39600 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

Coast Guard in complying with the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have 

determined that this action is one of a 

category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule involves 

establishment of a safety zone. It is 

categorically excluded from further 

review under paragraph L60(a) of 

Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction 

Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 01. A 

Record of Environmental Consideration 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. 

G. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to contact the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

coordinate protest activities so that your 

message can be received without 

jeopardizing the safety or security of 

people, places or vessels. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 

U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 

and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security 

Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T09–0635 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T09–0635 Safety Zone; Ski Show 

Sylvan Beach; Fish Creek, Oneida, NY. 

(a) Location. The safety zone will 

encompass all waters of Fish Creek in 

Oneida, NY, starting at position 

43°11′36.6′′ N, 75°43′53.8′′ W then South 

to 43°11′33.7′′ N, 75°43′51.2′′ W then 

East to 43°11′42.4′′ N, 75°43′38.6′′ W 

then North to 43°11′44.5′′ N, 75°43′39.7′′ 

W then returning to the point of origin 

(NAD 83). 

(b) Enforcement period. This rule is 

effective from 12:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. 

on August 12, 2018. 

(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with 

the general regulations in § 165.23 of 

this part, entry into, transiting, or 

anchoring within this safety zone is 

prohibited unless authorized by the 

Captain of the Port Buffalo or his 

designated on-scene representative. 

(2) This safety zone is closed to all 

vessel traffic, except as may be 

permitted by the Captain of the Port 

Buffalo or his designated on-scene 

representative. 

(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of 

the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any 

Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or 

petty officer who has been designated 

by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act 

on his behalf. 

(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter 

or operate within the safety zone must 

contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo 

or his on-scene representative to obtain 

permission to do so. The Captain of the 

Port Buffalo or his on-scene 

representative may be contacted via 

VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given 

permission to enter or operate in the 

safety zone must comply with all 

directions given to them by the Captain 

of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene 

representative. 

Dated: August 6, 2018. 

Joseph S. Dufresne, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Buffalo. 

[FR Doc. 2018–17181 Filed 8–9–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0437; FRL–9981– 

97—Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Adoption of Control 

Techniques Guidelines for Control of 

Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 

From Miscellaneous Metal Parts 

Surface Coating, Miscellaneous Plastic 

Parts Surface Coating, and Pleasure 

Craft Surface Coatings 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to 

the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s 

state implementation plan (SIP). The 

revision includes amendments to the 

Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection’s (PADEP) 

regulations and addresses the 

requirement to adopt reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) for 

sources covered by EPA’s control 

techniques guidelines (CTG) standards 

for the following categories: 

Miscellaneous metal parts surface 

coating, miscellaneous plastic parts 

surface coating, and pleasure craft 

surface coatings, as well as related 

cleaning activities. The SIP revision also 

amends regulations for graphic arts 

systems and mobile equipment repair 

and refinishing as well as making 

general administrative changes. This 

action is being taken under the Clean 

Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

September 10, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0437. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the http://www.regulations.gov website. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., confidential business information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available through http://

www.regulations.gov, or please contact 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section for 

additional availability information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gregory A. Becoat, (215) 814 2036, or by 

email at becoat.gregory@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

November 18, 2016, PADEP submitted a 

revision to the Pennsylvania SIP 

concerning the adoption of EPA’s CTG 

for miscellaneous metal parts surface 

coating processes, miscellaneous plastic 

parts surface coating processes, and 

pleasure craft surface coatings. 

Specifically, PADEP has amended 25 

Pennsylvania Code (Pa. Code) Chapter 

129 (relating to standards for sources) to 

address RACT and further reduce 

volatile organic compounds (VOC) 

emissions in Pennsylvania. In 

accordance with sections 172(c)(1), 

182(b)(2)(A) and 184(b)(1)(B) of the 

CAA, Pennsylvania’s SIP revision 

submittal establishes VOC emission 

limitations and other requirements 

consistent with the recommendations of 

EPA’s 2008 Control Techniques 

Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and 

Plastic Parts Coatings (MMPP) 

(Publication No. EPA 453/R–08–003; 

September 2008) and Control 

Techniques Guidelines for Automobile 

and Light-Duty Truck Assembly 

Coatings for these sources in the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

(Publication No. EPA 453/R–08–006). 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 39601 

1CTGs are documents issued by EPA intended to 

provide state and local air pollution control 

authorities information to assist them in 

determining RACT for VOC from various sources. 

