Air Plan Approval; Massachusetts; Reasonably Available Control Technology for the 2008 and 2015 Ozone Standard, 46581-46585 [2020-15807]
Download as PDF
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 149 / Monday, August 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
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 proposed 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 proposed
rulemaking, proposing approval of
Pennsylvania’s second maintenance
plan for the Franklin County Area, 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jul 31, 2020
Jkt 250001
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: July 10, 2020.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2020–15648 Filed 7–31–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2019–0220; FRL–9999–38–
Region 1]
Air Plan Approval; Massachusetts;
Reasonably Available Control
Technology for the 2008 and 2015
Ozone Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The
SIP revision consists of a demonstration
that Massachusetts meets the
requirements of reasonably available
control technology (RACT) for the two
precursors for ground-level ozone,
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile
organic compounds (VOCs), set forth by
the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) with
respect to the 2008 and 2015 ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQSs). Additionally, we are
proposing approval of specific
regulations that implement the RACT
requirements by limiting air emissions
of NOX and VOC pollutants from
sources within the Commonwealth. This
action is being taken in accordance with
the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before September 2,
2020.
SUMMARY:
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
OAR–2019–0220 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
mackintosh.david@epa.gov. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted,
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46581
comments cannot be edited or removed
from Regulations.gov. For either manner
of submission, the EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly
available docket materials are available
at https://www.regulations.gov or at the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
EPA Region 1 Regional Office, Office of
Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality
Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—
Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests
that if at all possible, you contact the
contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays and
facility closures due to COVID–19.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David L. Mackintosh, Air Quality
Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office
Square—Suite 100, (Mail Code 05–2),
Boston, MA 02109–3912, tel. 617–918–
1584, email Mackintosh.David@epa.gov.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Summary of Massachusetts’ SIP Revisions
III. EPA’s Evaluation of the Submittals
A. NOX RACT for Major Sources
B. Non-CTG VOC RACT for Major Sources
C. CTG VOC RACT
IV. Proposed Action
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
I. Background
Massachusetts is part of the Ozone
Transport Region (OTR) under Section
E:\FR\FM\03AUP1.SGM
03AUP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
46582
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 149 / Monday, August 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
184(a) of the CAA. Sections 182(b)(2)
and 184 of the CAA require states with
ozone nonattainment areas that are
classified as moderate or above, as well
as areas in the OTR, to submit a SIP
revision requiring the implementation
of RACT for sources covered by a
control techniques guideline (CTG) and
for all major sources. A CTG is a
document issued by EPA which
establishes a ‘‘presumptive norm’’ for
RACT for a specific VOC source
category. 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.1
The CTGs usually identify a particular
control level which EPA recommends as
being RACT. States are required to
address RACT for the source categories
covered by CTGs through adoption of
rules as part of the SIP.
On October 5, 2006 (71 FR 58745),
EPA issued four new CTGs: Industrial
Cleaning Solvents; Offset Lithographic
Printing and Letterpress Printing;
Flexible Package Printing; and Flat
Wood Paneling Coatings, and applicable
areas were required to address them by
October 5, 2007. On October 9, 2007 (72
FR 57215), EPA issued three more
CTGs: Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings;
Large Appliance Coatings; and Metal
Furniture Coatings, and applicable areas
were required to address them by
October 9, 2008. On October 7, 2008 (73
FR 58841), EPA issued an additional
four CTGs: Miscellaneous Metal and
Plastic Parts Coatings; Fiberglass Boat
Manufacturing Materials; Miscellaneous
Industrial Adhesives; and Automobile
and Light-Duty Truck Assembly
Coatings, and applicable areas were
required to address them by October 7,
2009. Lastly, on Oct 27, 2016 (81 FR
74798), EPA issued a new CTG for the
Oil and Natural Gas Industry, and
applicable areas were required to
address it by October 27, 2018.
On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436),
EPA revised the health-based NAAQS
for ozone to 0.075 parts per million
(ppm), averaged over an 8-hour
timeframe. EPA determined that the
revised 8-hour standard would be more
protective of human health, especially
with regard to children and adults who
are active outdoors and individuals with
a pre-existing respiratory disease such
as asthma.
1 See Memorandum from Roger Strelow, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Waste Management, U.S.
EPA, to Regional Administrators, U.S. EPA,
‘‘Guidance for Determining Acceptability of SIP
Regulations in Non-Attainment Areas’’ (Dec. 9,
1976); see also 44 FR 53761, 53762 (September 17,
1979).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jul 31, 2020
Jkt 250001
On March 6, 2015 (80 FR 12264), EPA
published a final rule outlining the
obligations for areas in nonattainment
with the 2008 ozone standard, as well
as obligations for areas in the OTR. This
rule, referred to as the ‘‘2008 Ozone
Implementation Rule,’’ contains a
description of EPA’s expectations for
states with RACT obligations, and
required states in the OTR to certify
RACT requirements by July 20, 2014.
The 2008 Ozone Implementation Rule
gives states several options for meeting
RACT requirements for the 2008 ozone
standard. States may (1) establish new
or more stringent rules that meet RACT
control levels for the 2008 standard; (2)
certify, where appropriate, that
previously adopted RACT rules
approved by EPA under a prior ozone
standard represent adequate RACT
control levels for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS; or (3) submit a negative
declaration in instances where there are
no sources in the state covered by a
specific CTG source category. States
may use these options alone or in
combination to demonstrate compliance
with RACT requirements.
On October 26, 2015 (80 FR 65291),
EPA revised the health-based NAAQS
for ozone, setting it at 0.070 ppm
averaged over an 8-hour time frame. On
December 6, 2018 (83 FR 62998), EPA
published a final rule that outlines the
obligations for areas in nonattainment
with the 2015 ozone standard, as well
as obligations for areas in the OTR. This
rule, referred to as the ‘‘2015 Ozone
Implementation Rule,’’ requires states in
the OTR to certify RACT requirements
by August 3, 2020.
