[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 9, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57215-57222]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-19627]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 59

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0454; FRL-8478-7]
RIN 2060-A014


Consumer and Commercial Products: Control Techniques Guidelines 
in Lieu of Regulations for Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings; Metal 
Furniture Coatings; and Large Appliance Coatings

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; Notice of final determination and availability of 
final control techniques guidelines.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 183(e)(3)(C) of the Clean Air Act, EPA has 
determined that control techniques guidelines will be substantially as 
effective as national regulations in reducing emissions of volatile 
organic compounds in ozone national ambient air quality standard 
nonattainment areas from the following three Group III product 
categories: paper, film, and foil coatings; metal furniture coatings; 
and large appliance coatings. Based on this determination, EPA is 
issuing control techniques guidelines in lieu of national regulations 
for these product categories. These control techniques guidelines will 
provide guidance to the States concerning EPA's recommendations for 
reasonably available control technology-level controls for these 
product categories. EPA further takes final action to list the three 
Group III consumer and commercial product categories

[[Page 57216]]

addressed in this notice pursuant to Clean Air Act section 183(e).

DATES: This final action is effective on October 9, 2007.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established the following dockets for these actions: 
Consumer and Commercial Products, Group III--Determination to Issue 
Control Techniques Guidelines in Lieu of Regulations, Docket No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2007-0454; Consumer and Commercial Products--Paper, Film, and 
Foil Coatings, Docket No.EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0336; Consumer and Commercial 
Products--Metal Furniture Coatings, Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0334; 
and Consumer and Commercial Products--Large Appliance Coatings, Docket 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0329. All documents in the docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business 
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is 
not placed on the Internet and is publicly available only in hard copy 
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either 
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 
the EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open 
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal 
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 
566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-
1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning the CAA 
section 183(e) consumer and commercial products program, contact Mr. 
Bruce Moore, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 
Sector Policies and Programs Division, Natural Resources and Commerce 
Group (E143-03), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, 
telephone number: (919) 541-5460, fax number (919) 541-3470, e-mail 
address: [email protected]. For further information on technical 
issues concerning the determination and control techniques guidelines 
(CTG) for paper, film, and foil coatings, contact: Ms. Kim Teal, U.S. 
EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and 
Programs Division, Natural Resources and Commerce Group (E143-03), 
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number: (919) 
541-5580, e-mail address: [email protected]. For further information on 
technical issues concerning the determination and CTG for metal 
furniture coatings, contact: Ms. Martha Smith, U.S. EPA, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division, 
Natural Resources and Commerce Group (E143-03), Research Triangle Park, 
North Carolina 27711, telephone number: (919) 541-2421, e-mail address: 
[email protected].
    For further information on technical issues concerning the 
determination and CTG for large appliance coatings, contact: Mr. Lynn 
Dail, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector 
Policies and Programs Division, Natural Resources and Commerce Group 
(E143-03), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone 
number: (919) 541-2363, e-mail address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Entities Potentially Affected by this Action. The entities 
potentially affected by this action include industrial facilities that 
use the respective consumer and commercial products covered in this 
action as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Examples of affected
          Category               NAICS code \a\           entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paper, film, and foil         322221, 322222,       Facilities that
 coatings.                     322223, 322224,       apply coatings to
                               322225, 322226,       packaging paper,
                               322229, 325992,       paper bags,
                               326111, 326112,       laminated aluminum
                               326113, 32613,        foil, coated
                               32791, 339944.        paperboard,
                                                     photographic film,
                                                     abrasives, carbon
                                                     paper, and other
                                                     coated paper, film
                                                     and foil products.
Metal furniture coatings....  337124, 337214,       Facilities that
                               337127, 337215,       apply coatings to
                               337127, 332951,       metal furniture
                               332116, 332612,       components or
                               337215, 335121,       products.
                               335122, 339111,
                               339114, 337127,
                               81142.
Large appliance coatings....  335221, 335222,       Facilities that
                               335224, 335228,       apply coatings to
                               333312, 333319.       household and
                                                     commercial cooking
                                                     equipment,
                                                     refrigerators,
                                                     laundry equipment,
                                                     laundry drycleaning
                                                     and pressing
                                                     equipment.
Federal Government..........  ....................  Not affected.
State/local/tribal            ....................  State, local and
 government.                                         tribal regulatory
                                                     agencies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this 
action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this 
action to a particular entity, consult the appropriate EPA contact 
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.

World Wide Web (WWW)

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
this final action will also be available on the Worldwide Web (WWW) 
through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a 
copy of the final action will be posted on the TTN's policy and 
guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at the following 
address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. The TTN provides information 
and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.

Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial review of EPA's 
listing and final determination is available only by filing a petition 
for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
Circuit by December 10, 2007. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, 
only an objection to the final determination that was raised with 
reasonable specificity during the period for public comment can be 
raised during judicial review.

Organization of This Document

    The information presented in this document is organized as follows:

I. Background Information
    A. The Ozone Problem
    B. Statutory and Regulatory Background
    C. Significance of CTGs
II. Summary of Changes to the Final CTGs
    A. Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings
    B. Metal Furniture Coatings and Large Appliance Coatings
III. Responses to Significant Comments on EPA's Determination
IV. Statutory and Executive Order (EO) Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

[[Page 57217]]

    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. Background Information

A. The Ozone Problem

    Ground-level ozone, a major component of smog, is formed in the 
atmosphere by reactions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides 
of nitrogen in the presence of sunlight. The formation of ground-level 
ozone is a complex process that is affected by many variables.
    Exposure to ground-level ozone is associated with a wide variety of 
human health effects, as well as agricultural crop loss, and damage to 
forests and ecosystems. Controlled human exposure studies show that 
acute health effects are induced by short-term (1 to 2 hour) exposures 
(observed at concentrations as low as 0.12 parts per million (ppm)), 
generally while individuals are engaged in moderate or heavy exertion, 
and by prolonged (6 to 8 hour) exposures to ozone (observed at 
concentrations as low as 0.08 ppm and possibly lower), typically while 
individuals are engaged in moderate exertion. Transient effects from 
acute exposures include pulmonary inflammation, respiratory symptoms, 
effects on exercise performance, and increased airway responsiveness. 
Epidemiological studies have shown associations between ambient ozone 
levels and increased susceptibility to respiratory infection, increased 
hospital admissions and emergency room visits. Groups at increased risk 
of experiencing elevated exposures include active children, outdoor 
workers, and others who regularly engage in outdoor activities. Those 
most susceptible to the effects of ozone include those with preexisting 
respiratory disease, children, and older adults. The literature 
suggests the possibility that long-term exposures to ozone may cause 
chronic health effects (e.g., structural damage to lung tissue and 
accelerated decline in baseline lung function).

B. Statutory and Regulatory Background

    Under section 183(e) of the CAA, EPA conducted a study of VOC 
emissions from the use of consumer and commercial products to assess 
their potential to contribute to levels of ozone that violate the 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone, and to 
establish criteria for regulating VOC emissions from these products. 
Section 183(e) of the CAA directs EPA to list for regulation those 
categories of products that account for at least 80 percent of the VOC 
emissions, on a reactivity-adjusted basis, from consumer and commercial 
products in areas that violate the NAAQS for ozone (i.e., ozone 
nonattainment areas), and to divide the list of categories to be 
regulated into four groups. EPA published the initial list in the 
Federal Register on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15264). In that notice, EPA 
stated that it may amend the list of products for regulation, and the 
groups of product categories, in order to achieve an effective 
regulatory program in accordance with the Agency's discretion under CAA 
section 183(e).
    EPA has revised the list several times. See 70 FR 69759 (November 
17, 2005); 64 FR 13422 (March 18, 1999). Most recently, in May 2006, 
EPA revised the list to add one product category, portable fuel 
containers, and to remove one product category, petroleum dry cleaning 
solvents. See 71 FR 28320 (May 16, 2006). As a result of these 
revisions, Group III of the list comprises five product categories: 
portable fuel containers; aerosol spray paints; paper, film, and foil 
coatings; metal furniture coatings; and large appliance coatings. 
Pursuant to the court's order in Sierra Club v. EPA, 1:01-cv-01597-PLF 
(D.C. Cir., March 31, 2006), EPA must take final action on the product 
categories in Group III by September 30, 2007. The portable fuel 
containers and aerosol spray paints categories are addressed in 
separate rulemaking actions.\1\ The remaining three categories in Group 
III are the subject of this action. On July 10, 2007, EPA published its 
proposed determination that a CTG is substantially as effective as a 
regulation for each of these three categories and announced 
availability of draft CTGs for paper, film, and foil coatings; metal 
furniture coating; and large appliance coatings. See 72 FR 37582.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA promulgated a national regulation that addresses VOC 
emissions from portable fuel containers on February 26, 2007 (72 FR 
8428). National VOC emission standards for aerosol coatings 
currently are under development.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any regulations issued under CAA section 183(e) must be based on 
``best available controls (BAC).'' CAA section 183(e)(1)(A) defines BAC 
as ``the degree of emissions reduction that the Administrator 
determines, on the basis of technological and economic feasibility, 
health, environmental, and energy impacts, is achievable through the 
application of the most effective equipment, measures, processes, 
methods, systems or techniques, including chemical reformulation, 
product or feedstock substitution, repackaging, and directions for use, 
consumption, storage, or disposal.'' CAA section 183(e) also provides 
EPA with authority to use any system or systems of regulation that EPA 
determines is the most appropriate for the product category. Under 
these provisions, EPA has previously issued ``national'' regulations 
for autobody refinishing coatings, consumer products, architectural 
coatings, and portable fuel containers.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See 63 FR 48806, 48819, and 48848 (September 11, 1998); and 
72 FR 8428 (February 26, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 183(e)(3)(C) further provides that EPA may issue a CTG 
in lieu of a national regulation for a product category where EPA 
determines that the CTG will be ``substantially as effective as 
regulations'' in reducing emissions of VOC in ozone nonattainment 
areas. The statute does not specify how EPA is to make this 
determination, but does provide a fundamental distinction between 
national regulations and CTGs.
    Specifically, for national regulations, CAA section 183(e) defines 
regulated entities as:

    (i) * * * manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or 
importers of consumer or commercial products for sale or 
distribution in interstate commerce in the United States; or (ii) 
manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or importers that 
supply the entities listed under clause (i) with such products for 
sale or distribution in interstate commerce in the United States.

    Thus, under CAA section 183(e), a regulation for consumer or 
commercial products is limited to measures applicable to manufacturers, 
processors, distributors, or importers of consumer and commercial 
products supplied to the consumer or industry. CAA section 183(e) does 
not authorize EPA to issue national regulations that would directly 
regulate end-users of these products. By contrast, CTGs are guidance 
documents that recommend reasonably available control technology (RACT) 
measures that States can adopt and apply to the end users of products. 
This dichotomy

[[Page 57218]]

(i.e., that EPA cannot directly regulate end-users under CAA section 
183(e), but can address end-users through a CTG) created by Congress is 
relevant to EPA's evaluation of the relative merits of a national 
regulation versus a CTG.

C. Significance of CTGs

    CAA section 172(c)(1) provides that state implementation plans 
(SIPs) for nonattainment areas must include ``reasonably available 
control measures (RACM),'' including RACT, for sources of emissions. 
CAA section 182(b)(2)(A) provides that for certain nonattainment areas, 
States must revise their SIPs to include RACT for each category of VOC 
sources covered by a CTG document issued between November 15, 1990, and 
the date of attainment. States subject only to the RACT requirements in 
CAA section 172(c)(1) may take action in response to this guidance, as 
necessary to achieve attainment of the national primary ambient air 
quality standards.
    EPA defines RACT as ``the lowest emission limitation that a 
particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control 
technology that is reasonably available considering technological and 
economic feasibility, 44 FR 53761 (September 17, 1979).'' In subsequent 
notices, EPA has addressed how States can meet the RACT requirements of 
the Act. Significantly, RACT for a particular industry is determined on 
a case-by-case basis, considering issues of technological and economic 
feasibility.
    EPA provides States with guidance concerning what types of controls 
could constitute RACT for a given source category through issuance of a 
CTG. The recommendations in the CTG are based on available data and 
information and may not apply to a particular situation based upon the 
circumstances of a specific source. States can follow the CTG and adopt 
State regulations to implement the recommendations contained therein, 
or they can adopt alternative approaches. In either event, States must 
submit their RACT rules to EPA for review and approval as part of the 
SIP process. EPA will evaluate the rules and determine, through notice 
and comment rulemaking in the SIP approval process, whether the 
submitted rules meet the RACT requirements of the CAA and EPA's 
regulations. To the extent a State adopts any of the recommendations in 
a CTG into its State RACT rules, interested parties can raise questions 
and objections about the substance of the guidance and the 
appropriateness of the application of the guidance to a particular 
situation during the development of the State rules and EPA's SIP 
approval process.
    We encourage States in developing their RACT rules to consider 
carefully the facts and circumstances of the particular sources in 
their States because, as noted above, RACT is determined on a case-by-
case basis, considering issues of technological and economic 
feasibility. For example, a State may decide not to require 90 percent 
control efficiency at facilities that are already well controlled, if 
the additional emission reductions would not be cost-effective. States 
may also want to consider reactivity-based approaches, as appropriate, 
in developing their RACT regulations.\3\ Finally, if States consider 
requiring more stringent VOC content limits than those recommended in 
the CTGs, States may also wish to consider averaging, as appropriate. 
In general, the RACT requirement is applied on a short-term basis up to 