The recommendations in the CTG are based upon 

available data and information and may not apply 

to a particular situation based upon the 

circumstances. States can follow the CTG and adopt 

state regulations to implement the 

recommendations contained therein, or they can 

adopt alternative approaches. In either case, states 

must submit their RACT rules to EPA for review 

and approval as part of the SIP process. Pursuant 

to section 184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, all areas in the 

OTR must implement RACT with respect to sources 

of VOCs in the state covered by a CTG issued before 

or after November 15, 1990. 

I. Background 

Ground level ozone is formed in the 

atmosphere by photochemical reactions 

between volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOX), and 

carbon monoxide (CO) in the presence 

of sunlight. In order to reduce ozone 

concentrations in the ambient air, the 

CAA requires all nonattainment areas to 

apply controls on VOC and NOX

emission sources to achieve emission 

reductions. Among effective control 

measures, RACT controls significantly 

reduce VOC and NOX emissions from 

major stationary sources. NOX and VOC 

are referred to as ozone precursors and 

are emitted by many types of pollution 

sources, including motor vehicles, 

power plants, industrial facilities, and 

area wide sources, such as consumer 

products and lawn and garden 

equipment. Scientific evidence 

indicates that adverse public health 

effects occur following exposure to 

ozone. These effects are more 

pronounced in children and adults with 

lung disease. Breathing air containing 

ozone can reduce lung function and 

inflame airways, which can increase 

respiratory symptoms and aggravate 

asthma or other lung diseases. 

RACT is defined 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 at 53762 (September 17, 

1979). Section 182 of the CAA sets forth 

two separate RACT requirements for 

ozone nonattainment areas. The first 

requirement, contained in section 

182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, and referred to 

as RACT fix-up, requires the correction 

of RACT rules for which EPA identified 

deficiencies before the CAA was 

amended in 1990. Pennsylvania 

previously corrected its deficiencies 

under the 1-hour ozone standard and 

has no further deficiencies to correct 

under this section of the CAA. The 

second requirement in section 182(b)(2) 

of the CAA applies to moderate (or 

worse) ozone nonattainment areas, and 

pursuant to section 184(b)(1)(B), to all 

areas in a state that are included in an 

ozone transport region (OTR). Section 

184 of the CAA includes all of 

Pennsylvania in the OTR. Sections 

182(b)(2) and 184(b) require these areas 

to implement RACT controls on all 

major VOC and NOX emission sources 

and on all sources and source categories 

covered by a CTG issued by EPA.1 See 

CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 184(b). 

In subsequent Federal Register 

notices, EPA has addressed how states 

can meet the RACT requirements of the 

CAA. EPA developed the CTG for 

MMPP in September 2008 (Publication 

No. EPA 453/R–08–003) that provides 

guidelines with regard to feasible 

emission limitations and operating 

practices for a number of different 

surface coatings used within this large 

and diverse source category. The 2008 

MMPP CTG recommends separate sets 

of emission limits for metal parts 

coatings, plastic parts coatings, 

automotive/transportation and business 

machine plastic parts, and pleasure 

craft, depending on the type of coating 

used by a particular source. The 

miscellaneous metal product and plastic 

parts surface coatings categories 

identified pursuant to section 183(e) of 

the CAA include the coatings that are 

applied to the surfaces of a varied range 

of metal and plastic parts and products. 

Such parts or products are constructed 

either entirely or partially from metal or 

plastic. These miscellaneous metal 

products and plastic parts include, but 

are not limited to, metal and plastic 

components of the following types of 

products as well as the products 

themselves: Fabricated metal products, 

molded plastic parts, small and large 

farm machinery, commercial and 

industrial machinery and equipment, 

automotive or transportation equipment, 

interior or exterior automotive parts, 

construction equipment, motor vehicle 

accessories, bicycles and sporting goods, 

toys, recreational vehicles, pleasure 

craft (recreational boats), extruded 

aluminum structural components, 

railroad cars, heavier vehicles, lawn and 

garden equipment, business machines, 

laboratory and medical equipment, 

electronic equipment, steel drums, 

metal pipes, and numerous other 

industrial and household products. 

