[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 243 (Monday, December 20, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71031-71035]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-32371]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IN114-1a; FRL-6500-9]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan; Indiana 
Volatile Organic Compound Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On August 18, 1999, the State of Indiana submitted a State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision request concerning amendments to 
Indiana's automobile refinishing rules for Lake, Porter, Clark, and 
Floyd Counties, and new Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) control 
measures including Stage I gasoline vapor recovery and automobile 
refinishing spray-gun requirements for Vanderburgh County. This 
rulemaking action approves, using the direct final process, the Indiana 
SIP revision request.

DATES: This rule is effective on February 18, 2000, unless EPA receives 
adverse written comments by January 19, 2000. If adverse comment is 
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the 
Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take 
effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604.
    Copies of the revision request for this rulemaking action are 
available for inspection at the following address: U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. (It is recommended that you 
telephone Mark J. Palermo at (312) 886-6082 before visiting the Region 
5 Office.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark J. Palermo, Environmental 
Protection Specialist, at (312) 886-6082.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What is EPA approving in this rule?
II. Automobile Refinishing Amendments.
    What are the existing SIP requirements for automobile 
refinishing?
    What changes did Indiana make to the automobile refinishing 
rule?
    Why are the changes approvable?
III. Vanderburgh County VOC Control Rules.
    Why were VOC control rules submitted for Vanderburgh County?
    What control measures do the rules require?
    A. Stage I Gasoline Vapor Control
    B. Automobile Refinishing Spray-gun Control
    Why are the rules approvable?
IV. Rulemaking Action.
V. Administrative Requirements.
    A. Executive Order 12866
    B. Executive Order 13132
    C. Executive Order 13045
    D. Executive Order 13084
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    F. Unfunded Mandates
    G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
    H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
I. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Throughout this document wherever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' are 
used, we mean EPA.

I. What Is EPA Approving in This Rule?

    We are approving amendments to Indiana's automobile refinishing 
rules for Lake, Porter, Clark, and Floyd Counties, and new rules for 
Stage I gasoline vapor recovery and automobile refinishing spray-gun 
requirements for Vanderburgh County. Our approval makes these rules 
part of the federally enforceable SIP.

II. Automobile Refinishing Amendments

What Are the Existing SIP Requirements for Automobile Refinishing?

    326 Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 8-10 provides VOC control 
requirements for facilities which refinish motor vehicles or mobile 
equipment in Lake, Porter, Clark, and Floyd Counties. The rule also 
regulates the suppliers of refinishing coatings to those facilities. 
EPA approved the rule

[[Page 71032]]

as a SIP revision on June 13, 1996 (61 FR 29965).
    The rule contains VOC content limits for various refinishing 
coatings and surface preparation products. There are also several work 
practice requirements, including provisions for using certain coating 
application equipment, equipment cleaners, and waste storage 
containers. Refinishing facilities must also develop employee training 
programs for reducing emissions of VOC at the facility.

What Changes Did Indiana Make to the Automobile Refinishing Rule?

