Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Indiana

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IN65-1-7288a; FRL-5613-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Indiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On November 21, 1995, and February 14, 1996 the State of

Indiana submitted a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision request to

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establishing regulations for

wood furniture coating operations in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter

Counties, as part of Clark and Floyd Counties' 15 percent (%) Rate-of-

Progress (ROP) plan control measures for Volatile Organic Compound

(VOC) emissions, and the State's requirement to develop post-1990

Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) Reasonably Available Control

Technology (RACT) rules for the four counties. These regulations

require wood furniture coating facilities which have the potential to

emit at least 25 tons of VOC per year to use coatings which meet a

certain VOC content limit or add on controls that are capable of

achieving an equivalent reduction. The rule also specifies work

practices and training requirements that must be implemented for the

wood working operations. Indiana expects that this rule will reduce VOC

emissions by approximately 2,445 pounds per day in Clark and Floyd

Counties. No wood furniture coating operations have been identified in

Lake or Porter Counties at this time.

DATES: This action is effective on December 30, 1996, unless EPA

receives adverse or critical comments by November 29, 1996. If the

effective date is delayed, timely notification will be published in the

Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the revision request are available for inspection

at the following address: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5,

Air and Radiation Division, Air Programs Branch, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. (It is recommended that you

telephone Francisco J. Acevedo at (312) 886-6082 before visiting the

Region 5 Office.)

Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,

Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francisco J. Acevedo at (312) 886-

6061.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 182(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (the Act) requires all ozone

nonattainment areas which are classified as ``moderate'' or worse to

achieve a 15% reduction of 1990 emissions of VOC by 1996. In Indiana,

Lake and Porter Counties are classified as ``severe'' nonattainment for

ozone, while Clark and Floyd Counties are classified as ``moderate''

nonattainment. As such, these areas are subject to the 15% ROP

requirement. Section 182(b)(2)(A) of the Act further requires States

with moderate or worse ozone nonattainment areas to submit a SIP

revision establishing RACT requirements for each source category

covered by a CTG issued by EPA between November 15, 1990, and the date

of area attainment. Under this provision, the State must submit these

SIP revisions within the period established in the relevant CTG

document. Section 183 of the Act required that EPA publish CTG

documents for thirteen source categories not already covered by a CTG

by November 15, 1993.

On April 28, 1992, the EPA published a supplement to the General

Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the 1990 Amendments to

the Act (57 FR 18069), which listed 13 source categories to be covered

by a post-enactment CTG document. One of these source categories is

wood furniture coating. This supplemental document also noted that the

EPA would not be able to publish all CTGs required by the Act by the

November 15, 1993 deadline, and therefore states may delay adoption of

RACT rules for forthcoming CTG source categories. However, it specifies

that if the CTGs are not completed on time, the states are to develop

and submit RACT rules for these categories by November 15, 1994. After

an extensive regulatory negotiation with industry, EPA issued a draft

CTG for wood furniture coating in August, 1995 which was released on

May 20, 1996 as a final CTG. As part of the final CTG, a model rule for

wood furniture finishing and cleaning operations was also released.

The emission points covered in the CTG are the finishing, cleaning,

and washoff operations. The finishing operation includes the finishing

application area, flashoff areas, curing ovens, and assorted cooldown

zones. Emissions can occur throughout the entire finishing operation.

Finishing operation-related cleaning includes application equipment

cleanup, process equipment cleaning, and spray booth cleaning. Cleaning

operations occur primarily in the application area, though

miscellaneous cleaning operations may occur along any part of the

finishing operation. Washoff operations are also covered by the model

rule. Washoff includes the removal of finishing material from a piece

of furniture that does not meet specifications.

The selected RACT contains two elements: emission standards

limiting the VOC content of coatings and work practice standards. The

VOC content should be calculated as applied to account for in-house

dilution of coatings purchased from an outside source. To incorporate

some flexibility, the model

[[Page 55890]]

rule allows sources to use either an averaging approach or add-on air

pollution control equipment to meet the RACT requirements. To use an

add-on control device, the source must demonstrate, through the use of

a series of calculations, that the source is achieving an emission

reduction equivalent to that achieved by sources using compliant

coatings.

Sources using an averaging approach must demonstrate that their

emissions are no greater than 90 percent of the emissions that would

result from the use of compliant coatings. Section B.4(a)(4) of the

model rule provides guidance on how to determine if the source is

achieving the required emission reduction. The model rule contains

extensive guidance for states which decide to allow averaging as a

method of demonstrating compliance. However, states have the option of

not incorporating an averaging mechanism into their rules. States may

also place limitations on the averaging program if they wish to do so.

