```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 102 (Thursday, May 26, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30545-30550]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13003]

[[Page 30545]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-R01-OAR-2010-1080; A-1-FRL-9285-8]

Approval of the Clean Air Act, Section 112(l), Authority for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for 
Dry Cleaning Facilities: State of Maine Department of Environmental 
Protection

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'').

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act (``CAA'') and 
Federal regulations promulgated thereunder, the Maine Department of 
Environmental Protection (``ME DEP'') submitted a request for approval 
to implement and enforce the amended ``Chapter 125: Perchloroethylene 
Dry Cleaner Regulation'' (Maine Dry Cleaner Rule) as a partial 
substitution for the amended National Emissions Standards for Hazardous 
Air Pollutants for Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities (``Dry 
Cleaning NESHAP''), as it applies to area sources. EPA has reviewed 
this request and has determined that the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule 
satisfies the requirements necessary for partial substitution approval. 
Thus, EPA is hereby granting ME DEP the authority to implement and 
enforce its amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule in place of the Dry Cleaning 
NESHAP for area sources, but EPA is retaining its authority with 
respect to major source dry cleaners and dry cleaners installed in a 
residence between July 13, 2006, and June 24, 2009. This approval makes 
the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule Federally enforceable.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective July 25, 2011, unless 
EPA receives adverse comments by June 27, 2011. If adverse comments are 
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule 
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not 
take effect. The incorporation by reference of certain publications 
listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register 
as of July 25, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R01-OAR-2010-1080 by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: mcdonnell.ida@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: (617) 918-0653.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R01-OAR-2010-1080'', Ida E. McDonnell, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Five 
Post Office Square, Suite 100 (OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Ida E. 
McDonnell, Manager, Air Permits, Toxics and Indoor Programs Unit, 
Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
EPA New England Regional Office, Five Post Office Square, 5th floor, 
(OEP5-02), Boston, MA 02109-3912. Such deliveries are only accepted 
during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional 
Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 
4:30, excluding legal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-
2010-1080. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (``CBI'') or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov, or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI 
or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an 
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. EPA will forward copies of all submitted 
comments to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Office of Ecosystem 
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England 
Regional Office, Five Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA 
requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. 
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through 
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays.
    In addition, copies of the State submittal are also available for 
public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the 
Maine Department of Environmental Protection, State House Station 17, 
Augusta, Maine, 04333-0017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lancey, Air Permits, Toxics and 
Indoor Programs Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Five 
Post Office Square, Suite 100 (OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, 
telephone number (617) 918-1656, fax number (617) 918-0656, e-mail 
lancey.susan@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to 
aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. Background and Purpose
II. What requirements must a state rule meet to substitute for a 
section 112 rule?
III. How will EPA determine equivalency for state alternative NESHAP 
requirements?
IV. What significant changes did EPA make to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP 
and how did ME DEP address those changes?
    A. What definitions were added to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and 
the Amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule?
    B. What control requirements were added for new dry cleaners 
installed after December 21, 2005?
    C. What requirements were added for dry cleaners installed in a 
building with a residence after December 21, 2005?
    D. What requirements were added for transfer machines?
    E. What monitoring requirements were added?

[[Page 30546]]

    F. How did the reporting requirements change?
V. What is epa's action regarding Maine's amended Dry Cleaner Rule?
VI. Final Action
VII. Judicial Review
    VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. Background and Purpose

    Under CAA section 112(l), EPA may approve state or local rules or 
programs to be implemented and enforced in place of certain otherwise 
applicable Federal rules, emissions standards, or requirements. The 
Federal regulations governing EPA's approval of state and local rules 
or programs under section 112(l) are located at 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
E. See 58 FR 62262 (November 26, 1993), as amended by 65 FR 55810 
(September 14, 2000). Under these regulations, a state air pollution 
control agency has the option to request EPA's approval to substitute a 
state rule for the applicable Federal rule (e.g., the National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants). Upon approval by EPA, the 
state agency is authorized to implement and enforce its rule in place 
of the Federal rule.
    EPA promulgated the Dry Cleaning NESHAP on September 22, 1993. See 
58 FR 49354 (codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart M, ``National 
Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning 
Facilities''). On August 12, 2003, EPA received ME DEP's request to 
implement and enforce ``Chapter 125: Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaner 
Regulation'' in lieu of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP as applied to area 
sources. On April 24, 2006, EPA approved the Maine Dry Cleaner Rule in 
place of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area sources pursuant to the 
provisions of 40 CFR part 63, subpart E. See 71 FR 20895.