    Indiana has amended the automobile refinishing rule in three areas:
    (1) It has changed recordkeeping requirements to be less burdensome 
and more reflective of records currently being kept on solvent usage;
    (2) It has created an exemption for facilities that refinish three 
or fewer motor vehicles per calendar year; and,
    (3) It has removed the requirement that containers holding waste 
materials or solvent be gasket-sealed.
    The Indiana rule, as originally adopted, required that refinishing 
facilities keep records of each job performed, and for each coating or 
surface preparation product, the identification of the product, the 
quantity used, the VOC content as supplied, and the quantity and VOC 
content of components added.
    The originally adopted rule also required refinishing and surface 
preparation product manufacturers to keep records of, and provide the 
refinisher with, for each product supplied, the product identification, 
the manufacturer's mixing instructions for the product, and the VOC 
content as supplied and as applied after any thinning recommended by 
the manufacturer. The commercial providers of the products were 
required to keep records and provide the refinisher with the product 
identification, the amount supplied, and the VOC content as supplied 
and as applied after any thinning recommended by the manufacturer.
    The amendments contained in the August 18, 1999, SIP submission 
change the rule to require that refinishing facilities keep coating 
records on a per-batch or per-job basis, and record the identification 
and VOC content of the coating as supplied or packaged, along with the 
quantity of coating used in making the mix or the mix ratio used, and 
the identification and quantity of components added or the mix ratio 
used. For surface preparation products, the refinishing facilities must 
keep monthly records of the identification, volume, and VOC content of 
products used.
    Requirements for suppliers of refinishing or surface preparation 
products have also changed. Manufacturers and commercial providers must 
provide to the refinisher and keep a record of, for each product 
supplied, the product identification, the VOC content as packaged or as 
supplied, and the VOC content as applied in accordance with the 
manufacturer's mixing instructions. The rule specifies, for multi-stage 
systems, certain formats for indicating the as applied VOC content of 
coatings. These formats are consistent with the formats the industry 
typically uses in providing product information to the refinshers.
    As noted above, the remaining amendments to the rule include an 
exemption for facilities that refinish three or fewer motor vehicles 
per calendar year, and a change to the work practice provisions of the 
rule regarding storage requirements for solvents and refinishing job 
waste. Under the amended rule, refinishing facilities no longer need to 
keep solvents and wastes in gasket-sealed containers, but facilities 
must still store solvents and wastes in closed containers.

Why Are the Changes Approvable?

    Section 110(l) of the Act requires that any revisions to the SIP 
must not interfere with an area's attainment of the National Ambient 
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), reasonable further progress (as defined 
under section 171 of the Act), and any other requirement under the Act. 
Indiana's automobile refinishing rule has been credited as a control 
measure to reduce VOC emissions under Indiana's 15% Rate-Of-Progress 
(ROP) plans for Lake, Porter, Clark, and Floyd Counties (see 62 FR 
38457, and 62 FR 24815). Indiana is also relying on the VOC emission 
reduction from this rule to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in these 
counties. Therefore, to be approvable, the amendments to this rule must 
not lead to an increase in VOC that would affect either the 15% ROP 
plans, or attainment of the NAAQS.
    On September 11, 1998, we promulgated a national rule establishing 
VOC limits for refinishing coatings sold nation-wide, beginning on 
January 11, 1999 (63 FR 48806). The federal rule covers the coating 
categories regulated under the State rule, and the limits are as 
stringent as, or tighter than, the limits specified in the State rule. 
The federal rule's requirements ensure that refinishing coatings, when 
applied after preparation according to the manufacturer's mixing 
instructions, are meeting the applicable VOC content limits in the 
Indiana rule.
    The changes to the recordkeeping requirements of the automobile 
refinishing rule will not lead to an increase in VOC emissions, due to 
the impact of the national autobody coating rule. In addition, 
automobile refinishers must strictly follow the coating manufacturer 
mixing instructions. The refinishers are dependent on using these 
instructions to properly use computerized mixing equipment, to obtain 
customer satisfaction with the color match of the finished job, and to 
properly adhere to the conditions of the coating manufacturer's 
warranty. Therefore, refinishers will not increase the VOC content of 
coatings by adding solvents or other additives beyond the levels 
required by the manufacturer mixing instructions.
    The change to monthly recordkeeping for surface coating preparation 
is acceptable because, unlike coatings, no thinning is involved with 
the application of surface preparation products which would increase 
the VOC content of the products beyond what is required under the rule. 
Therefore, no daily records of surface preparation products used and 
components added, as was required under the originally adopted rule, is 
necessary to ensure compliance with the rule's VOC content limits.
    We expect no impact to the nonattainment areas' ozone 
concentrations or ROP plans due to the exemption for refinishing 
facilities which refinish three or fewer motor vehicles or mobile 
equipment per calendar year. Nearly all of the refinishers that have 
been covered since the adoption of the rule are not eligible for this 
limited exemption. We also expect no impact in VOC emissions from the 
removal of the gasket-sealed requirement for closed waste storage 
containers. We have no data showing gasket-sealed containers reduce VOC 
emissions any more effectively than by simply keeping containers 
closed.
    In conclusion, because the amendments to Indiana's automobile 
refinishing rule will not lead to an increase in VOC emissions that 
would affect either the ROP plans, or the attainment of the ozone 
standard for Lake, Porter, Clark, and Floyd Counties, the amendments 
are approvable.