For example, a state may limit averaging to facilities of a certain

size, limit the number of coatings subject to averaging, or limit the

amount of time a source could use averaging in anticipation that, in

the future, compliant coatings may be available for every situation.

The baseline for each finishing material included in the averaging

program shall be the lower of the actual or allowable emission rate as

of the effective date of the State's RACT rule. For example, assuming a

limit of 0.8 lb VOC/lb solids, if a source is already using a 0.3 lb

VOC/lb solids topcoat, it is not entitled to any sort of credit for the

0.5 lb VOC/lb solids difference. Methods used in determining the usage

of each finishing material shall be accurate enough to ensure that the

affected source's actual emissions are less than the allowable

emissions.

On May 3, 1995, the Indiana Air Pollution Control Board (IAPCB)

adopted the Wood Furniture Coatings rule. Public hearings on the rule

were held on March 1, 1995, and May 3, 1995, in Indianapolis, Indiana.

The rule was signed by the Secretary of State on December 5, 1995, and

became effective on January 4, 1996; it was published in the Indiana

Register on February 1, 1996. Indiana Department of Environmental

Management (IDEM) formally submitted the Wood Furniture Coatings rule

to EPA on November 21, 1995, as a revision to the Indiana SIP for

ozone; supplemental documentation to this revision was submitted on

February 14, 1996. EPA made a finding of completeness in a letter dated

February 23, 1996.

II. Analysis of State Submittal

The submittals include the following new or revised rules:

326 Indiana Air Code (IAC) 8-11 Wood Furniture Coatings

In order to determine the approvability of the Indiana Wood

Furniture Coating SIP revision, the State rule was reviewed for

enforceability and consistency with the model rule found in the draft

and final CTG for Wood Furniture Coating. A discussion of the rule and

EPA's analysis follows:

8-11-1 Applicability

This section establishes which facilities are subject to the

Indiana wood furniture coating rules. Subject facilities include all

sources in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties which have the

potential to emit at least 25 tons of VOC per year and are classified

under any of the following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)

codes: 2434 (wood cabinets), 2511 (wood household furniture, including

tables, beds, chairs, and unupholstered sofas), 2512 (upholstered wood

household furniture), 2517 (wood television, radios, phonographs, and

sewing machine cabinets), 2519 (household furniture, not elsewhere

classified), 2521 (wood office furniture), 2531 (public building and

related furniture), 2541 (wood office and store fixtures, partitions,

shelving, and lockers), 2599 (furniture and fixtures and any other

coated furnishings made of solid wood, wood composition, or simulated

wood material not elsewhere classified). The applicability section of

the Indiana rule is generally consistent with EPA's model rule for wood

furniture finishing and cleaning operations and is therefore

approvable.

8-11-2 Definitions

This section establishes definitions for 42 terms used throughout

the State rule. The definitions section of the Indiana rule accurately

describes the specified terms and is generally consistent with EPA's

model rule for wood furniture finishing and cleaning operations. The

Indiana rule does not define additional terms found in the model rule

that are also used in the State rule. However, the lack of these

definitions does not appear to create a conflict in the rule nor does

it weaken the interpretation of the rule. This section is therefore

approvable.

8-11-3 Emission Limits

This section requires that on or after January 1, 1996, each

facility subject to the rule must limit VOC emissions from finishing

operations by complying with one of the following options: (1) Using

as-applied topcoats with a VOC content limit of 0.8 kg VOC/kg solids

(0.8 lb VOC/lb solids); (2) Using a finishing system of sealers with a

VOC content limit of 1.9 kg VOC/kg solids (1.9 lb VOC/lb solids), as

applied and topcoats with a VOC content limit of 1.8 kg VOC/kg solids

(1.8 lb VOC/lb solids), as applied; (3a) For sources using acid-cured

alkyd amino vinyl sealers and acid-cured alkyd amino conversion varnish

topcoats the sealer is to contain no more than 2.3 kg VOC/kg solids

(2.3 lb VOC/lb solids), as-applied, and the topcoat no more than 2.0 kg

VOC/kg solids (2.0 lb VOC/lb solids), as-applied; (3b) For sources

using a sealer other than an acid-cured alkyd amino vinyl sealer and

acid-cured amino conversion varnish topcoats, the sealer is to contain

no more than 1.9 kg VOC/kg solids (1.9 lb VOC/lb solids), as-applied,

and the topcoat is to contain no more than 2.0 kg VOC/kg solids (2.0 lb

VOC/lb solids), as applied; (3c) For sources using an acid-cured alkyd

amino vinyl sealer and a topcoat other than an acid-cured alkyd amino

conversion varnish topcoat, the sealer is to contain no more than 2.3

kg VOC/kg solids (2.3 lb VOC/lb solids), as-applied, and the topcoat is

to contain no more than 1.8 kg VOC/kg solids (1.8 lb VOC/lb solids), as

applied.

As an alterative to meeting these coating limits, the rule allows

regulated sources to use either a control system that achieves an

equivalent reduction in emissions as calculated using specified

compliance procedures in section 6(a)(2) of the rule, or an emissions

averaging approach which must demonstrate that emissions reductions

from the finishing materials are at least 10% greater than would be

achieved by use of compliant coatings to meet the coating limits.

Section 3(a)(4) establishes the equations, based upon those developed

in the CTG's model rule, to demonstrate compliance with the rule

through emissions averaging, and sources using an averaging approach

must meet additional requirements as provided for in section 10.

To limit VOC emissions from cleaning operations, section 3(b)

requires that wood furniture coating facilities meet a VOC content

limit of 0.8 kg VOC/kg solids (0.8 lb VOC/lb solids), for strippable

booth coatings, as applied. The emission limits section of the Indiana

rule follows the approach recommended in the EPA model rule and is

therefore approvable.

8-11-4 Work Practice Standards

This section requires that certain work practices be followed. On

or after

[[Page 55891]]

July 23, 1995, all equipment is to be maintained according to the

manufacturer's specifications; all fresh or used solvent must be kept

in closed containers; all organic solvents used for line cleaning must

be pumped or drained into a closed container; and all finishing

materials and cleaning materials must also be stored in closed

containers. In addition, closed tanks are required to be used for

washoff operations, and during washoff operations dripping of

components must be minimized by tilting or rotating the part to drain

as much organic solvent as possible. Further, sources are not to use

organic solvents containing more than 8% by weight of VOC for cleaning

spray booth components other than conveyors, continuous coaters and

their enclosures, or metal filters, except during refurbishing of the

spray booth. If the spray booth is being refurbished, that is, the

spray booth coating or material used to cover the booth is being

replaced, no more than 1 gallon of organic solvent shall be used to

clean the booth. Conventional air spray guns are prohibited under the

rule except under certain circumstances specified under section 4(c).

On or after May 1, 1996, wood furniture coating operations must

clean spray guns using an enclosed device which minimizes solvent

evaporation, recirculates solvent for reuse, and collects solvent for

proper disposal or recycling. Sources must also implement a written

leak inspection and maintenance plan which meets criteria specified in

section 4(g). A cleaning and washoff solvent accounting system must be

implemented, by means of maintaining forms that record the quantity and

type of organic solvent used each month for washoff and cleaning, the

number of pieces washed off, and the reason for the washoff, and the

quantity of spent solvent generated from each activity that is recycled

on-site or disposed off-site each month. Finally, sources must

implement a written and hands-on annual training program which at a

minimum will cover applicable application techniques, cleaning

procedures, equipment setup and adjustment to minimize finishing

material usage and overspray, and management of clean-up wastes.

Records of such training programs shall be kept on-site for at least

three years. The work practice standards section is consistent with

EPA's model rule for wood furniture finishing and cleaning operations

and is therefore approvable.

8-11-5 Continuous Compliance Plan

This section requires that on or before May 1, 1996, each owner or

operator of a subject facility must submit to IDEM a continuous

compliance plan (CCP) which shall address, at a minimum, the work

practice requirements specified in section 4 of the rule. Further, the

CCP should include a statement signed by a responsible official

certifying that the facility is in compliance with the control

requirements of section 3 and the work practice standards of section 4.

A copy of the CCP shall be maintained on site and shall be available

for inspection. If IDEM determines the CCP is inadequate, IDEM shall

require the CCP to be modified appropriately. The continuous compliance

plan section is consistent with EPA's model rule for wood furniture

finishing and cleaning operations and is therefore approvable.

8-11-6 Compliance Procedures and Monitoring Requirements

This section requires sources subject to the emission limits in the

State rule to demonstrate compliance with those limits by using any of

the following methods: (1) To support that each sealer, topcoat, and

strippable booth coating meets the requirements of the emission limits

section, the sources are required to maintain documentation that uses

EPA Method 24 data, or data from an equivalent method, to determine the

VOC and solids content of the as-supplied finished material. If

solvents or other VOC are added to the finishing material before

application, the source is required to maintain documentation showing

the VOC content of the finishing material as-applied, in kilograms of

VOC per kilograms of solids. (2) To comply through the use of a control

system, sources are required to determine the overall control

efficiency needed to demonstrate compliance using the overall control

efficiency equation provided in the rule for the specific capture

system and control devices employed by the source. Sources are also

required to document that the actual or daily weighted average VOC

content used in the overall control efficiency equation is obtained

from the VOC and solids content of the as-applied finishing material.

In addition, sources will need to calculate the overall efficiency of

the capture system and control device, using the procedures described

in the test procedures section of the rule, and demonstrate that the

value of the overall control efficiency thus estimated is equal or

greater than the value of the overall control efficiency calculated by

the overall control efficiency equation.

Initial compliance with the rule is to be met as follows. (1)

Sources subject to the provisions of section 3(a)(1) through 3(a)(3) or

3(b) which are complying through the procedures established in section

6(a)(1) are to submit an initial compliance status report, as required

by the continuous compliance plan and reporting requirements sections

of the rule, stating that compliant sealers and topcoats and strippable

booth coatings are being used in the wood furniture manufacturing

operations. (2) Sources subject to the coating limit provisions of

section 3 that are complying through the procedures established in

subsection (a)(1) and are applying sealers and topcoats using

continuous coaters are required to demonstrate initial compliance by

either of the following two options: (a) By submitting an initial

compliance status report stating that compliant sealers and topcoats,

as determined by the VOC content of the finishing material in the

reservoir and the VOC content as calculated from records, are being

used; or (b) By submitting an initial compliance status report stating

that compliant sealers or topcoats, as determined by the VOC content of

the finishing material in the reservoir, are being used and the

viscosity of the finishing material in the reservoir is being

monitored. The source is also required to provide data that demonstrate

the correlation between viscosity of the finishing material and the VOC

content of the finishing material in the reservoir. (3) Sources using a

control system or capture or control device to comply with the

requirements of this rule, as allowed in the emission limits section of

the State rule and subsection (a)(2), are required to demonstrate

initial compliance by doing the following on or before January 1, 1996:

Conducting an initial compliance test using the procedures and test

methods listed in the test procedures section of the rule; calculating

the overall control efficiency; determining those operating conditions

critical to determining compliance and establishing operating

parameters that will ensure compliance with the standards; and

submitting a monitoring plan that identifies the operating parameter to

be monitored for the capture device and discusses why the parameter is

appropriate for demonstrating ongoing compliance. In addition, this

subsection requires sources complying with this subsection to calculate

the site-specific operating parameter value as the arithmetic average

of the maximum or minimum operating parameter values, as appropriate,

that demonstrate compliance with the standards, during the initial

compliance test required in subsection (c)(3)(A)(iv) of the rule. (4)

[[Page 55892]]

This section also states that sources subject to the CCP requirements

of the rule are required to submit an initial compliance status report,

as required by the reporting requirements section of the rule, stating

that the CCP has been developed and procedures have been established

for implementing the provisions of the plan.

The Indiana rule states that continuous compliance must be

demonstrated as follows: (1) Sources that are complying through the

procedures established in subsection (a)(1) shall demonstrate

continuous compliance by using compliant materials, maintaining records

that demonstrate the finishing materials are compliant, and submitting

a compliance certification with the semiannual report required by

section 9(c) of this rule. (2) Sources that are complying through the

procedures established in subsection (a)(1) and are applying sealers

and topcoats using continuous coaters shall demonstrate continuous

compliance by use of the following procedures: (A) Using compliant

materials, as determined by the VOC content of the finishing material

in the reservoir and the VOC content as calculated from records, and

submitting a compliance certification with the semiannual report

required by section 9(c) of the rule; (B) Using compliant materials, as

determined by the VOC content of the finishing material in the

reservoir, maintaining a viscosity of the finishing material in the

reservoir that is no less than the viscosity of the initial finishing

material by monitoring the viscosity with a viscosity meter or by

testing the viscosity of the initial finishing material and retesting

the material in the reservoir each time solvent is added, maintaining

records of solvent additions, and submitting a compliance certification

with the semiannual report required by section 9(c) of the rule. (3)

Sources that are complying through the use of a control system or a

capture or control device are required to demonstrate continuous

compliance by complying with the control system operation, maintenance,

and testing, and control system monitoring, record keeping, and

reporting requirements stated in this section of the rule. (4) Sources

subject to the continuous compliance plan requirements in section 5 are

required to demonstrate continuous compliance by following the

provisions of the CCP and submitting a compliance certification with

the semiannual report required by the reporting requirements section of

the rule. The compliance procedures and monitoring requirements section

is consistent with EPA's model rule for wood furniture finishing and

cleaning operations and is therefore approvable.

8-11-7 Test Procedures

This section provides that compliance with the rule's emission

coating limits will be determined by the procedures and methods

contained in 326 IAC 8-1-4 and 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A. The former

contains the State's testing provisions, while the latter contains

EPA's Method 24. If it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of IDEM and

EPA that a finishing material does not release VOC by-products during

the cure, (for example, all VOC is solvent), then batch formulation

information shall be accepted. In the event of any inconsistency

between an EPA Method 24 test and a facility's formulation data, that

is, if the EPA Method 24 value is higher, the EPA Method 24 shall

govern. Compliance through the use of a control system shall be

demonstrated initially by demonstrating that the overall control

efficiency determined by using procedures in 326 IAC 8-1-4 and 40 CFR

60, Appendix A is at least equal to the required overall control

efficiency determined by using the equation in section 6(a)(2)(A). All

tests required in this section are to be conducted according to the

protocol developed in consultation with IDEM. The test procedures

section is consistent with EPA's model rule for wood furniture

finishing and cleaning operations and is therefore approvable.

8-11-8 Record Keeping Requirements

This section requires that the owner or operator of a source

subject to the Indiana rule maintain the following records as part of

this program: A list of each of the finishing material and strippable

booth coating subject to the emission limits of the rule; the VOC and

solids content, as applied, of each finishing material and strippable

booth coating subject to the emission limits of the rule; and copies of

data sheets documenting how the as-applied values were determined.

In addition, the owner or operator of a Source following the

compliance procedures of section 6(c)(2) shall maintain records

required by subsection (a), viscosity measurements, and daily records

of solvent and finishing material additions to the continuous coater

reservoir. Sources following the compliance method of section 6(a)(2)

in addition to complying with the record keeping requirements of

section 6(c)(3)(B) shall maintain the following records: Copies of the

calculations to support the equivalency of using a control system, as

well as the data necessary to support the calculation of the required

overall efficiency and actual determined control efficiency; and

records of the daily average value of each continuously monitored

parameter for each operating day.

Sources subject to the work practice standards in section 4 of the

State rule are to maintain on-site the CCP and all records associated

with fulfilling the requirements of that plan, including, but not

limited to the following: Records demonstrating compliance with the

operator training program; records maintained in accordance with the

leak inspection and maintenance plan; records associated with cleaning

solvent accounting system; records associated with the limitation on

the use of conventional air spray guns showing total finishing material

usage and the percentage of finishing materials applied with

conventional air spray guns for each semiannual reporting period;

records showing the VOC content of solvent used for cleaning booth

components, except for solvent used to clean conveyors, continuous

coaters and their enclosures, or metal filters; and copies of logs and

other documentation developed to demonstrate that the other provisions

of the CCP are followed. All records under this rule are to be

maintained for a minimum period of three years. Failure to maintain the

records constitutes a violation of the rule for each day records are

not maintained. The record keeping requirements section is consistent

with EPA's model rule for wood furniture finishing and cleaning

operations and is therefore approvable.

8-11-9 Reporting Requirements

On or before May 1, 1996, owners or operators of wood furniture

manufacturing operation are to submit the following information to

IDEM: the continuous compliance plan required by section 5 of the State

rule and the initial compliance report for sources using add-on

controls as required by section 6(b)(3) of the rule. Sources

demonstrating compliance in accordance with section 6(a)(1) or 6(a)(2)

of the rule are to submit a semiannual report covering the previous six

months of operation. The first report is to be submitted 30 calendar

days after the end of the first six (6) month period following the

compliance date. Subsequent reports are to be submitted within 30

calendar days after the end of each six month period following the

first report. Each semiannual report shall include: the information

required by section 6(c); a statement of whether the operation was in

compliance or noncompliance; and if the operation

[[Page 55893]]

was not in compliance, the measures taken to bring the source into

compliance. The reporting requirements section is consistent with EPA's

model rule for wood furniture finishing and cleaning operations and is

therefore approvable.

8-11-10 Provisions for Sources Electing To Use Emissions Averaging

This section provides that sources electing a program to comply

with the emission standard via averaging equations need to submit to

IDEM, a plan addressing the following provisions detailed in the rule:

Program goals and rationale; program scope; for program baseline, each

finishing material included in the averaging program shall be the lower

of the actual or allowable emission rate as of the effective date of

this rule; quantification procedures; and monitoring, record keeping,

and reporting. In addition, this section states that pending approval

by IDEM and EPA of a proposed emissions averaging plan, the source is

to continue to comply with the provisions of the rule. The provisions

for sources electing to use emissions averaging section is consistent

with EPA's model rule for wood furniture finishing and cleaning

operations and is therefore approvable.

Enforcement

The Indiana Code (IC) 13-7-13-1, states that any person who

violates any provision of IC 13-1-1, IC 13-1-3, or IC 13-1-11, or any

regulation or standard adopted by one of the boards (i.e., Indiana Air

Pollution Control Board), or who violates any determination, permit, or

order made or issued by the commissioner (of Indiana Department of

Environmental Management) pursuant to IC 13-1-1, or IC 13-1-3, is

liable for a civil penalty not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars

per day of any violation. Because this submittal is a regulation

adopted by the IAPCB, a violation of which subjects the violator to

penalties under IC 13-7-13-1, and because a violation of the ozone SIP

would also subject a violator to enforcement under section 113 of the

Act by EPA, EPA finds that the submittal contains sufficient

enforcement penalties for approval. In addition, IDEM has submitted a

civil penalty policy document which accounts for various factors in the

assessment of an appropriate civil penalty for noncompliance with IAPCB

rules, among them, the severity of the violation, intent of the

violator, and frequency of violations. EPA finds these criteria

sufficient to deter non-compliance and is therefore approvable.

III. Final Rulemaking Action

Indiana's rules for wood furniture finishing and cleaning

operations are generally consistent with EPA's guidance in the Act for

this category and are therefore considered to constitute RACT. EPA

therefore approves these rules in 326 Indiana Air Code (IAC) 8-11 that

were submitted on November 21, 1995, and February 14, 1996.

The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because

the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates

no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal

Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be

effective December 30, 1996 unless, by November 29, 1996, adverse or

critical comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn

before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public comments received will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on

this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should

do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is

advised that this action will be effective December 30, 1996.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for

revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to

the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light

of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature

by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the

Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a

July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator

for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has

exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA

must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of

any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small

entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,

and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than

50,000.

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 impose any new requirements, the

Administrator certifies that it does not have a significant impact on

any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-State relationship under the CAA, 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).

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995,

signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must undertake various actions

in association with any proposed or final rule that includes a Federal

mandate that may result in estimated costs to state, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate; or to the private sector, of $100 million

or more. This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under

state or local law, and imposes no new Federal requirements.

Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or tribal

governments, or the private sector, result from this action.

D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted 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

General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's

Federal Register. This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for

judicial review of this action must be filed in the United

[[Page 55894]]

States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 30,

1996. 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, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: September 5, 1996.

William E. Muno,

Acting Regional Administrator.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, title

40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

2. Section 52.770 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(114) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.770 Identification of Plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(114) On November 21, 1995, and February 14, 1996, Indiana

submitted regulations for wood furniture coating operations in Clark,

Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties as a revision to the State

Implementation Plan for ozone.

(i) Incorporation by reference. 326 Indiana Administrative Code 8-

11 Wood Furniture Coatings, Section 1 Applicability, Section 2

Definitions, Section 3 Emission limits, Section 4 Work practice

standards, Section 5 Continuous compliance plan, Section 6 Compliance

procedures and monitoring requirements, Section 7 Test procedures,

Section 8 Recordkeeping requirements, Section 9 Reporting requirements,

Section 10 Provisions for sources electing to use emission averaging.

Adopted by the Indiana Air Pollution Control Board May 3, 1995. Filed

with the Secretary of State December 5, 1996. Published at Indiana

Register, Volume 19, Number 5, February 1, 1996. Effective January 4,

1996.

[FR Doc. 96-27607 Filed 10-29-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P