24 hours.\4\ However, EPA guidance addresses averaging times longer 
than 24 hours under certain conditions.\5\ The EPA's ``Economic 
Incentive Policy'' \6\ provides guidance on use of long-term averages 
with regard to RACT and generally provides for averaging times of no 
greater than 30 days. Thus, if the appropriate conditions are present, 
States may wish to consider the use of averaging in conjunction with 
more stringent limits. Because of the nature of averaging, however, we 
would expect that any State RACT Rules that allow for averaging also 
include appropriate recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Interim Guidance on Control of Volatile Organic Compounds 
in Ozone State Implementation Plans,'' 70 FR 54046 (September 13, 
2005).
    \4\ See, e.g., 52 FR at 45108, col. 2, ``Compliance Periods'' 
(November 24, 1987). ``VOC rules should describe explicitly the 
compliance timeframe associated with each emission limit (e.g., 
instantaneous or daily). However, where the rules are silent on 
compliance time, EPA will interpret it as instantaneous.''
    \5\ Memorandum from John O'Connor, Acting Director of the Office 
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, January 20, 1984, ``Averaging 
Times for Compliance with VOC Emission Limits--SIP Revision 
Policy.''
    \6\ ``Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs, 
January 2001,'' available at http://www.epa.gov/region07/programs/artd/air/policy/search.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By this action, we are issuing final CTGs that cover three product 
categories in Group III of the CAA section 183(e) list. These CTGs are 
guidance to the States and provide recommendations only. A State can 
determine what constitutes RACT for these three product categories, and 
EPA will review the State's rules reflecting RACT in the context of the 
SIP process and determine whether those rules meet the RACT 
requirements of the Act and its implementing regulations.
    Finally, CAA section 182(b)(2) provides that a CTG issued after 
1990 specify the date by which a State must submit a SIP revision in 
response to the CTG. In the CTGs at issue here, EPA provides that 
States should submit their SIP revisions within 1 year of the date that 
the CTGs are finalized.

II. Summary of Changes to the Final CTGs

A. Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings

    The final CTG has been revised to provide separate applicability 
recommendations for coating operations and cleaning operations. For 
coating operations, we have changed the applicability recommendation to 
apply to individual coating lines. Specifically, we recommend that the 
control measures recommended in the final CTG apply to any coating line 
with the potential to emit 25 tons or more per year (tpy) of VOC, 
before consideration of control. This applicability level for coating 
operations is the same applicability level that we recommended for 
coatings, inks and adhesives in the final CTG for flexible package 
printing and for heatset dryers in the final CTG for offset 
lithographic printing and letterpress printing.
    We made this change in response to a comment that the cost of using 
add-on controls to control coating emissions from an individual coating 
line with potential to emit of 3 tpy would be unreasonable compared to 
the emission reduction that would be achieved and that it would be even 
more costly to control multiple coating lines with total potential to 
emit of 3 tpy. The commenter provided information on the cost of 
controlling an individual coating line with the potential to emit 3 
tpy. The commenter also provided information on the cost of controlling 
an individual coating line with the potential to emit 25 tpy. We agree 
with the commenter that, for purposes of recommending an applicability 
threshold for add-on controls, it is more appropriate to examine the 
cost of add-on control for a single coating line than the cost of add-
on control for all of the coating lines at a facility because the 
number of coating lines at a facility varies. Based on the information 
provided by the commenter and similar cost analyses we performed during 
the development of the CTG for flexible package printing and the CTG 
for offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing, we conclude 
that add-on

