### 31885 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0189; FRL–9946–61– Region 3]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;**  **Pennsylvania; Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From**  **Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a revision to the Pennsylvania state implementation plan (SIP) submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. This SIP revision pertains to Pennsylvania’s regulation for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials found in section 129.74 of the Pennsylvania Code. This regulation meets the requirement to adopt reasonably available control technology (RACT) for sources covered by EPA’s control techniques guidelines (CTG) standards for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials. EPA is, therefore, proposing approval of the revision to the Pennsylvania SIP in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

**DATES :**  Written comments must be received on or before June 20, 2016.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– OAR–2016–0189 at http:// www.regulations.gov, or via email to fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the ‘‘For Further Information Contact’’ section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Irene Shandruk, (215) 814–2166, or by email at shandruk.irene@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Background

Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides that SIPs for nonattainment areas must include reasonably available control measures (RACM), including RACT, for sources of emissions. Section 182(b)(2)(A) provides that for certain nonattainment areas, states must revise their SIPs to include RACT for sources of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions covered by a CTG document issued after November 15, 1990 and prior to the area’s date of attainment. EPA defines RACT as ‘‘the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility.’’ 44 FR 53761 (September 17, 1979). In subsequent Federal Register notices, EPA has addressed how states can meet the RACT requirements of the CAA.

CTGs are intended to provide state and local air pollution control authorities information that should assist them in determining RACT for VOCs from various sources of fiberglass boat manufacturing. EPA has not published a previous CTG for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials, but did publish an assessment of VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing in 1990. The 1990 assessment defined the nature and scope of VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing, characterized the industry, estimated per plant and national VOC emissions, and identified and evaluated potential control options. In 2001, EPA promulgated the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Boat Manufacturing, 40 CFR part 63, subpart VVVV (2001 NESHAP). The 2001 NESHAP established organic hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions limits based on low-HAP resins and gel coats and low-emitting resin application technology. Several of the air pollution control districts in California have specific regulations that control VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing operations as part of their regulations for limiting VOC emissions from polyester resin operations. Several other states also have regulations that address VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing as part of polyester resin operations. After reviewing the 1990 VOC assessment, the 2001 NESHAP, and existing California district and other state VOC emission reduction approaches, and after considering information obtained since the issuance of the 2001 NESHAP, EPA developed a CTG entitled Control Techniques Guidelines for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials (Publication No. EPA 453/R–08–004; September 2008).

The CTG for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials provides control recommendations for reducing VOC emissions from the use of gel coats, resins, and materials used to clean application equipment in fiberglass boat manufacturing operations. This CTG applies to facilities that manufacture hulls or decks of boats from fiberglass, or build molds to make fiberglass boat hulls or decks. EPA’s 2008 CTG recommends that the following operations should be covered: Open molding resin and gel coat operations (these include pigmented gel coat, clear gel coat, production resin, tooling gel coat, and tooling resin); resin and gel coat mixing operations; and resin and gel coat application equipment cleaning operations.

EPA’s 2008 CTG recommends the following VOC reduction measures: VOC emission limits for molding resins and gel coats; work practices for resin and gel coat mixing containers; and VOC content and vapor pressure limits for cleaning materials. Recommended VOC emission limits for open molding resin and gel coat operations are shown in Table 1. A more detailed explanation for determining the VOC emission limits for molding resin and gel coats can be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this rulemaking under Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR– 2016–0189 and available online at www.regulations.gov.


### 31886 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 

### 1—M ONOMER 

### VOC C ONTENT 

### L IMITATIONS FOR 

### O PEN 

### M OLDING 

### R ESIN AND 

### G EL 

### C OAT 

### O PERATIONS

Materials Application method Individual monomer VOC

content or weight average monomer VOC

content limit (weight percent)

Production Resin ...................................................................... Atomized (spray) ......................... ............................................. 28 Production Resin ...................................................................... Nonatomized .............................. .............................................. 35 Pigmented Gel Coat ................................................................. Any Method .................................. ............................................ 33 Clear Gel Coat .......................................................................... Any Method ............................. ................................................. 48 Tooling Resin ............................................................................ Atomized .............................. .................................................... 30 Tooling Resin ............................................................................ Nonatomized ........................... ................................................. 39 Tooling Gel Coat ....................................................................... Any Method .............................. ................................................ 40

II. Summary of SIP Revision

On March 2, 2016, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) submitted to EPA a SIP revision concerning implementation of RACT requirements for the control of VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing materials. Pennsylvania is adopting EPA’s CTG standards for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials, including the emission limits found in Table 1. The regulation is contained in

25 Pa. Code Chapter 129 (relating to standards for sources), and this SIP revision seeks to add 25 Pa. Code section 129.74 (control of VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing materials) to the Pennsylvania SIP. In addition to adopting EPA’s CTG standards, 25 Pa. Code section 129.74 includes numerous terms and definitions to support the interpretation of the measures, as well as work practices for cleaning; compliance and monitoring requirements; sampling and testing; and record keeping requirements. EPA finds the provisions in 25 Pa. Code section 129.74 identical to the CTG standards for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials and is therefore approvable in accordance with sections 172(c)(1) and 182(b)(2)(A) of the CAA. For more detailed analysis by EPA of how 25 Pa. Code section 129.74 addresses the CTG, see the TSD for this rulemaking.

