[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12673-12677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05872]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0342; FRL-9975-86-Region 3]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Pennsylvania; Pennsylvania's Adoption of Control Techniques Guidelines 
for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a 
revision to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's state implementation 
plan (SIP). The revision includes amendments to the Pennsylvania 
Department of Environmental Protection's (PADEP) regulations 
incorporating the control techniques guidelines (CTG) for the 
automobile and light-duty truck assembly coatings category and 
addresses the requirement to adopt reasonably available control 
technology (RACT) for that category. This action is being taken under 
the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This final rule is effective on April 23, 2018.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0342. All documents in the docket are listed on 
the http://www.regulations.gov website. 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 will be publicly available only in hard 
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through 
http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability 
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Schulingkamp, (215) 814-2021, 
or by email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Ground level ozone is formed in the atmosphere by photochemical 
reactions between volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides 
(NOX), and carbon monoxide (CO) in the presence of sunlight. 
In order to reduce ozone concentrations in the ambient air, the CAA 
requires all nonattainment areas to apply controls on VOC and 
NOX emission sources to achieve emission reductions. Among 
effective control measures, RACT controls significantly reduce VOC and 
NOX emissions from major stationary sources. NOX 
and VOC are referred to as ozone precursors and are emitted by many 
types of pollution sources, including motor vehicles, power plants, 
industrial facilities, and area wide sources, such as consumer products 
and lawn and garden equipment. Scientific evidence indicates that 
adverse public health effects occur following exposure to ozone. These 
effects are more pronounced in children and adults with lung disease. 
Breathing air containing ozone can reduce lung function and inflame 
airways, which can increase respiratory symptoms and aggravate asthma 
or other lung diseases.
    RACT is defined 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 at 53762, September 17, 1979). Section 182 of 
the CAA sets forth two separate RACT requirements for

[[Page 12674]]

ozone nonattainment areas. The first requirement, contained in section 
182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, and referred to as RACT fix-up, requires the 
correction of RACT rules for which EPA identified deficiencies before 
the CAA was amended in 1990. Pennsylvania previously corrected its 
deficiencies under the 1-hour ozone standard and has no further 
deficiencies to correct under this section of the CAA. The second 
requirement, set forth in section 182(b)(2) of the CAA, applies to 
moderate (or worse) ozone nonattainment areas as well as to marginal 
and attainment areas in ozone transport regions (OTRs) established 
pursuant to section 184 of the CAA, and requires these areas to 
implement RACT controls on all major VOC and NOX emission 
sources and on all sources and source categories covered by a CTG 
issued by EPA.\1\ See CAA section 182(b)(2) and 184(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ CTGs are documents issued by EPA intended to provide state 
and local air pollution control authorities information to assist 
them in determining RACT for VOC from various sources. 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. Pursuant to section 184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, all 
areas in the OTR must implement RACT with respect to sources of VOCs 
in the state covered by a CTG issued before or after November 15, 
1990.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In subsequent Federal Register notices, EPA has addressed how 
states can meet the RACT requirements of the CAA. In June 1977, EPA 
published a CTG for automobile and light-duty truck assembly coatings 
(EPA-450/2-77-008). This CTG discusses the nature of VOC emissions from 
this industry, available control technologies for addressing such 
emissions, the costs of available control options, and other items. EPA 
also published a national emission standard for hazardous air 
pollutants (NESHAP) for surface coating of automobiles and light-duty 
trucks in 2004 (40 CFR part 63, subpart IIII).
    In 2008, after conducting a review of currently existing state and 
local VOC emission reduction approaches for this industry, reviewing 
the 1977 CTG and the NESHAP for this industry, and considering the 
information that has become available since then, EPA developed a new 
CTG for automobile and light-duty truck assembly coatings, entitled 
Control Techniques Guidelines for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck 
Assembly Coatings (Publication No. EPA 453/R-08-006).
    On November 18, 2016, the PADEP submitted a formal revision to the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's SIP to adopt EPA's 2008 CTG for 
automobile and light-duty truck assembly coatings. The new regulation 
reflecting this adoption can be found under 25 Pa. Code Chapter 129--
Standards for Sources. Specifically, this revision adds to the SIP 25 
Pa. Code Sec.  129.52e which adopts the RACT requirements for 
automobile and light-duty assembly coatings and covers heavier vehicle 
coating operations as well. The revision also includes changes to 25 
Pa. Code Sec.  129.51 to accommodate alternative compliance methods for 
the adopted CTG.