On February 3, 2017 (82 FR 9158),
EPA published a final rule finding that
Massachusetts, as well as 14 other states
and the District of Columbia, had failed
to submit SIP revisions in a timely
manner to satisfy certain requirements
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. With
respect to Massachusetts, EPA found
that the Commonwealth had failed to
submit three required SIP elements:
NOX RACT for Major Sources; Non-CTG
VOC RACT for Major Sources; and CTG
VOC RACT. Id. at 9162. This finding
became effective March 6, 2017, and
started a SIP sanctions clock, which
required the missing SIP elements to be
submitted and deemed complete before
September 6, 2018. Id. at 9160–61.
On May 18, 2020, EPA proposed to
approve a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision submitted by the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts (see
85 FR 29678). The revision provides
Massachusetts’ determination, via a
negative declaration, that there are no
facilities within its borders subject to
EPA’s 2016 Control Technique
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Guideline (CTG) for the oil and gas
industry. The comment period for this
action closed on June 17, 2020. EPA’s
separate approval action on the
Massachusetts negative declaration for
the Oil and Natural Gas Industry, can
also be found under Docket ID No. EPA–
R01–OAR–2019–0220 at https://
www.regulations.gov.
II. Summary of SIP Revisions
On October 18, 2018, Massachusetts
submitted a SIP revision to address its
RACT requirements set forth by the
CAA for the 2008 and 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQSs (i.e., RACT
Certifications). On October 19, 2018,
EPA determined Massachusetts’ SIP
submittal was administratively and
technically complete for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. This completeness
determination ended the offset
sanctions identified in Clean Air Act
Section 179(b)(2), which began on
September 6, 2018, as described in the
Findings of Failure to Submit SIP
Submittals for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
(82 FR 9158, February 3, 2017).
The Massachusetts RACT
Certification submittal is based on (1)
newly required RACT controls, for both
major sources of NOX and VOCs as well
as for sources subject to CTGs, that have
been implemented in Massachusetts,
and will be part of the Massachusetts
SIP upon final approval of this EPA
action; (2) previously EPA-approved
RACT controls which are not being
revised in this action, including
regulations and source-specific
requirements, that represent RACT
control levels under the 2008 and 2015
ozone NAAQSs; and (3) the fact that
Massachusetts has no sources subject to
RACT for several source categories, for
which negative declarations are
described in Section III.
Specifically, the Massachusetts
October 2018 RACT SIP revision
contains a certification that
Massachusetts has met all RACT
requirements for the 2008 and 2015 8hour ozone NAAQSs and updates the
SIP with the following changes to Title
310 Code of Massachusetts Regulations
(CMR): revised section 7.00, Definitions;
revised section 7.08(2), Municipal
Waste Combustors; revised section 7.18,
VOC RACT subsections (3) Metal
Furniture Surface Coating, (5) Large
Appliance Surface Coating, (11) Surface
Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts
and Products, (12) Packaging
Rotogravure and Packaging
Flexographic Printing, (14) Paper, Film
and Foil Surface Coating, (21) Surface
Coating of Plastic Parts, (24) Flat Wood
Paneling Surface Coating, (25) Offset
Lithographic Printing Letterpress
E:\FR\FM\03AUP1.SGM
03AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 149 / Monday, August 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Printing; withdrawal of section 7.18(7),
Automobile Surface Coating; adding
7.18, VOC RACT subsections (31)
Industrial Cleaning Solvents and (32)
Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing; and
revised section 7.19, NOX RACT
subsections (2) General Provisions, (4)
Large Boilers, (5) Medium-size Boilers,
(6) Small Boilers, (7) Stationary
Combustion Turbines, (8) Stationary
Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engines, and (9) Municipal Waste
Combustor Units.
On May 28, 2020, Massachusetts
submitted a ‘‘RACT SIP Revision’’ to
withdraw portions of the Massachusetts
October 2018 RACT SIP revision and
replace these portions with more
recently adopted versions of the
regulations. EPA determined
Massachusetts’ May 28, 2020 RACT SIP
revision was administratively and
technically complete on June 2, 2020.
Massachusetts’ May 28, 2020, RACT SIP
revision adds an exemption for
aerospace operations to subsection (31)
Industrial Cleaning Solvents since
aerospace cleaning operations are
already subject to VOC controls in
subsection (11) Surface Coating of
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products.
Aerospace coating operation
requirements in subsection (11) Surface
Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts
and Products were also revised to be
consistent with the coating limits last
approved as RACT by EPA on October
9, 2013 (78 FR 54960), which are also
consistent with the EPA Aerospace CTG
issued June 6, 1994 (59 FR 29216). The
May 28, 2020, RACT SIP revision also
contains a number of miscellaneous
changes and technical corrections,
including an exemption for ‘‘quality
assurance/quality control cleaning
activities in manufacturing processes’’
in subsection (31) Industrial Cleaning
Solvents, clarifications to provisions for
alternative VOC emissions standards for
surface coatings, and a revised
definition of Paper, Film, and Foil
Coating to better align with the EPA
CTG. Massachusetts’ May 28, 2020
RACT SIP revision also reaffirms that
the requirements in the regulations as
amended continue to constitute RACT
in accordance with EPA guidance.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
III. EPA’s Evaluation of the Submittals
A. NOX RACT for Major Sources
Massachusetts revised 310 CMR 7.19,
Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for Sources of
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX), to contain
more stringent emission standards for
large boilers, stationary combustion
turbines, and stationary reciprocating
internal combustion engines.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jul 31, 2020
Jkt 250001
Massachusetts evaluated other states’
recent RACT regulations and analyzed
emissions and operational profiles of
combustion units at major source
facilities in Massachusetts to determine
RACT requirements for these categories.
As part of its review, Massachusetts
concluded that it was not reasonable for
large boilers, turbines, and engines that
operate infrequently to meet the more
stringent emission limits. Therefore, the
revised regulation exempts from the
new emission standards large boilers
and turbines with a three-year-average
capacity factor less than ten percent.
MassDEP’s regulations already allow
owners of engines that operate less than
1,000 hours in any 12-month period to
make a specific combustion control
adjustment to reduce NOX rather than
meet numerical emissions limits; this
provision remains in the new RACT
regulations.