This SIP revision also notes that the requirements of 25 Pa. Code section 129.74 supersede the requirements of a RACT permit issued under 25 Pa. Code sections 129.91–129.95 prior to December 19, 2015 to the owner or operator of a source subject to 25 Pa. Code section 129.74 to control, reduce, or minimize VOCs from a fiberglass boat manufacturing process, except to the extent the RACT permit contains more stringent requirements. III. Proposed Action EPA is proposing to approve the March 2, 2016 Pennsylvania SIP revision pertaining to adding 25 Pa. Code section 129.74 to the Pennsylvania SIP because section 129.74 meets the requirement to adopt RACT for sources covered by EPA’s CTG standards for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will be considered before taking final action. IV. Incorporation by Reference

In this proposed rulemaking action, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference 25 Pa. Code section 129.74 into the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or may be viewed at the EPA Region III office (see the **ADDRESSES** section of this preamble for more information). V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);

• does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. );

• is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. );

• does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);

• does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and

• does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this proposed rule concerning Pennsylvania’s control of VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing materials does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.


### 31887 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules

1 CSAPR requires substantial reductions of SO 2 and NOx emissions in 28 states in the eastern United States that significantly contribute to downwind nonattainment of the 1997 PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS and 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS.

2 Thus, after December 31, 2014, CAIR was replaced by CSAPR and was a defunct, moot CAA program no longer implemented by EPA. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: May 3, 2016. Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 2016–11845 Filed 5–19–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0054; FRL–9946–67– Region 3]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;**  **Maryland; Control of Emissions From Various Processes and Fuel-Burning**  **Equipment From Kraft Pulp Mills**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to conditionally approve a revision to the Maryland state implementation plan (SIP) submitted by the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) on October 15, 2014. The SIP revision adds and amends regulations in the SIP which control emissions from various processes and fuel-burning equipment at Kraft pulp mills. The SIP revision includes the following: (1) A new definition for ‘‘NO X Ozone Season Allowance;’’ (2) a new regulation with nitrogen oxides (NO X) limits for fuelburning equipment located at Kraft pulp mills; (3) a removal and relocation of existing NO X reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements for Kraft pulp mills into another Maryland regulation; and (4) a revised regulation which clarifies the volatile organic compound (VOC) control system and emission requirements for several process installations at Kraft pulp mills. EPA proposes a conditional approval because the new Maryland definition references the defunct Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and because MDE provided a commitment to remove all references to CAIR within the definition of ‘‘NO X Ozone Season Allowance’’ and submit a revised definition as a new SIP revision, no later than a year from EPA finalizing this conditional approval. Upon timely meeting of this commitment, EPA will propose to convert the conditional approval of the SIP revision to a final approval. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

**DATES :**  Written comments on EPA’s proposed conditional approval must be received on or before June 20, 2016.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– OAR–2016–0054 at http:// www.regulations.gov, or via email to fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the **FOR FURTHER**

**INFORMATION CONTACT** section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Gregory Becoat, (215) 814–2036, or by email at becoat.gregory@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  On October 15, 2014, EPA received a revision to the State of Maryland’s SIP submitted by MDE. The SIP revision includes Maryland regulations which control emissions from various processes and fuel-burning equipment at Kraft pulp mills and which clarify the VOC control system and requirements for several process installations at Kraft pulp mills. I. Background

In the October 15, 2014 SIP revision, MDE’s submittal included a definition for ‘‘NO X Ozone Season Allowance’’ which references a defunct CAA program, CAIR. EPA discussed with MDE the need to remove all references to CAIR within the definition of ‘‘NO X Ozone Season Allowance,’’ for EPA to approve the October 15, 2014 SIP revision. In May 2005, EPA promulgated CAIR which required certain states to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO 2) and NO X that significantly contribute to downwind nonattainment of the 1997 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ) and ozone. 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005). After litigation in the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit) which remanded CAIR to EPA, EPA promulgated the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to replace CAIR and to help states reduce air pollution and attain CAA standards. 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). 1 In subsequent, additional litigation, CSAPR was initially vacated by the D.C. Circuit but upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). EPA began implementing CSAPR in January 2015 as CAIR’s replacement. See 79 FR 71663 (December 3, 2014) (interim final rulemaking issued after DC Circuit lifted stay on CSAPR). 2

On September 29, 2015, EPA received a supplemental letter from MDE committing to remove all references to CAIR within the definition of ‘‘NO X Ozone Season Allowance,’’ as a SIP revision, no later than a year from EPA finalizing our conditional approval of the SIP submittal. Upon final approval of the revised definition of ‘‘NO X Ozone Season Allowance’’ as a SIP revision, EPA will convert the conditional approval of the October 15, 2014 SIP submission with the regulations and requirements for Kraft pulp mills to a full approval. II. Summary of SIP Revision

MDE’s SIP revision includes amended and new regulations in order to control emissions from various processes and fuel-burning equipment at Kraft pulp mills. The SIP revision submittal includes an amendment to the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) 26.11.01.01—‘‘General Administrative Provisions’’ in order to add a definition for ‘‘NO X Ozone Season Allowance.’’ This definition was added to the COMAR by Maryland because the NO X emission limitations for the Kraft pulp mills rely on use of NO X allowances. Because the definition in COMAR 26.11.01.01 makes references to CAIR which sunset on December 31, 2014 as