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    EPA's CTG for automobile and light-duty truck assembly coatings 
includes recommendations to reduce VOC emissions. These recommendations 
include VOC emissions limits for coating operations; work practices for 
storage and handling of coatings, thinners, and coating waste 
materials; and work practices for the handling and use of cleaning 
materials. The emission limits for coating processes covered by this 
CTG are found in Table 1 of the technical support document (TSD) which 
EPA prepared supporting this rulemaking.\2\ Table 1 includes emission 
limits expressed in kilograms of VOC per liter (kg VOC/liter) and 
pounds of VOC per gallon (lbs VOC/gal). The emission limits for the 
miscellaneous materials used at coating facilities are found in Table 2 
of the TSD. Table 2 includes emission limits expressed in grams of VOC 
per liter (g VOC/liter). Additional information regarding this CTG can 
be found in the TSD found in the docket for this rulemaking and 
available online at www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The TSD is available in the docket for this proposed 
rulemaking and available online at www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PADEP's submittal presented the regulatory revisions undertaken to 
adopt EPA's CTG for automobile and light-duty truck coatings. PADEP 
revised 25 Pa. Code Chapter 129--Standards for Sources to adopt the 
aforementioned CTG. The revisions include the addition of Sec.  129.52e 
which adopts the RACT requirements for automobile and light-duty truck 
assembly coatings as stated by EPA in the relevant CTG for this 
category of sources. The revision also includes updates to 25 Pa. Code 
Sec.  129.51 to accommodate alternative compliance methods for the 
adopted CTG. Additional information regarding PADEP's submittal can be 
found within the TSD and state submittal which are both located in this 
docket and available online at www.regulations.gov.
    EPA reviewed PADEP's submittal and found that the regulatory 
changes reflect EPA's CTG for automobile and light-duty trucks. The 
emission limits for the coating processes as well as the emission 
limits for the miscellaneous materials used during coating processes 
are consistent with those recommended in EPA's CTG. Additionally, the 
regulatory changes address EPA's recommended work practices.
    EPA notes that under 25 Pa. Code Sec.  129.52e(c), Existing RACT 
permit, PADEP is allowing the provisions of Sec.  129.52e to supersede 
the requirements of a RACT permit previously issued under 25 Pa. Code 
Sec. Sec.  129.91-129.95 if the permit was issued prior to January 1, 
2017 and to the extent that the RACT permit contains less stringent 
requirements than those in 25 Pa. Code Sec.  129.52e. EPA further notes 
that the RACT permits issued under Sec. Sec.  129.91-129.95 were issued 
for previous RACT determinations on a case-by-case basis; these permits 
would then have been submitted to EPA as source-specific SIP revisions 
and would likely have been approved by EPA for inclusion into the 
Pennsylvania SIP. If EPA approved those source-specific RACT 
determinations as meeting the requirements of RACT under the CAA, then 
the permits associated with those determinations were approved into the 
SIP and would have been identified at 40 CFR 52.2020(d). To the extent 
that the provisions of Sec.  129.52e are more stringent than those of a 
previous SIP-approved permit, PADEP may make a source-specific 
determination as to whether the requirements of the previous RACT 
permit apply, or those of Sec.  129.52e. If PADEP chooses to make such 
a determination to remove prior case-by-case RACT limits from the SIP, 
such revision must be submitted to EPA as a SIP revision in order to 
remove the previously approved permit from the SIP and must meet 
requirements under CAA section 110(l). Otherwise, the previously 
approved RACT limits (even if less stringent) remain applicable 
requirements for sources subject now to the more stringent CTG also. 
Until such a SIP revision is made, the requirements of 25 Pa. Code 
129.52e and the SIP-approved case by case RACT requirements both apply 
and EPA cannot remove the source-specific permits from the SIP. EPA is 
not taking any such action in this rulemaking to remove previously 
approved RACT permits and thus the requirements of a previously SIP-
approved permit still apply until such permit is removed from

