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

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 [email protected].

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