[[Page 57219]]

control for a coating line with the potential to emit 25 or more tpy 
will generally be cost effective and that add-on control for a coating 
line with the potential to emit below 25 tpy will generally be too 
costly for the emission reduction that would be achieved.
    We continue to recommend that the final CTG work practice 
recommendations for cleaning apply to paper, film and foil coating 
facilities with actual emissions of 6.8 kg/day (15 lb/day) or more, 
before consideration of controls, from all covered paper, film and foil 
coating operations and related cleaning activities at the facility. 
Since work practices are carried out on a facility-wide basis, we 
believe it is most appropriate for the applicability of work practices 
to be determined on a facility-wide basis.
    We expect the change to our applicability recommendation, as 
reflected in the final CTGs, to have little, if any, effect on VOC 
emission reductions from this category. Because the majority of 
emissions from paper, film, and foil coating come from coating lines 
emitting more than 25 tpy VOC before consideration of control, we 
anticipate that the change to our applicability recommendation in the 
final CTG will have a negligible impact on the VOC emission reduction 
estimates presented at proposal. Therefore, our determination that the 
CTG will be substantially as effective as a national regulation for 
this category is not affected by this change.
    We have also clarified in the final CTG that (1) daily within-line 
averaging, and (2) using low VOC coatings in conjunction with capture 
and control devices are viable options for achieving the recommended 
limits for coating operations in the final CTG. These types of 
compliance options were available in the 1977 CTG and are present in 
most existing RACT regulations.

B. Metal Furniture Coatings and Large Appliance Coatings

    EPA has changed the low VOC content coatings recommendation in both 
the final metal furniture coatings CTG and the final large appliance 
coatings CTG. The draft CTGs for these product categories recommended 
an emissions limit of 0.275 kg VOC/l (2.3 lbs/gal) of coating, 
excluding water and exempt compounds, as applied. This recommendation 
was based on the California South Coast Air Quality Management District 
(South Coast) regulations limiting VOC emissions from general purpose 
baked coatings used in metal products coating operations. Based on the 
public comments, we determined that the recommendation in the draft CTG 
may inadvertently exclude certain coatings that are needed in the metal 
furniture and large appliance industries. Therefore, in the final CTGs, 
we have added to our recommendations other provisions of the South 
Coast regulation, which is the regulation that formed the basis of our 
recommendations in the draft CTGs. The additional provisions of the 
South Coast regulation that we are now recommending include separate 
VOC limits for certain specialty coatings and exemptions for certain 
specialty coating operations. We believe that these other provisions of 
the South Coast regulation are necessary to accommodate the range of 
coatings that are needed in the metal furniture and large appliance 
industries.
    Specifically, consistent with the South Coast regulation, the final 
CTGs for metal furniture coatings and large appliance coatings include 
separate recommended limits for baked coatings and air-dried coatings 
in the following categories: general, one component; general, multi-
component; extreme high gloss; extreme performance; heat resistant; 
metallic; pretreatment; and solar absorbent. Also, consistent with the 
South Coast regulation, EPA recommends that the following types of 
specialty coatings and coating operations be exempt from VOC content 
limits: stencil coatings; safety-indicating coatings; solid-film 
lubricants; electric-insulating and thermal-conducting coatings; touch-
up and repair coatings; and coating application utilizing hand-held 
aerosol cans. Further details of these recommendations can be found in 
the CTGs.
    Because the majority of liquid coatings used in metal furniture and 
large appliance coating operations fall into the ``general, one 
component'' coatings category, for which the recommended limits are 
unchanged from the limit recommended in the draft CTGs, we do not 
anticipate that the changes made in the final CTG will significantly 
alter the VOC emission reduction estimates presented at proposal. 
Therefore, the changes described above do not affect our determination 
that CTGs will be substantially as effective as national regulations 
for metal furniture coatings and large appliance coating.
    We have also clarified in the final CTGs that (1) daily within-
coating unit averaging, and (2) using low VOC coatings in conjunction 
with capture and control devices are viable options for achieving the 
recommended limits for coating operations in the final CTGs. These 
types of compliance options were available in the 1977 CTGs and are 
present in most existing RACT regulations.