    Under 40 CFR 63.91(e)(3), if EPA amends or otherwise revises a 
promulgated CAA section 112 rule or requirement in a way that increases 
its stringency, EPA will notify any state with a delegated alternative 
of the need to revise its equivalency demonstration. EPA will consult 
with the state to set a time frame for the state to submit a revised 
equivalency demonstration. EPA will then review and approve the revised 
equivalency demonstration according to the procedures in 40 CFR part 
63, subpart E. More stringent NESHAP amendments to a delegated 
alternative apply to all sources until EPA determines that the approved 
or revised alternative requirements are equivalent to the more 
stringent amendments.
    On July 27, 2006, September 21, 2006 and July 11, 2008, EPA 
promulgated amendments to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP. See 71 FR 42724, 71 
FR 55280 and 73 FR 39871. In a letter dated October 25, 2006, EPA 
notified ME DEP that EPA had published more stringent amendments to the 
Dry Cleaning NESHAP and of the need for ME DEP to revise its 
equivalency demonstration. Accordingly, ME DEP revised the Maine Dry 
Cleaner Rule with an effective date of June 24, 2009. On December 11, 
2009, ME DEP submitted a request for approval to implement and enforce 
the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule in place of the amended Dry Cleaning 
NESHAP. On March 4, 2010, EPA determined that Maine's submittal was 
complete. As explained below, EPA has reviewed the State's submission 
and determined that the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule is no less 
stringent than the amended Dry Cleaning NESHAP, as applied to area 
sources.
    In addition, in the Federal Register on May 13, 2009, EPA corrected 
a sequential numbering error in 40 CFR 63.99. See 74 FR 22437. In this 
rulemaking, paragraph (a)(19) of section 63.99, the subparagraph for 
the state of Maine, was redesignated as paragraph (a)(20). However, the 
reference to paragraph (a)(19)(iii) in the incorporation by reference 
section 63.14(d)(6) was not corrected to refer to paragraph 
(a)(20)(iii) at that time. Therefore, today's notice also corrects the 
reference in 40 CFR 63.14(d)(6) to appropriately refer to paragraph 
(a)(20)(iii).
    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.

II. What requirements must a State rule meet to substitute for a 
section 112 rule?

    A state must demonstrate that it has satisfied the general 
delegation/approval criteria contained in 40 CFR 63.91(d). The process 
of providing ``up-front approval'' assures that a state has met the 
delegation criteria in Section 112(l)(5) of the CAA (as codified in 40 
CFR 63.91(d)), that is, that the state has demonstrated that its NESHAP 
program contains adequate authorities to assure compliance with each 
applicable Federal requirement, adequate resources for implementation, 
and an expeditious compliance schedule. Under 40 CFR 63.91(d)(3), 
interim or final Title V program approval satisfies the criteria set 
forth in 40 CFR 63.91(d) for ``up-front approval.'' On October 18, 
2001, EPA promulgated full approval of ME DEP's operating permits 
program with an effective date of December 17, 2001. See 66 FR 52874. 
Accordingly, ME DEP has satisfied the up-front approval criteria of 40 
CFR 63.91(d).
    Additionally, the ``rule substitution'' option requires EPA to make 
a detailed and thorough evaluation of the state's submittal to ensure 
that it meets the stringency and other requirements of 40 CFR 63.93. A 
rule will be approved if the state or local government demonstrates: 
(1) the state and local rules contain applicability criteria that are 
no less stringent than the corresponding Federal rule; (2) the state 
and local rule requires levels of control and compliance and 
enforcement measures that would achieve emission reductions from each 
affected source that are no less stringent than would result from the 
otherwise applicable Federal standard; (3) the schedule for 
implementation and compliance is consistent with the deadlines 
established in the otherwise applicable Federal rule; and (4) the state 
requirements include additional compliance and enforcement measures as 
specified in 40 CFR 63.93(b)(4). See 40 CFR 63.93(b). After reviewing 
ME DEP's amended partial rule substitution request and equivalency 
demonstration for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP as it applies to area 
sources, EPA has determined this request meets all the requirements 
necessary for approval under CAA section 112(l) and 40 CFR 63.91 and 
63.93.

