that are

[[Page 46042]]

contained in dyestuffs and auxiliary chemicals as purchased. The HAP 
constituents are needed to impart certain desirable characteristics to 
the dyed substrate (e.g., certain colors can only be attained through 
the use of HAP-containing dyestuffs or auxiliaries.) No HAP are known 
to be added by the users. The fraction of HAP contained in dye 
materials that are emitted to the atmosphere are generally estimated to 
range from zero to 10 percent, but have been reported as high as 100 
percent, and depend on the characteristics of the specific HAP 
constituents and the pressures and temperatures that the HAP are 
exposed to in the dyeing process operations. The fraction of HAP 
emitted to the atmosphere from dye materials have not been confirmed by 
test data. Most HAP constituents are believed to be rinsed from the 
substrate before the substrate is dried, because drying a substrate 
with unattached dye would adversely affect the quality of the dyed 
product.
    Finishing refers to any process operation performed after 
bleaching, dyeing, or printing that improves the appearance and/or 
usefulness of a textile substrate. Finishing encompasses any of several 
mechanical (e.g., texturizing, napping) and chemical processes (e.g., 
optical finishes, softeners, urea-formaldehyde resins for crease 
resistance) performed on fiber, yarn, or fabric to improve its 
appearance, texture, or performance. The organic HAP emission sources 
from finishing are specific chemical compounds that may be applied and 
released during subsequent drying and curing operations. Chemical 
finishing is also referred to as wet finishing. No chemicals are used 
in mechanical or dry finishing.
    The textile is usually dried prior to chemical finishing using 
either convective (hot air) or conductive (heated cans) methods. 
Chemical finishing is commonly done on a continuous finishing range 
(pad and tenter frame). The textile is passed through an aqueous 
solution containing the finishing chemical(s) and auxiliaries. After 
treatment, the textile is typically passed through an oven to drive off 
water and activate/cure finishing chemicals. It is important to note 
that there is no set recipe for the chemical finishes or mechanical 
finishing processes applied to any given substrate. Finishing methods 
are used according to desired characteristics of the end product (which 
vary widely and are market driven), and the firms themselves have some 
amount of flexibility in the specific processes or chemicals they 
choose to use for a particular function.
    The industry uses numerous categories of proprietary chemical 
speciality products that are used as chemical finishes. Some examples 
of chemical finish classes include:
     Resin finishes (permanent press) are used on cotton or 
rayon to minimize the need to iron by keeping the fabric smooth after 
washing and drying. Most resins contain formaldehyde; resins without 
formaldehyde are typically much costlier and adversely affect product 
quality.
     Softeners are used with resins to improve the way the 
fabric feels by breaking down hardness or stiffness.
     Stain resist finishes are used extensively on carpets and 
upholstery fabrics. Soil release finishes allow soils and stains to be 
removed by laundering.
     Water repellants used to prevent fabrics from being wet 
out (breathable, unlike waterproofing agents) include, but are not 
limited to, wax, silicone, and fluorine.
     Flame retardant qualities can be achieved by using special 
fibers or phosphorus-based finishes.
     Antistatic agents decrease or eliminate static electricity 
in textiles.
     Handbuilders give the fabrics body or stiffness. Other 
examples of types of chemical finishes include anticreasing agents, 
deodorants, moth resisting agents, oil repellants, rust preventatives, 
and shrinkage controllers. Some companies use more specialized finishes 
like electrical finishes and teflon. Because there are 
typically a wide variety of choices of chemical finishes that can be 
used within each finish class, it is often difficult to tag finishes 
used in certain classes as always toxic or nontoxic. In certain cases, 
as in the case of permanent press finishes, most of the resins used 
contain formaldehyde, although low or non-formaldehyde finishes are 
being developed to suit certain applications.
    There are also several different types of mechanical finishing 
techniques. For example, heatsetting can be done to improve dimensional 
stability in synthetic textiles. Shearing involves using rotary 
blade(s) to trim raised surfaces and reduce pilling. Other examples 
include embossing, glazing, sueding, and polishing.
    Many chemical and mechanical alternatives are available for every 
finishing operation, but the specific nature and applicability of these 
is unclear. Some mechanical finishes and design alternatives can avoid 
chemical processing. For example for softness, enzyme softening of 
cotton and other mechanical alternatives can be used. Proper use and 
application of N-methylol crosslinkers can minimize formaldehyde 
releases. Mechanical finishing (compacting) can also eliminate use of 
the crosslinker. Some crosslinkers that eliminate formaldehyde are 
available, but much more expensive. The industry has made a lot of 
efforts to reduce the amount of free formaldehyde in resins, however 
good substitutes that do not adversely affect the quality of the 
product are difficult to find. Formaldehyde contents can vary anywhere 
from less than one half of one percent for light weight fabrics to 4 
percent for heavy fabrics (melamine-formaldehyde resins), and there is 
a lot of variability in types of resins. Formaldehyde itself does not 
affect the product, however it does affect the properties of the resin 
itself (manufacturing). Acrylic handbuilders and stiffeners can replace 
formaldehyde-based handbuilders.
    The sources of organic HAP emissions from finishing are the HAP 
constituents that are contained in finishing materials as purchased. As 
is the case with dyeing, the organic HAP constituents are needed to 
impart certain desirable characteristics to the finished substrate 
(e.g., a resin finish containing organic HAP might be applied to a 
cotton/polyester blend for durable press and dimensional stability). No 
organic HAP are known to be added by the users. In finishing, unlike in 
dyeing, the fraction of organic HAP contained in finishes that are 
emitted to the atmosphere are generally assumed to be 100 percent with 
the exception of HAP that cross-link to the fiber, such as 
formaldehyde. This is because the finished textile is typically dried 
and cured at relatively high temperatures over 300 degrees Fahrenheit.