III. Responses to Significant Comments on EPA's Determination

    With the exception of one commenter, all other commenters that 
addressed EPA's proposed CAA section 183(e)(3)(C) determination that 
CTGs will be substantially as effective as national regulations in 
reducing emissions of VOC in ozone nonattainment areas from the three 
product categories associated with this action agreed with the proposed 
determination.
    In support of the proposed determination and use of CTGs, 
commenters remarked that the CTG approach would afford industry 
flexibility to achieve VOC emission reductions while not compromising 
their ability to meet customer needs. We also received specific 
comments agreeing with EPA's position that State regulation of 
facilities that apply the coatings covered by the CTGs will result in a 
greater volume of emission reductions than would limiting the VOC 
content of the products through a national regulation. Finally, we 
received comments noting that the use of CTGs allows States greater 
flexibility to tailor regulatory requirements to their specific 
circumstances. The commenter stated that site-specific factors 
necessitate the need for flexible controls. Because there can be great 
variation in the operations of facilities and the environmental 
conditions in which they operate, State regulators should be granted 
some latitude to fashion control strategies to address the variables 
that are inherent to the formation of ground-level ozone in their 
States. The commenter concluded that the CTG approach affords this 
flexibility by allowing the use of a variety of mechanisms to achieve 
emission reductions, including the use of low-VOC coatings, add-on 
control devices, work practice standards, restrictive permitting, 
averaging of materials, and vapor pressure and reactivity measures.
    The only adverse comment on the determination that we received 
asserted that CTGs will not be effective because they are voluntary 
measures. We disagree with the commenter. CAA section 183(e)(3)(C) 
specifically authorizes EPA to issue CTGs, which are guidance, in lieu 
of national regulations if EPA determines that the CTGs will be as 
substantially as effective as regulations in reducing emissions of VOC 
in ozone nonattainment areas. In our proposal, we presented the 
rationale for our determination that a CTG is

[[Page 57220]]

substantially as effective as a rule for each of the three categories 
here. The commenter raised no concerns or issues with that rationale. 
Furthermore, the commenter is incorrect in comparing CTGs to voluntary 
measures. As discussed in section I.B. of this notice, the CTGs contain 
recommendations. Certain States must revise their SIP to include RACT 
for paper film and foil coatings, metal furniture coatings, and large 
appliance coatings, as a result of EPA's issuance of the CTGs for these 
three categories. The CTGs provide States with guidance from EPA 
concerning the types of controls that could constitute RACT for these 
three product categories. Because the recommendations in the CTG are 
based on available data and information, they may not apply to a 
particular situation based upon the circumstances. States have the 
flexibility to either adopt EPA's recommendations in the CTGs as RACT 
or develop alternative approaches that are better suited for the 
sources within their States. In either event, States must submit their 
RACT rules to EPA for review and approval as part of the notice and 
comment SIP process. Finally, Congress was well aware of the nature and 
structure of CTGs when it included CAA section 183(e)(3)(C) in the 
statute, affording EPA the opportunity to issue CTGs in lieu of 
national regulations. EPA acted consistently with the CAA in issuing 
the determination, and the commenter has not challenged the rationale 
that EPA provided in support of that determination.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order (EO) Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under EO 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a 
``significant regulatory action,'' since it is deemed to raise novel 
legal or policy issues. Accordingly, EPA submitted this action to the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under EO 12866, and 
any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been 
documented in the docket for this action.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 
This action does not contain any information collection requirements.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 
provide information to or for a Federal Agency. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute 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 organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small 
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined 
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of 
a city, county, town, school district, or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this final rule on small 
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final 
rule will not impose any requirements on small entities. EPA is taking 
final action to list the three Group III consumer and commercial 
product categories addressed in this notice for purposes of CAA section 
183(e) of the Act. The listing action alone does not impose any 
regulatory requirements. EPA has also determined that, for each of the 
three product categories at issue, a CTG will be substantially as 
effective as a national regulation in achieving VOC emission reductions 
in ozone nonattainment areas. This final determination means that EPA 
has concluded that it is not appropriate to issue Federal regulations 
under CAA section 183(e) to regulate VOC emissions from these three 
product categories. Instead, EPA has concluded that it is appropriate 
to issue guidance in the form of CTGs that provide recommendations to 
States concerning potential methods to achieve needed VOC emission 
reductions from these product categories. In addition to the final 
determination, EPA is also announcing availability of the final CTGs 
for these three product categories. These CTGs are guidance documents. 
EPA does not directly regulate any small entities through the issuance 
of a CTG. Instead, EPA issues CTG to provide States with guidance on 
developing appropriate regulations to obtain VOC emission reductions 
from the affected sources within certain nonattainment areas. EPA's 
issuance of a CTG does trigger an obligation on the part of certain 
States to issue State regulations, but States are not obligated to 
issue regulations identical to the Agency's CTG. States may follow the 
guidance in the CTG or deviate from it, and the ultimate determination 
of whether a State regulation meets the RACT requirements of the CAA 
would be determined through notice and comment rulemaking in the 
Agency's action on each State's State Implementation Plan. Thus, States 
retain discretion in determining to what degree to follow the CTGs.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L. 
104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and to 
adopt the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome 
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of 
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with

