40550 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

available in the office of the 

Superintendent and online at 

www.nps.gov/chat/planyourvisit/bikemaps.htm. 

(4) How will the Superintendent 

manage the designated bicycle routes? 

(i) The Superintendent may open or 

close designated bicycle routes, or 

portions thereof, or impose conditions 

or restrictions for bicycle use after 

taking into consideration public health 

and safety, natural and cultural resource 

protection, carrying capacity and other 

management activities and objectives. 

(ii) Following a rain event, the 

Superintendent may exercise discretion 

to temporarily close the trails in the 

Johnson Ferry South and Cochran 

Shoals units to mitigate soil erosion and 

water quality impacts from bicycle use. 

(iii) The Superintendent will provide 

public notice of all such actions through 

one or more of the methods listed in 

§ 1.7 of this chapter. 

(iv) Violating a closure or restriction 

is prohibited. 

Dated: June 20, 2012. 

Rachel Jacobson, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. 2012–16702 Filed 7–9–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–PV–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0468; FRL–9698–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; Revision for the Control of 

Volatile Organic Compounds 

Emissions From Vehicle Refinishing 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

Maryland. The SIP revision amends 

Maryland’s COMAR 26.11.19.23 

‘‘Control of Volatile Organic 

Compounds Emissions from Vehicle 

Refinishing’’ to establish new volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) content 

limits for coating and cleaning solvents 

used in vehicle refinishing and 

standards for coating application, work 

practices, monitoring, and 

recordkeeping. This action is being 

taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before August 9, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2012–0468 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: mastro.donna@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0468, 

Donna Mastro, Acting Associate 

Director, Office of Air Program 

Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2012– 

0468. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

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 information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The 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 email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email 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. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

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 www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Maryland Department of 

the Environment, 1800 Washington 

Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21230. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emlyn Ve ́lez-Rosa, (215) 814–2038, or 

by email at velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Maryland was designated 

nonattainment with respect to the 1- 

hour ozone NAAQS on November 15, 

1990, with several serious 

nonattainment areas, including: the 

Baltimore, Maryland area, the Maryland 

portion of the Philadelphia-WilmingtonAtlantic City area, and the Maryland 

portion of the Washington, DC area. 

Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA requires 

states with ozone nonattainment areas 

classified as moderate or above to 

submit a SIP revision that provides VOC 

emissions reductions of at least 15 

percent from the baseline emissions of 

1990. In Maryland, the 15 percent plans 

(the 15% rate-of-progress plans) were 

required for the 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment areas. 

Pursuant to this requirement, 

Maryland revised its SIP on August 4, 

1997 to adopt COMAR 26.11.19.23 

‘‘Control of Volatile Organic 

Compounds Emissions from Vehicle 

Refinishing.’’ The regulation would 

achieve fully enforceable VOC 

emissions reductions from vehicle 

refinishing sources throughout the State 

of Maryland, which were creditable 

towards the 15% rate-of-progress plans. 

The rule, which followed EPA’s 

‘‘Alternative Control Techniques (ACT) 

Document: Automobile Body 

Refinishing’’ (EPA–453/R–94–031, April 

1994), established standards for vehicle 

refinishing based on VOC content of 

coatings, methods for calculating the 

VOC content of a coating system, and 

standards for operating, monitoring, 

reporting, and recordkeeping. The 

coating categories included: 

pretreatment coatings, precoatings, 

primer surfacers, primer sealers, 

topcoats, multi-stage coating systems, 

and specialty coatings. 

Section 183(e) of the Act authorizes 

EPA to establish national standards to 


wreier-aviles on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 40551 

reduce VOC emissions from consumer 

and commercial products, including the 

automobile refinishing coatings. On 

September 11, 1998, a final rule 

‘‘National Volatile Organic Compound 

Emissions Standards for Automobile 

Refinish Coatings’’ (EPA’s National 

Rule) was published by EPA under the 

authority of section 183(e) of the CAA 

(63 FR 48806), as identified in 40 CFR 

part 59, subpart B. The federal rule 

applies to all automobile refinish 

coatings that are manufactured or 

imported for sale or distribution in the 

United States, and sets VOC content 

limits by automotive refinish category. 