B. How did We Select The Regulated Pollutants?

    Organic HAP. Available emission data collected during the 
development of the proposed NESHAP show that the primary organic HAP 
emitted from printing, coating and dyeing sources include toluene, MEK, 
methanol, xylenes, MIBK, methylene chloride, n-hexane, 
trichloroethylene, and n,n-dimethylformamide. These compounds account 
for approximately 81 percent of this category's nationwide organic HAP 
emissions. However, many other organic HAP are used, or can be used, in 
coating, printing, slashing, dyeing, and finishing operations. 
Therefore, the proposed rule would regulate emissions of all organic 
HAP.
    Inorganic HAP. Based on information reported during development of 
the proposed NESHAP, inorganic HAP

[[Page 46043]]

contained in the coating, printing, dyeing and finishing materials used 
by this source category include chromium, cobalt, hydrogen chloride, 
lead, manganese compounds and nickel. There is limited opportunity for 
these HAP to be emitted into the ambient air because all of the 
application techniques used involve direct application of the inorganic 
HAP-containing material to the substrate by techniques such as knife-
over-roll, reverse roll, dip, pad and immersion. These techniques would 
not typically generate air emissions of the inorganic compounds. Once 
deposited on the substrate, the inorganic compounds remain on the 
substrate and are not emitted during subsequent drying and curing 
process operations. Therefore, we conclude that there are limited or no 
air emissions of inorganic HAP, and the proposed standards would not 
regulate them.