The pleasure craft coating category 

does not include coatings that are a part 

of other product categories listed under 

Section 183(e) of the CAA for which 

CTGs have been published or included 

in other CTGs. For pleasure craft surface 

coatings, EPA took into account 

California regulations when developing 

the 2008 MMPP CTG. California was the 

only state at that time with regulations 

governing VOC emissions from pleasure 

craft surface coatings. After EPA 

finalized the 2008 MMPP CTG, the 

pleasure craft coatings industry asserted 

to EPA that three of the VOC emission 

limits in the CTG were too low 

considering the performance 

requirements of the pleasure craft 

coatings and that the VOC emission 

limits recommended did not represent 

RACT for the National pleasure craft 

coatings industry. On September 14, 

2009, EPA was contacted by the 

pleasure craft coatings industry to 

reconsider some of the VOC emission 

limits recommended in the final 2008 

MMPP CTG. In response, EPA issued a 

memorandum on June 1, 2010, entitled 

‘‘Control Technique Guidelines for 

Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Part 

Coatings—Industry Request for 

Reconsideration,’’ recommending that 

the pleasure craft industry work with 

state agencies during their RACT rule 

development process to assess what is 

reasonable for the specific sources 

regulated. EPA has stated that states can 

use the recommendations from the 

MMPP CTG to form their own 

determinations as to what constitutes 

RACT for pleasure craft coating 

operations. CTGs impose no legally 

binding requirements on any entity, 

including pleasure craft coating 

facilities. As stated in the memorandum, 

EPA will evaluate state-developed 

RACT rules and determine whether the 

submitted rules meet the RACT 

requirements of the CAA. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA 

Analysis 

On November 18, 2016, PADEP 

submitted a SIP revision which adopted 

the recommendations contained in the 

2008 MMPP CTG with respect to 

sources in the miscellaneous metal 

products coatings and plastic parts 

coatings product categories. For the 

pleasure craft coating industry, after 

evaluating what is reasonable for this 

source category, PADEP determined that 

three VOC content limits in the CTG 

should be revised from the limits in the 

CTG to represent RACT for the pleasure 

craft coating industry. This is based on 

EPA’s memorandum that the pleasure 

craft industry should work with state 

agencies during their RACT rule 

development process to assess what is 

reasonable for the specific sources 

regulated. 

The SIP revision includes an 

amendment to 25 Pa. Code Chapter 

129—(relating to standards for sources) 

as follows: (1) Amended section 

129.51(a)—(relating to general) in order 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
39602 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

2Based on the comment, EPA assumes the E.O. 

in question is E.O. 13783, Promoting Energy 

Independence and Economic Growth, signed March 

28, 2017. 

to extend applicability; (2) added 

section 129.52d—‘‘Control of VOC 

emissions from miscellaneous metal 

parts surface coating processes, 

miscellaneous plastic parts surface 

coating processes and pleasure craft 

surface coatings,’’ in order to regulate 

VOC emissions from these three 

categories; (3) amended section 

129.52(g)—(relating to surface coating 

processes) in order to clarify record 

keeping and reporting requirements; (4) 

added section 129.52 subsection (k) in 

order to clarify the applicability of the 

requirements of section 129.52, Table I, 

Category 10 in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 129; 

(5) amended section 129.67 (relating to 

graphic arts systems) in order to extend 

applicability; and (6) amended section 

129.75 (relating to mobile equipment 

repair and refinishing) in order to 

specify exceptions for those who apply 

surface coating to mobile equipment 

already subject to requirements of 

sections 129.52 and 129.52d. More 

detailed information on these provisions 

as well as a detailed summary of EPA’s 

review and rationale for approving these 

SIP revisions can be found in the 

Technical Support Document (TSD) for 

this action, which is available on line at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket number 

EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0437. 

