[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 158 (Tuesday, August 17, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50711-50713]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-19827]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2005-OH-0003; FRL-9187-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Ohio; Final Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans;
Carbon Monoxide and Volatile Organic Compounds
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under section 110(k)(3) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is
disapproving an Ohio regulation revision pertaining to volatile organic
compound (VOC) limits for high performance architectural coatings
contained in Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) 3745-21-09(U)(1)(h). Under
section 110(k)(4) of the CAA, we are also conditionally approving a
revision of paragraph (BBB)(1) of OAC 3745-21-09, based on a State
commitment to provide for enforceability of a pertinent limit no later
than one year from the date of EPA's conditional approval.
DATES: This final rule is effective on September 16, 2010.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2005-OH-0003. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Anthony Maietta,
Environmental Protection Specialist, at (312) 353-8777 before visiting
the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Maietta, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8777,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What Were EPA's Proposed Actions?
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. What Actions is EPA Taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Were EPA's Proposed Actions?
On January 22, 2010 (75 FR 3668), EPA proposed a variety of actions
regarding revisions to OAC 3745-21, from submittals dated October 9,
2000, February 6, 2001, August 3, 2001, and June 24, 2003. We proposed
to (1) approve into the State Implementation Plan (SIP) certain
revisions in OAC 3745-21 which have been adopted by the State; (2)
disapprove a revision pertaining to high performance architectural
coatings; (3) conditionally approve a revision of paragraph (BBB)(1) of
OAC 3745-21-09, if the State gives EPA a letter that commits to provide
for enforceability of the 1 ton per year limit no later than one year
from the expected date of EPA's conditional approval; (4) take no
action on certain regulation revisions, and, (5) provide notice that
EPA and Ohio have created a mechanism to incorporate into the Ohio SIP
permits to facilities operating under previously issued alternate VOC
limit and emission control exemptions for miscellaneous metal coating
operations under OAC 3745-21-09(U)(2)(f). For administrative
convenience, in a separate rulemaking published June 21, 2010, at 75 FR
34939, we approved certain submitted regulation revisions, took no
action on others, and recognized various emission control exemptions
that have been granted for miscellaneous metal coating operations under
OAC 3745-21-09(U)(2)(f). Today's action makes final our disapproval and
conditional approval of portions of OAC rule 3745-21-09. You can learn
more information about the rule revisions submitted and our evaluation
of them in our proposed action.
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period. We
did not receive any comments on the proposed action. On March 1, and
July 2, 2010, Ohio EPA committed to remedy deficiencies in OAC 3745-21-
09(BBB)(1).
III. What Actions is EPA Taking?
EPA is disapproving the coating VOC content limit for high
performance architectural aluminum coatings contained in paragraph
(U)(1)(h) of OAC 3745-21-09 because the State has not demonstrated that
the relaxation of the VOC content limit for high performance
architectural aluminum coatings would not interfere with attainment of
the ozone standard and other requirements. EPA is conditionally
approving a revision to OAC 3745-21-09(BBB)(1) provided that the State
is able to, within one year of our final rulemaking, further revise the
paragraph to include test procedures and recordkeeping requirements
compatible with the paragraph's revised emission limit. On March 1, and
July 2, 2010, Ohio EPA committed to remedy the deficiencies in this
revision. If the State fails to correct this rule and confirm this
correction within the allowed one year period, this conditional
approval will revert to disapproval.
[[Page 50712]]
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and, therefore, is
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.
Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601 et seq.).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state
law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that
required by state law, it 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).
Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (59
FR 22951, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action also does not have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a
Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air
Act (CAA).
Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a
Federal Standard.
National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
In reviewing state submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state
submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
section 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by October 18, 2010. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: August 3, 2010.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart KK--Ohio
0
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (kk) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(kk) Disapproval. EPA is disapproving the coating VOC content limit
for high performance architectural aluminum coatings contained in
paragraph (U)(1)(h) of chapter 3745-21-09 of the Ohio Administrative
Code.
0
3. Section 52.1919 is amended by adding paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1919 Identification of plan--conditional approval.
* * * * *
(b) On October 9, 2000, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
submitted a revision to Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) 3745-21-09(BBB).
The revision removed a requirement that for the agerite resin D
process, the VOC emissions from the vapor recovery system vents and
neutralization and distillation system vents (except wash kettle or
still feed condenser vents, stills vacuum jet tailpipe vents, and
process emergency safety relief devices) be vented to an emissions
control device that is designed and operated to achieve an
[[Page 50713]]
emissions control efficiency of at least 90 percent, by weight. In
place of this deleted emissions control efficiency requirement, the
revised paragraph now specifies a total annual VOC emissions limit of
1.0 ton from the recovery system and neutralization and distillation
system vents. The revision lacked test procedures and record keeping
requirements compatible with the revised emission limit. On March 1,
2010, Ohio submitted a commitment to revise OAC 3745-21-09(BBB) to
include the necessary test procedures and record keeping requirements
by September 16, 2011. When EPA determines the state has met its
commitment, OAC 3745-21-09(BBB) will be incorporated by reference into
the SIP.
[FR Doc. 2010-19827 Filed 8-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P