C. How Did We Select the Affected Source?

    In selecting the affected source(s) for emission standards, our 
primary goal is to ensure that MACT is applied to HAP-emitting 
operations or activities within the source category or subcategory 
being regulated. The affected source also serves to establish where new 
source MACT applies under a particular standard. Specifically, the 
General Provisions in subpart A of 40 CFR part 63 define the terms 
``construction'' and ``reconstruction'' with reference to the term 
``affected source'' and provide that new source MACT applies when 
construction or reconstruction of an affected source occurs. The 
collection of equipment and activities evaluated in determining MACT 
(including the MACT floor) is used in defining the affected source.
    When an emission standard is based on a collection of emissions 
sources, or total facility emissions, we select an affected source 
based on that same collection of emission sources, or the total 
facility, as well. This approach for defining the affected source 
broadly is particularly appropriate for industries where a plantwide 
emission standard provides the opportunity and incentive for owners and 
operators to utilize control strategies that are more cost effective 
than if separate standards were established for each emission point 
within an affected source.
    Selection of affected source. The affected source for the proposed 
standards is broadly defined for each subcategory. It includes all 
operations associated with coating and printing, with slashing, or with 
dyeing and finishing and in all cases includes the cleaning of process 
operation equipment. These operations include storage and mixing of 
regulated materials, regulated material application and flash-off and 
drying and curing of applied materials by exposure to heat, cleaning 
operations, waste handling operations, and wastewater treatment 
operations.
    In selecting the affected source, we considered, for each 
operation, the extent to which HAP-containing materials are used and 
the amount of HAP that are emitted. Coating, printing, slashing, dyeing 
and finishing material application, flash-off, and curing/drying 
operations by exposure to heat account for the majority of HAP 
emissions from coating, printing, slashing, dyeing and finishing 
operations. These operations are included in the affected source.
    We were not able to obtain data to adequately quantify HAP 
emissions from storage, mixing, cleaning, waste handling and wastewater 
treatment. However, solvents that are added to coatings as thinners, 
for example, and HAP from other HAP-containing materials such as dyeing 
or finishing auxiliaries, may be emitted during mixing and storage. The 
level of emissions depends on the type of mixing and the type of 
storage container and the work practices used at the affected source. 
The magnitude of emissions from cleaning depends heavily on the amount 
and HAP content of cleaning materials used. Emissions from waste 
handling operations depend on the type of system used to collect and 
transport organic HAP-containing waste materials in the affected 
source. For example, solvent-laden rags that are used to clean 
application equipment could be a source of HAP emissions. The method 
used to isolate and store such rags affects the level of emissions to 
ambient air. The HAP emissions from wastewater treatment depend on the 
quantity and types of HAP discharged to the wastewater treatment 
operation and the subsequent wastewater treatment processes, e.g., 
treatment by aeration or by biodegradation. Mixing, storage, cleaning, 
waste handling, and wastewater treatment operations are included in the 
affected source.
    A broad definition of the affected source was selected to provide 
maximum flexibility in complying with the proposed emission limits for 
organic HAP. In planning its total usage of HAP-containing materials, 
each affected source can select among available coating, printing, 
slashing, dyeing, finishing, thinning, and cleaning materials, as well 
as use of emission capture systems and add-on controls for coating and 
printing operations, to maximize emissions reductions in the most cost-
effective manner.
    Additional information on the coating, printing, slashing, dyeing 
and finishing operations is included in the docket for the proposed 
standards.

D. How Did We Determine the Basis and Level of the Proposed Standards 
for Existing and New or Reconstructed Sources?

    The sections below present the rationale for determining the MACT 
floor, regulatory alternatives beyond the floor, and selection of the 
proposed standards for existing and new or reconstructed affected 
sources in each of the three subcategories identified in the Printing, 
Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles source category.
    How did we determine the MACT floor technology? After we identify 
the specific source categories or subcategories of sources to regulate 
under section 112 of the CAA, we must develop emission standards for 
each category and subcategory. Section 112(d)(3) establishes a minimum 
baseline or ``floor'' for standards. For new sources in a category or 
subcategory, the standards cannot be less stringent than the emission 
control that is achieved in practice by the best-controlled similar 
source. The standards for existing sources can be less stringent than 
standards for new sources, but they cannot be less stringent than the 
average emission limitation achieved by the best-performing 12 percent 
of existing sources (or the best-performing five sources for categories 
or subcategories with fewer than 30 sources).
    Coating and printing subcategory. There are an estimated 60 
facilities in the coating and printing subcategory. Quantitative data 
on HAP use and emission control were obtained from 22 coating sources. 
The 22 sources in the MACT database are representative of the different 
sizes of companies and the range of products in the national population 
of coating sources. Qualitative data providing descriptions of coating 
and printing processes, HAP control technologies, and process and 
control technology concerns also were obtained from site visits and 
industry trade groups, such as the Rubber Manufacturers Association. 
These data verified that the coating processes and HAP emission sources 
are similar for all coating types and that similar HAP control 
technologies are used. They also verified that, although we do not have 
quantitative data on printing operations, it is reasonable to use the 
coating data for making decisions for both coating and printing sources 
due to the

[[Page 46044]]