III. How will EPA determine equivalency for state alternative NESHAP 
requirements?

    Before we can approve alternative requirements in place of a part 
63 emissions standard, the state must

[[Page 30547]]

submit to us detailed information that demonstrates how the alternative 
requirements compare with the otherwise applicable Federal standard. 
Under 40 CFR part 63 subpart E, the level of control in the state rule 
must be at least as stringent as the level of control in the Federal 
rule. In addition, in order for equivalency to be granted, the level of 
control and compliance and enforcement measures (``MRR'') of the state 
rule, taken together as a whole, must be equivalent to the level of 
control and MRR of the Federal rule, taken together as a whole. A 
detailed discussion of how EPA will determine equivalency for state 
alternative NESHAP requirements is provided in the preamble to EPA's 
proposed Subpart E amendments on January 12, 1999. See 64 FR 1908.

IV. What significant changes did EPA make to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP 
and how did ME DEP address those changes?

    The following discussion explains the changes that EPA made to the 
Dry Cleaning NESHAP and how ME DEP addressed these changes in the 
amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule. The April 24, 2006 Federal Register 
Notice initially approving the Maine Dry Cleaner Rule as a substitute 
for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP contains a more detailed discussion of the 
differences between the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and the Maine Dry Cleaner 
Rule. See 71 FR 20895.

A. What definitions were added to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and the 
amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP added definitions for halogenated 
hydrocarbon detector, perchloroethylene gas analyzer, residence, vapor 
leak, and vapor barrier. The amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule adopted the 
same definitions, with the exception of vapor barrier and residence. 
Residence is defined in the Dry Cleaner NESHAP as any dwelling or 
housing in which people reside, excluding short-term housing that is 
occupied by the same person for a period of less than 180 days (such as 
a hotel room). Maine's amended Dry Cleaner Rule defines residence as 
``any dwelling or housing in which people reside,'' without exclusion 
for short-term housing. Maine's definition is more stringent. ME DEP 
did not adopt the definition of vapor barrier into its amended Maine 
Dry Cleaner Rule because the requirement is no longer necessary. 
Specifically, the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule specifies that dry 
cleaning machines installed in a building with a residence after 
December 21, 2005 must comply with the NESHAP provisions under Section 
63.320(b)(2)(ii). See Chapter 125 Section 3.A.(2). Section 
63.320(b)(2)(ii) of the Dry Cleaner NESHAP requires any facility 
installed in a building with a residence between December 21, 2005 and 
July 13, 2006 (i.e., those facilities which were required to utilize a 
vapor barrier under the Dry Cleaning NESHAP) to eliminate perc 
emissions by July 27, 2009. Therefore, any facility which was required 
to install a vapor barrier is effectively prohibited from operating 
under the Dry Cleaner NESHAP and the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule as 
of July 27, 2009. The amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule is equivalent to 
the Dry Cleaner NESHAP.

B. What control requirements were added for new dry cleaners installed 
after December 21, 2005?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires new area source dry cleaners which 
commence construction after December 21, 2005, to be equipped with a 
refrigerated condenser and a non-vented carbon adsorber. The carbon 
adsorber must be desorbed in accordance with the manufacturer's 
instruction. See 40 CFR 63.322(o)(2). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner 
Rule required these control requirements for new dry cleaners installed 
after February 12, 1997 and added clarifying language for these 
controls on new dry cleaners installed after December 21, 2005. See 
Chapter 125 Section 3.B(2) and Section 3.(C)(3). The Maine Dry Cleaner 
Rule added the requirement for the carbon adsorber to be desorbed in 
accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. See Chapter 125 
Section 3.C(1)(a). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule is accordingly no 
less stringent than the corresponding Federal rule.

C. What requirements were added for dry cleaners installed in a 
building with a residence after December 21, 2005?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires a vapor barrier and other control 
requirements for dry cleaners installed in a building with a residence 
between December 21, 2005 and July 13, 2006. The Dry Cleaning NESHAP 
requires that such dry cleaners eliminate perc emissions by July 27, 
2009. See 40 CFR 63.322(o)(5)(i)-(ii) and 63.320(b)(2)(ii). The Maine 
Dry Cleaner Rule specifies that such dry cleaners must comply with the 
Dry Cleaner NESHAP Section 63.320(b)(2)(ii). See Chapter 125 Section 
3.A(2). Under both the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and the amended Maine Dry 
Cleaner Rule, such sources are effectively prohibited from operating as 
of July 27, 2009. The Maine Dry Cleaner rule is equivalent to the Dry 
Cleaning NESHAP.
