Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Revision for the Control of Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions From Vehicle Refinishing, 40550-40552 [2012-16809]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
40550
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
available in the office of the
Superintendent and online at
www.nps.gov/chat/planyourvisit/bikemaps.htm.
(4) How will the Superintendent
manage the designated bicycle routes?
(i) The Superintendent may open or
close designated bicycle routes, or
portions thereof, or impose conditions
or restrictions for bicycle use after
taking into consideration public health
and safety, natural and cultural resource
protection, carrying capacity and other
management activities and objectives.
(ii) Following a rain event, the
Superintendent may exercise discretion
to temporarily close the trails in the
Johnson Ferry South and Cochran
Shoals units to mitigate soil erosion and
water quality impacts from bicycle use.
(iii) The Superintendent will provide
public notice of all such actions through
one or more of the methods listed in
§ 1.7 of this chapter.
(iv) Violating a closure or restriction
is prohibited.
Dated: June 20, 2012.
Rachel Jacobson,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and
Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2012–16702 Filed 7–9–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–PV–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0468; FRL–9698–1]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Revision for the Control of
Volatile Organic Compounds
Emissions From Vehicle Refinishing
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Maryland. The SIP revision amends
Maryland’s COMAR 26.11.19.23
‘‘Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds Emissions from Vehicle
Refinishing’’ to establish new volatile
organic compounds (VOC) content
limits for coating and cleaning solvents
used in vehicle refinishing and
standards for coating application, work
practices, monitoring, and
recordkeeping. This action is being
taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before August 9, 2012.
wreier-aviles on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jul 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2012–0468 by one of the
following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. Email: mastro.donna@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0468,
Donna Mastro, Acting 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 previouslylisted 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–2012–
0468. 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,
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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:
´
Emlyn Velez-Rosa, (215) 814–2038, or
by email at velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Maryland was designated
nonattainment with respect to the 1hour ozone NAAQS on November 15,
1990, with several serious
nonattainment areas, including: the
Baltimore, Maryland area, the Maryland
portion of the Philadelphia-WilmingtonAtlantic City area, and the Maryland
portion of the Washington, DC area.
Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA requires
states with ozone nonattainment areas
classified as moderate or above to
submit a SIP revision that provides VOC
emissions reductions of at least 15
percent from the baseline emissions of
1990. In Maryland, the 15 percent plans
(the 15% rate-of-progress plans) were
required for the 1-hour ozone
nonattainment areas.
Pursuant to this requirement,
Maryland revised its SIP on August 4,
1997 to adopt COMAR 26.11.19.23
‘‘Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds Emissions from Vehicle
Refinishing.’’ The regulation would
achieve fully enforceable VOC
emissions reductions from vehicle
refinishing sources throughout the State
of Maryland, which were creditable
towards the 15% rate-of-progress plans.
The rule, which followed EPA’s
‘‘Alternative Control Techniques (ACT)
Document: Automobile Body
Refinishing’’ (EPA–453/R–94–031, April
1994), established standards for vehicle
refinishing based on VOC content of
coatings, methods for calculating the
VOC content of a coating system, and
standards for operating, monitoring,
reporting, and recordkeeping. The
coating categories included:
pretreatment coatings, precoatings,
primer surfacers, primer sealers,
topcoats, multi-stage coating systems,
and specialty coatings.
Section 183(e) of the Act authorizes
EPA to establish national standards to
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
40551
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
reduce VOC emissions from consumer
and commercial products, including the
automobile refinishing coatings. On
September 11, 1998, a final rule
‘‘National Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions Standards for Automobile
Refinish Coatings’’ (EPA’s National
Rule) was published by EPA under the
authority of section 183(e) of the CAA
(63 FR 48806), as identified in 40 CFR
part 59, subpart B. The federal rule
applies to all automobile refinish
coatings that are manufactured or
imported for sale or distribution in the
United States, and sets VOC content
limits by automotive refinish category.