Massachusetts also revised 310 CMR
7.08(2) and 7.19(9) to contain lower
NOX RACT emissions limits for large
and small municipal waste combustors
(MWCs), respectively. Under 310 CMR
7.08(2), the emissions standards for
mass-burn waterwall and refusederived-fuel (RDF) stoker units is
reduced from 205 and 250 parts per
million (ppm) NOX to 150 and 146 ppm,
respectively. These facilities use a
combination of selective non-catalytic
reduction (SNCR) as well as combustion
air staging to minimize NOX emissions
and ammonia slip. The revised
emissions limits are consistent with the
most stringent RACT regulations in
nearby states. For small MWC units
under 310 CMR 7.19(9), Massachusetts
revised the emission limit to 167 ppm,
which is a reasonable limit of NOX
emissions based on the inherent NOX
emissions performance and control
technology limitations of refractory-wall
modular mass-burn small MWC units.
These NOX RACT revisions reduce
NOX emissions by lowering the
maximum NOX content of most sources
compared to Massachusetts’ previouslyapproved regulation. Therefore, the
revised rule is expected to achieve
equivalent or greater emissions
reductions. Thus, revising the SIP to
incorporate the revised rule will not
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress or any other
applicable requirement of the Act. See
CAA § 110(l).
Three source-specific requirements
were previously approved into the
Massachusetts SIP for NOx RACT. One
of these facilities, Solutia, formerly
Monsanto, 55 FR 5986 (2/21/1990),
repowered its coal-fired boiler to natural
gas-only fuel, which is subject to the
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46583
newer control standards that are no less
stringent than RACT. The remaining
two facilities with EPA approved
source-specific requirements are
Oldcastle, formerly Medusa, 64 FR
48095 (9/2/1999) and Specialty
Minerals 64 FR 48095 (9/2/1999). These
two facilities continue to operate the
same emissions units and EPA approved
RACT controls.
After reviewing existing EPAapproved source-specific NOX control
requirements, revised regulations
controlling NOX sources, and the
existing SIP approved regulations
described in 40 CFR part 52.1120(c)
EPA-approved regulations, the EPA
agrees with Massachusetts’
determination that requirements for
major sources of NOx meet, or are more
stringent than, RACT requirements.
Herein, EPA proposes that the above
controls represent RACT for these NOX
sources in Massachusetts for the 2008
and 2015 ozone standards.
B. Non-CTG VOC RACT for Major
Sources
Massachusetts has eight major VOC
emitting facilities subject to sourcespecific control requirements that were
previously approved by EPA. One of
these faculties, Duro Textile Printers,
closed permanently in 2017. The
remaining seven facilities with EPA
approved source-specific requirements
are: (1) Alliance Leather, formerly
Barnet Corporation, 67 FR 62179 (10/4/
2002); (2) Brittany Dyeing and Finishing
60 FR 12123 (3/6/1995); (3) Callaway,
formerly Spalding Corporation, 54 FR
46894 (11/8/1989); (4) Erving Paper
Mills 55 FR 5447 (2/15/1990); (5)
Gillette 67 FR 62179 (10/4/2002); (6)
Solutia, formerly Monsanto Chemical,
67 FR 62179 (10/4/2002); and (7) St.
Gobain Abrasives, Inc., formerly Norton,
67 FR 62179 (10/4/2002). These sources
continue to operate in the same
manufacturing sectors and while some
of these facilities have experienced
physical and operational changes
including new and reconfigured
processes subject to Best Available
Control Technology (BACT) as part of
state minor New Source Review (NSR)
permitting, the level of VOC control
continues to be no less stringent than
RACT.
After reviewing existing stationary
VOC sources in Massachusetts, the EPA
agrees with Massachusetts’
determination that the requirements for
major sources of VOC meet RACT
requirements. EPA proposes that the
seven operating facilities with sourcespecific requirements continue to
represent RACT for major VOC sources
in Massachusetts for the 2008 and 2015
E:\FR\FM\03AUP1.SGM
03AUP1
46584
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 149 / Monday, August 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
ozone standards because no new control
technologies are known to be reasonably
available considering technological and
economic feasibility for these sources
since our last approval.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
C. CTG VOC RACT
The revisions to 310 CMR 7.18,
subsections (3) Metal Furniture Surface
Coating, (5) Large Appliance Surface
Coating, (11) Surface Coating of
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products,
and (21) Surface Coating of Plastic Parts
contain updated work practices, coating
application methods, and recordkeeping
requirements for applicable facilities.
The rules specifically list multiple types
of approved coating applications
methods; however, other coating
application methods capable of
achieving a transfer efficiency
equivalent to, or better than, that
provided by high-volume low-pressure
(HVLP) spray application may also be
used if approved by EPA. Control
options permit equivalent emissions
limits expressed in terms of mass of
VOC per volume of solids as applied or
the use of add-on controls. The coating
limits in the revised regulations
generally follow the recommendations
in EPA’s CTGs, with three notable
category exceptions for metal parts
coatings: Extreme high gloss topcoat;
other substrate antifoulant coating; and
antifouling sealer/tie. For these three
categories, Massachusetts reviewed
industry data and determined that for
purposes of functionality, cost, and VOC
emissions, the higher limits adopted for
these three coating categories constitute
RACT. Massachusetts’ approach is
consistent with the EPA guidance
memorandum entitled ‘‘Control
Technique Guidelines for Miscellaneous
Metal and Plastic Part Coatings—
Industry Request for Reconsideration’’
from Stephen Page to Air Branch Chiefs,
Regions I–X, dated June 1, 2010.
Massachusetts’ new VOC coating limits
are also lower than most of the
previously SIP-approved limits.
Although some specialty coatings limits
are higher than previous limits, since
the general use coating limit is lower
and these coatings are more frequently
used, coupled with the fact that the
revised rule’s applicability is broader,
the revised rule reduces VOC emissions
and will not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further
progress or any other applicable
requirement of the Act. See CAA
§ 110(l). This analysis is also consistent
with the March 17, 2011, EPA guidance
memorandum entitled ‘‘Approving SIP
Revisions Addressing VOC RACT
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jul 31, 2020
Jkt 250001
Requirements for Certain Coating
Categories.’’