    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP does not allow any dry cleaning systems to 
be installed in a building with a residence as of July 13, 2006. See 40 
CFR 63.322(o)(4) and 63.320(b)(3). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule 
prohibits the installation of a dry cleaner co-located with a residence 
as of June 24, 2009, and requires all new or relocated dry cleaning 
machines located in a building with a residence which commenced 
construction on or after December 21, 2005 to comply with 40 CFR Part 
63.320(b)(2)(ii). See Chapter 125 Section 3.A(1) and (2). The amended 
Maine Dry Cleaner rule does not prohibit dry cleaning machines from 
being installed in a building with a residence between July 13, 2006 
and June 24, 2009, the effective date of the amended Maine Dry Cleaner 
rule. Therefore, EPA is retaining its authority with respect to dry 
cleaners installed in a residence between July 13, 2006 and June 24, 
2009, the effective date of the amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule. In 
addition, the amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule prohibits the installation 
of a co-located dry cleaner as of June 24, 2009. See Chapter 125 
Section 3.(A)(1). A co-located dry cleaner includes dry cleaning 
facilities located in a building with a residence, or with a day care 
center, a health care facility, a prison, an elementary school, a 
middle or high school or a pre-school, a senior center or a youth 
center, or other facility inhabited by children or the elderly. 
Therefore, this provision of the amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule is more 
stringent than the Dry Cleaning NESHAP because it prohibits all co-
located dry cleaners as of June 24, 2009, in addition to prohibiting 
co-located dry cleaners in a building with a residence as of June 24, 
2009.
    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires all dry cleaners located in a 
building with a residence to eliminate perc emissions by December 21, 
2020. See 40 CFR 63.322(o)(5)(ii). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule 
requires all co-located dry cleaners to cease operation on or before 
December 21, 2020. See Chapter 125 Section 3.A(3). The amended Maine 
Dry Cleaner rule is more stringent than the Dry Cleaning NESHAP because 
this provision applies to all co-located facilities in addition to dry 
cleaners installed in a building with a residence.

D. What requirements were added for transfer machines?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP effectively prohibits all transfer machines 
as of July 28, 2008, by requiring the owner or

[[Page 30548]]

operator to eliminate emissions of perc during the transfer of articles 
between the washer and the dryer(s) or reclaimer(s). See 40 CFR 
63.320(b)(1)) and 63.322(o)(4). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule 
prohibited the installation and use of transfer machines as of January 
4, 2003. See Chapter 125 Section 3.(D). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner 
rule is more stringent because it prohibited transfer machines earlier 
than the Dry Cleaning NESHAP.

E. What monitoring requirements were added?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP added a requirement for area source dry 
cleaners to conduct leak checks monthly using a halogenated hydrocarbon 
detector or a PCE gas analyzer that is operated according to the 
manufacturer's recommendation. See 40 CFR 63.322(o)(1). The amended 
Maine Dry Cleaner rule requires vapor leak checks weekly with a 
halogenated hydrocarbon detector or a PCE gas analyzer. See Chapter 125 
Section 4.(C)(2). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule is more stringent 
than the Dry Cleaning NESHAP because it requires leak checks with a 
detector or analyzer to be conducted weekly.
    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP added a requirement that allows facilities 
using a refrigerated condenser to monitor the refrigeration system high 
pressure and low pressure as an alternative to monitoring for the 
temperature of the perc vapor gas vapor-stream. See 40 CFR 
63.323(a)(1). Maine added this requirement and is therefore equivalent 
to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP. See Chapter 125 Section 4.(B).