See EPA’s August 1998 report ‘‘Volatile
Organic Compound Emissions from
Automobile Refinishing—Background
Information for Promulgated Standards’’
(EPA–453/R–96–011b).
On January 9, 2008, EPA published
the final rule 40 CFR part 63 subpart
HHHHHH ‘‘National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous
Surface Coating Operations at Area
Sources’’ (EPA’s 6H NESHAP), which
includes automobile refinishing. This
Federal rule specifically applies to area
sources that engage in paint stripping
operations that use methylene chloride
(MeCl) containing paint stripping
formulations, and in spray application
of coatings to motor vehicle and mobile
equipment, plastic and or metal
substrate, where the coatings contain
compounds of chromium, lead,
manganese, nickel, or cadmium. Motor
vehicle or mobile equipment surface
coating operations may petition the
EPA’s Administrator for an exemption
from this rule if the owner or operator
can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of
the EPA’s Administrator, that the spray
applied does not include coatings
containing any of these compounds.
This rule establishes important
requirements for these types of facilities,
among the following: Training
certification of all new and existing
personnel who spray surface coatings,
minimum training requirements, and
installation to all facilities of a filtered
spray booth and enclosed spray gun
cleaner.
Maryland’s 1997 SIP-approved
regulation COMAR 26.11.19.23 ‘‘Control
of Volatile Organic Compounds
Emissions from Vehicle Refinishing’’
complies with the federal standards
established in EPA’s rules. On May 8,
2012, EPA received a revision to the
Maryland SIP submitted by the
Maryland Department of Environment
(MDE). The SIP revision (#12–04)
amends Maryland’s COMAR 26.11.19.23
‘‘Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds from Vehicle Refinishing,’’
in order to establish new standards and
requirements for VOC, including: VOC
content limits for coatings and solvents,
controls on emissions from equipment
cleaning, the use of coating application
methods, recordkeeping, maintenance
activities, and operator training. These
amendments are based on the 2009
‘‘Model Rule for Motor Vehicle and
Mobile Equipment Non-Assembly Line
Coating Operations’’ (MVMERR)
developed in conjunction with member
states of the Ozone Transport
Commission (OTC). The MVMERR
established requirements which comply
with those established in EPA’s
National Rule and 6H NESHAP.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
The proposed SIP revision establishes
VOC content limits for automotive
coatings and cleaning solvents used in
vehicle refinishing, and standards for
coating application, work practices,
monitoring, and recordkeeping, to be
effective for all affected sources as of
July 1, 2013. Sources subject to the
requirements of this regulation include:
auto body and repair facilities, fleet
operator repair and paint facilities, new
and used auto dealer repair and paint
facilities, and after-market auto
customizing and detailing facilities
located throughout the State of
Maryland; manufacturers, suppliers,
distributors of coatings and cleaning
solvents intended for use and
application to motor vehicles, mobile
equipment, and associated components
within the State of Maryland; and
manufacturers, suppliers, and
distributors of application equipment
and materials storage such as spray
booths, spray guns, and sealed
containers for cleaning rags for use
within Maryland.
The regulation establishes VOC
content limits for 11 categories of
automotive coatings and two categories
of cleaning solvents which are used in
the preparation, application, and drying
phases of vehicle refinishing. The VOC
content limits established for the
automotive coatings and solvents
exclude water and exempt compounds
as listed in 40 CFR 51.100(s), and are
provided in Table 1 and Table 2,
respectively.
TABLE 1—VOC CONTENT LIMITS FOR AUTOMOTIVE COATINGS FOR MOTOR VEHICLE AND MOBILE EQUIPMENT
REFINISHING AND RECOATING VOC CONTENT LIMIT FOR AUTOMOTIVE COATINGS
Maximum VOC content
Coating category
wreier-aviles on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
lbs/gal
Adhesion promoter ..................................................................................................................................................
Automotive pretreatment coating .............................................................................................................................
Automotive primer ....................................................................................................................................................
Clear coating ............................................................................................................................................................
Color coating, including metallic/iridescent color coating ........................................................................................
Multicolor coating .....................................................................................................................................................