After evaluating the SIP revision 

submittal, EPA concluded that it meets 

CAA requirements under sections 110, 

172(c)(1), 182(b)(2)(A), and 184(b)(1) by 

adopting EPA’s CTG and continuing to 

address and minimize VOC emissions in 

the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as 

discussed in more detail in EPA’s TSD 

for this rulemaking action. PADEP is 

adopting without change most of the 

requirements recommended by the 

MMPP CTG but adopting the pleasure 

craft industry recommendations for the 

following three coating categories: 

Antifouling Sealer/Tiecoat; Other 

Substrate Antifoulant; and Extreme 

High Gloss. For these three categories, 

the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

reviewed industry data and determined 

that for the purpose of functionality, 

cost, and VOC emissions, the alternative 

limits adopted for these three coating 

categories constitute RACT. EPA 

concludes that Pennsylvania’s approach 

is consistent with the guidance 

memorandum entitled, ‘‘Control 

Technique Guidelines for Miscellaneous 

Metal and Plastic Part Coatings— 

Industry Request for Reconsideration,’’ 

and therefore, concludes that these 

regulations reflect RACT given costs and 

VOC emissions. The revised VOC 

content limits for the pleasure craft 

surface coatings proposed by PADEP are 

expected to have a de minimis impact 

on the amount of VOC emission 

reductions from the implementation of 

the revised VOC limits due to having no 

facilities with the potential to emit VOC 

emissions for pleasure craft surface 

coatings. 

EPA notes that under 25 Pa. Code 

§§ 129.52d, PADEP is allowing the 

provisions of 25 Pa. Code § 129.52d to 

supersede the requirements of a RACT 

permit previously issued under 25 Pa. 

Code §§ 129.91–129.95 if the permit was 

issued prior to January 1, 2017, to the 

owner or operator of a source subject to 

section 129.52d(a), except to the extent 

the RACT permit contains more 

stringent requirements. EPA further 

notes that the RACT permits issued 

under 25 Pa. Code §§ 129.91–129.95 

were issued for previous RACT 

determinations on a case-by-case basis; 

these permits were then submitted to 

EPA as source-specific SIP revisions and 

were previously acted on by EPA and 

would have been approved into the 

Pennsylvania SIP. If EPA approved 

those source-specific RACT 

determinations as meeting the 

requirements of RACT under the CAA, 

then the permits associated with those 

determinations were approved into the 

SIP as listed in 40 CFR 52.2020(d). The 

requirements of the source-specific 

RACT determination which EPA 

approved into the Pennsylvania SIP 

remain applicable requirements for the 

specific source unless and until 

Pennsylvania seeks to remove the limits 

from the SIP in accordance with CAA 

section 110(l). To the extent that the 

provisions of 25 Pa. Code § 129.52d are 

more stringent than those of a previous 

SIP-approved permit, PADEP will need 

to make a source-specific determination 

as to whether the requirements of the 

previous RACT permit apply, or those of 

§ 129.52d, and submit that 

determination to EPA as a SIP revision 

in order to remove the previously 

approved permit from the SIP. Until 

such a SIP revision is made, EPA cannot 

remove the source-specific permits from 

the SIP and EPA is not taking such 

action in this rulemaking. Thus, the 

requirements of a previously SIPapproved permit are not superseded 

under the SIP. In accordance with 

section 110 of the CAA including 110(a) 

and 110(l), EPA determines that 

approval of this PADEP SIP revision 

will not interfere with reasonable 

further progress, attainment of any 

NAAQS or any other applicable CAA 

requirements. 

On October 16, 2017 (82 FR 48034 

and 82 FR 47988), EPA simultaneously 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) and a direct final rule 

(DFR) for the Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania approving the SIP 

revision. EPA received five adverse 

comments on the rulemaking and 

withdrew the DFR prior to the effective 

date of December 15, 2017. 

III. Response to Comments 

During the comment period, EPA 

received several anonymous comments 

on the rulemaking. Of the comments, 

one comment generally discussed 

greenhouse gas from electric vehicles, a 

second comment generally discussed 

wildfires and wildland fire management 

policy, and a third comment generally 

discussed the Mercury and Air Toxics 

Standards. EPA believes these three 

comments are not germane to this 

rulemaking action, thus no further 

response is provided. The following is 

a summary of the comments pertinent to 

this rulemaking action and EPA’s 

response to those comments. 