[[Page 12675]]

the SIP even if the new limits, reflected in this CTG that Pennsylvania 
has adopted, are more stringent. EPA is approving PADEP's SIP submittal 
because the regulatory revisions adopt EPA's CTG for automobile and 
light-duty truck coatings.
    On October 24, 2017 (82 FR 49128 and 82 FR 49166), EPA 
simultaneously published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) and a 
direct final rule (DFR) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania approving 
the SIP revision. EPA received four adverse comments on the rulemaking 
and withdrew the DFR prior to the effective date of December 26, 2017.

III. Response to Comments

    During the comment period, EPA received several anonymous comments 
on the rulemaking. Of the comments, one comment generally discussed 
climate change and a second comment generally discussed wildfires and 
wildland fire management policy; EPA believes these two comments are 
not germane to this rulemaking action, thus no further response is 
provided. The following is a summary of the comments that are pertinent 
to this rulemaking action along with EPA's response to those comments.
    Comment #1: The first commenter stated that EPA did not address a 
March 28, 2017 Executive Order (E.O.) regarding the promotion of energy 
independence and economic growth.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Based on the comment, EPA assumes the E.O. in question is 
E.O. 13738, Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth, 
signed March 28, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response #1: EPA disagrees with the commenter's assertion that this 
rulemaking action required evaluation mandated under the E.O.. The E.O. 
in question pertains to reviewing existing regulations, order, guidance 
documents, policies, and any other similar agency actions 
(collectively, agency action) that potentially burden the development 
or use of domestically produced energy resources, with particular 
attention to oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy. First, EPA 
does not believe this E.O. applies to this rulemaking action because, 
to the extent this rulemaking is considered an agency action under the 
E.O. this action was not an existing agency action as of March 28, 
2017, the date the E.O. was signed. Second, assuming arguendo, that 
this rulemaking action is considered an agency action under the E.O. 
this rulemaking action does not create a burden as that term is defined 
in the E.O. As defined in the E.O., the term ``burden'' means, ``to 
unnecessarily obstruct, delay, curtail, or otherwise impose significant 
cost on the siting, permitting, production, utilization, transmission, 
or delivery of energy resources.'' This rulemaking action does not 
affect the siting, permitting, production, utilization, transmission, 
or delivery of energy resources as this action merely approves 
Pennsylvania's submission as meeting certain CTG requirements necessary 
under the CAA, thus any required review under this E.O. is not 
applicable. Finally, EPA does not have discretion to disapprove the 
state's SIP submission where it meets the applicable CAA requirements. 
CAA section 110(k)(3) requires that EPA ``shall'' approve the SIP 
submission ``as a whole'' if it meets the applicable requirements in 
the CAA. Pennsylvania's submission adopts RACT for sources identified 
in EPA's CTG, as required by CAA section 184(b). Thus, considering the 
plain language of the CAA in section 110(k)(3), EPA cannot consider 
disapproving or requiring changes to a state's SIP submittal based on a 
particular E.O. or statutory reviews.
    Comment #2: The second commenter asserted that EPA should review 
its CTG and Alternative Control Technology (ACT) guidance documents to 
``make sure they aren't too costly.'' The commenter further asserted 
that VOC reductions in Pennsylvania are not needed and EPA should only 
require RACT reductions in areas with ``bad air.'' The commenter 
concluded by stating EPA should withdraw the rule in its entirety to 
enable economic growth and promote jobs.
    Response #2: EPA disagrees with the commenter that this rulemaking 
should be withdrawn and that EPA's CTGs and ACTs should be reviewed. 
The CTG at issue in this rulemaking was issued in 2008. This rulemaking 
action concerns only EPA's action approving Pennsylvania's SIP 
submission adopting the CTG requirements, and thus comments about the 
CTG itself are outside the scope of this action. In any case, EPA 
considered the cost of installing controls when developing the CTG and 
concluded, ``The recommended VOC emission rates described [in the CTG] 
reflect the control measures that are currently being implemented by 
these facilities. Consequently, there is no additional cost to 
implement the CTG recommendations for coatings.'' Further, the CTG went 
on to state the following for the work practices being recommended: 
``The CTG also recommends work practices for reducing VOC emissions 
from both coatings and cleaning materials. We believe that our work 
practice recommendations in the CTG will result in a net cost savings. 
Implementing work practices reduces the amount of coating and cleaning 
materials used by decreasing evaporation.'' Thus, EPA did consider cost 
when issuing this CTG in a prior rulemaking.
    EPA further disagrees with the commenter's assertion that VOC 
reductions are not needed in the entire Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 
and disagrees that the state or EPA has the discretion not to implement 
those reductions. First, the commenter provided no evidence supporting 
a claim that VOC reductions are only needed in areas with ``bad air.'' 
(EPA assumes this is a reference to nonattainment areas). Second, 
Congress, through the CAA, has dictated that VOC RACT is required to be 
implemented throughout entire Commonwealth. CAA section 182(b)(2)(A) 
requires that, for each ozone nonattainment area classified as Moderate 
or above, the area must revise their SIPs to include RACT for each 
category of VOC sources covered by CTG documents issued between 
November 15, 1990 and the date of attainment. CAA section 184(a) 
further establishes a single OTR, of which the entire Commonwealth of 
Pennsylvania is included, and section 184(b)(1)(B) requires all states 
in the OTR to submit SIPs implementing RACT with respect to all sources 
of VOC in the state that are covered by a CTG. Finally, Pennsylvania 
and EPA are not permitted to ignore statutory mandates for any policy 
reason, including to promote jobs or to enable economic growth. Thus, 
the requirements of the CAA require Pennsylvania to revise its SIP in 
order to implement VOC RACT for all CTGs issued, including the 
automobile and light-duty truck assembly coating category. As 
Pennsylvania is in the OTR, VOC reductions from RACT and from 
implementing CTGs are required by the CAA in the entire Commonwealth.