F. How did the reporting requirements change?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP added a requirement for facilities to 
submit a notification of compliance status by July 28, 2008. See 40 CFR 
63.324(f). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule did not add this 
requirement but all affected sources were required under the NESHAP to 
submit this report and the date for submitting the report was prior to 
the effective date of the Maine Dry Cleaner rule amendments. ME DEP did 
develop a sample form for the July 28, 2008, NESHAP report and sent a 
direct mailing to every dry cleaner in the state with the form, 
notifying sources to submit the report to both EPA and ME DEP. In 
addition, the amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule requires facilities to 
register annually with the state. The Dry Cleaning NESHAP does not 
require an annual report. The annual report was revised to include all 
of the information required in the July 28, 2008, NESHAP report, except 
for a statement of compliance. Given that the NESHAP report date has 
passed, all dry cleaners in Maine were required to send in the report 
with a statement of compliance under the NESHAP requirements, and that 
Maine requires an annual report not required by the NESHAP, EPA has 
determined that reporting requirements of the amended Maine Dry Cleaner 
rule are equivalent to the requirements of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP.

V. What is EPA's action regarding Maine's amended Dry Cleaner Rule?

    After reviewing ME DEP's request for approval of the amended Maine 
Dry Cleaner Rule, EPA has determined that Maine's regulation meets all 
of the requirements necessary for partial rule substitution under 
section 112(l) of the CAA and 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93. The amended Maine 
Dry Cleaner rule, taken as a whole, is no less stringent than the Dry 
Cleaning NESHAP, as applied to area sources. Therefore, EPA hereby 
approves ME DEP's request to implement and enforce Chapter 125, as 
amended on June 24, 2009, in place of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area 
sources in Maine. EPA retains the requirements for major source dry 
cleaners and dry cleaners installed in a residence between July 13, 
2006 and June 24, 2009. As of the effective date of this action, the 
amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule is enforceable by EPA and by citizens 
under the CAA. Although ME DEP has primary responsibility to implement 
and enforce the amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule, EPA retains the 
authority to enforce any requirement of the rule upon its approval 
under CAA 112. See CAA section 112(l)(7).

VI. Final Action

    EPA is approving the Maine Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaner 
Regulation, Chapter 125, as amended on June 24, 2009, as a partial rule 
substitution for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area sources in Maine. EPA 
retains the requirements for major source dry cleaners and dry cleaners 
installed in a residence between July 13, 2006 and June 24, 2009.
    EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this 
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve the rule revision should 
relevant adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective July 
25, 2011 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant 
adverse comments by June 27, 2011.
    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a notice 
withdrawing the direct final rule and informing the public that the 
direct final rule will not take effect. All public comments received 
will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed 
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on the proposed 
rule. All parties interested in commenting on the proposed rule should 
do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is 
advised that this rule will be effective on July 25, 2011 and no 
further action will be taken on the proposed rule. 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.

VII. Judicial Review

    Under CAA section 307(b)(1), judicial review of this final rule is 
available only by filing a petition for review in the United States 
Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 25, 2011. Under 
CAA section 307(b)(2), the requirements established by this final rule 
may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal proceedings 
brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
    Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that ``[o]nly an 
objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable 
specificity during the period for public comment (including any public 
hearing) may be raised during judicial review.'' This section also 
provides a mechanism for us to convene a proceeding for 
reconsideration, ``[i]f the person raising an objection can demonstrate 
to the EPA that it was impracticable to raise such objection within 
[the period for public comment] or if the grounds for such objection 
arose after the period for public comment (but within the time 
specified for judicial review) and if such objection is of central 
relevance to the outcome of the rule.'' Any person seeking to make such 
a demonstration to us should submit a Petition for Reconsideration to 
the Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 
New England Regional Office, Five Post Office Square, Suite 100 (ORA01-
4), Boston, MA 02109-3912, with a copy to the person(s) listed in the 
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the Regional 
Counsel, U.S.

[[Page 30549]]

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Five 
Post Office Square, Suite 100 (ORA01-4), Boston, MA 02109-3912. Filing 
a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
under CAA section 307(d)(7)(B) does not affect the finality of this 
rule for the purposes of judicial review, does not extend the time 
within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and does not 
postpone the effectiveness of the rule.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action approves equivalent state requirements in place of 
Federal requirements under CAA section 112(l). This type of action is 
exempt from review under EO 12866.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This action allows the State of 
Maine to implement equivalent state requirements in lieu of pre-
existing Federal requirements as applied only to area source dry 
cleaners. Thus, this action does not require any person to submit 
information.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes 
of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small entities, small 
entity is defined as: (1) A small business that meets the Small 
Business Administration size standards found at 13 CFR 121.201 (coin 
operated laundries and drycleaners as defined by NAICS code 812310 with 
annual receipts of less than $7.0 million or drycleaning and laundry 
services (except coin operated) as defined by NAICS code 812320 with 
annual receipts of less than $4.5 million); (2) a small governmental 
jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school 
district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and 
(3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. 