Comment #1: The first commenter 

stated that EPA did not address a March 

28, 2017 Executive Order (E.O.) 

regarding the promotion of energy 

independence and economic growth.2

Response #1: EPA disagrees with the 

commenter’s assertion that this 

rulemaking action required evaluation 

mandated under the E.O.. The E.O. in 

question pertains to reviewing existing 

regulations, orders, guidance 

documents, policies, and any other 

similar agency actions (collectively, 

agency actions) that potentially burden 

the development or use of domestically 

produced energy resources, with 

particular attention to oil, natural gas, 

coal, and nuclear energy. First, EPA 

does not believe this E.O. applies to this 

rulemaking action because, to the extent 

this rulemaking is considered an agency 

action under the E.O., this action was 

not an existing agency action as of 

March 28, 2017, the date the E.O. was 

signed. Second, assuming arguendo, 

that this rulemaking action is 

considered an agency action under the 

E.O., this rulemaking action does not 

create a burden as that term is defined 

in the E.O.. As defined in the E.O., the 

term ‘‘burden’’ means, ‘‘to unnecessarily 

obstruct, delay, curtail, or otherwise 

impose significant cost on the siting, 

permitting, production, utilization, 

transmission, or delivery of energy 

resources.’’ This rulemaking action does 

not affect the siting, permitting, 

production, utilization, transmission, or 

delivery of energy resources because 

this action merely approves 

Pennsylvania’s submission as meeting 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 39603 

3 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997). 

certain necessary CTG requirements 

under the CAA, thus any required 

review under this E.O. is not applicable. 

Finally, EPA does not have discretion to 

disapprove the state’s SIP submission if 

it meets the applicable CAA 

requirements. CAA section 110(k)(3) 

requires that EPA ‘‘shall’’ approve the 

SIP submission ‘‘as a whole’’ if it meets 

the applicable requirements in the CAA. 

Pennsylvania’s submission adopts 

RACT for sources identified in EPA’s 

CTG, as required by CAA section 184(b). 

Thus, considering the plain language of 

CAA section 110(k)(3), EPA cannot 

consider disapproving or requiring 

changes to a state’s SIP submittal based 

on a particular E.O. or statutory reviews. 

Comment #2: The second commenter 

asserted that EPA should review its CTG 

and Alternative Control Technology 

(ACT) guidance documents to ‘‘make 

sure they aren’t too costly.’’ The 

commenter further asserted that VOC 

reductions in Pennsylvania are not 

needed and EPA should only require 

RACT reductions in areas with ‘‘bad 

air.’’ The commenter concluded by 

stating EPA should withdraw the rule in 

its entirety to enable economic growth 

and promote jobs. 

Response #2: EPA disagrees with the 

commenter that this rulemaking should 

be withdrawn and that EPA’s CTGs and 

ACTs should be reviewed. The CTG at 

issue in this rulemaking was issued in 

2008. This rulemaking action concerns 

only EPA’s action approving 

Pennsylvania’s SIP submission adopting 

the CTG requirements, and thus 

comments about the CTG itself are 

outside the scope of this action. In any 

case, EPA considered the cost of 

installing controls when developing the 

CTG and concluded, ‘‘The 

recommended VOC emission rates 

described [in the CTG] reflect the 

control measures that are currently 

being implemented by these facilities. 

Consequently, there is no additional 

cost to implement the CTG 

recommendations for coatings.’’ Further, 

the CTG went on to state the following 

for the work practices being 

recommended: ‘‘The CTG also 

recommends work practices for 

reducing VOC emissions from both 

coatings and cleaning materials. We 

believe that our work practice 

recommendations in the CTG will result 

in a net cost savings. Implementing 

work practices reduces the amount of 

coating and cleaning materials used by 

decreasing evaporation.’’ Thus, EPA did 

consider cost when issuing this CTG in 

a prior rulemaking. 

EPA further disagrees with the 

commenter’s assertion that VOC 

reductions are not needed in the entire 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and 

disagrees that the state or EPA has any 

discretion to not implement those 

reductions. First, the commenter 

provided no evidence supporting a 

claim that VOC reductions are only 

needed in areas with ‘‘bad air’’ (EPA 

assumes this is a reference to 

nonattainment areas). Second, Congress 

has dictated through the CAA that VOC 

RACT is required to be implemented 

throughout the entire Commonwealth. 