The revisions to 310 CMR 7.18,
subsections (12) Packaging Rotogravure
and Packaging Flexographic Printing,
(14) Paper, Film and Foil Surface
Coating, and (25) Offset Lithographic
Printing and Letterpress Printing are
consist with the recommendations in
EPA’s CTGs. The revisions reduce VOC
emissions by lowering applicability
thresholds compared to Massachusetts’
previously-approved regulation. The
applicability thresholds for the work
practices are revised to be the greater of
15 pounds of VOC per day or 3 tons per
rolling 12-month period before
application of control equipment. The
applicability thresholds for the emission
limits are now 25 tons of VOC per
rolling 12-month period per printing
line before application of control
equipment. Therefore, the revised rules
are expected to achieve equivalent or
greater emissions reductions. Thus,
revising the SIP to incorporate the
revised rule will not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further
progress or any other applicable
requirement of the Act. See CAA
§ 110(l).
The revisions to 310 CMR 7.18,
subsection (24) Flat Wood Paneling
Surface Coating are generally consistent
with EPA’s CTG for Flat Wood Paneling
Coatings (EPA–453/R–06–004,
September 2006). The applicability
threshold of the greater of 15 pounds of
VOC per day or 3 tons per rolling 12month period before application of
control equipment was revised to also
consider associated cleaning operations.
Applicable sources are required to limit
VOC emissions by adding on a pollution
control device with 90% efficiency or
by limiting VOC content in coatings to
2.1 lbs of VOC per gallon of coating. The
rule also requires record keeping and
work practices for handling VOCcontaining coatings, thinners, cleaning
materials, and coatings-related waste
materials. The revised rule reduces VOC
emissions by lowering the maximum
VOC content of most coatings,
compared to Massachusetts’ previouslyapproved regulation. Therefore, the
revised rule is expected to achieve
equivalent or greater emissions
reductions. Thus, revising the SIP to
incorporate the revised rule will not
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress or any other
applicable requirement of the Act. See
CAA § 110(l).
The addition of 310 CMR 7.18,
subsection (31) Industrial Cleaning
Solvents creates a new regulation,
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
which generally applies to any facility
with emissions from industrial cleaning
solvents greater than 15 pounds of VOC
per day or 3 tons per rolling 12-month
period, before application of control
equipment. The regulation contains
work practices and three options for
compliance with the VOC content of the
industrial cleaning solvent: (1) Use of
materials which meet the specific VOC
content limitations in Table 310 CMR
7.18(31)(d)1; or (2) use of industrial
cleaning solvents that have a VOC
composite partial pressure equal to or
less than eight mm Hg at 20 °C (68 °F);
or (3) achievement of an overall VOC
capture control efficiency of at least
85% by weight using add-on air
pollution capture and control
equipment.
The addition of 310 CMR 7.18,
subsection (32) Fiberglass Boat
Manufacturing creates a new regulation,
which applies to any fiberglass boat
manufacturing facility with emissions
from manufacturing and cleaning
operations greater than 15 pounds of
VOC per day or 3 tons per rolling 12month period, before the application of
control equipment. The regulation
includes work practices and four
options for compliance with the
monomer (the basic building block of
fiberglass resins) VOC content
limitations for open molding resins and
gel coats, as follows: (1) Use materials
which meet the specific VOC content
limitations in Table 310 CMR
7.18(32)(E)1; (2) emissions of no more
than a calculated weighted-average
monomer VOC content for a specific
category and application method; (3)
emissions of no more than a calculated
facility-wide emissions average VOC
emissions cap; or (4) use of add-on air
pollution capture and control
equipment to emit no more than a
numerical monomer VOC emission
limitation that is determined for each
facility.
Massachusetts has determined that
there are no applicable stationary
sources of VOC in Massachusetts for ten
CTG categories: (1) Refinery Vacuum
Producing Systems, Wastewater
Separators, and Process Unit
Turnarounds; (2) Leaks from Petroleum
Refinery Equipment; (3) Manufacture of
Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products;
(4) Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber
Tires; (5) Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners;
(6) Manufacture of High-Density
Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and
Polystyrene Resins; (7) Equipment Leaks
from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing
Plants; (8) Air Oxidation Processes; (9)
Surface Coating of Automobiles and
Light-Duty Trucks; and (10) Oil and
Natural Gas Industry. These negative
E:\FR\FM\03AUP1.SGM
03AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 149 / Monday, August 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
declarations mean that Massachusetts
has no applicable stationary sources of
VOC that are covered by these CTGs.
Since Massachusetts is making a
negative declaration with respect to the
Automobiles and Light-Duty Truck
Assembly Coatings CTG, they have
requested 310 CRM 7.18, subsection (7)
be withdrawn from the Massachusetts
SIP. Since Massachusetts has certified
there are no applicable sources, and
new sources would be subject to minor
new source review permitting, the
withdrawal of the rule will have no
effect on VOC emissions compared to
currently-approved regulations. Thus,
revising the SIP to withdraw the rule
will not interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress or any other
applicable requirement of the Act. See
CAA § 110(l).
EPA has evaluated Massachusetts’
CTG VOC regulations, which the
Commonwealth certifies as meeting
RACT for the 2008 and 2015 ozone
standards, and EPA finds that the
regulations are sufficiently consistent
with recommendations in the respective
EPA CTGs and are based on currently
available technologically and
economically feasible controls.