Other automotive coating type ................................................................................................................................
Single-stage coating, including single-stage metallic/iridescent coating .................................................................
Temporary protective coating ..................................................................................................................................
Truck bed liner coating ............................................................................................................................................
Underbody coating ...................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jul 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
g/L
4.5
5.5
2.1
2.1
3.5
5.7
2.1
2.8
0.5
1.7
3.6
540
660
250
250
420
680
250
340
60
200
430
40552
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—VOC CONTENT LIMITS FOR CLEANING SOLVENTS FOR MOTOR VEHICLE AND MOBILE EQUIPMENT REFINISHING
AND RECOATING VOC CONTENT LIMIT FOR CLEANING SOLVENTS
Solvent category
Maximum VOC content
Cleaning solvent (other than bug and tar removers) ...................................................................................................
0.21 lbs/gal ..
Bug and tar removers** ................................................................................................................................................
The regulation provides methods for
calculating the VOC content of coatings
and cleaning solvents and a list of test
methods to be used for demonstrating
compliance with provisions of this
regulation. Instead of complying with
the VOC content limits specified, a
person subject to this regulation may
use an emission control device that has
been approved by MDE, which achieves
an overall emission control efficiency of
85 percent or greater, as determined in
accordance with the approved test
methods. The regulation requires using
at least one of the approved methods for
applying an automotive coating,
including: Flow or curtain coating, dip
coating, brush coating, cotton-tipped
swab application, electrodeposition
coating, high volume-low pressure
(HVLP) spraying, electrostatic spraying,
airless spraying, or an alternate spray
equipment method approved by MDE.
Work practice standards include
procedures for cleaning the spray gun
equipment for applying automotive
coatings. Affected facilities are also
required to keep extensive records on
the total amount of coating used, VOC
actual and regulatory contents, purchase
records, and system operating
parameters of any emission control
device installed. Additional information
concerning EPA’s review and rationale
for proposing to approve this SIP
revision may be found in the Technical
Support Document (TSD) for this action
which is available on line at
www.regulations.gov, Docket number
EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0468.
wreier-aviles on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
III. Proposed Action
The Maryland SIP revision for the
control of VOC emissions from vehicle
refinishing under Regulation COMAR
26.11.19.23, as adopted by the State of
Maryland on March 26, 2012, meets the
applicable requirements of the CAA and
the applicable EPA regulations. The SIP
revision will achieve emission
reductions of VOC throughout the State
of Maryland. EPA is proposing to
approve this Maryland SIP revision
submitted on May 8, 2012. EPA is
soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jul 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
IV. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25 g/L.
40% VOC by weight.
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule,
pertaining to Maryland’s COMAR
26.11.19.23 ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds Emissions from Vehicle
Refinishing,’’ 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, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 27, 2012.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2012–16809 Filed 7–9–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
48 CFR Part 15
[FAR Case 2012–018; Docket 2012–0018,
Sequence 1]
RIN 9000–AM27
Federal Acquisition Regulation; Price
Analysis Techniques
Department of Defense (DoD),
General Services Administration (GSA),
and National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
DoD, GSA, and NASA are
proposing to amend the Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to clarify
the use of a price analysis technique in
order to establish a fair and reasonable
price.
DATES: Interested parties should submit
written comments to the Regulatory
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 10, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40550-40552]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16809]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0468; FRL-9698-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Revision for the Control of Volatile Organic Compounds
Emissions From Vehicle Refinishing
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Maryland. The SIP revision amends
Maryland's COMAR 26.11.19.23 ``Control of Volatile Organic Compounds
Emissions from Vehicle Refinishing'' to establish new volatile organic
compounds (VOC) content limits for coating and cleaning solvents used
in vehicle refinishing and standards for coating application, work
practices, monitoring, and recordkeeping. This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 9, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2012-0468 by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. Email: mastro.donna@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0468, Donna Mastro, Acting 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-
2012-0468. 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: Emlyn V[eacute]lez-Rosa, (215) 814-
2038, or by email at velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Maryland was designated nonattainment with respect to the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS on November 15, 1990, with several serious nonattainment
areas, including: the Baltimore, Maryland area, the Maryland portion of
the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City area, and the Maryland
portion of the Washington, DC area. Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA
requires states with ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate
or above to submit a SIP revision that provides VOC emissions
reductions of at least 15 percent from the baseline emissions of 1990.