CAA section 182(b)(2)(A) requires that, 

for each ozone nonattainment area 

classified as Moderate or above, the area 

must revise their SIPs to include RACT 

for each category of VOC sources 

covered by CTG documents issued 

between November 15, 1990 and the 

date of attainment. CAA section 184(a) 

further establishes a single OTR which 

includes the entire Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania, and section 184(b)(1)(B) 

requires all OTR states to submit SIPs 

implementing RACT with respect to all 

sources of VOC in the state that are 

covered by a CTG. Finally, Pennsylvania 

and EPA are not permitted to ignore 

statutory mandates for any policy 

reason, including to promote jobs or to 

enable economic growth. Thus, the 

requirements of the CAA require 

Pennsylvania to revise its SIP in order 

to implement VOC RACT for all CTGs 

issued, including the automobile and 

light-duty truck assembly coating 

category. As an OTR state, Pennsylvania 

is required to reduce VOCs by 

implementing RACT and CTGs. 

IV. Final Action 

EPA is approving the Commonwealth 

of Pennsylvania’s November 2016 SIP 

revision submittal, which adopts EPA’s 

CTG for miscellaneous metal parts 

surface coating, miscellaneous plastic 

parts surface coating, and pleasure craft 

surface coatings, and which makes other 

related administrative changes, because 

the revision meets the requirements of 

CAA sections 110, 172(c)(1), 

182(b)(2)(A), and 184(b)(2). 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, 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 the Pennsylvania rule 

discussed in section II of this preamble. 

EPA has made, and will continue to 

make, these materials generally 

available through http://

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region III Office (please contact the 

person identified in the ‘‘For Further 

Information Contact’’ section of this 

preamble for more information). 

Therefore, these materials have been 

approved by EPA for inclusion in the 

SIP, have been incorporated by 

reference by EPA into that plan, are 

fully federally enforceable under 

sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of 

the effective date of the final rulemaking 

of EPA’s approval, and will be 

incorporated by reference in the next 

update to the SIP compilation.3

VI. 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); 

• is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because SIP approvals are 

exempted under Executive Order 12866. 

• 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 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
39604 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

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 October 9, 2018. 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. This action, which 

approves Pennsylvania’s SIP revision 

adopting CTGs for miscellaneous metal 

parts surface coating, miscellaneous 

plastic parts surface coating, and 

pleasure craft surface coatings, as well 

as general administrative changes 

related to cleaning activities, 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: July 26, 2018. 

Cecil Rodrigues, 

Acting 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 NN—Pennsylvania 

■ 2. In § 52.2020, the table in paragraph 

(c)(1) is amended by: 

■ i. Revising the entries for Section 

129.51 and Section 129.52; 

■ ii. Adding an entry for Section 

129.52d; and 

■ iii. Revising the entries for Section 

129.67, and Section 129.75. 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2020 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) * * * 

State citation Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Additional explanation/ 

§ 52.2063 citation 

Title 25—Environmental Protection 

Article III—Air Resources 

*******

Section 129.51 ......................... General ................................... 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Federal Register citation].Revised Section 129.51(a). 

Section 129.52 ......................... Surface coating processes ..... 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Federal Register citation].Revised 129.52(g) and added 

Subsection 129.52(k). 

* * * * * * * 

Section 129.52d ....................... Control of VOCs from Miscellaneous Metal Parts Surface Coating Processes, 

Miscellaneous Plastic Parts 

Surface Coating Processes 

and Pleasure Craft Surface 

Coatings.

10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Federal Register citation].New section 129.52d is 

added. This section does 

not remove or replace any 

permits approved under 

52.2020(d). 

* * * * * * * 

Section 129.67 ......................... Graphic arts systems .............. 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Federal Register citation].Revised Subsection 

129.67(a)(1). 

* * * * * * * 

Section 129.75 ......................... Mobile equipment repair and 

refinishing.

10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Federal Register citation].Revised Subsection 

129.75(b)(1). 

Previous approval 8/14/00 (c) 

148. 