Therefore, EPA proposes that the
regulations being added and revised in
this action, along with the past
approved VOC CTG regulations,
represent RACT in Massachusetts for
the 2008 and 2015 ozone standards.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve
Massachusetts’ SIP revision as meeting
the Commonwealth’s RACT obligations
for the 2008 and 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQSs as set forth in sections 182(b)
and 184(b)(2) of the CAA, and to add
‘‘Massachusetts Reasonably Available
Control Technology State
Implementation Plan Revision for the
2008 and 2015 Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards’’ dated October
18, 2018, and ‘‘RACT SIP Revision’’
dated May 28, 2020 to the
Massachusetts SIP, which includes ten
negative declarations for CTG source
categories. EPA is proposing to approve
310 CMR changes to the Massachusetts
SIP, as follows: revised section 7.00,
Definitions; revised section 7.08(2),
Municipal Waste Combustors; revised
section 7.18, VOC RACT subsections (3)
Metal Furniture Surface Coating, (5)
Large Appliance Surface Coating, (11)
Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal
Parts and Products, (12) Packaging
Rotogravure and Packaging
Flexographic Printing, (14) Paper, Film
and Foil Surface Coating, (21) Surface
Coating of Plastic Parts, (24) Flat Wood
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jul 31, 2020
Jkt 250001
Paneling Surface Coating, (25) Offset
Lithographic Printing Letterpress
Printing; withdrawal of 7.18, section (7)
Automobile Surface Coating; addition of
7.18 VOC RACT, subsections (31)
Industrial Cleaning Solvents and (32)
Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing; revised
section 7.19, NOX RACT subsections (2)
General Provisions, (4) Large Boilers, (5)
Medium-size Boilers, (6) Small Boilers,
(7) Stationary Combustion Turbines, (8)
Stationary Reciprocating Internal
Combustion Engines, and (9) Municipal
Waste Combustor Units. EPA is
soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this notice or on
other relevant matters. These comments
will be considered before taking final
action. Interested parties may
participate in the Federal rulemaking
procedure by submitting written
comments to this proposed rule by
following the instructions listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this Federal
Register.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to
amend regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is proposing changes to the
Massachusetts SIP as described in the
Proposed Action section above. The
EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these documents generally
available through https://
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region 1 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
VI. 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
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed 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 proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not expected to be an Executive
Order 13771 regulatory action because
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
46585
this action is not significant 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 Clean Air Act;
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, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: July 16, 2020.
Dennis Deziel,
Regional Administrator,EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2020–15807 Filed 7–31–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\03AUP1.SGM
03AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 149 (Monday, August 3, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46581-46585]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15807]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R01-OAR-2019-0220; FRL-9999-38-Region 1]
Air Plan Approval; Massachusetts; Reasonably Available Control
Technology for the 2008 and 2015 Ozone Standard
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing
approval of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The SIP revision consists of a
demonstration that Massachusetts meets the requirements of reasonably
available control technology (RACT) for the two precursors for ground-
level ozone, oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), set forth by the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) with
respect to the 2008 and 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQSs). Additionally, we are proposing approval of specific
regulations that implement the RACT requirements by limiting air
emissions of NOX and VOC pollutants from sources within the
Commonwealth. This action is being taken in accordance with the Clean
Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 2,
2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2019-0220 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly
available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1 Regional
Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5
Post Office Square--Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., excluding legal holidays and facility closures due to COVID-19.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David L. Mackintosh, Air Quality
Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1, 5 Post
Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail Code 05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, tel.
617-918-1584, email [email protected]
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Summary of Massachusetts' SIP Revisions
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Submittals
A. NOX RACT for Major Sources
B. Non-CTG VOC RACT for Major Sources
C. CTG VOC RACT
IV. Proposed Action
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
I. Background
Massachusetts is part of the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) under
Section
[[Page 46582]]
184(a) of the CAA. Sections 182(b)(2) and 184 of the CAA require states
with ozone nonattainment areas that are classified as moderate or
above, as well as areas in the OTR, to submit a SIP revision requiring
the implementation of RACT for sources covered by a control techniques
guideline (CTG) and for all major sources. A CTG is a document issued
by EPA which establishes a ``presumptive norm'' for RACT for a specific
VOC source category. 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.\1\ The CTGs usually identify a
particular control level which EPA recommends as being RACT. States are
required to address RACT for the source categories covered by CTGs
through adoption of rules as part of the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Memorandum from Roger Strelow, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Waste Management, U.S. EPA, to Regional Administrators,
U.S. EPA, ``Guidance for Determining Acceptability of SIP
Regulations in Non-Attainment Areas'' (Dec. 9, 1976); see also 44 FR
53761, 53762 (September 17, 1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 5, 2006 (71 FR 58745), EPA issued four new CTGs:
Industrial Cleaning Solvents; Offset Lithographic Printing and
Letterpress Printing; Flexible Package Printing; and Flat Wood Paneling
Coatings, and applicable areas were required to address them by October
5, 2007. On October 9, 2007 (72 FR 57215), EPA issued three more CTGs:
Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings; Large Appliance Coatings; and Metal
Furniture Coatings, and applicable areas were required to address them
by October 9, 2008. On October 7, 2008 (73 FR 58841), EPA issued an
additional four CTGs: Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings;
Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials; Miscellaneous Industrial
Adhesives; and Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings, and
applicable areas were required to address them by October 7, 2009.
Lastly, on Oct 27, 2016 (81 FR 74798), EPA issued a new CTG for the Oil
and Natural Gas Industry, and applicable areas were required to address
it by October 27, 2018.
On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436), EPA revised the health-based NAAQS
for ozone to 0.075 parts per million (ppm), averaged over an 8-hour
timeframe. EPA determined that the revised 8-hour standard would be
more protective of human health, especially with regard to children and
adults who are active outdoors and individuals with a pre-existing
respiratory disease such as asthma.
On March 6, 2015 (80 FR 12264), EPA published a final rule
outlining the obligations for areas in nonattainment with the 2008
ozone standard, as well as obligations for areas in the OTR. This rule,
referred to as the ``2008 Ozone Implementation Rule,'' contains a
description of EPA's expectations for states with RACT obligations, and
required states in the OTR to certify RACT requirements by July 20,
2014. The 2008 Ozone Implementation Rule gives states several options
for meeting RACT requirements for the 2008 ozone standard. States may
(1) establish new or more stringent rules that meet RACT control levels
for the 2008 standard; (2) certify, where appropriate, that previously
adopted RACT rules approved by EPA under a prior ozone standard
represent adequate RACT control levels for the 2008 ozone NAAQS; or (3)
submit a negative declaration in instances where there are no sources
in the state covered by a specific CTG source category. States may use
these options alone or in combination to demonstrate compliance with
RACT requirements.
On October 26, 2015 (80 FR 65291), EPA revised the health-based
NAAQS for ozone, setting it at 0.070 ppm averaged over an 8-hour time
frame. On December 6, 2018 (83 FR 62998), EPA published a final rule
that outlines the obligations for areas in nonattainment with the 2015
ozone standard, as well as obligations for areas in the OTR. This rule,
referred to as the ``2015 Ozone Implementation Rule,'' requires states
in the OTR to certify RACT requirements by August 3, 2020.
On February 3, 2017 (82 FR 9158), EPA published a final rule
finding that Massachusetts, as well as 14 other states and the District
of Columbia, had failed to submit SIP revisions in a timely manner to
satisfy certain requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. With respect to
Massachusetts, EPA found that the Commonwealth had failed to submit
three required SIP elements: NOX RACT for Major Sources;
Non-CTG VOC RACT for Major Sources; and CTG VOC RACT. Id. at 9162. This
finding became effective March 6, 2017, and started a SIP sanctions
clock, which required the missing SIP elements to be submitted and
deemed complete before September 6, 2018. Id. at 9160-61.
On May 18, 2020, EPA proposed to approve a State Implementation
Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (see
85 FR 29678). The revision provides Massachusetts' determination, via a
negative declaration, that there are no facilities within its borders
subject to EPA's 2016 Control Technique Guideline (CTG) for the oil and
gas industry. The comment period for this action closed on June 17,
2020. EPA's separate approval action on the Massachusetts negative
declaration for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry, can also be found
under Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-2019-0220 at https://www.regulations.gov.
II. Summary of SIP Revisions
On October 18, 2018, Massachusetts submitted a SIP revision to
address its RACT requirements set forth by the CAA for the 2008 and
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQSs (i.e., RACT Certifications). On October 19,
2018, EPA determined Massachusetts' SIP submittal was administratively
and technically complete for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This completeness
determination ended the offset sanctions identified in Clean Air Act
Section 179(b)(2), which began on September 6, 2018, as described in
the Findings of Failure to Submit SIP Submittals for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS (82 FR 9158, February 3, 2017).
The Massachusetts RACT Certification submittal is based on (1)
newly required RACT controls, for both major sources of NOX
and VOCs as well as for sources subject to CTGs, that have been
implemented in Massachusetts, and will be part of the Massachusetts SIP
upon final approval of this EPA action; (2) previously EPA-approved
RACT controls which are not being revised in this action, including
regulations and source-specific requirements, that represent RACT
control levels under the 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQSs; and (3) the fact
that Massachusetts has no sources subject to RACT for several source
categories, for which negative declarations are described in Section
III.
Specifically, the Massachusetts October 2018 RACT SIP revision
contains a certification that Massachusetts has met all RACT
requirements for the 2008 and 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQSs and updates the
SIP with the following changes to Title 310 Code of Massachusetts
Regulations (CMR): revised section 7.00, Definitions; revised section
7.08(2), Municipal Waste Combustors; revised section 7.18, VOC RACT
subsections (3) Metal Furniture Surface Coating, (5) Large Appliance
Surface Coating, (11) Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and
Products, (12) Packaging Rotogravure and Packaging Flexographic
Printing, (14) Paper, Film and Foil Surface Coating, (21) Surface
Coating of Plastic Parts, (24) Flat Wood Paneling Surface Coating, (25)
Offset Lithographic Printing Letterpress
[[Page 46583]]
Printing; withdrawal of section 7.18(7), Automobile Surface Coating;
adding 7.18, VOC RACT subsections (31) Industrial Cleaning Solvents and
(32) Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing; and revised section 7.19,
NOX RACT subsections (2) General Provisions, (4) Large
Boilers, (5) Medium-size Boilers, (6) Small Boilers, (7) Stationary
Combustion Turbines, (8) Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engines, and (9) Municipal Waste Combustor Units.
On May 28, 2020, Massachusetts submitted a ``RACT SIP Revision'' to
withdraw portions of the Massachusetts October 2018 RACT SIP revision
and replace these portions with more recently adopted versions of the
regulations. EPA determined Massachusetts' May 28, 2020 RACT SIP
revision was administratively and technically complete on June 2, 2020.
Massachusetts' May 28, 2020, RACT SIP revision adds an exemption for
aerospace operations to subsection (31) Industrial Cleaning Solvents
since aerospace cleaning operations are already subject to VOC controls
in subsection (11) Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and
Products. Aerospace coating operation requirements in subsection (11)
Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products were also
revised to be consistent with the coating limits last approved as RACT
by EPA on October 9, 2013 (78 FR 54960), which are also consistent with
the EPA Aerospace CTG issued June 6, 1994 (59 FR 29216). The May 28,
2020, RACT SIP revision also contains a number of miscellaneous changes
and technical corrections, including an exemption for ``quality
assurance/quality control cleaning activities in manufacturing
processes'' in subsection (31) Industrial Cleaning Solvents,
clarifications to provisions for alternative VOC emissions standards
for surface coatings, and a revised definition of Paper, Film, and Foil
Coating to better align with the EPA CTG. Massachusetts' May 28, 2020
RACT SIP revision also reaffirms that the requirements in the
regulations as amended continue to constitute RACT in accordance with
EPA guidance.
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Submittals
A. NOX RACT for Major Sources
Massachusetts revised 310 CMR 7.19, Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for Sources of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX),
to contain more stringent emission standards for large boilers,
stationary combustion turbines, and stationary reciprocating internal
combustion engines. Massachusetts evaluated other states' recent RACT
regulations and analyzed emissions and operational profiles of
combustion units at major source facilities in Massachusetts to
determine RACT requirements for these categories. As part of its
review, Massachusetts concluded that it was not reasonable for large
boilers, turbines, and engines that operate infrequently to meet the
more stringent emission limits. Therefore, the revised regulation
exempts from the new emission standards large boilers and turbines with
a three-year-average capacity factor less than ten percent. MassDEP's
regulations already allow owners of engines that operate less than
1,000 hours in any 12-month period to make a specific combustion
control adjustment to reduce NOX rather than meet numerical
emissions limits; this provision remains in the new RACT regulations.
Massachusetts also revised 310 CMR 7.08(2) and 7.19(9) to contain
lower NOX RACT emissions limits for large and small
municipal waste combustors (MWCs), respectively. Under 310 CMR 7.08(2),
the emissions standards for mass-burn waterwall and refuse-derived-fuel
(RDF) stoker units is reduced from 205 and 250 parts per million (ppm)
NOX to 150 and 146 ppm, respectively. These facilities use a
combination of selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) as well as
combustion air staging to minimize NOX emissions and ammonia
slip. The revised emissions limits are consistent with the most
stringent RACT regulations in nearby states. For small MWC units under
310 CMR 7.19(9), Massachusetts revised the emission limit to 167 ppm,
which is a reasonable limit of NOX emissions based on the
inherent NOX emissions performance and control technology
limitations of refractory-wall modular mass-burn small MWC units.
