[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 211 (Wednesday, October 30, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55889-55894]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-27607]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
