[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 95 (Thursday, May 16, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28773-28775]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-11789]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0066; FRL- 9814-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Adoption of Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous
Metal and Plastic Parts Which Includes Pleasure Craft Coating
Operations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Maryland State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Maryland Department of the
Environment (MDE) on January 10, 2013. The SIP revision consists of a
new regulation pertaining to control of volatile organic compound
emissions from pleasure craft coating operations. This action is being
taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 17, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2013-0066 by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. Email: [email protected].
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0066, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2013-0066. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the Maryland Department of the Environment, 1800
Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 21230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat, (215) 814-2036, or by
email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. EPA Action
II. Background
III. SIP Revision Submitted by the State of Maryland
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Review
I. EPA Action
EPA is proposing to approve revisions to Maryland's SIP which were
submitted by MDE on January 10, 2013. The SIP revision submittal adopts
the requirements as recommended by EPA's control technique guidelines
(CTG) for Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Plastic Coating (MMPPC)
operations and as recommended by trade associations representing the
pleasure craft industry.
[[Page 28774]]
Specifically, MDE has added Regulation .27-1 under COMAR 26.11.19 to
reduce further volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from pleasure
craft coating operations. This revision reflects technology
developments and expands VOC emission controls, as well as reflects the
recommended reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements
in EPA's CTG for MMPPC.
II. Background
Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides that SIPs for nonattainment
areas must include reasonably available control measures (RACM),
including RACT, for sources of emissions. Section 182(b)(2)(A) provides
that for certain nonattainment areas, states must revise their SIP to
include RACT for sources of VOC emissions covered by a CTG document
issued after November 15, 1990 and prior to the area's date of
attainment. 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).
CTGs are documents issued by EPA intended to provide state and
local air pollution control authorities information that should assist
them in determining RACT for VOC from various sources. Section
183(e)(3)(c) provides that EPA may issue a CTG in lieu of a national
regulation as RACT 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 recommendations in
the CTG are based upon available data and information and may not apply
to a particular situation based upon the circumstances. States can
follow the CTG and adopt state regulations to implement the
recommendations contained therein, or they can adopt alternative
approaches. In either case, states must submit their RACT rules to EPA
for review and approval as part of the SIP process.
EPA developed the CTG for MMPPC in September 2008. The
miscellaneous metal product and plastic parts surface coatings
categories under section 183(e) of the CAA include the coatings that
are applied to the surfaces of a varied range of metal and plastic
parts and products. Such parts or products are constructed either
entirely or partially from metal or plastic. These miscellaneous metal
products and plastic parts include, but are not limited to, metal and
plastic components of the following types of products as well as the
products themselves: Fabricated metal products, molded plastic parts,
small and large farm machinery, commercial and industrial machinery and
equipment, automotive or transportation equipment, interior or exterior
automotive parts, construction equipment, motor vehicle accessories,
bicycles and sporting goods, toys, recreational vehicles, pleasure
craft (recreational boats), extruded aluminum structural components,
railroad cars, heavier vehicles, lawn and garden equipment, business
machines, laboratory and medical equipment, electronic equipment, steel
drums, metal pipes, and numerous other industrial and household
products.
The pleasure craft coating category does not include coatings that
are a part of other product categories listed under Section 183(e) of
the CAA for which CTGs have been published or included in other CTGs.
As a result, members of the pleasure craft coatings industry contacted
EPA requesting reconsideration of the pleasure craft VOC limits
contained in EPA's 2008 MMPPC CTG. In response, EPA issued a memorandum
on June 1, 2010, titled ``Control Technique Guidelines for
Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Part Coatings--Industry Request for
Reconsideration,'' recommending that the pleasure craft industry work
with state agencies during their RACT rule development process to
assess what is reasonable for the specific sources regulated. EPA has
stated that states can use the recommendations from the MMPPC CTG to
form their own determinations as to what constitutes RACT for pleasure
craft coating operations in their particular ozone nonattainment area.
CTGs impose no legally binding requirements on any entity, including
pleasure craft coating facilities. As stated in the memorandum, EPA
will evaluate state-developed RACT rules and determine whether the
submitted rules meet the RACT requirements of the CAA.
III. SIP Revision Submitted by the State of Maryland
On January 10, 2013, MDE submitted a SIP revision adopting the
recommendations contained in both EPA's MMPPC CTG and in comments from
trade associations representing the pleasure craft industry for the
control of VOC as RACT. The SIP revision adds Regulation .27-1 under
COMAR 26.11.19 in order to: (1) Establish applicability for pleasure
craft and fiberglass boat coating operations at facilities with actual
VOC emissions of 15 pounds or more per day (15 lb/day) from coating
operations as determined on a monthly average on or after January 1,
2013; (2) establish exemptions for certain types of coatings; (3) add
definitions and terms to reflect pleasure craft coating operations; (4)
incorporate by reference the standard test method for Specular Gloss;
(5) establish that the least stringent emission limitation is
applicable if more than one emission limitation applies to a specific
coating; (6) establish application methods; and (7) specify VOC limit
requirements for pleasure craft coating operations in Table 1 below.
Table 1--Pleasure Craft Coating Standards
[Expressed in terms of mass of VOC per volume of coating excluding water
and exempt compounds, as applied]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pounds (lbs) VOC/ Kilograms (kg) VOC/
Coating types gallon liter
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extreme high gloss topcoat...... 5.0 0.60
High gloss topcoat.............. 3.5 0.42
Pretreatment wash primers....... 6.5 0.78
Finish primer/surface:
Applicable through March 31, 5.0 0.60
2014.......................
Applicable through March 31, 3.5 0.42
2014.......................
High build primer/surface....... 2.8 0.34
Aluminum substrate antifoulant 4.7 0.56
coating........................
Antifouling sealer/tiecoat...... 3.5 0.42
Other substrate antifoulant 3.3 0.40
coating........................
All other pleasure craft surface 3.5 0.42
coatings.......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 28775]]
More detailed information on these provisions can be found in the
technical support document located in the docket prepared for this
rulemaking action.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the State of Maryland SIP revision
submitted on January 10, 2013, adopting the requirements as recommended
by the MMPPC CTG and adopting the pleasure craft industry
recommendations for the following four coating categories: Finish
Primer/Surfacer; Antifouling Sealer/Tiecoat; Other Substrate
Antifoulant; and Extreme High Gloss. For these four categories,
Maryland reviewed industry data and determined that for the purpose of
functionality, cost, and VOC emissions, the alternative limits adopted
for these four coating categories constitute RACT. EPA believes that
Maryland's approach is consistent with the guidance memorandum
entitled, ``Control Technique Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and
Plastic Part Coatings--Industry Request for Reconsideration,'' and
therefore, believes that these regulations reflect RACT. EPA concurs
with MDE's analysis in the SIP submittal that this regulation reflects
RACT. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule, pertaining to the State of
Maryland's amendments to regulations for the control of VOCs for MMPPC,
does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to
apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it
will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 2, 2013.
W.C. Early,
Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2013-11789 Filed 5-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P