After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on small 
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final 
rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of 
small entities because approvals under CAA section 112(l) and 40 CFR 
63.93 do not create any new requirements. Such approvals simply allow a 
state to implement and enforce equivalent requirements in place of the 
Federal requirements that EPA is already imposing.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of 
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 
1531-1538 for State, local, or Tribal governments or the private 
sector. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any State, local or 
Tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this action is not 
subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. This 
action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA 
because it contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly 
or uniquely affect small governments. This action allows the State of 
Maine to implement equivalent state requirements in lieu of pre-
existing Federal requirements as applied only to area source dry 
cleaners. Thus, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132. This action simply allows Maine to 
implement equivalent alternative requirements to replace a Federal 
rule, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power 
and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. Thus, Executive 
Order 13132 does not apply to this action.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have Tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action 
allows the State of Maine to implement equivalent state requirements in 
lieu of pre-existing Federal requirements as applied only to area 
source dry cleaners. This action will not have substantial direct 
effects on Tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal 
government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian Tribes, as 
specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does 
not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or 
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of 
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This 
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it approves a 
state program such that it allows the State of Maine to implement 
equivalent state requirements in lieu of pre-existing Federal 
requirements as applied only to area source dry cleaners.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action 
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 
272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to 
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not 
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA 
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

[[Page 30550]]

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes 
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this final rule will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not 
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the 
environment. This action allows the State of Maine to implement 
equivalent state requirements in lieu of pre-existing Federal 
requirements as applied only to area source dry cleaners. As explained 
above, the state requirements contain standards that are at least 
equivalent to the Federal standards; thus, we anticipate only a 
positive impact from this action.

K. Congressional Review Act

    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 rule 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). This rule will be effective July 25, 2011.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Authority: This action is issued under the authority of section 
112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7412.

    Dated: May 13, 2011.
Ira W. Leighton,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

    40 CFR part 63 is amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--[Amended]

0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(6) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  63.14  Incorporation by reference.

    (d) * * *
    (6) Maine Department of Environmental Protection regulations at 
Chapter 125, Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaner Regulation, effective as of 
June 2, 1991, last amended on June 24, 2009. Incorporation By Reference 
approved for Sec.  63.99(a)(20)(iii) of subpart E of this part.
* * * * *

Subpart E--[Amended]

0
3. Section 63.99 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(20)(iii) to read 
as follows:

Sec.  63.99  Delegated Federal authorities.

    (a) * * *
    (20) * * *
    (iii) Affected area sources within Maine must comply with the Maine 
Regulations Applicable to Hazardous Air Pollutants (incorporated by 
reference as specified in Sec.  63.14) as described in paragraph 
(a)(20)(iii)(A) of this section:
    (A) The material incorporated into the Maine Department of 
Environmental Protection regulations at Chapter 125, Perchloroethylene 
Dry Cleaner Regulation, effective as of June 2, 1991, last amended on 
June 24, 2009, pertaining to dry cleaning facilities in the State of 
Maine jurisdiction, and approved under the procedures in Sec.  63.93 to 
be implemented and enforced in place of the Federal NESHAP for 
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities (subpart M of this part), 
effective as of July 11, 2008, for area sources only, as defined in 
Sec.  63.320(h).
    (1) Authorities not delegated.
    (i) Maine is not delegated the Administrator's authority to 
implement and enforce Maine regulations at Chapter 125, in lieu of 
those provisions of subpart M of this part which apply to major 
sources, as defined in Sec.  63.320(g).
    (ii) Maine is not delegated the Administrator's authority to 
implement and enforce Maine regulations at Chapter 125, in lieu of 
those provisions of subpart M of this part which apply to dry cleaning 
systems installed in a building with a residence between July 13, 2006 
and June 24, 2009, as defined in Sec.  63.320(b)(2)(i) and Sec.  
63.322(o)(4).
    (2) [Reserved]
    (B) [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-13003 Filed 5-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```