III. Vanderburgh County VOC Control Rules

Why Were VOC Control Rules Submitted for Vanderburgh County?

    Interested citizens and businesses formed a group known as Action

[[Page 71033]]

Committee for Ozone Reduction Now (ACORN), to identify control measures 
which would reduce VOC emissions in Vanderburgh County, and ensure the 
county's maintenance of the NAAQS for ground-level ozone.
    VOC is a precursor of ozone, an air pollutant which causes health 
problems because it damages lung tissue, reduces lung function, and 
sensitizes the lungs to other irritants.
    The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) followed 
ACORN's recommendations in adopting control measures for Vanderburgh 
County and submitting the measures as a SIP revision.

What Control Measures do the Rules Require?

A. Stage I Gasoline Vapor Control
    On September 4, 1987, EPA approved Indiana's regulations requiring 
that certain gasoline stations, and the tank trucks that transport 
gasoline to those stations, be equipped with what is referred to as 
Stage I vapor recovery systems (see 52 FR 33590). The regulations are 
codified under 326 IAC 8-4-6. Stage I requires that storage tanks at 
gas stations and transport trucks operate devices that capture gasoline 
vapors which would otherwise escape during the loading and unloading of 
fuel.
    This SIP submission amends the applicability of the Stage I 
requirement to include all gasoline stations located in Vanderburgh 
County. Specifically, gasoline stations in Vanderburgh County must 
comply with the requirements under 326 IAC 8-4-6(a) through 6(c), and 
6(h). Under these regulations, no owner or operator of a gasoline 
dispensing facility shall allow the transfer of gasoline between any 
transport and any storage tank unless such tank is equipped with the 
following:
    (1) A submerged fill pipe;
    (2) Either a pressure relief valve set to release at no less than 
0.7 pounds per square inch or an orifice of 0.5 inch in diameter; and,
    (3) A vapor balance system connected between the tank and the 
transport, which is operated according to the manufacturer's 
specifications.
    If the owner or employees of a gasoline dispensing facility are not 
present during loading, it shall be the responsibility of the operator 
of the transport to make certain the vapor balance system is connected 
between the transport and the storage tank and the vapor balance system 
is operating according to the manufacturer's specifications.
B. Automobile Refinishing Spray-Gun Control
    The submittal also amends the automobile refinishing rule, 326 IAC 
8-10, to expand the applicability of the rule's coating applicator 
requirements to automobile refinishing facilities in Vanderburgh 
County. On and after May 1, 1999, facilities must use one or a 
combination of the following equipment for coating application:
    (1) Electrostatic equipment;
    (2) High-volume, low-pressure spray equipment;
    (3) Any other coating application equipment that has been 
demonstrated, by the owner or operator, to IDEM to be capable of 
achieving at least 65% transfer efficiency.
    The refinishing facility must also develop an employee training 
program on methods to reduce VOC at the facility, in accordance with 
the criteria for such a program as specified in the rule.

Why Are the Rules Approvable?

    The rules included in the August 18, 1999, submittal expand the 
applicability to Vanderburgh County of rules that have already been 
approved by EPA. Because these rules strengthen the SIP, these rules 
are approvable.

IV. Rulemaking Action

    In this rulemaking action, EPA approves the August 18, 1999, SIP 
revision request regarding automobile refinishing amendments for Lake, 
Porter, Clark, and Floyd Counties, and VOC control rules for 
Vanderburgh County. The EPA is publishing this action without prior 
proposal because EPA views this as a noncontroversial revision and 
anticipates no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in 
this Federal Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the 
SIP revision should adverse written comments be filed. This action will 
be effective without further notice unless EPA receives relevant 
adverse written comment by January 19, 2000. Should the Agency receive 
such comments, it will publish a final rule informing the public that 
this action will not take effect. Any parties interested in commenting 
on this action should do so at this time. If no such comments are 
received, the public is advised that this action will be effective on 
February 18, 2000.

V. Administrative Requirements.

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled 
``Regulatory Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 13132

    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces E.O. 
12612 (Federalism) and E.O. 12875 (Enhancing the Intergovernmental 
Partnership). E.O. 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process 
to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in 
the development of regulatory policies that have federalism 
implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is 
defined in the E.O. to include regulations that have ``substantial 
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Under E.O. 
13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has federalism implications, 
that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not 
required by statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds 
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and 
local governments, or EPA consults with State and local officials early 
in the process of developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not 
issue a regulation that has federalism implications and that preempts 
State law unless the Agency consults with State and local officials 
early in the process of developing the proposed regulation.
    This final rule will not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in E.O. 13132. Thus, the 
requirements of section 6 of the E.O. do not apply to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13045

    Protection of the Children from Environmental Health Risks and 
Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: 
(1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under 
E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk 
that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on 
children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must 
evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule 
on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to 
other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives 
considered by the Agency.

[[Page 71034]]

    This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not involve 
decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.

D. Executive Order 13084

    Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded, 
EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation.
    In addition, E.O. 13084 requires EPA to develop an effective 
process permitting elected and other representatives of Indian tribal 
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development 
of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect 
their communities.'' Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely 
affect the communities of Indian tribal governments. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental 
jurisdictions.
    This final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and 
subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new 
requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is already 
imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create 
any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under 
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

F. Unfunded Mandates

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; 
or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA 
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with 
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan 
for informing and advising any small governments that may be 
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not 
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of 
$100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves 
pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This rule is not a ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing 
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with 
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards'' 
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies 
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical.
    The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's 
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to 
the use of VCS.

I. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 18, 2000. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: November 4, 1999.
Jerri-Anne Garl,
Acting Regional Administrator,
Region 5.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, title 
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart P--Indiana

    2. Section 52.770 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(126) and 
(c)(127) to read as follows:


Sec. 52.770  Identification of Plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

[[Page 71035]]

    (126) On August 18, 1999, Indiana submitted amendments to the 
State's automobile refinishing rule for Lake, Porter, Clark, and Floyd 
Counties.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    326 Indiana Administrative Code 8-10: Automobile Refinishing, 
Section 1: Applicability, Section 5: Work practice standards, Section 
6: Compliance procedures, Section 9: Recordkeeping and reporting. 
Adopted by the Indiana Air Pollution Control Board February 4, 1998. 
Filed with the Secretary of State July 14, 1998. Published at Indiana 
Register, Volume 21, Number 12, page 4518, September 1, 1998. Effective 
August 13, 1998.
    (127) On August 18, 1999, Indiana submitted rules for controlling 
Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) emissions in Vanderburgh County. The 
rules contain control requirements for Stage I gasoline vapor recovery 
equipment, and a requirement for automobile refinishers to use special 
coating application equipment (automobile refinishing spray guns) to 
reduce VOC.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) 326 Indiana Administrative Code 8-4: Petroleum Sources, Section 
1: Applicability, Subsection (c). Adopted by the Indiana Air Pollution 
Control Board November 4, 1998. Filed with the Secretary of State April 
23, 1999. Published at Indiana Register, Volume 22, Number 9, June 1, 
1999. Effective May 23, 1999.
    (B) 326 Indiana Administrative Code 8-10: Automobile Refinishing, 
Section 1: Applicability, Section 3: Requirements. Adopted by the 
Indiana Air Pollution Control Board November 4, 1998. Filed with the 
Secretary of State April 23, 1999. Published at Indiana Register, 
Volume 22, Number 9, June 1, 1999. Effective May 23, 1999.

[FR Doc. 99-32371 Filed 12-17-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P