These NOX RACT revisions reduce NOX emissions
by lowering the maximum NOX content of most sources compared
to Massachusetts' previously-approved regulation. Therefore, the
revised rule is expected to achieve equivalent or greater emissions
reductions. Thus, revising the SIP to incorporate the revised rule will
not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress or any other applicable requirement of the
Act. See CAA Sec. 110(l).
Three source-specific requirements were previously approved into
the Massachusetts SIP for NOx RACT. One of these facilities, Solutia,
formerly Monsanto, 55 FR 5986 (2/21/1990), repowered its coal-fired
boiler to natural gas-only fuel, which is subject to the newer control
standards that are no less stringent than RACT. The remaining two
facilities with EPA approved source-specific requirements are
Oldcastle, formerly Medusa, 64 FR 48095 (9/2/1999) and Specialty
Minerals 64 FR 48095 (9/2/1999). These two facilities continue to
operate the same emissions units and EPA approved RACT controls.
After reviewing existing EPA-approved source-specific
NOX control requirements, revised regulations controlling
NOX sources, and the existing SIP approved regulations
described in 40 CFR part 52.1120(c) EPA-approved regulations, the EPA
agrees with Massachusetts' determination that requirements for major
sources of NOx meet, or are more stringent than, RACT requirements.
Herein, EPA proposes that the above controls represent RACT for these
NOX sources in Massachusetts for the 2008 and 2015 ozone
standards.
B. Non-CTG VOC RACT for Major Sources
Massachusetts has eight major VOC emitting facilities subject to
source-specific control requirements that were previously approved by
EPA. One of these faculties, Duro Textile Printers, closed permanently
in 2017. The remaining seven facilities with EPA approved source-
specific requirements are: (1) Alliance Leather, formerly Barnet
Corporation, 67 FR 62179 (10/4/2002); (2) Brittany Dyeing and Finishing
60 FR 12123 (3/6/1995); (3) Callaway, formerly Spalding Corporation, 54
FR 46894 (11/8/1989); (4) Erving Paper Mills 55 FR 5447 (2/15/1990);
(5) Gillette 67 FR 62179 (10/4/2002); (6) Solutia, formerly Monsanto
Chemical, 67 FR 62179 (10/4/2002); and (7) St. Gobain Abrasives, Inc.,
formerly Norton, 67 FR 62179 (10/4/2002). These sources continue to
operate in the same manufacturing sectors and while some of these
facilities have experienced physical and operational changes including
new and reconfigured processes subject to Best Available Control
Technology (BACT) as part of state minor New Source Review (NSR)
permitting, the level of VOC control continues to be no less stringent
than RACT.
After reviewing existing stationary VOC sources in Massachusetts,
the EPA agrees with Massachusetts' determination that the requirements
for major sources of VOC meet RACT requirements. EPA proposes that the
seven operating facilities with source-specific requirements continue
to represent RACT for major VOC sources in Massachusetts for the 2008
and 2015
[[Page 46584]]
ozone standards because no new control technologies are known to be
reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility
for these sources since our last approval.
C. CTG VOC RACT
The revisions to 310 CMR 7.18, subsections (3) Metal Furniture
Surface Coating, (5) Large Appliance Surface Coating, (11) Surface
Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products, and (21) Surface
Coating of Plastic Parts contain updated work practices, coating
application methods, and recordkeeping requirements for applicable
facilities. The rules specifically list multiple types of approved
coating applications methods; however, other coating application
methods capable of achieving a transfer efficiency equivalent to, or
better than, that provided by high-volume low-pressure (HVLP) spray
application may also be used if approved by EPA. Control options permit
equivalent emissions limits expressed in terms of mass of VOC per
volume of solids as applied or the use of add-on controls. The coating
limits in the revised regulations generally follow the recommendations
in EPA's CTGs, with three notable category exceptions for metal parts
coatings: Extreme high gloss topcoat; other substrate antifoulant
coating; and antifouling sealer/tie. For these three categories,
Massachusetts reviewed industry data and determined that for purposes
of functionality, cost, and VOC emissions, the higher limits adopted
for these three coating categories constitute RACT. Massachusetts'
approach is consistent with the EPA guidance memorandum entitled
``Control Technique Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Part
Coatings--Industry Request for Reconsideration'' from Stephen Page to
Air Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X, dated June 1, 2010. Massachusetts' new
VOC coating limits are also lower than most of the previously SIP-
approved limits. Although some specialty coatings limits are higher
than previous limits, since the general use coating limit is lower and
these coatings are more frequently used, coupled with the fact that the
revised rule's applicability is broader, the revised rule reduces VOC
emissions and will not interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress or any other
applicable requirement of the Act. See CAA Sec. 110(l). This analysis
is also consistent with the March 17, 2011, EPA guidance memorandum
entitled ``Approving SIP Revisions Addressing VOC RACT Requirements for
Certain Coating Categories.''
The revisions to 310 CMR 7.18, subsections (12) Packaging
Rotogravure and Packaging Flexographic Printing, (14) Paper, Film and
Foil Surface Coating, and (25) Offset Lithographic Printing and
Letterpress Printing are consist with the recommendations in EPA's
CTGs. The revisions reduce VOC emissions by lowering applicability
thresholds compared to Massachusetts' previously-approved regulation.
The applicability thresholds for the work practices are revised to be
the greater of 15 pounds of VOC per day or 3 tons per rolling 12-month
period before application of control equipment. The applicability
thresholds for the emission limits are now 25 tons of VOC per rolling
12-month period per printing line before application of control
equipment. Therefore, the revised rules are expected to achieve
equivalent or greater emissions reductions. Thus, revising the SIP to
incorporate the revised rule will not interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress or
any other applicable requirement of the Act. See CAA Sec. 110(l).
