[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 136 (Wednesday, July 16, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41987-41988]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-18003]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Region 2 Docket No. NY61-259, FRL-7528-5]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New York State 
Implementation Plan Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the New York State Implementation Plan (SIP) for 
ozone concerning the control of volatile organic compounds. The SIP 
revision consists of amendments to New York Codes, Rules and 
Regulations, Part 228, ``Surface Coating Processes.'' This SIP revision 
consists of a control measure needed to meet the shortfall emissions 
reduction identified by EPA in New York's 1-hour ozone attainment 
demonstration SIP. The intended effect of this action is to approve a 
control strategy required by New York's SIP which will result in 
emission reductions that will help achieve attainment of the national 
ambient air quality standard for ozone.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 15, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted either by mail or electronically. 
Written comments should be mailed to Raymond Werner, Chief, Air 
Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 
Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. Electronic 
comments could be sent either to [email protected] or to http://www.regulations.gov, which is an alternative method for submitting 
electronic comments to EPA. Go directly to http://www.regulations.gov, 
then select ``Environmental Protection Agency'' at the top of the page 
and use the ``go'' button. Please follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    A copy of the New York's submittal is available at the following 
addresses for inspection during normal business hours:
    Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, Air Programs 
Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
    New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division 
of Air Resources, 625 Broadway, Albany, New York 12233.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirk J. Wieber, Air Programs Branch, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 
New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-3381 or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What Is Required by the Clean Air Act and How Does It Apply to New 
York?

    Section 182 of the Clean Air Act (Act) specifies the required State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions and requirements for areas 
classified as nonattainment for ozone and when these submissions and 
requirements are to be submitted to EPA by the states. The specific 
requirements vary depending upon the severity of the ozone problem. The 
New York--Northern New Jersey--Long Island area is classified as a 
severe ozone nonattainment area. Under section 182, severe ozone 
nonattainment areas were required to submit demonstrations of how they 
would attain the 1-hour standard. On December 16, 1999 (64 FR 70364), 
EPA proposed approval of New York's 1-hour ozone attainment 
demonstration SIP for the New York--Northern New Jersey--Long Island 
nonattainment area. In that rulemaking, EPA identified an emission 
reduction shortfall associated with New York's 1-hour ozone attainment 
demonstration SIP, and required New York to address the shortfall. In a 
related matter, the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) developed six 
model rules which provided control measures for a number of source 
categories and estimated emission reduction benefits from implementing 
these model rules. These model rules were designed for use by states in 
developing their own regulations to achieve additional emission 
reductions to close emission shortfalls.
    On February 4, 2002 (67 FR 5170), EPA approved New York's 1-hour 
ozone attainment demonstration SIP. This approval included an 
enforceable commitment submitted by New York to adopt additional 
control measures to close the shortfall identified by EPA for 
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard.

II. What Was Included in New York's Submittal?

    On April 30, 2003, Carl Johnson, Deputy Commissioner, New York 
State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), submitted to 
EPA a revision to the SIP which included state-proposed revisions to 
NYCRR, Part 228, ``Surface Coating Processes.'' The proposed revisions 
to Part 228 will provide volatile organic compound (VOC) emission 
reductions to address, in part, the shortfall identified by EPA. New 
York used the OTC model rule as a guideline to develop Part 228.

A. What Do the Revisions to Part 228, ``Surface Coating Processes'' 
Consist Of?

    The majority of the proposed revisions to part 228 pertain to 
mobile equipment repair and refinishing (MERR) requirements, including 
VOC content limits for several MERR coating lines. The proposed 
revisions to part 228 establish that, beginning January 1, 2005, a 
person may not apply to mobile equipment or mobile equipment components 
any automotive pretreatment primer, automotive primer-surfacer, 
automotive primer-sealer, automotive topcoat or automotive specialty 
coatings that contain VOCs in excess of the VOC

[[Page 41988]]

content limits specified by New York for those products.
    In addition, the proposed revisions to part 228 establish that, 
beginning January 1, 2001, a person at a facility subject to the MERR 
provisions of Part 228 must use one or more of the following 
application techniques to apply MERR or color-matching coatings: flow/
curtain coating; dip coating; cotton-tipped swab application; electro-
deposition coating; high-volume, low-pressure spraying; electrostatic 
spray; airless spray; and other coating application methods approved by 
the NYSDEC which can achieve emission reductions equivalent to high-
volume, low-pressure spray or electrostatic spray application methods.
    The proposed revisions to part 228 also include clarifications to 
definitions; permit requirements; exemptions; VOC emission control 
requirements; test methods, including capture efficiency test protocols 
and test methods; equipment cleaning specifications; and recordkeeping 
requirements.

III. What Is EPA's Conclusion?

    EPA has evaluated New York's submittal for consistency with the 
Act, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. EPA has determined that the 
proposed revisions made to part 228, entitled, ``Surface Coating 
Processes'' meet the SIP revision requirements of the Act.
    In addition, the proposed revisions to part 228, ``Surface Coating 
Processes'' are being processed under a procedure called parallel 
processing, whereby EPA proposes rulemaking action concurrent with the 
state's procedures for amending its regulations. If the proposed 
revisions to part 228 are substantially different than those identified 
in this document, EPA will evaluate those changes and may publish 
another notice of proposed rulemaking. If no substantial changes are 
made to part 228 as cited in this document, EPA will publish a final 
rulemaking on the revisions. The final rulemaking action by EPA will 
occur only after the SIP revision has been adopted by New York and 
submitted formally to EPA for incorporation into the SIP.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive 
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This 
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any 
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does 
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995 (Public Law 104-4).
    This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because 
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian 
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian 
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive 
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not 
have Federalism implications because it does 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 Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action 
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal 
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of 
power and responsibilities established in the Act. This proposed rule 
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children 
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Act. In this 
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state 
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to 
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Act. Thus, the requirements of section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed rule does not impose 
an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Dated: July 1, 2003.
Jane M. Kenny,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 03-18003 Filed 7-15-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P