![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Control of VOC Emissions From Decorative Surfaces, Brake Shoe Coatings, Structural Steel Coatings, and Digital Imaging
Related Material
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: June 17, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 116)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 32415-32418]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17jn99-15]
[[Page 32415]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[MD-3039a; FRL-6357-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Control of VOC Emissions From Decorative Surfaces, Brake Shoe
Coatings, Structural Steel Coatings, and Digital Imaging
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on revisions to the Maryland
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions establish reasonable
available control technology (RACT) to limit volatile organic compound
(VOC) emissions from solid resin decorative surfaces, brake shoe
coatings, structural steel coatings, and digital imaging. EPA is fully
approving these revisions in accordance with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act.
DATES: This rule is effective on August 16, 1999 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by July 19, 1999.
If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed to David L. Arnold, Chief,
Ozone and Mobile Sources Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the Air and
Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460; and Maryland Department
of the Environment, 2500 Broening Highway, Baltimore, Maryland, 21224.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carolyn M. Donahue, (215) 814-2095, or
by e-mail at donahue.carolyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On February 10, 1999 and February 12, 1999, the State of Maryland
submitted formal revisions to its State Implementation Plan (SIP).
These SIP revisions, submitted by the Maryland Department of the
Environment (MDE), consist of the control of volatile organic compound
(VOC) emissions from solid resin decorative surface manufacturing,
brake shoe coating operations, structural steel coating operations, and
digital imaging.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
COMAR 26.11.19.07-1: Control of VOC Emissions From Solid Resin
Decorative Surface Manufacturing
This new regulation establishes RACT standards to control VOC
emissions from solid resin decorative surface (SRDS) operations. These
operations do not fall under the requirements for other paper coatings
at COMAR 26.11.19.07.
General Provisions
This section establishes definitions for the terms ``particle plant
operation,'' ``related operations,'' ``shaped goods plant,'' and
``solid resin decorative surface operation.'' This new regulation
applies to a person who owns or operates a solid resin decorative
surface operation that is a major VOC source.
Requirements for SRDS Operations
This section establishes that SRDS facility owners or operators
must control VOC emissions by venting the curing oven exhaust at each
SRDS operation through a VOC control system, which consists of a
condenser and carbon adsorber unit, or through another control system
that is maintained and operated to reduce VOC emissions from the curing
oven exhaust by 75% or more.
SRDS facility owners or operators, as well as owners and operators
of shaped goods plants and related operations, must take all reasonable
precautions to minimize VOC emissions from SRDS mixing vessels and
storage tanks, including the use of covers on mixers except when adding
or emptying materials, operator training in procedures to minimize
spills and evaporative losses during the mixing and transferring of VOC
containing materials, implementing programs to minimize the quantity of
VOC-based materials used to clean lines or equipment, storing VOC-
contaminated cloth or paper in closed containers, and implementing an
effective leak inspection and maintenance program that includes monthly
inspections of equipment for leaks.
Requirements for Particle Plant Operations
Particle plant owners or operators must vent the curing oven
exhaust at each particle plant operation into a VOC control system
consisting of a carbon adsorber unit, or other control system that is
maintained and operated to reduce VOC emissions from the curing oven
exhaust by 75% or more. Also, the requirements to control VOC emissions
from mixing vessels and storage tanks at SRDS operations apply to
particle plant operations.
Requirements for VOC Storage Tanks, Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements
Raw material storage tanks containing VOC materials shall be
equipped with vapor balance lines or conservation vents to minimize
working and breathing losses. The reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for affected sources are established in the source's
permit to operate.
Evaluation: This revision, which regulates VOC emissions from solid
resin decorative surface manufacturing, will result in significant
enforceable VOC emission reductions and is acceptable to EPA.
COMAR 26.11.19.13-2: Control of VOC Emissions From Brake Shoe Coating
Operations
This new regulation establishes standards for brake shoe coating
operations based on VOC content in the coatings. This revision also
amends COMAR 26.11.19.13B to exempt brake shoe coating operations and
structural steel coating operations from Maryland's miscellaneous metal
coating rule.
General Provisions
This regulation establishes definitions for the terms ``brake
caliper rust preventive coating (brake caliper coating),'' and ``brake
shoe coating operation,'' and provides that this rule applies to owners
or operators of brake shoe coating operations at a premises that has
actual total VOC emissions of 20 or more pounds per day (lbs/day) from
all brake shoe coating operations.
Coating Requirements and Equipment Cleanup
An owner or operator of a brake shoe coating operation may not emit
VOCs unless the VOC content of the coating is less than 6.3 pounds of
VOC per gallon (lbs/gal) of coating applied (0.76 kilograms per liter
[kg/l]) for brake shoe coating, and 4.8 lbs/gal (0.58 kg/l) for brake
caliper coating. The coatings may be applied by dipping, by spraying
with high volume low pressure or electrostatic spray systems, or by
other comparable high transfer efficiency methods.
Persons who own or operate a brake shoe coating operation must
store all
[[Page 32416]]
waste materials containing VOC in closed containers, and must maintain
lids or covers on all containers or vessels containing VOC when not in
use.
Evaluation: This SIP revision, controlling VOC emissions from brake
shoe coating operations, will result in significant enforceable VOC
emission reductions. EPA has determined that COMAR 26.11.19.13-1, as
well as the administrative revisions to COMAR 26.11.19.13, is
approvable as a SIP revision.
COMAR 26.11.19.13-3: Control of VOC Emissions From Structural Steel
Coating Operations
This regulation establishes RACT standards for the control of VOC
emissions from structural steel coating operations. Structural steel
coating operations apply a protective coating to manufactured
components such as welded steel joists, steel beams and columns that
are used to assemble buildings and other structures.
General Provisions
This regulation establishes definitions for the terms ``controlled
air spray system,'' ``dip coating operation,'' ``protective coating,''
and ``structural steel coating operation.'' Owners or operators of a
structural steel coating operation that has a potential to emit VOCs of
25 or more tons per year or actual VOC emissions of 20 or more lbs/day
are subject to this regulation.
Requirements for Structural Steel Coating Operations
The VOC content in protective coatings is limited to 3.9 lbs/gal
for dip coating operations, and 3.5 lbs/gal for any means other than
dip coating, which includes controlled air spray systems or other
systems approved by MDE. However, a higher VOC content coating may be
used if the VOC content does not exceed the standard by more than 20%,
and if it is used only between November 1 of one year and March 31 of
the next year.
The owner or operator of a structural steel coating operation also
must minimize VOC emissions by using detergents, high pressure water,
or low VOC cleaning materials to clean lines or equipment; using
enclosed containers or VOC recycling equipment to clean spray gun
equipment; storing all waste containing VOC in closed containers; and
maintaining lids on any VOC-bearing materials when not in use.
Evaluation: This SIP revision, which regulates VOC emissions from
structural steel coating operations, will result in VOC emission
reductions from coatings of girders and building components that are
not covered under Maryland's miscellaneous metal coatings rule. EPA has
determined that COMAR 26.11.19.13-2 is approvable as a SIP revision.
COMAR 26.11.19.18: Screen Printing and Digital Imaging
This rule amends the previous regulation .18 by adding RACT
standards for digital imaging. The same RACT limits for VOC content are
retained from the previous COMAR 26.11.19.18, Control of VOC Emissions
from Screen Printing. COMAR 26.11.19.18 is revised to delete the old
interim dates for VOC content in screen printing operations.
General Provisions
The definition for the term ``digital imaging'' is added to this
rule. This regulation applies to the same screen printing facilities
listed in the previous screen printing rule (62 FR 53544, October 15,
1997), as well as to any person who performs digital imaging at a
premise which causes VOC emissions of 20 or more lbs/day from all
digital imaging.
Sections B to I from the previous COMAR 26.11.19.18 have been
repealed and the new sections B-G are added. This eliminates expired
interim dates for limiting VOC content for screen printing and adds
RACT for digital imaging. All of the limits in Maryland's screen
printing rule are retained in this revision. Digital imaging owners or
operators subject to this regulation may not cause VOC emissions of
more than 100 lbs/day from all digital imaging on the premises.
Evaluation: Controlling VOC emissions from digital imaging will
result in enforceable emissions reductions. The revision also clarifies
the screen printing regulation by eliminating passed dates. These
amendments to COMAR 26.11.19.18 are approvable to EPA.
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no
adverse comment. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's
Federal Register, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve
as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are
filed. This rule will be effective on August 16, 1999 without further
notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by July 19, 1999. If EPA
receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take
effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so
at this time.
II. Final Action
EPA is approving the SIP revisions submitted by MDE on February 10,
1999 and February 12, 1999 to control VOC emissions from solid resin
decorative coatings, brake shoe coating operations, structural steel
coating operations, and digital imaging.
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from review under E.O. 12866, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''
B. Executive Order 12875
Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or
tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, E.O. requires EPA to
provide to the Office of Management and Budget a description of the
extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected
state, local, and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns,
copies of written communications from the governments, and a statement
supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of state, local, and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875
do not apply to this rule.
C. Executive Order 13045
E.O. 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies
to any rule that the EPA determines (1) is ``economically
significant,'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) the environmental
health or safety risk addressed by the rule has a disproportionate
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria,
[[Page 32417]]
the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of
the planned rule on children and explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible
alternatives considered by the Agency.
This final rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it is not an
economically significant regulatory action as defined by E.O. 12866,
and it does not address an environmental health or safety risk that
would have a disproportionate effect on children.
D. Executive Order 13084
Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to provide to the Office
of Management and Budget, in a separately identified section of the
preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a
summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected and
other representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies
on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities
of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve or impose
any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under
section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create
any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is
already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not
create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the
Clean Air Act, preparation of a flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
F. Unfunded Mandates
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate;
or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of
$100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in
the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves
pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this 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. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
H. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action, pertaining to revisions to the Maryland
SIP establishing VOC control requirements for solid resin decorative
surface manufacturing, brake shoe coatings, structural steel coatings,
and digital imaging, must be filed in the United States Court of
Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 16, 1999. 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, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: May 27, 1999.
W. Michael McCabe,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart V--Maryland
2. Section 52.1070 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(142) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1070 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(142) Revisions to the Maryland State Implementation Plan submitted
on February 10, 1999 and February 12, 1999 by the Maryland Department
of the Environment:
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Three letters dated February 10, 1998 and one letter dated
February 12, 1999 from the Maryland Department of the Environment
transmitting additions to Maryland's State Implementation Plan,
pertaining to volatile organic compound (VOC) regulations in
[[Page 32418]]
Maryland's air quality regulations, COMAR 26.11.
(B) Regulations:
(1) Addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.07-1: Control of VOC Emissions
from Solid Resin Decorative Surface Manufacturing, adopted by the
Secretary of the Environment on May 20, 1998 and effective on June 15,
1998, including the following:
(i) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.07-1.A Definitions, including
definitions for the terms ``particle plant operation,'' ``related
operations,'' ``shaped goods plant,'' and ``solid resin decorative
surface (SRDS) operation.''
(ii) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.07-1.B Applicability.
(iii) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.07-1.C General Requirements
for SRDS Operations.
(iv) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.07-1.D General Requirements for
Particle Plant Operations.
(v) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.07-1.E General Requirements for
Shaped Goods Plants.
(vi) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.07-1.F General Requirements for
Related Operations.
(vii) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.07-1.G Additional Requirements
for VOC Storage Tanks.
(viii) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.07-1.H Reporting and Record-
Keeping Requirements.
(2) Addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.13-2: Control of VOC Emissions
from Brake Shoe Coating Operations, adopted by the Secretary of the
Environment on August 4, 1998 and effective on August 24, 1998,
including the following:
(i) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.13-2.A Definitions.
(ii) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.13-2.B Terms Defined, including
definitions for the terms ``brake caliper rust preventive coating,''
and ``brake shoe coating operation.''
(iii) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.13-2.C Applicability.
(iv) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.13-2.D General Coating
Requirements.
(v) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.18.E Equipment Cleanup.
(vi) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.13.B(3)(e) and (f), exempting
brake shoe coating and structural steel coating operations from
Miscellaneous Metal Coatings.
(3) Addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.13-3: Control of Volatile
Organic Compounds from Structural Steel Coating Operations, adopted by
the Secretary of the Environment on June 5, 1998, and effective on June
29, 1998, including the following:
(i) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.13-3.A Definitions, including
definitions for the terms ``controlled air spray system,'' ``dip
coating operation,'' ``protective coating,'' and ``structural steel
coating operation.''
(ii) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.13-3.B Applicability.
(iii) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.13-3.C Coating Requirements.
(iv) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.13-3.D Cleanup Requirements.
(4) Revision to COMAR 26.11.19.18: Control of VOC Emissions from
Screen Printing and Digital Imaging, adopted by the Secretary of the
Environment on August 4, 1998, and effective on August 24, 1998,
including the following:
(i) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.18.A(5-1), definition for the
term ``digital imaging.''
(ii) deletion of existing COMAR 26.11.19.18.B-I.
(iii) addition of new COMAR 26.11.18.21.B Applicability.
(iv) addition of new COMAR 26.11.18.21.C General Requirements for
Screen Printing.
(v) addition of new COMAR 26.11.18.21.D General Requirements for
Plywood Sign Coating.
(vi) addition of new COMAR 26.11.18.21.E General Requirements for
Plastic Card Manufacturing.
(vii) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.18.F General Requirements for
Digital Imaging.
(viii) addition of new COMAR 26.11.19.18.G Record Keeping.
(ii) Additional Material.
(A) Remainder of February 10, 1999 and February 12, 1999 Maryland
State submittals pertaining to COMAR 26.11.19.07-1, .13-2, .13-3, and
.18.
[FR Doc. 99-15159 Filed 6-16-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P