The revisions to 310 CMR 7.18, subsection (24) Flat Wood Paneling
Surface Coating are generally consistent with EPA's CTG for Flat Wood
Paneling Coatings (EPA-453/R-06-004, September 2006). The applicability
threshold of the greater of 15 pounds of VOC per day or 3 tons per
rolling 12-month period before application of control equipment was
revised to also consider associated cleaning operations. Applicable
sources are required to limit VOC emissions by adding on a pollution
control device with 90% efficiency or by limiting VOC content in
coatings to 2.1 lbs of VOC per gallon of coating. The rule also
requires record keeping and work practices for handling VOC-containing
coatings, thinners, cleaning materials, and coatings-related waste
materials. The revised rule reduces VOC emissions by lowering the
maximum VOC content of most coatings, compared to Massachusetts'
previously-approved regulation. Therefore, the revised rule is expected
to achieve equivalent or greater emissions reductions. Thus, revising
the SIP to incorporate the revised rule will not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress or any other applicable requirement of the Act. See CAA Sec.
110(l).
The addition of 310 CMR 7.18, subsection (31) Industrial Cleaning
Solvents creates a new regulation, which generally applies to any
facility with emissions from industrial cleaning solvents greater than
15 pounds of VOC per day or 3 tons per rolling 12-month period, before
application of control equipment. The regulation contains work
practices and three options for compliance with the VOC content of the
industrial cleaning solvent: (1) Use of materials which meet the
specific VOC content limitations in Table 310 CMR 7.18(31)(d)1; or (2)
use of industrial cleaning solvents that have a VOC composite partial
pressure equal to or less than eight mm Hg at 20 [deg]C (68 [deg]F); or
(3) achievement of an overall VOC capture control efficiency of at
least 85% by weight using add-on air pollution capture and control
equipment.
The addition of 310 CMR 7.18, subsection (32) Fiberglass Boat
Manufacturing creates a new regulation, which applies to any fiberglass
boat manufacturing facility with emissions from manufacturing and
cleaning operations greater than 15 pounds of VOC per day or 3 tons per
rolling 12-month period, before the application of control equipment.
The regulation includes work practices and four options for compliance
with the monomer (the basic building block of fiberglass resins) VOC
content limitations for open molding resins and gel coats, as follows:
(1) Use materials which meet the specific VOC content limitations in
Table 310 CMR 7.18(32)(E)1; (2) emissions of no more than a calculated
weighted-average monomer VOC content for a specific category and
application method; (3) emissions of no more than a calculated
facility-wide emissions average VOC emissions cap; or (4) use of add-on
air pollution capture and control equipment to emit no more than a
numerical monomer VOC emission limitation that is determined for each
facility.
Massachusetts has determined that there are no applicable
stationary sources of VOC in Massachusetts for ten CTG categories: (1)
Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, and Process
Unit Turnarounds; (2) Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment; (3)
Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products; (4) Manufacture of
Pneumatic Rubber Tires; (5) Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners; (6)
Manufacture of High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and
Polystyrene Resins; (7) Equipment Leaks from Natural Gas/Gasoline
Processing Plants; (8) Air Oxidation Processes; (9) Surface Coating of
Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks; and (10) Oil and Natural Gas
Industry. These negative
[[Page 46585]]
declarations mean that Massachusetts has no applicable stationary
sources of VOC that are covered by these CTGs.
Since Massachusetts is making a negative declaration with respect
to the Automobiles and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings CTG, they
have requested 310 CRM 7.18, subsection (7) be withdrawn from the
Massachusetts SIP. Since Massachusetts has certified there are no
applicable sources, and new sources would be subject to minor new
source review permitting, the withdrawal of the rule will have no
effect on VOC emissions compared to currently-approved regulations.
Thus, revising the SIP to withdraw the rule will not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress or any other applicable requirement of the Act. See CAA Sec.
110(l).
EPA has evaluated Massachusetts' CTG VOC regulations, which the
Commonwealth certifies as meeting RACT for the 2008 and 2015 ozone
standards, and EPA finds that the regulations are sufficiently
consistent with recommendations in the respective EPA CTGs and are
based on currently available technologically and economically feasible
controls. Therefore, EPA proposes that the regulations being added and
revised in this action, along with the past approved VOC CTG
regulations, represent RACT in Massachusetts for the 2008 and 2015
ozone standards.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve Massachusetts' SIP revision as meeting
the Commonwealth's RACT obligations for the 2008 and 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQSs as set forth in sections 182(b) and 184(b)(2) of the CAA, and to
add ``Massachusetts Reasonably Available Control Technology State
Implementation Plan Revision for the 2008 and 2015 Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards'' dated October 18, 2018, and ``RACT SIP
Revision'' dated May 28, 2020 to the Massachusetts SIP, which includes
ten negative declarations for CTG source categories. EPA is proposing
to approve 310 CMR changes to the Massachusetts SIP, as follows:
revised section 7.00, Definitions; revised section 7.08(2), Municipal
Waste Combustors; revised section 7.18, VOC RACT subsections (3) Metal
Furniture Surface Coating, (5) Large Appliance Surface Coating, (11)
Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products, (12)
Packaging Rotogravure and Packaging Flexographic Printing, (14) Paper,
Film and Foil Surface Coating, (21) Surface Coating of Plastic Parts,
(24) Flat Wood Paneling Surface Coating, (25) Offset Lithographic
Printing Letterpress Printing; withdrawal of 7.18, section (7)
Automobile Surface Coating; addition of 7.18 VOC RACT, subsections (31)
Industrial Cleaning Solvents and (32) Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing;
revised section 7.19, NOX RACT subsections (2) General
Provisions, (4) Large Boilers, (5) Medium-size Boilers, (6) Small
Boilers, (7) Stationary Combustion Turbines, (8) Stationary
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines, and (9) Municipal Waste
Combustor Units. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues
discussed in this notice or on other relevant matters. These comments
will be considered before taking final action. Interested parties may
participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure by submitting written
comments to this proposed rule by following the instructions listed in
the ADDRESSES section of this Federal Register.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to amend regulatory text that
includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of
1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing changes to the Massachusetts SIP as
described in the Proposed Action section above. The EPA has made, and
will continue to make, these documents generally available through
https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 1 Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble for more information).
VI. 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 state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed 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 proposed action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory
action because this action is not significant 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 Clean Air Act; 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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: July 16, 2020.
Dennis Deziel,
Regional Administrator,EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2020-15807 Filed 7-31-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P