See EPA’s August 1998 report ‘‘Volatile 

Organic Compound Emissions from 

Automobile Refinishing—Background 

Information for Promulgated Standards’’ 

(EPA–453/R–96–011b). 

On January 9, 2008, EPA published 

the final rule 40 CFR part 63 subpart 

HHHHHH ‘‘National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: 

Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous 

Surface Coating Operations at Area 

Sources’’ (EPA’s 6H NESHAP), which 

includes automobile refinishing. This 

Federal rule specifically applies to area 

sources that engage in paint stripping 

operations that use methylene chloride 

(MeCl) containing paint stripping 

formulations, and in spray application 

of coatings to motor vehicle and mobile 

equipment, plastic and or metal 

substrate, where the coatings contain 

compounds of chromium, lead, 

manganese, nickel, or cadmium. Motor 

vehicle or mobile equipment surface 

coating operations may petition the 

EPA’s Administrator for an exemption 

from this rule if the owner or operator 

can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of 

the EPA’s Administrator, that the spray 

applied does not include coatings 

containing any of these compounds. 

This rule establishes important 

requirements for these types of facilities, 

among the following: Training 

certification of all new and existing 

personnel who spray surface coatings, 

minimum training requirements, and 

installation to all facilities of a filtered 

spray booth and enclosed spray gun 

cleaner. 

Maryland’s 1997 SIP-approved 

regulation COMAR 26.11.19.23 ‘‘Control 

of Volatile Organic Compounds 

Emissions from Vehicle Refinishing’’ 

complies with the federal standards 

established in EPA’s rules. On May 8, 

2012, EPA received a revision to the 

Maryland SIP submitted by the 

Maryland Department of Environment 

(MDE). The SIP revision (#12–04) 

amends Maryland’s COMAR 26.11.19.23 

‘‘Control of Volatile Organic 

Compounds from Vehicle Refinishing,’’ 

in order to establish new standards and 

requirements for VOC, including: VOC 

content limits for coatings and solvents, 

controls on emissions from equipment 

cleaning, the use of coating application 

methods, recordkeeping, maintenance 

activities, and operator training. These 

amendments are based on the 2009 

‘‘Model Rule for Motor Vehicle and 

Mobile Equipment Non-Assembly Line 

Coating Operations’’ (MVMERR) 

developed in conjunction with member 

states of the Ozone Transport 

Commission (OTC). The MVMERR 

established requirements which comply 

with those established in EPA’s 

National Rule and 6H NESHAP. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

The proposed SIP revision establishes 

VOC content limits for automotive 

coatings and cleaning solvents used in 

vehicle refinishing, and standards for 

coating application, work practices, 

monitoring, and recordkeeping, to be 

effective for all affected sources as of 

July 1, 2013. Sources subject to the 

requirements of this regulation include: 

auto body and repair facilities, fleet 

operator repair and paint facilities, new 

and used auto dealer repair and paint 

facilities, and after-market auto 

customizing and detailing facilities 

located throughout the State of 

Maryland; manufacturers, suppliers, 

distributors of coatings and cleaning 

solvents intended for use and 

application to motor vehicles, mobile 

equipment, and associated components 

within the State of Maryland; and 

manufacturers, suppliers, and 

distributors of application equipment 

and materials storage such as spray 

booths, spray guns, and sealed 

containers for cleaning rags for use 

within Maryland. 

The regulation establishes VOC 

content limits for 11 categories of 

automotive coatings and two categories 

of cleaning solvents which are used in 

the preparation, application, and drying 

phases of vehicle refinishing. The VOC 

content limits established for the 

automotive coatings and solvents 

exclude water and exempt compounds 

as listed in 40 CFR 51.100(s), and are 

provided in Table 1 and Table 2, 

respectively. 