In Maryland, the 15 percent plans (the 15% rate-of-progress plans) were
required for the 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas.
Pursuant to this requirement, Maryland revised its SIP on August 4,
1997 to adopt COMAR 26.11.19.23 ``Control of Volatile Organic Compounds
Emissions from Vehicle Refinishing.'' The regulation would achieve
fully enforceable VOC emissions reductions from vehicle refinishing
sources throughout the State of Maryland, which were creditable towards
the 15% rate-of-progress plans. The rule, which followed EPA's
``Alternative Control Techniques (ACT) Document: Automobile Body
Refinishing'' (EPA-453/R-94-031, April 1994), established standards for
vehicle refinishing based on VOC content of coatings, methods for
calculating the VOC content of a coating system, and standards for
operating, monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping. The coating
categories included: pretreatment coatings, precoatings, primer
surfacers, primer sealers, topcoats, multi-stage coating systems, and
specialty coatings.
Section 183(e) of the Act authorizes EPA to establish national
standards to
[[Page 40551]]
reduce VOC emissions from consumer and commercial products, including
the automobile refinishing coatings. On September 11, 1998, a final
rule ``National Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Standards for
Automobile Refinish Coatings'' (EPA's National Rule) was published by
EPA under the authority of section 183(e) of the CAA (63 FR 48806), as
identified in 40 CFR part 59, subpart B. The federal rule applies to
all automobile refinish coatings that are manufactured or imported for
sale or distribution in the United States, and sets VOC content limits
by automotive refinish category. See EPA's August 1998 report
``Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Automobile Refinishing--
Background Information for Promulgated Standards'' (EPA-453/R-96-011b).
On January 9, 2008, EPA published the final rule 40 CFR part 63
subpart HHHHHH ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating
Operations at Area Sources'' (EPA's 6H NESHAP), which includes
automobile refinishing. This Federal rule specifically applies to area
sources that engage in paint stripping operations that use methylene
chloride (MeCl) containing paint stripping formulations, and in spray
application of coatings to motor vehicle and mobile equipment, plastic
and or metal substrate, where the coatings contain compounds of
chromium, lead, manganese, nickel, or cadmium. Motor vehicle or mobile
equipment surface coating operations may petition the EPA's
Administrator for an exemption from this rule if the owner or operator
can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the EPA's Administrator, that
the spray applied does not include coatings containing any of these
compounds. This rule establishes important requirements for these types
of facilities, among the following: Training certification of all new
and existing personnel who spray surface coatings, minimum training
requirements, and installation to all facilities of a filtered spray
booth and enclosed spray gun cleaner.
Maryland's 1997 SIP-approved regulation COMAR 26.11.19.23 ``Control
of Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions from Vehicle Refinishing''
complies with the federal standards established in EPA's rules. On May
8, 2012, EPA received a revision to the Maryland SIP submitted by the
Maryland Department of Environment (MDE). The SIP revision
(12-04) amends Maryland's COMAR 26.11.19.23 ``Control of
Volatile Organic Compounds from Vehicle Refinishing,'' in order to
establish new standards and requirements for VOC, including: VOC
content limits for coatings and solvents, controls on emissions from
equipment cleaning, the use of coating application methods,
recordkeeping, maintenance activities, and operator training. These
amendments are based on the 2009 ``Model Rule for Motor Vehicle and
Mobile Equipment Non-Assembly Line Coating Operations'' (MVMERR)
developed in conjunction with member states of the Ozone Transport
Commission (OTC). The MVMERR established requirements which comply with
those established in EPA's National Rule and 6H NESHAP.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
The proposed SIP revision establishes VOC content limits for
automotive coatings and cleaning solvents used in vehicle refinishing,
and standards for coating application, work practices, monitoring, and
recordkeeping, to be effective for all affected sources as of July 1,
2013. Sources subject to the requirements of this regulation include:
auto body and repair facilities, fleet operator repair and paint
facilities, new and used auto dealer repair and paint facilities, and
after-market auto customizing and detailing facilities located
throughout the State of Maryland; manufacturers, suppliers,
distributors of coatings and cleaning solvents intended for use and
application to motor vehicles, mobile equipment, and associated
components within the State of Maryland; and manufacturers, suppliers,
and distributors of application equipment and materials storage such as
spray booths, spray guns, and sealed containers for cleaning rags for
use within Maryland.
