NESHAP for Plastic Parts and
Products Surface Coating (40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPP) (Proposed
Rule)
Revision of a currently approved collection
No
Regular
04/06/2020
Requested
Previously Approved
03/31/2023
03/31/2023
769
948
87,407
86,400
85,900
66,900
The National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Plastic Parts and Products
Surface Coating were proposed on December 4, 2002, promulgated on
April 19, 2004, and revised or amended on April 26, 2004, April 20,
2006, December 22, 2006, and April 24, 2007. The NESHAP is codified
at 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart PPPP. This supporting statement
addresses information collection activities that will be imposed by
the NESHAP for Plastic Parts and Products Surface Coating,
including activities proposed to be added based on the residual
risk and technology review (RTR) required under the Clean Air Act
(CAA). The NESHAP for Plastic Parts and Products Surface Coating
applies to each new and existing affected source of HAP emissions
at facilities that are major sources and that perform surface
coating of plastic parts and products. New facilities include those
that commenced construction or reconstruction after December 4,
2002. As part of the RTR for the NESHAP for Plastic Parts and
Products Surface Coating, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is not proposing to revise the emission limit requirements. The EPA
is proposing to require periodic air emissions testing to measure
organic HAP destruction or removal efficiency at the inlet and
outlet of the add-on control device once every five years for
existing and new surface coating affected sources using the
emission rate with add-on controls compliance option. The EPA is
proposing to revise the startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM)
provisions of the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rule
and proposing the use of electronic data reporting for future
performance test data submittals, notifications, and reports. This
information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR
Part 63, Subpart PPPP. In general, all NESHAP standards require
initial notifications, performance tests (if sources are using
add-on controls to demonstrate compliance), and periodic reports by
the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also
required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any
deviation from an emission limitation (either a numerical emission
limit, an operating limit, or an equipment or work practice
standard), or any period during which the monitoring system is
inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are
essential in determining compliance, and are required of all
affected facilities subject to the NESHAP.
There is an increase in the
labor hours per respondent in this ICR as compared to the currently
approved ICR. This situation is due to four considerations: 1)
increased time in year one to become familiar with the amended
rules, 2) increased time in year one to re-evaluating previously
developed SSM record systems, 3) increased time in year one to
become familiar with CEDRI and the electronic reporting form for
the semiannual report, and 4) time required in year three for
conducting a performance test and reporting the results. There is
an increase in the capital/startup costs as compared to the
currently approved ICR. The requirement for periodic performance
testing requires three existing facilities to conduct a performance
test on three add-on control devices, with an estimate of zero
tests being repeated. These facilities are not currently required
to perform testing as a condition of their part 70 operating
permits.
On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that
the collection of information encompassed by this request complies
with 5 CFR 1320.9 and the related provisions of 5 CFR
1320.8(b)(3).
The following is a summary of the topics, regarding
the proposed collection of information, that the certification
covers:
(i) Why the information is being collected;
(ii) Use of information;
(iii) Burden estimate;
(iv) Nature of response (voluntary, required for a
benefit, or mandatory);
(v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and
(vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control
number;
If you are unable to certify compliance with any of
these provisions, identify the item by leaving the box unchecked
and explain the reason in the Supporting Statement.