[[Page 57221]]

applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an 
alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective or least 
burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final 
rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before EPA 
establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it 
must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government 
agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected 
small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to 
have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory 
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and 
informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with 
the regulatory requirements.
    This rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory 
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal 
governments or the private sector because they impose no enforceable 
duty on any State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. 
(Note: The term ``enforceable duty'' does not include duties and 
conditions in voluntary Federal contracts for goods and services.) 
Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 
205 of the UMRA. In addition, we have determined that this rule 
contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments because they contain no regulatory 
requirements that apply to such governments or impose obligations upon 
them. Therefore, this action is not subject to the requirements of 
section 203 of UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), 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 EO 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.''
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It 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 Executive Order 13132. The CAA establishes the 
relationship between the Federal Government and the States, and this 
action does not impact that relationship. Thus, Executive Order 13132 
does not apply to this rule. However, in the spirit of EO 13132, and 
consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and 
State and local governments, EPA solicited comments from State and 
local officials. EPA received no adverse comments from State or local 
governments on these issues.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
With Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by Tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have Tribal implications.''
    This final rule does not have Tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. They do not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian Tribes, in that the listing action and the final 
determination impose no regulatory burdens on tribes. Furthermore, the 
listing action and the final determination do not affect the 
relationship or distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal government and Indian Tribes. The CAA and the Tribal Authority 
Rule (TAR) establish the relationship of the Federal government and 
Tribes in implementing the Clean Air Act. Thus, Executive Order 13175 
does not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under EO 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.
    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that are based on health and safety risks, such that 
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has 
the potential to influence the regulations. This rule is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an environmental 
standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in 
Executive Order 13211, ``Action Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001)) because it is not likely to have a significant adverse 
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. These actions 
impose no regulatory requirements and are therefore not likely to have 
any adverse energy effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    As noted in the proposed rule, Section 12(d) of the National 
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 
104-113, Section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use 
voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless to 
do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards 
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, 
business practices, etc.) that are developed or adopted by voluntary 
consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, 
through OMB, with explanations when the Agency does not use available 
and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA 
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes 
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing,

[[Page 57222]]

as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on 
minority populations and low-income populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that the listing action and the final 
determination will not have disproportionately high and adverse human 
health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations 
because it increases the level of environmental protection to 
populations in affected ozone nonattainment areas without having any 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on any populations, including any minority or low-income 
populations. The purpose of section 183(e) is to obtain VOC emission 
reductions to assist in the attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The health 
and environmental risks associated with ozone were considered in the 
establishment of the ozone NAAQS. The level is designed to be 
protective of the public with an adequate margin of safety. EPA's 
listing of the products and its determination that CTGs are 
substantially as effective as regulations are actions intended to help 
States achieve the NAAQS in the most appropriate fashion.

K. Congressional Review Act

    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 notice 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 notice in the Federal Register. A major rule 
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This rule will be effective October 9, 2007.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 59

    Air pollution control, Consumer and commercial products, 
Confidential business information, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 28, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code 
of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 59--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 59 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414 and 7511b(e).

Subpart A--General

0
2. Section 59.1 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  59.1  Final determinations under section 183(e)(3)(C) of the 
Clean Air Act.

    This section identifies the consumer and commercial product 
categories for which EPA has determined that control techniques 
guidelines (CTGs) will be substantially as effective as regulations in 
reducing volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions in ozone 
nonattainment areas:
    (a) Wood furniture coatings;
    (b) Aerospace coatings;
    (c) Shipbuilding and repair coatings;
    (d) Lithographic printing materials;
    (e) Letterpress printing materials;
    (f) Flexible packaging printing materials;
    (g) Flat wood paneling coatings;
    (h) Industrial cleaning solvents;
    (i) Paper, film, and foil coatings;
    (j) Metal furniture coatings; and
    (k) Large appliance coatings.

[FR Doc. E7-19627 Filed 10-5-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P