similarities between coating and printing processes and materials used.
    The MACT database shows that the most common approach for reducing 
organic HAP emissions at coating and printing sources is the use of 
add-on capture and control systems. At the sources reporting the 
highest level of control, coating application stations are enclosed in 
rooms, and the ventilation air is directed to the add-on control 
device. This type of capture system can achieve 100 percent capture of 
emissions when designed to meet the criteria specified in EPA Method 
204 of 40 CFR part 51, appendix M. This capture system is called a PTE. 
Of the 22 sources in the MACT database, six reported the use of PTE and 
13 reported that they operated control devices on a total of 29 coating 
lines. Of the 29 controlled lines, 16 lines use thermal oxidizers, 
three lines use catalytic oxidizers, nine lines use carbon adsorbers, 
and one line uses an electrostatic precipitator.
    The MACT database contains information concerning the level of HAP 
emissions from coating application and drying/curing, the capture 
efficiency for each coating application area or for the entire coating 
line, and the destruction or removal efficiency of the add-on control 
device receiving the HAP emissions. We were able to determine the 
coating line application and drying/curing OCE for each source from 
this information when available. This value was the most common among 
all the data available, and it was determined that the coating 
application and drying/curing OCE was the value that was most 
correlated with HAP emissions. Therefore, the coating application and 
drying/curing OCE was used as the basis for the MACT floor 
calculations. The OCE was calculated as a sourcewide average to 
incorporate the effects of averaging across coating lines in sources 
with more than one coating line.
    To determine the existing source MACT floor, the sources were 
ranked based on the average OCE. The statute requires EPA to base the 
floor for existing sources on the average emission limitation achieved 
by the best performing 12 percent of existing sources for which the 
Administrator has data. The best performing 12 percent of the 22 
sources in the MACT database constitutes a set of three affected 
sources. All three of the best-performing sources use capture systems 
and add-on control devices including both thermal oxidizers and carbon 
adsorbers. The two sources using thermal oxidizers are achieving 100 
percent capture of application station emissions through the use of 
PTE. The reported OCE for the top three sources ranged from 93 to 99 
percent. These data clearly indicate that controls on some specific 
coating operations may be capable of achieving greater than 99 percent 
HAP destruction based on 100 percent capture and thermal oxidizer 
destruction efficiency greater than 99 percent. However, to determine 
the level of emission control that is technically and consistently 
achievable over the long term with thermal oxidation, it is important 
to consider not only the level of control reported, but also the data 
quality concerns and the control levels that EPA has generally found to 
be achievable for this type of control technology. This approach 
ensures that factors that affect control levels, such as variations in 
source operating conditions and inlet loadings to the add-on control 
device, are accommodated in the determination of the MACT floor.
    A study conducted by EPA indicated that a 98 percent reduction is 
the minimum control efficiency that new thermal oxidizers can be 
expected to achieve. Information from vendor guarantees supports the 
determination of a destruction efficiency of 98 percent for thermal 
oxidizers. Therefore, we adjusted the destruction efficiencies for the 
two MACT floor sources using thermal oxidizers to 98 percent. The 
calculated MACT floor using the adjusted value results in an average 97 
percent OCE for the three sources that make up the best-performing 12 
percent of sources in the coating and printing subcategory. Therefore, 
the MACT floor for existing sources is 97 percent OCE.
    As indicated previously in this preamble, the MACT floor for new 
sources must reflect the emission control achieved in practice by the 
best-controlled similar source. The OCE data cited above show that the 
best-controlled similar source for which we have data is using a PTE to 
achieve 100 percent capture and a thermal oxidizer, which as described 
above, we have determined can consistently achieve 98 percent 
destruction. Therefore, a 98 percent OCE is the MACT floor for new and 
reconstructed sources in the coating and printing subcategory.
    Data from the coating MACT database were used to calculate 
alternative emission rate limits for existing and new and reconstructed 
sources. The alternative organic HAP emission rate was calculated based 
on applying the MACT floor OCE (97 percent for existing sources and 98 
percent for new and reconstructed sources) to a pre-controlled HAP 
emission rate representative for this industry. This calculation 
process, described in the docket, resulted in HAP emission rates of 
0.12 lb of organic HAP per lb of solids for existing sources and 0.08 
lb of organic HAP per lb of solids for new and reconstructed sources. 
The alternative emission rate limits are being proposed to provide 
compliance flexibility for affected sources.
    Slashing subcategory. As has been previously noted in this 
preamble, the primary source of HAP emissions from slashing is methanol 
from PVA size. The methanol emissions can arise either from the size 
cooking operation, the application process, or both; the distribution 
is unclear. Also as previously noted, there are no known HAP emission 
capture or control systems in place on size cooking or slashing 
processes. Therefore, we judged that the most reasonable approach to 
establishing a MACT floor would be to identify a pollution prevention 
option that is the average being achieved by all affected slashing 
operations.
    Based on information submitted to the EPA by the American Textile 
Manufacturers Institute (ATMI) on September 17, 1999, we determined 
that the majority, not just the top 12 percent, of the domestic textile 
market in 1998 was using PVA for slashing with methanol comprising less 
than 1 percent by weight of the PVA ``as purchased.'' Methanol is a 
contaminant in the PVA that is a residual material from the manufacture 
of the PVA. Prior to 1999, the typical PVA sizing compound contained 
from 4 to 10 percent methanol. The