* * * * * * * 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 39605 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2018–17078 Filed 8–9–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0429; FRL–9980–47] 

Picoxystrobin; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes 

tolerances for residues of picoxystrobin 

in or on multiple commodities that are 

identified and discussed later in this 

document. E.I. DuPont De Nemours and 

Company requested these tolerances 

under the Federal Food, Drug, and 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

August 10, 2018. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before October 9, 2018, and must 

be filed in accordance with the 

instructions provided in 40 CFR part 

178 (see also Unit I.C. of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0429, is 

available at http://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pesticide Programs 

Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) 

in the Environmental Protection Agency 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William 

Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001. The Public Reading Room 

is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the OPP 

Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review 

the visitor instructions and additional 

information about the docket available 

at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael L. Goodis, P.E., Registration 

Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; main 

telephone number: (703) 305–7090; 

email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

B. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of EPA’s tolerance 

regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through 

the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR 

site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/ 

40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP test 

guidelines referenced in this document 

electronically, please go to http://

www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ‘‘Test 

Methods and Guidelines.’’ 

C. How can I file an objection or hearing 

request? 

Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 

U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an 

objection to any aspect of this regulation 

and may also request a hearing on those 

objections. You must file your objection 

or request a hearing on this regulation 

in accordance with the instructions 

provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure 

proper receipt by EPA, you must 

identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2017–0429 in the subject line on 

the first page of your submission. All 

objections and requests for a hearing 

must be in writing, and must be 

received by the Hearing Clerk on or 

before October 9, 2018. Addresses for 

mail and hand delivery of objections 

and hearing requests are provided in 40 

CFR 178.25(b). 

In addition to filing an objection or 

hearing request with the Hearing Clerk 

as described in 40 CFR part 178, please 

submit a copy of the filing (excluding 

any Confidential Business Information 

(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. 

Information not marked confidential 

pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be 

disclosed publicly by EPA without prior 

notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your 

objection or hearing request, identified 

by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2017–0429, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be CBI or 

other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. 

NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 

dockets generally, is available at http:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

II. Summary of Petitioned-For 

Tolerance 

In the Federal Register of November 

27, 2017 (82 FR 56017) (FRL–9968–55), 

EPA issued a document pursuant to 

FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 

346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a 

pesticide petition (PP 7F8557) by E.I. Du 

Pont De Nemours and Company, 

Chestnut Run Plaza, 974 Centre Road, 

Wilmington, DE 19805. The petition 

requested 40 CFR 180.669 be amended 

by establishing tolerances for residues of 

the fungicide picoxystrobin, methyl 

(aE)-a-(methoxymethylene)-2-[[[6- 

(trifluoromethyl)-2- 

pyridinyl]oxy]methyl]benzeneacetate, in 

or on alfalfa, forage at 4 parts per 

million (ppm); alfalfa, hay at 5 ppm; 

alfalfa, seed at 9 ppm; almond hulls at 

15 ppm; cotton, gin by-products at 40 

ppm; cottonseed (Crop Subgroup 20C) at 

4 ppm; grass, forage (Grown for Seed) at 

40 ppm; grass, hay (Grown for Seed) at 

80 ppm; head lettuce at 7 ppm; onion, 

bulb (Crop Subgroup 3–07A) at 0.8 ppm; 

onion, green (Crop Subgroup 3–07B) at 

15 ppm; pea and bean, succulent 

shelled (Crop Subgroup 6B) at 3 ppm; 

peanut at 0.1 ppm; peanut, hay at 40 

ppm; sunflower (Crop Subgroup 20B) at 

3 ppm; tree nut except hulls (Crop 

Group 14–12) at 0.15 ppm; vegetable, 

brassica head and stem (Crop Group 5– 

16) at 5 ppm; vegetable, cucurbit (Crop 

Group 9) at 0.7 ppm; vegetable, fruiting 

(Crop Group 8–10) at 1.5 ppm; 

vegetable, leaf petiole (Crop Subgroup 

22B) at 40 ppm; vegetable, leafy except 

head lettuce (Crop Group 4–16) at 60 

ppm; vegetable, leaves of root and tuber 

(Crop Group 2) at 40 ppm; vegetable, 

legume, edible podded (Crop Subgroup 

6A) at 4 ppm; vegetable, root (Crop 

Subgroup 1A) at 0.6 ppm; and vegetable, 

tuberous and corm (Crop Subgroup 1C) 

at 0.06 ppm. That document referenced 

a summary of the petition prepared by 

E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company, 

the registrant, which is available in the 

docket, http://www.regulations.gov. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES