Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Adoption of Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance Coatings, 27610-27613 [2011-11557]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
27610
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 92 / Thursday, May 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
This document describes
corrections to final regulations (TD
9521) that were published in the Federal
Register on Thursday, April 7, 2011,
providing guidance relating to the
reduction of the number of separate
foreign tax credit limitation categories
under section 904(d) of the Internal
Revenue Code.
SUMMARY:
This correction is effective on
May 12, 2011, and is applicable on
April 7, 2011.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeffrey L. Parry, (202) 622–3850 (not a
toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The final regulations that are the
subject of this correction are under
section 904 of the Internal Revenue
Code.
Need for Correction
As published on Thursday, April 7,
2011 (76 FR 19268), final regulations
(TD 9521) contain errors that may prove
to be misleading and are in need of
clarification.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Correction of Publication
Accordingly, the publication of the
final regulations (TD 9521) which were
the subject of FR Doc. 2011–8229 is
corrected as follows:
1. On page 19268, column 2, in the
preamble, under the paragraph heading
‘‘II. Losses in and Losses With Respect to
the Pre-2007 Separate Category for High
Withholding Tax Interest’’, line 9 from
the last paragraph of the column, the
language ‘‘7T(g)(ii)) that offset U.S.
source income’’ is corrected to read
‘‘7T(g)(1)(ii)) that offset U.S. source
income’’.
2. On page 19269, column 1, in the
preamble, under the paragraph heading
‘‘II. Losses in and Losses With Respect to
the Pre-2007 Separate Category for High
Withholding Tax Interest’’, the last
sentence of first paragraph of the
column, the language ‘‘The regulations
have also been revised to clarify that, in
the case of a financial services entity, to
the extent an SLL in the post-2006
separate category for general category
income is recaptured as income in the
post-2006 separate category for passive
category income, the amount that would
otherwise be recaptured as passive
income (as opposed to specified passive
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:42 May 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103.
LaNita Van Dyke,
D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslyChief, Publications and Regulations Branch,
listed EPA Region III address. Such
Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief
deliveries are only accepted during the
Counsel (Procedure and Administration).
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
[FR Doc. 2011–11580 Filed 5–11–11; 8:45 am]
special arrangements should be made
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2011–
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
0142. EPA’s policy is that all comments
AGENCY
received will be included in the public
docket without change, and may be
40 CFR Part 52
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0142; FRL–9304–2]
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
Approval and Promulgation of Air
claimed to be Confidential Business
Quality Implementation Plans;
Information (CBI) or other information
Maryland; Adoption of Control
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Techniques Guidelines for Large
Do not submit information that you
Appliance Coatings
consider to be CBI or otherwise
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
protected through www.regulations.gov
Agency (EPA).
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov
ACTION: Direct final rule.
website is an anonymous access system,
which means EPA will not know your
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
identity or contact information unless
action to approve a State
you provide it in the body of your
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
comment. If you send an e-mail
submitted by the Maryland Department
comment directly to EPA without going
of the Environment (MDE). This SIP
through www.regulations.gov, your erevision includes amendments to
mail address will be automatically
Maryland’s regulation for Volatile
captured and included as part of the
Organic Compounds from Specific
comment that is placed in the public
Processes and meets the requirement to
docket and made available on the
adopt Reasonably Available Control
Internet. If you submit an electronic
Technology (RACT) for sources covered comment, EPA recommends that you
by EPA’s Control Techniques
include your name and other contact
Guidelines (CTG) standards for large
information in the body of your
appliance coatings. These amendments
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
will reduce emissions of volatile organic you submit. If EPA cannot read your
compound (VOC) emissions from large
comment due to technical difficulties
appliance coating facilities. Therefore,
and cannot contact you for clarification,
this revision will help Maryland attain
EPA may not be able to consider your
and maintain the national ambient air
comment. Electronic files should avoid
quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone.
the use of special characters, any form
This action is being taken under the
of encryption, and be free of any defects
Clean Air Act (CAA).
or viruses.
DATES: This rule is effective on July 11,
Docket: All documents in the
2011 without further notice, unless EPA electronic docket are listed in the
receives adverse written comment by
www.regulations.gov index. Although
June 13, 2011. If EPA receives such
listed in the index, some information is
comments, it will publish a timely
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the information whose disclosure is
Federal Register and inform the public
restricted by statute. Certain other
that the rule will not take effect.
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
publicly available only in hard copy
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
form. Publicly available docket
R03–OAR–2011–0142, by one of the
materials are available either
following methods:
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
in hard copy during normal business
on-line instructions for submitting
hours at the Air Protection Division,
comments.
B. E-mail: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0142,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director,
Copies of the State submittal are
Office of Air Program Planning,
available at the Maryland Department of
Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental
category income) will be recaptured as
general category income.’’ is removed.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12MYR1.SGM
12MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 92 / Thursday, May 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
the Environment, 1800 Washington
Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore,
Maryland 21230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory Becoat, (215) 814–2036, or by
e-mail at becoat.gregory@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
December 15, 2010, MDE submitted to
EPA SIP revision concerning the
adoption of the EPA CTG for large
appliance coatings.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
I. 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 SIPs 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, Sept. 17, 1979). In
subsequent Federal Register notices,
EPA has addressed how states can meet
the RACT requirements of the CAA.
The CTG for large appliance coatings
is intended to provide State and local
air pollution control authorities
information that should assist them in
determining RACT for VOC from large
appliance coatings. In developing this
CTG, EPA evaluated the sources of VOC
emissions from the large appliance
coating industry and the available
control approaches for addressing these
emissions, including the costs of such
approaches. Based on available
information and data, EPA provides
recommendations for RACT for large
appliance coating.
In December 1977, EPA published a
final CTG for large appliance coatings,
entitled ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic
Emissions from Existing Stationary
Sources, Volume V, Surface Coating of
Large Appliances,’’ EPA–450/2–77–034
(December 1977). In October 1982, EPA
promulgated national standards of
performance for new stationary sources
(NSPS) for large appliances (40 CFR part
60, subpart SS). The 1982 NSPS requires
VOC emissions limits based on VOC
content of low VOC coating materials. In
July 2002, EPA promulgated a national
emission standard for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAP) for these
industries large appliances (40 CFR part
63, subpart NNNN). The 2002 NESHAP
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:42 May 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
establishes national emission standards
for hazardous air pollutants (HAP) for
large appliance surface coating facilities
and emissions limits based on the
organic HAP content of low organic
HAP coating materials.
In 2006 and 2007, after conducting a
review of currently existing state and
local VOC emission reduction
approaches for these industries,
reviewing the 1977/1978 CTGs and the
NESHAPs for these industries, and
taking into account the information that
has become available since then, EPA
developed new CTGs for: Surface
coating of large appliances, entitled
‘‘Control Techniques Guidelines for
Large Appliance Coatings,’’ EPA 453/R–
07–004 (September 2007).
Large appliance coatings include, but
are not limited to, materials referred to
as paint, topcoats, basecoats, primers,
enamels, and adhesives used in the
manufacture of large appliance parts or
products. A large appliance part is
defined as any organic surface-coated
metal lid, door, casing, panel, or other
interior or exterior part or accessory that
is assembled to form a large appliance
product. A large appliance product is
also defined as any organic surfacecoated metal range, oven, microwave,
refrigerator, freezer, washer, dryer,
dishwasher, water heater, or trash
compactor manufactured for household,
commercial, or recreational use. There
are several approaches to reducing VOC
emissions from large appliance coatings:
(1) Emission limits that can be achieved
through the use of low-VOC coatings, (2)
equivalent emission limits that can be
achieved through the use of low-VOC
coatings or a combination of coatings
and add-on controls, (3) an overall
control efficiency of 90 percent for addon controls, and (4) the implementation
of work practice standards.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
On December 15, 2010, MDE
submitted to EPA a SIP revision (#10–
09) concerning the adoption of the EPA
CTG for large appliance coatings. EPA
develops CTGs as guidance on control
requirements for source categories.
States can follow the CTGs or adopt
more restrictive standards. MDE is
adopting the more restrictive 2.3
pounds/gallon (lbs/gal) standard for
large appliance coatings (see EPA–450/
2–78–034, June 1978). This SIP revision
amends Regulation .06—Large
Appliance Coatings under COMAR
26.11.19—Volatile Organic Compounds
from Specific Processes. This action
affects sources that coat doors, cases,
lids, panels, or other interior or exterior
part or accessory of residential and
commercial washers, dryers, ranges,
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
27611
refrigerators, freezers, water heaters,
dishwashers, trash compactors, air
conditioners, ovens, microwave ovens,
and other similar products.
Regulation COMAR 26.11.19.06—
Control of Volatile Organic Compounds
Emissions from Large Appliance
Coatings includes under section .06A
the definition for large appliance
coatings. Under section .06B, it also
includes the coating standard
requirements for large appliance
coatings. These standards require that
any person who uses a large appliance
coating installation may not cause or
permit the discharge into the
atmosphere of any VOC from a large
appliance coating installation in excess
of 2.3 lbs/gal of coating applied
(excluding water) (0.275 kg/l of coating
applied (excluding water)); shall use
control equipment to achieve an overall
VOC emissions reduction of 90 percent
or greater from the large appliance
coating installation at the affected
facility; and use one or more of the
following application methods:
(a) Electrostatic application; (b) high
volume/low pressure (HVLP) spray; (c)
Flow coat; (d) Roller coat; (e) Dip coat
including electrodeposition; (f) Brush
coat; or (g) other coating application
method that has a transfer efficiency
equivalent to or better than that
achieved by HVLP spraying.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving the Maryland SIP
revision that adopts the CTG standards
for large appliance coatings. EPA is
publishing this rule without prior
proposal because the Agency views this
as a noncontroversial amendment and
anticipates no adverse comment.
However, in the Proposed Rules section
of today’s Federal Register, EPA is
publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to approve the
SIP revision if adverse comments are
filed. This rule will be effective on July
11, 2011 without further notice unless
EPA receives adverse comment by June
13, 2011. If EPA receives adverse
comment, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. EPA will address all
public comments in a subsequent final
rule based on the proposed rule. EPA
will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at
this time.
E:\FR\FM\12MYR1.SGM
12MYR1
27612
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 92 / Thursday, May 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
IV. 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
Act 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 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 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 Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by July 11, 2011.
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. Parties with
objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in
response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action
published in the proposed rules section
of today’s Federal Register, rather than
file an immediate petition for judicial
review of this direct final rule, so that
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking.
This action pertaining to Maryland’s
adoption of the CTG standards for large
appliance coatings may not be
challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See CAA
section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: April 26, 2011.
James W. Newsom,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart V—Maryland
2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by revising an entry for
COMAR 26.11.19.06 to read as follows:
■
§ 52.1070
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE MARYLAND SIP
Code of Maryland Administrative
Regulations (COMAR) citation
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
*
*
*
26.11.19
*
*
26.11.19.06 .....................................
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
*
Jkt 223001
EPA approval date
*
*
Additional explanation/
citation at 40 CFR
52.1100
*
Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes
*
*
Large Appliance Coating ................
*
12:42 May 11, 2011
State
effective
date
Title/subject
PO 00000
10/1/10
*
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
*
*
5/12/11 [Insert page number
where the document begins].
*
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12MYR1.SGM
*
12MYR1
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 92 / Thursday, May 12, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
*
revisions were proposed in the Federal
Register on November 16, 2010 and
concern volatile organic compound
(VOC) emissions from consumer
products. We are approving a State rule
that regulates these emission sources
under the Clean Air Act as amended in
1990 (CAA or the Act).
[FR Doc. 2011–11557 Filed 5–11–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0906; FRL–9278–9]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, California Air
Resources Board—Consumer
Products
Effective Date: This rule is
effective on June 13, 2011.
DATES:
EPA has established docket
number EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0906 for
this action. The index to the docket is
available electronically at
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may be
publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material), and
some may not be publicly available in
ADDRESSES:
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is finalizing approval of
revisions to the California Air Resources
Board portion of the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP). These
SUMMARY:
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the
hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415)
947–4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On November 16, 2010 (75 FR 69910),
EPA proposed to approve the following
rule into the California SIP.
Regulation
Regulation title
California Code of Regulations, Title 17, Division 3,
Chapter 1, Subchapter 8.5—Consumer Products.
Article 2—Consumer Products .....................................
We proposed to approve this rule
because we determined that it complies
with the relevant CAA requirements.
Our proposed action contains more
information on the rule and our
evaluation.
II. Public Comments and EPA
Responses
EPA’s proposed action provided a
30-day public comment period. During
this period, we received one comment
from the general public regarding cap
and trade regulations. The submitted
comment is not germane to this action
as amendments to California’s
Consumer Products regulation deal with
limiting the VOC content of products
and does not deal with cap and trade
programs.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
III. EPA Action
No comments were submitted that
change our assessment that the
submitted rule complies with the
relevant CAA requirements. Therefore,
as authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the
Act, EPA is fully approving this rule
into the California SIP.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:42 May 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
State choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
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 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);
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
27613
Amended
05/05/09
Submitted
02/16/10
• 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 Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not interfere with Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16,
1994)) because EPA lacks the
discretionary authority to address
environmental justice in this
rulemaking.
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.
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
E:\FR\FM\12MYR1.SGM
12MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 92 (Thursday, May 12, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27610-27613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11557]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0142; FRL-9304-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Adoption of Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance
Coatings
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Maryland Department
of the Environment (MDE). This SIP revision includes amendments to
Maryland's regulation for Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific
Processes and meets the requirement to adopt Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) for sources covered by EPA's Control
Techniques Guidelines (CTG) standards for large appliance coatings.
These amendments will reduce emissions of volatile organic compound
(VOC) emissions from large appliance coating facilities. Therefore,
this revision will help Maryland attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone. This action is being
taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on July 11, 2011 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by June 13, 2011. If EPA
receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that
the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2011-0142, by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. E-mail: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0142, 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-
2011-0142. 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 e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov website 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 e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
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
[[Page 27611]]
the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore,
Maryland 21230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat, (215) 814-2036, or by
e-mail at becoat.gregory@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 15, 2010, MDE submitted to EPA
SIP revision concerning the adoption of the EPA CTG for large appliance
coatings.
I. 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 SIPs 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, Sept. 17, 1979). In subsequent
Federal Register notices, EPA has addressed how states can meet the
RACT requirements of the CAA.
The CTG for large appliance coatings is intended to provide State
and local air pollution control authorities information that should
assist them in determining RACT for VOC from large appliance coatings.
In developing this CTG, EPA evaluated the sources of VOC emissions from
the large appliance coating industry and the available control
approaches for addressing these emissions, including the costs of such
approaches. Based on available information and data, EPA provides
recommendations for RACT for large appliance coating.
In December 1977, EPA published a final CTG for large appliance
coatings, entitled ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from
Existing Stationary Sources, Volume V, Surface Coating of Large
Appliances,'' EPA-450/2-77-034 (December 1977). In October 1982, EPA
promulgated national standards of performance for new stationary
sources (NSPS) for large appliances (40 CFR part 60, subpart SS). The
1982 NSPS requires VOC emissions limits based on VOC content of low VOC
coating materials. In July 2002, EPA promulgated a national emission
standard for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for these industries
large appliances (40 CFR part 63, subpart NNNN). The 2002 NESHAP
establishes national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) for large appliance surface coating facilities and emissions
limits based on the organic HAP content of low organic HAP coating
materials.
In 2006 and 2007, after conducting a review of currently existing
state and local VOC emission reduction approaches for these industries,
reviewing the 1977/1978 CTGs and the NESHAPs for these industries, and
taking into account the information that has become available since
then, EPA developed new CTGs for: Surface coating of large appliances,
entitled ``Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance
Coatings,'' EPA 453/R-07-004 (September 2007).
Large appliance coatings include, but are not limited to, materials
referred to as paint, topcoats, basecoats, primers, enamels, and
adhesives used in the manufacture of large appliance parts or products.
A large appliance part is defined as any organic surface-coated metal
lid, door, casing, panel, or other interior or exterior part or
accessory that is assembled to form a large appliance product. A large
appliance product is also defined as any organic surface-coated metal
range, oven, microwave, refrigerator, freezer, washer, dryer,
dishwasher, water heater, or trash compactor manufactured for
household, commercial, or recreational use. There are several
approaches to reducing VOC emissions from large appliance coatings: (1)
Emission limits that can be achieved through the use of low-VOC
coatings, (2) equivalent emission limits that can be achieved through
the use of low-VOC coatings or a combination of coatings and add-on
controls, (3) an overall control efficiency of 90 percent for add-on
controls, and (4) the implementation of work practice standards.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
On December 15, 2010, MDE submitted to EPA a SIP revision
(10-09) concerning the adoption of the EPA CTG for large
appliance coatings. EPA develops CTGs as guidance on control
requirements for source categories. States can follow the CTGs or adopt
more restrictive standards. MDE is adopting the more restrictive 2.3
pounds/gallon (lbs/gal) standard for large appliance coatings (see EPA-
450/2-78-034, June 1978). This SIP revision amends Regulation .06--
Large Appliance Coatings under COMAR 26.11.19--Volatile Organic
Compounds from Specific Processes. This action affects sources that
coat doors, cases, lids, panels, or other interior or exterior part or
accessory of residential and commercial washers, dryers, ranges,
refrigerators, freezers, water heaters, dishwashers, trash compactors,
air conditioners, ovens, microwave ovens, and other similar products.
Regulation COMAR 26.11.19.06--Control of Volatile Organic Compounds
Emissions from Large Appliance Coatings includes under section .06A the
definition for large appliance coatings. Under section .06B, it also
includes the coating standard requirements for large appliance
coatings. These standards require that any person who uses a large
appliance coating installation may not cause or permit the discharge
into the atmosphere of any VOC from a large appliance coating
installation in excess of 2.3 lbs/gal of coating applied (excluding
water) (0.275 kg/l of coating applied (excluding water)); shall use
control equipment to achieve an overall VOC emissions reduction of 90
percent or greater from the large appliance coating installation at the
affected facility; and use one or more of the following application
methods: (a) Electrostatic application; (b) high volume/low pressure
(HVLP) spray; (c) Flow coat; (d) Roller coat; (e) Dip coat including
electrodeposition; (f) Brush coat; or (g) other coating application
method that has a transfer efficiency equivalent to or better than that
achieved by HVLP spraying.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving the Maryland SIP revision that adopts the CTG
standards for large appliance coatings. EPA is publishing this rule
without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comment. However,
in the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, EPA is
publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to
approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed. This rule will
be effective on July 11, 2011 without further notice unless EPA
receives adverse comment by June 13, 2011. If EPA receives adverse
comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will
address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
[[Page 27612]]
IV. 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 Act 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 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 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 Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 11, 2011. 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. Parties with objections to this direct final
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed
rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so
that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in
the proposed rulemaking.
This action pertaining to Maryland's adoption of the CTG standards
for large appliance coatings may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See CAA section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: April 26, 2011.
James W. Newsom,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart V--Maryland
0
2. In Sec. 52.1070, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
an entry for COMAR 26.11.19.06 to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1070 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved Regulations in the Maryland SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code of Maryland State
Administrative Regulations Title/subject effective EPA approval date Additional explanation/
(COMAR) citation date citation at 40 CFR 52.1100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
26.11.19.06................... Large Appliance 10/1/10 5/12/11 [Insert
Coating. page number
where the
document begins].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 27613]]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-11557 Filed 5-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