The regulation establishes VOC content limits for 11 categories of
automotive coatings and two categories of cleaning solvents which are
used in the preparation, application, and drying phases of vehicle
refinishing. The VOC content limits established for the automotive
coatings and solvents exclude water and exempt compounds as listed in
40 CFR 51.100(s), and are provided in Table 1 and Table 2,
respectively.
Table 1--VOC Content Limits for Automotive Coatings for Motor Vehicle
and Mobile Equipment Refinishing and Recoating VOC Content Limit for
Automotive Coatings
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum VOC content
Coating category -------------------------------
lbs/gal g/L
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adhesion promoter....................... 4.5 540
Automotive pretreatment coating......... 5.5 660
Automotive primer....................... 2.1 250
Clear coating........................... 2.1 250
Color coating, including metallic/ 3.5 420
iridescent color coating...............
Multicolor coating...................... 5.7 680
Other automotive coating type........... 2.1 250
Single-stage coating, including single- 2.8 340
stage metallic/iridescent coating......
Temporary protective coating............ 0.5 60
Truck bed liner coating................. 1.7 200
Underbody coating....................... 3.6 430
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40552]]
Table 2--VOC Content Limits for Cleaning Solvents for Motor Vehicle and
Mobile Equipment Refinishing and Recoating VOC Content Limit for
Cleaning Solvents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solvent category Maximum VOC content
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cleaning solvent (other than 0.21 lbs/gal....... 25 g/L.
bug and tar removers).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bug and tar removers**......... 40% VOC by weight.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The regulation provides methods for calculating the VOC content of
coatings and cleaning solvents and a list of test methods to be used
for demonstrating compliance with provisions of this regulation.
Instead of complying with the VOC content limits specified, a person
subject to this regulation may use an emission control device that has
been approved by MDE, which achieves an overall emission control
efficiency of 85 percent or greater, as determined in accordance with
the approved test methods. The regulation requires using at least one
of the approved methods for applying an automotive coating, including:
Flow or curtain coating, dip coating, brush coating, cotton-tipped swab
application, electrodeposition coating, high volume-low pressure (HVLP)
spraying, electrostatic spraying, airless spraying, or an alternate
spray equipment method approved by MDE. Work practice standards include
procedures for cleaning the spray gun equipment for applying automotive
coatings. Affected facilities are also required to keep extensive
records on the total amount of coating used, VOC actual and regulatory
contents, purchase records, and system operating parameters of any
emission control device installed. Additional information concerning
EPA's review and rationale for proposing to approve this SIP revision
may be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this action
which is available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-
R03-OAR-2012-0468.
III. Proposed Action
The Maryland SIP revision for the control of VOC emissions from
vehicle refinishing under Regulation COMAR 26.11.19.23, as adopted by
the State of Maryland on March 26, 2012, meets the applicable
requirements of the CAA and the applicable EPA regulations. The SIP
revision will achieve emission reductions of VOC throughout the State
of Maryland. EPA is proposing to approve this Maryland SIP revision
submitted on May 8, 2012. EPA is soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this document. These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
IV. 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 Maryland's COMAR
26.11.19.23 ``Control of Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions from
Vehicle Refinishing,'' 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, Ozone, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 27, 2012.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2012-16809 Filed 7-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
