### 50336 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

((CF 3 ) 2CFCF 2 OCH 3 ); 1-ethoxy1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4-nonafluorobutane (C 4F 9 OC 2H 5 or HFE-7200); 2- (ethoxydifluoromethyl)-1,1,1,2,3,3,3- heptafluoropropane ((CF 3 ) 2CFCF 2 OC 2H 5 ); methyl acetate;1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxypropane (n-C3F7OCH3, HFE-7000); 3- ethoxy-1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6- dodecafluoro-2-(trifluoromethyl) hexane (HFE-7500); 1,1,1,2,3,3,3- heptafluoropropane (HFC 227ea); methyl formate (HCOOCH3); 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3- methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane (HFE-7300); propylene carbonate; dimethyl carbonate; trans-1,3,3,3- tetrafluoropropene; HCF 2 OCF 2H (HFE134); HCF 2 OCF 2 OCF 2H (HFE-236cal2); HCF 2 OCF 2CF 2 OCF 2H (HFE-338pcc13); HCF 2 OCF 2 OCF 2CF 2 OCF 2H (H-Galden 1040x or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or 180)); trans 1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop1-ene; 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene; 2- amino-2-methyl-1-propanol; t-butyl acetate; 1,1,2,2- Tetrafluoro -1-(2,2,2- trifluoroethoxy) ethane; and perfluorocarbon compounds which fall into these classes:

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2016–17789 Filed 7–29–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0304; FRL–9949–72– Region 3]** 

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

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

**ACTION :**  Direct final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maryland. This revision pertains to Maryland’s adoption of the requirements in EPA’s control technique guidelines (CTG) for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

**DATES :**  This rule is effective on September 30, 2016 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by August 31, 2016. 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 :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– OAR–2016–0304 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 :**  Gavin Huang, (215) 814–2042, or by email at huang.gavin@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 reasonably available control technology (RACT), for sources of emissions. Additionally, Maryland is in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) established under section 184(a) of the CAA. Pursuant to section 184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, all areas in the OTR must submit SIP revisions that include implementation of RACT with respect to all sources of VOCs in the states covered by a CTG. See CAA section 184(b)(1). 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).

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:


### 50337 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

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.



### 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 December 23, 2015, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) submitted on behalf of the State of Maryland to EPA SIP revision #15–07 concerning implementation of RACT requirements for the control of VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing materials. Maryland has adopted EPA’s CTG standards for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials, including the emission limits found in Table 1 of this rulemaking action, through a regulation, found at Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) 26.11.19 (relating to VOC from specific processes). This SIP revision seeks to add COMAR 26.11.19.26–1 (control of VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing materials) to the Maryland SIP and also includes an amendment to COMAR 26.11.19.26 (control of VOC emissions from reinforced plastic manufacturing) which was previously approved into the Maryland SIP. In addition to adopting EPA’s CTG standards, COMAR 26.11.19.26–1 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. The amendment to COMAR 26.11.19.26 at COMAR 26.11.19.26A exempts fiberglass boat manufacturing to avoid duplicative or conflicting requirements. Prior to Maryland’s new COMAR 26.11.19.26–1, fiberglass boat manufacturing materials were covered under COMAR 26.11.19.26 which did not address fully EPA’s CTG requirements. Thus, with COMAR 26.11.19.26–1 now addressing fiberglass boat manufacturing materials, Maryland has revised COMAR 26.11.19.26A to clarify and exempt fiberglass boat manufacturing materials from COMAR 26.11.19.26A as these are now clearly addressed in COMAR 26.11.19.26–1. EPA finds the provisions in COMAR 26.11.19.26–1 identical to the CTG standards for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials and therefore approvable in accordance with sections 172(c)(1) and 184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA.

III. Final Action

EPA is approving the Maryland SIP revision adding new regulation COMAR 26.11.19.26–1 and amending COMAR 26.11.19.26, which was submitted on December 23, 2015, because it meets the requirement to adopt RACT for sources covered by EPA’s CTG standards for fiberglass boat manufacturing materials. EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because EPA views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comment. However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of this 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 September 30, 2016 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by August 31, 2016. 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. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rulemaking action, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of COMAR 26.11.19.26–1 and an amendment to COMAR 26.11.19.26 into the Maryland 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 appropriate EPA office (see the **ADDRESSES** section of this preamble for more information). V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements

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 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


### 50338 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

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 rule 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. B. 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 action 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 . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register

. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). C. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 30, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action 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. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of this Federal Register , rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking action.

This action to approve the Maryland SIP revision adding new regulation COMAR 26.11.19.26–1 and amending COMAR 26.11.19.26 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, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: July 15, 2016. Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III.

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

**PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF**  **IMPLEMENTATION PLANS**

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

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

**Subpart V—Maryland**

■ 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising the entry for ‘‘26.11.19.26’’ and adding in numerical order the entry for ‘‘26.11.19.26–1’’ to read as follows:

**§ 52.1070 Identification of plan.**
* * * * *

(c) * * *



### EPA-A PPROVED 

### R EGULATIONS 

### , T ECHNICAL 

### M EMORANDA



### , AND 

### S TATUTES IN THE 

### M ARYLAND 

### SIP

Code of Maryland

Administrative

Regulations (COMAR) citation Title/subject State effective

date EPA approval date Additional explanation/ citation at 40 CFR 52.1100

*******

**26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds From Specific Processes**

******* 26.11.19.26 ..................... Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Reinforced Plastic Manufacturing. 09/28/15 8/1/16 [ Insert **Federal Register**  citation ]. Amendment to .26A.

26.11.19.26–1 ................. Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing. 09/28/15 8/1/16 [ Insert **Federal Register**  citation ]. New Regulation.

*******


### 50339 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2016–17809 Filed 7–29–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0280; FRL–9947–70– Region 9]** 

**Revisions to California State Implementation Plan; Bay Area Air**  **Quality Management District; Stationary Source Permits** 

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

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing a limited approval and limited disapproval of revisions to Regulation 2, Rules 1 and 2 for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD or District) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on April 22, 2013. These revisions consist of significant updates to rules governing the issuance of permits for stationary sources, including review and permitting of major sources and major modifications under parts C and D of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA). Under the authority of the CAA, this action simultaneously approves a local rule that regulates permit requirements for stationary sources and directs the BAAQMD to correct rule deficiencies.

**DATES :**  These rules will be effective on August 31, 2016. **ADDRESSES :**  The EPA has established docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2015– 0280 for this action. Generally, documents in the docket for this action are available electronically at http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105–3901. While all documents in the docket are listed at http://www.regulations.gov

, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location ( e.g. , copyrighted material, large maps, multi-volume reports), and some may not be available in either location ( e.g. , confidential business information (CBI)). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the **FOR**
**FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** section.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Shaheerah Kelly, EPA Region 9, (415) 947–4156, kelly.shaheerah@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document, the terms ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action II. Summary of Public Comments and EPA Responses III. EPA Action IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Order Review

Definitions

For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain words or initials as follows:

(i) The word or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.

(ii) The initials ATC mean or refer to the authority to construct permit. (iii) The word or initials BAAQMD or District mean or refer to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

(iv) The initials CFR mean or refer to Code of Federal Regulations.

(v) The initials or words EPA

, we , us

or our mean or refer to the United States Environmental Protection Agency.

(vi) The initials ERCs mean or refer to Emission Reduction Credits.

(vii) The initials FLM mean or refer to Federal Land Manager.

(viii) The initials FR mean or refer to Federal Register

.

(ix) The initials NSR mean or refer to New Source Review.

(x) The initials PM 2.5 mean or refer to particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (fine particulate matter).

(xi) The initials PSD mean or refer to Prevention of Significant Deterioration.

(xii) The initials PTE mean or refer to potential to emit.

(xiii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.

(xiv) The initials SO 2 mean or refer to sulfur dioxide.

(xv) The initials TSD mean or refer to the technical support document for the proposed action. I. Proposed Action

On August 28, 2015, the EPA proposed a limited approval and limited disapproval of the rules listed in Table 1 that were submitted for incorporation into the California SIP. 80 FR 52236 (Aug. 28, 2015). Our detailed analysis of these rules is provided in the TSD and Federal Register notice for the proposed rulemaking for this SIP revision approval action.



### TABLE 

### 1—S UBMITTED 

### NSR R ULES

Regulation & rule No. Rule title Adopted/ amended Submitted

Regulation 2, Rule 1 (2–1) ........................................... Permits, General Requirements ............................. ...... 12/19/12 4/22/13 Regulation 2, Rule 2 (2–2) ........................................... Permits, New Source Review ................................ ....... 12/19/12 4/22/13

We proposed a limited approval because we determined that these rules strengthen the SIP and are largely consistent with the relevant CAA requirements. We simultaneously proposed a limited disapproval because some rule provisions conflict with CAA section 110, including Parts C and D, and the regulations implementing those laws. The disapproved provisions include the following:

1. The definitions of ‘‘agricultural source’’ in Section 2–1–239 and ‘‘large confined animal facility’’ used in Section 2–1–424 rely on other definitions and provisions in District rules that are not SIP approved. (See our evaluation of Sections 2–1–239 and 2– 1–424 in section 6.1.2 of the TSD.)

2. Section 2–1–234, subparagraph 2.2, is deficient because it does not satisfy the PSD provisions at 40 CFR 51.166(a)(7) and 51.166(r)(6) & (7), which require PSD programs to contain specific applicability procedures and recordkeeping provisions. (See our evaluation of Section 2–1–234 in sections 6.1.2 and 7.2.2 of the TSD.)

3. The same deficiency discussed above for the PSD provisions applies to the nonattainment NSR provisions. Section 2–1–234, subparagraph 2.1, does not satisfy the requirements of 51.165(a)(2) and 51.165(a)(6) & (7), which require nonattainment NSR programs to contain specific applicability procedures and recordkeeping provisions. (See our evaluation of Section 2–1–234 in sections 6.1.2 and 7.3.12 of the TSD.)

4. The definition of the term ‘‘PSD pollutant’’ as defined in Section 2–2– 223, which is used in place of the federal definition for the term ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant,’’ is deficient