[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 10, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2568-2569]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-550]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[IN42-1-6344; FRL-5136-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Indiana
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On February 25, 1994, the State of Indiana submitted
regulations as a revision to the ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP),
governing the control of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) emissions from
graphic arts facilities, as part of the Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) Catch-up requirements. Amendments to the graphic arts
operation regulation, Indiana Administrative Code 326 IAC 8-8-5 are
intended to require existing graphic arts operations, which have the
potential to emit 25 tons per year or more of VOC, to comply with VOC
RACT regulations previously applicable to graphic arts operations with
the potential to emit 100 tons per year or more of VOC. However, the
graphic arts regulation contains insufficient recordkeeping and
reporting requirements. Because the State has committed to correcting
this deficiency by January 31, 1996, USEPA is proposing conditional
approval of this SIP revision request. If the State fails to correct
the deficiency, the conditional approval will convert to a disapproval.
DATES: Comments on this revision request and on the proposed USEPA
action must be received by February 9, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the SIP revision request and USEPA's analysis are
available for inspection at the following address:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division (AR-18J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
(It is recommended that you telephone Rosanne Lindsay at (312) 353-
1151, before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Regulation Development Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosanne Lindsay at (312) 353-1151.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Summary of State Submittal
The State of Indiana submitted a revision request for its Ozone SIP
on February 25, 1994, amending the graphic arts rule. The amendments
for graphic arts (326 IAC 8-5-5) function to reduce the source size
applicability cut-off for graphic arts facilities located in the severe
ozone nonattainment area (Lake and Porter Counties) from 100 to 25 tons
of VOC per year (potential to emit) as required by the Clean Air Act
(the Act), as amended in 1990. The USEPA, on May 17, 1993, commented on
a draft version of this regulation, noting several deficiencies,
including the lack of recordkeeping and reporting requirements to show
compliance with the regulation required by section 182(b)(2) of the
Act. The State of Indiana responded with a copy of the current
recordkeeping and reporting rule (8-1-1), and stated that USEPA had not
previously required any revisions of the rule based on numerous recent
changes to the VOC Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
rules. The rules were adopted by the Indiana Pollution Control Board on
June 2, 1993.
II. Analysis of State Submittal
The State of Indiana has corrected most of the deficiencies noted
in the USEPA comments of May 17, 1993. However, the recordkeeping and
[[Page 2569]] reporting requirements, contained in Title 326 IAC 8-1-2,
do not provide for adequate enforcement of the graphic arts rule.
Region 5 has provided the Indiana Department of Environmental
Management with a copy of the June 1992 Model VOC Rules. The following
deficiencies must be corrected in order for USEPA to take final action
approving the rule:
1. General
(a) The monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting (MRR) requirements
must be made more comprehensive to include more than: (1) Daily volume-
weighted averages of all coatings applied in a coating or printing
line; and (2) records of daily usage of gallons of solids coating and
VOC content of each coating or ink solvent. For instance, when a source
does not comply with daily weighted averaging (i.e., when the source
complies with ``complying coatings or inks'' such as low VOC coating),
then daily recordkeeping must be kept which specifies both the VOC
content and the ink or coating identification. Alternatively, when a
source complies by using control devices, then records of monitoring
parameters and other information must also be kept (See (B) Sources
Using Control Devices, below; See also, June 1992 Model VOC Rules).
(b) The MRR requirements, should specify a period of time (i.e., 5
years) during which records shall be maintained at the facility. The
rules only require that: (1) The owner/operator ``keep records to
demonstrate compliance with the permit or document restrictions'' (326
IAC 8-1-1); and (2) ``records * * * shall be made available upon
request'' (326 IAC 8-1-2).
2. Sources Using Control Devices
The Indiana recordkeeping/reporting rules do not contain the
requirement for the recordkeeping or reporting of new or existing
control devices. Records and reports that should be maintained include
monitoring data, calibration and maintenance logs, and logs of
operating time. Indiana rule 326 IAC 8-1-2(7) only requires the
maintenance of records of daily usage of gallons of solids coating, VOC
content of each coating or ink solvent, and daily emissions in pounds
of VOC (See June 1992 Model VOC Rules).
3. Exempt Sources
The Indiana rules do not require the maintenance of records and
reports for exempt sources such as: Information pertaining to the
initial certification, calculations demonstrating that total potential
emissions of VOC from all flexographic and rotogravure printing presses
at the facility will be less than the required limits for each year,
the maintenance of records for a period of 5 years, and the requirement
that any exceedances will be reported to the Administrator within 30
days after the exceedance occurs (See Model VOC Rules). Exempt sources
should calculate: (1) Yearly potential emissions, (2) yearly actual
emissions, and (3) the name, identification, VOC content, and yearly
volume of coatings/inks.
Based on EPA's preliminary analysis that the State's submittal was
unapprovable, Indiana submitted to USEPA, a letter dated December 14,
1994, committing to the necessary rule revision. In accordance with an
attached schedule, Indiana expects a final rule to be adopted and
submitted to USEPA by January 1996.
III. Proposed Rulemaking Action and Solicitation of Public Comment
The USEPA has reviewed the Indiana graphic arts rule against the
June 1992 Model Rule and is proposing a conditional approval because
the State has committed to correct the rule so that it fully comports
with the Federal requirements described above. Upon a final conditional
approval by USEPA, if the State ultimately fails to meet its commitment
to correct the deficiency, noted herein, by January 31, 1996, the date
the State committed to in its commitment letter, then USEPA's action
for the State's requested SIP revision will automatically convert to a
final disapproval.
Public comments are solicited on the requested SIP revision and on
USEPA's proposed conditional approval. Public comments received by
February 9, 1995 will be considered in the development of USEPA's final
rulemaking action.
This action has been classified as a Table 2 action by the Regional
Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on
January 19, 1989, (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993,
memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any
SIP. Each request for revision to any SIP shall be considered
separately in light of specific technical, economic, and environmental
factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory
requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA
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, USEPA 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 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, I certify 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 Act,
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State action. The
Act forbids USEPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.
Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S. Ct. 1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: December 29, 1994.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-550 Filed 1-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