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving the revision to Pennsylvania's SIP which adopts 
EPA's CTG for automobile and light-duty truck coatings because 
Pennsylvania's regulation incorporates the requirements of the CTG and 
thus meets requirements in CAA sections 110 and 184(b).

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes 
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation

[[Page 12676]]

by reference of 25 Pa. Code Chapter 129--Standards for Sources, 
Sections 129.51 and 129.52e. EPA has made, and will continue to make, 
these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at 
the EPA Region III Office (please contact the person identified in the 
``For Further Information Contact'' section of this preamble for more 
information). Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for 
inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into 
that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 
of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's 
approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the 
Federal Register in the next update of the SIP compilation.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    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 approves state law as meeting federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866.
     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 rule 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.

B. 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 action 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 action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by May 22, 2018. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action 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, in which Pennsylvania adopts EPA's CTG for 
automobile and light-duty truck assembly coatings, 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 13, 2018.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart NN--Pennsylvania

0
2. In Sec.  52.2020, the table in paragraph (c)(1) is amended by 
revising the entry for Section 129.51 and adding an entry for Section 
129.52e.
    The revision and addition read as follows:


Sec.  52.2020  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) EPA-Approved Pennsylvania Regulations and Statutes

[[Page 12677]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          State
         State citation              Title/subject      effective    EPA approval date   Additional explanation/
                                                           date                          Sec.   52.2063 citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Chapter 129--Standards for Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Sources of VOCs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 129.51..................  General............     10/22/16  3/23/18 [Insert      Amendments add
                                                                     Federal Register     alternative compliance
                                                                     citation].           methods for the
                                                                                          requirements of
                                                                                          Section 129.52e.
                                                                                         Previous approval dated
                                                                                          6/25/2015.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 129.52e.................  Control of VOC          10/22/16  3/23/18 [Insert      New section is added.
                                   emissions from                    Federal Register     This section does not
                                   automobile and                    citation].           remove or replace any
                                   light-duty truck                                       permits approved under
                                   assembly coating                                       52.2020(d).
                                   operations and
                                   heavier vehicle
                                   coating operations.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-05872 Filed 3-22-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P