TABLE 1—VOC CONTENT LIMITS FOR AUTOMOTIVE COATINGS FOR MOTOR VEHICLE AND MOBILE EQUIPMENT

REFINISHING AND RECOATING VOC CONTENT LIMIT FOR AUTOMOTIVE COATINGS

Coating category 

Maximum VOC content 

lbs/gal g/L 

Adhesion promoter .................................................................................................................................................. 4.5 540 

Automotive pretreatment coating ............................................................................................................................. 5.5 660 

Automotive primer .................................................................................................................................................... 2.1 250 

Clear coating ............................................................................................................................................................ 2.1 250 

Color coating, including metallic/iridescent color coating ........................................................................................ 3.5 420 

Multicolor coating ..................................................................................................................................................... 5.7 680 

Other automotive coating type ................................................................................................................................ 2.1 250 

Single-stage coating, including single-stage metallic/iridescent coating ................................................................. 2.8 340 

Temporary protective coating .................................................................................................................................. 0.5 60 

Truck bed liner coating ............................................................................................................................................ 1.7 200 

Underbody coating ................................................................................................................................................... 3.6 430 


wreier-aviles on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
40552 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2—VOC CONTENT LIMITS FOR CLEANING SOLVENTS FOR MOTOR VEHICLE AND MOBILE EQUIPMENT REFINISHING

AND RECOATING VOC CONTENT LIMIT FOR CLEANING SOLVENTS

Solvent category Maximum VOC content 

Cleaning solvent (other than bug and tar removers) ................................................................................................... 0.21 lbs/gal .. 25 g/L. 

Bug and tar removers** ................................................................................................................................................ 40% VOC by weight. 

The regulation provides methods for 

calculating the VOC content of coatings 

and cleaning solvents and a list of test 

methods to be used for demonstrating 

compliance with provisions of this 

regulation. Instead of complying with 

the VOC content limits specified, a 

person subject to this regulation may 

use an emission control device that has 

been approved by MDE, which achieves 

an overall emission control efficiency of 

85 percent or greater, as determined in 

accordance with the approved test 

methods. The regulation requires using 

at least one of the approved methods for 

applying an automotive coating, 

including: Flow or curtain coating, dip 

coating, brush coating, cotton-tipped 

swab application, electrodeposition 

coating, high volume-low pressure 

(HVLP) spraying, electrostatic spraying, 

airless spraying, or an alternate spray 

equipment method approved by MDE. 

Work practice standards include 

procedures for cleaning the spray gun 

equipment for applying automotive 

coatings. Affected facilities are also 

required to keep extensive records on 

the total amount of coating used, VOC 

actual and regulatory contents, purchase 

records, and system operating 

parameters of any emission control 

device installed. Additional information 

concerning EPA’s review and rationale 

for proposing to approve this SIP 

revision may 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–2012–0468. 

III. Proposed Action 

The Maryland SIP revision for the 

control of VOC emissions from vehicle 

refinishing under Regulation COMAR 

26.11.19.23, as adopted by the State of 

Maryland on March 26, 2012, meets the 

applicable requirements of the CAA and 

the applicable EPA regulations. The SIP 

revision will achieve emission 

reductions of VOC throughout the State 

of Maryland. EPA is proposing to 

approve this Maryland SIP revision 

submitted on May 8, 2012. EPA is 

soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before taking final action. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule, 

pertaining to Maryland’s COMAR 

26.11.19.23 ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic 

Compounds Emissions from Vehicle 

Refinishing,’’ 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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: June 27, 2012. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2012–16809 Filed 7–9–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Part 15 

[FAR Case 2012–018; Docket 2012–0018, 

Sequence 1] 

RIN 9000–AM27 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; Price 

Analysis Techniques 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are 

proposing to amend the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to clarify 

the use of a price analysis technique in 

order to establish a fair and reasonable 

price. 

DATES: Interested parties should submit 

written comments to the Regulatory 


wreier-aviles on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS