Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 24 / Monday, February 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 6355

TABLE 52.1031.—EPA-APPROVED RULES AND REGULATIONS

State citation Title/Subject 

Date 

adopted by 

State 

Date

approved 

by EPA 

Federal Register

citation 52.1020

* * * * * * * 

155 ............... Portable Fuel Container Spillage 

Control.

6/3/04 2/7/05 [Insert FR citation 

from published 

date].

(c)(53) All of Chapter 155 is approved with the 

exception of the word ‘‘or’’ in Subsection 7C which Maine did not submit 

as part of the SIP revision. 

* * * * * * * 

Note.—1. The regulations are effective statewide unless stated otherwise in comments section. 

[FR Doc. 05–2060 Filed 2–4–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63

[OAR–2003–0194; FRL–7869–7] 

RIN 2060–AL89

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for Leather 

Finishing Operations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule; amendments.

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final 

action on amendments to the national 

emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants (NESHAP) for leather 

finishing operations, which were issued 

on February 27, 2002, under section 112 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The direct 

final amendments clarify the frequency 

for categorizing leather product process 

types, modify the definition of 

‘‘specialty leather,’’ add a definition for 

‘‘vacuum mulling,’’ and add an 

alternative procedure for determining 

the actual monthly solvent loss from an 

affected source. We are issuing the 

amendments as a direct final rule, 

without prior proposal, because we 

view the revisions as noncontroversial 

and anticipate no significant adverse 

comments. However, in the Proposed 

Rules section of this Federal Register, 

we are publishing a separate document 

that will serve as the proposal to amend 

the national emission standards for 

leather finishing operations if 

significant adverse comments are filed.

DATES: The direct final rule is effective 

on February 28, 2005 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

written comment by February 17, 2005 

or by February 22, 2005 if a public 

hearing is requested. If significant 

adverse comments are received, EPA 

will publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register indicating which 

provisions will become effective, and 

which provisions are being withdrawn 

due to adverse comment.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. OAR–2003–

0194, by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Agency Web site: http://

www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

system, is EPA’s preferred method for 

receiving comments. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: air-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–1741. 

• Mail: EPA Docket Center, EPA, 

Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. 

Please include a duplicate copy, if 

possible. 

• Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation 

Docket, EPA, 1301 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Room B–108, Washington, DC 

20460. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Docket’s normal 

hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

We request that a separate copy also 

be sent to the contact person listed 

below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT). 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. OAR–2003–0194. 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.epa.gov/

edocket, 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 EDOCKET, 

regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA 

EDOCKET and the federal 

regulations.gov websites are 

‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, 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 

EDOCKET or 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. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit 

EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal 

Register of May 31, 2002 (67 FR 38102). 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the EDOCKET index at 

http://www.epa.gov/edocket. 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 EDOCKET or in 

hardcopy at the Air and Radiation 

Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 

B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC. 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 Air Docket is (202) 566–1742.

6356 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 24 / Monday, February 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

William Schrock, Organic Chemicals 

Group, Emission Standards Division 

(C504–04), Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711; telephone number (919) 541–

5032; facsimile number (919) 541–3470; 

electronic mail (e-mail) address: 

schrock.bill@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Since 

these rule amendments do not add 

substantive requirements and ease 

certain compliance obligations, EPA 

finds that there is good cause to make 

the rule amendments immediately 

effective upon the close of the comment 

period, within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 

section 553(d). 

Regulated Entities. Categories and 

entities potentially regulated by this 

action include:

Category NAICS * code Examples of regulated entities 

Industry ............................................................................................................................................ 3161 Leather finishing operations. 

31611 Leather finishing operations. 

316110 Leather finishing operations. 

Federal government ........................................................................................................................ ........................ Not affected. 

State/local/tribal government ........................................................................................................... ........................ Not affected. 

* North American Industrial Classification System. 

This table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

regulated by this action. To determine 

whether your facility is regulated by this 

action, you should carefully examine 

the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 

63.5285. If you have any questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult the person 

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition 

to being available in the docket, an 

electronic copy of today’s document 

will also be available on the WWW 

through EPA’s Technology Transfer 

Network (TTN). Following signature by 

the EPA Administrator, a copy of the 

direct final rule amendments will be 

posted on the TTN’s policy and 

guidance page for newly proposed or 

promulgated rules at http://

www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN 

provides information and technology 

exchange in various areas of air 

pollution control. If more information 

regarding the TTN is needed, call the 

TTN HELP line at (919) 541–5384. 

Comments. We are publishing the 

direct final rule amendments without 

prior proposal because we view the 

amendments as noncontroversial and do 

not anticipate significant adverse 

comments. However, in the Proposed 

Rules section of this Federal Register

notice, we are publishing a separate 

document that will serve as the proposal 

to amend the national emission 

standards for leather finishing 

operations if significant adverse 

comments are filed. If we receive any 

significant adverse comments on one or 

more distinct amendments, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

which provisions will become effective, 

and which provisions are being 

withdrawn due to adverse comment. We 

will address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule, should the 

Agency determine to issue one. Any of 

the distinct amendments in today’s 

direct final rule for which we do not 

receive significant adverse comment 

will become effective on the previously 

mentioned date. We will not institute a 

second comment period on the direct 

final rule amendments. Any parties 

interested in commenting must do so at 

this time.

Judicial Review. Under section 

307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial review of 

the direct final rule amendments is 

available only by filing a petition for 

review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the District of Columbia Circuit by 

February 28, 2005. Under section 

307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an 

objection to the direct final rule 

amendments which was raised with 

reasonable specificity during the period 

for public comment can be raised during 

judicial review. Moreover, under section 

307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements 

established by the direct final rule 

amendments may not be challenged 

separately in any civil or criminal 

proceedings brought by EPA to enforce 

these requirements. 

Outline. The following outline is 

provided to aid in reading the preamble 

to the direct final rule amendments.

I. Background 

A. Frequency of Testing for Product 

Process Type Categorization 

B. Revised Specialty Leather Definition 

C. Alternative Procedure for Determining 

Actual Solvent Loss 

II. Amendments to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart 

TTTT 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as 

Amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

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 of 1995

J. Congressional Review Act

I. Background 

The EPA promulgated NESHAP for 

leather finishing operations on February 

27, 2002 (67 FR 9156). The final rule (40 

CFR part 63, subpart TTTT) includes 

standards for hazardous air pollutants 

(HAP), as well as monitoring, 

performance testing, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements related to those 

standards. Today’s action includes 

direct final rule amendments to clarify 

the frequency for categorizing leather 

product process types, modify the 

definition of ‘‘specialty leather,’’ add a 

definition for ‘‘vacuum mulling,’’ and 

add an alternative procedure for 

determining the actual monthly solvent 

loss from an affected source. 

A. Frequency of Testing for Product 

Process Type Categorization 

We noticed that the promulgated 

standards were silent regarding how 

often an affected source will perform 

appropriate testing to properly 

categorize each finish application in one 

of four leather product process 

operations: (1) Upholstery operations 

with less than four grams of finish addons, (2) upholstery operations with four 

grams or more of finish add-ons, (3) 

water-resistant/specialty, and (4) 

nonwater-resistant. In the final rule, to 

determine whether a leather finish 

application is categorized as ‘‘waterresistant’’ or ‘‘nonwater-resistant,’’ you 

must use the Maeser Flexes test method 

on finished leather samples according to 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 24 / Monday, February 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 6357

American Society for Testing and 

Materials (ASTM) Designation D2099–

00, or use an alternative testing method 

approved by the Administrator (40 CFR 

63.5345–63.5350). We are amending the 

final rule to clarify that once you have 

determined that a unique finish 

application corresponds to one of the 

four product process operations, the 

applied finish categorization can remain 

valid for up to 5 years, provided there 

are no changes in the applied finish 

chemical characteristics. However, if the 

chemical characteristics of the applied 

finish change, or if you operate for 5 

years with an unchanged applied finish 

formula, you must re-categorize the 

applied finish using appropriate testing 

procedures to document the leather 

product process operation to which the 

applied finish will correspond. Thus, 

once a leather finish application has 

been categorized through proper 

documentation, you will need to renew 

the categorization every 5 years or when 

the applied finish chemical 

characteristics change, whichever 

occurs sooner.

B. Revised Specialty Leather Definition 

The definition of specialty leather in 

the final rule states that it is a select 

grade of chrome tanned, bark retanned, 

or fat liquored leather that is retanned 

through the application of greases, 

waxes, and oils in quantities greater 

than 25 percent of the dry leather 

weight. The specialty leather definition 

was added to the final rule after 

commenters to the proposed rule noted 

that leather that has been retanned with 

greater than 25 percent greases, fats, and 

oils requires finishing with coatings that 

contain more solvents and, therefore, 

more HAP to achieve proper adhesion of 

the finish to the leather and produce the 

color and textures the market demands. 

While the definition in the final rule 

appeared to cover all the specialty 

leather produced at the time, one leather 

finishing company (Horween Leather 

Company) raised the issue that they 

finish leather that should meet the 

definition of ‘‘specialty’’ based on the 

amount of solvent they are required to 

use in the coatings. These products, 

however, did not meet the definition of 

specialty leather in the final rule. In 

fact, in order to produce some highquality dress or performance shoe 

leathers, higher solvent-based finishes 

are required to provide the rich color, 

luster, or an oily/tacky feel demanded 

by the market. These leathers are 

produced by retanning with oils, fat, 

and greases of less than 25 percent 

which does not qualify them for the 

specialty leather category. 

In a letter sent via a facsimile on 

December 3, 2002, Horween Leather 

provided EPA with technical 

information relating to the solvent 

content of the coatings required for their 

proposed specialty leather products and 

the oil, fat, and grease content of the 

retanned leather. This information 

clearly showed that higher solvent 

coatings were required to achieve 

satisfactory product qualities down to 

some oil, fat, and grease content of 

approximately 12 percent. EPA 

discussed this information with 

representatives of Horween, as well as 

with coatings experts for the leather 

industry, to determine whether 

alternatives for the higher solvent 

coatings could be used with lower oil, 

fat, and grease content leather and 

achieve the same results. After 

considering these discussions and 

reviewing the data, EPA determined that 

the only means of producing this leather 

with the lower fat, oil, and grease 

content and achieving the same results 

is by revising the specialty leather 

definition. 

The revised specialty leather 

definition in the direct final rule 

amendments lowers the minimum 

percentage of applied grease, waxes, and 

oil used for retanning the leather to 

greater than 12 percent of the dry 

leather weight. This revision enables 

leather finishers to use the higher 

solvent coatings required to achieve the 

desired results since no other options 

exist. The Agency estimates that this 

change in definition will only affect one 

or two facilities that produce this 

specialty leather and will enable them 

to meet market demand for products 

with a lower fat, oil, and grease content. 

The fraction of leather produced at these 

facilities that will be affected by this 

change is estimated to be approximately 

3 percent of their total amount of leather 

finished in a year. This change will 

therefore have the effect of moving this 

quantity of leather from the non-water 

resistant leather category with an 

emission limit of 3.7 pounds of HAP 

loss per 1,000 square feet of leather 

finished to the water resistant/specialty 

leather category with an emission limit 

of 5.6 pounds of HAP loss per 1,000 

square feet of leather finished. 

In addition to lowering the percentage 

of oil, fat, and grease, we are revising 

the specialty leather definition to also 

include high-quality dress or 

performance shoe leather that can 

withstand one or both of the following 

visual tests: Moisture injection into the 

leather using vacuum mulling without 

signs of blistering, or prolonged ironing 

at 200 °F for smoothing out surface 

roughness without finish lift off. As 

noted above, one of the reasons for 

using higher solvent coatings was to 

achieve a higher level of adhesion. 

Vacuum mulling and prolonged ironing 

are used as an indicator of coating 

adhesion to the leather substrate and 

are, therefore, being incorporated into 

the definition. Incorporating these 

criteria into a revised specialty leather 

definition allows for these mostly lowproduction quantities of high-quality 

dress or performance shoe leathers to be 

appropriately categorized as ‘‘specialty 

leather’’ products.

C. Alternative Procedure for 

Determining Actual Solvent Loss 

After promulgation of the final rule, 

we received several comment letters on 

behalf of the trade organization, Leather 

Industries of America (LIA), and two 

leather finishing companies (Prime 

Tanning Company and S.B. Foot 

Tanning Company). The primary issue 

centered on the potential recordkeeping 

burden of a finish inventory log to 

determine the actual monthly solvent 

loss from an affected source. As stated 

in the final rule, each source must 

record the pounds of each type of finish 

applied for each leather product process 

operation and the mass fraction of HAP 

in each applied finish. The basis for this 

type of recordkeeping was that each 

source knew the chemical composition 

of each applied finish and was capable 

of measuring the amount of finish as 

applied to each leather product; thus, a 

‘‘measure-as-you-directly-apply’’

approach appears generally reasonable. 

Two leather finishing companies 

indicated that current company 

practices determine actual monthly 

solvent loss through mass balance 

calculations based on a detailed 

inventory of stored chemicals, at the 

beginning- and end-of-each month, and 

business purchasing records to indicate 

additions to the inventory of chemical 

supplies. Thus, the net loss of finishing 

solvents is determined by subtracting 

the end-of-the month chemical 

inventory from the beginning-of-themonth chemical inventory and adding 

the quantities of all chemicals 

purchased during the same 1-month 

period. Typically, a unique finish 

application is prepared by removing 

known quantities of chemicals from a 

storage location, and the unique finish 

is formulated in a separate location, 

commonly referred to as a mixing room. 

In situations when an excess amount of 

finish is formulated, the companies 

indicated that the excess amount is 

generally accounted for in the mass 

balance procedures as consumed by the 

process (i.e., fugitive solvent loss). This 

assumption is often taken as a 

6358 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 24 / Monday, February 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

simplifying step which results in a 

conservative and slightly overestimated 

measure of the solvent loss. Excess 

finish may eventually be used in other 

finish applications; thus, its use and 

consumption by the process may not be 

immediate. Nonetheless, the excess 

amount is immediately accounted for as 

a solvent loss. 

In other situations, the companies 

indicated they may choose to dispose of 

the excess finish and make an 

appropriate adjustment in their 

corresponding mass balance 

calculations. If the disposed quantities 

of finish are small, the companies may 

choose to record the disposed quantity 

in the mass balance as consumed by the 

process (i.e., fugitive solvent loss). 

Again, this assumption is a simplifying 

step which results in a conservative and 

slightly overestimated measure of the 

solvent loss. However, the companies 

may choose to record the quantity as 

disposed and remove the quantity from 

the mass balance, so it is neither listed 

as released to the air nor is the quantity 

of solvent listed as remaining in the 

inventory. 

The two companies indicated it 

would cause an extreme labor and cost 

burden to change and implement a 

‘‘measure-as-you-directly-apply’’

approach. Furthermore, they stated that 

their current ‘‘mass balance’’ approach 

is just as accurate in determining actual 

monthly solvent losses as the ‘‘measureas-you-directly-apply’’ approach. Both 

of these leather finishing companies 

provided sufficient supporting 

documentation that their current solvent 

measurement procedures are capable of 

accurately determining the quantity of 

solvent finishes used each month and 

determining the mass fraction of HAP in 

the consumed solvent finishes. 

Therefore, in today’s action, we are 

allowing a monthly chemical inventory 

mass balance as an alternative 

procedure in 40 CFR 63.5335(b) for 

determining actual monthly HAP loss 

from an affected source. A monthly 

chemical inventory mass balance is 

appropriate, as long as the source 

follows its detailed mass balance 

procedures and calculations in its plan 

for demonstrating compliance, in 

accordance with 40 CFR 63.5325. 

Regardless of which approach is used to 

determine finish loss, each source is 

still required to maintain a written or 

printed log that documents the total 

quantity of solvents/finishes used each 

month in the process and the mass 

fraction of HAP in each solvent/finish. 

II. Amendments to 40 CFR Part 63, 

Subpart TTTT 

Today’s action includes amendments 

that add an alternative procedure for 

determining the actual monthly solvent 

loss from an affected source, clarify the 

frequency in which leather product 

process types must be categorized, 

modify the definition of ‘‘specialty 

leather,’’ and add a definition for 

‘‘vacuum mulling.’’

Section 63.5335 of 40 CFR part 63 is 

amended by adding a new alternative 

requirement for maintaining a finish 

application log based on a detailed 

chemical inventory mass balance. This 

was accomplished by splitting 

paragraph (b) into two subparagraphs to 

list the two acceptable methodologies 

for determining actual monthly solvent 

loss from an affected source. The 

revised paragraph (b)(1) includes the 

previous requirements for maintaining a 

log of finish types as they are applied 

to a leather product process. Previously, 

these requirements were listed in 

paragraphs (b)(1) through (7) of 

§ 63.5335. However, the requirements 

have been redesignated, without any 

further changes, as paragraphs (b)(1)(i) 

through (vii). Paragraph (b)(2) of 

§ 63.5335 includes the new alternative 

requirements for maintaining a finish 

application log based on a detailed 

chemical inventory mass balance. 

Section 63.5345 is amended by 

adding paragraph (d) to clarify the 

frequency for the two types of 

upholstery product process operations 

which must be categorized. 

Section 63.5350 is amended by 

clarifying the frequency for waterresistant and nonwater-resistant product 

process operations which must be 

categorized, incorporating the revised 

definition of specialty leather, and by 

providing alternative visual test criteria 

to support the categorization of highquality dress or performance shoe 

leather as specialty leather. We have 

also clarified the frequency for 

categorizing specialty leather product 

process operations. 

Section 63.5460 is amended by 

revising the definition for the term 

specialty leather and adding a definition 

for the term vacuum mulling. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Review 

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency 

must determine whether the regulatory 

action is ‘‘significant’’ and, therefore, 

subject to Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) review and the 

requirements of the Executive Order. 

The Executive Order defines 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as one 

that is likely to result in a rule that may: 

(1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more or 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy, a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or tribal governments or 

communities; 

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or, 

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in the Executive Order. 

It has been determined that the direct 

final rule amendments are not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

the terms of Executive Order 12866 and 

are, therefore, not subject to OMB 

review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden. This 

action modifies a definition and adds a 

new definition to the final standards. It 

also adds an alternative option for 

determining HAP loss from the process. 

Since this action only clarifies the 

existing standards and adds an option, 

this action will not increase the 

information collection burden. The 

OMB has previously approved the 

information collection requirements 

contained in the existing regulations 

under the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., 

and has assigned OMB control number 

2060–0478 (EPA ICR No. 1985.02). 

Copies of the Information Collection 

Request (ICR) document(s) may be 

obtained from Susan Auby, by mail at 

the Office of Environmental 

Information, Collection Strategies 

Division; U.S. EPA (2822T); 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460, by email at 

auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 

566–1672. A copy may also be 

downloaded off the Internet at http://

www.epa.gov/icr. Include the ICR 

number in any correspondence. 

Burden means the total time, effort, or 

financial resources expended by persons 

to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose 

or provide information to or for a 

Federal agency. This includes the time 

needed to review instructions; develop, 

acquire, install, and utilize technology 

and systems for the purposes of 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 24 / Monday, February 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 6359

collecting, validating, and verifying 

information, processing and 

maintaining information, and disclosing 

and providing information; adjust the 

existing ways to comply with any 

previously applicable instructions and 

requirements; train personnel to be able 

to respond to a collection of 

information; search data sources; 

complete and review the collection of 

information; and transmit or otherwise 

disclose the information. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed 

in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The EPA has determined that it is not 

necessary to prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis in connection with 

the direct final rule amendments. 

For purposes of assessing the impact 

of today’s direct final rule amendments 

on small entities, small entities are 

defined as: (1) A small business that has 

fewer than 750 employees; (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-forprofit enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s direct final rule 

amendments on small entities, the EPA 

has concluded that this action will not 

have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The direct final rule amendments will 

not impose any new requirements on 

small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their regulatory actions on State, local, 

and tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 

the EPA generally must prepare a 

written statement, including a costbenefit analysis, for proposed and final 

rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures by State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or by the private sector, of $100 million 

or more in any 1 year. Before 

promulgating an EPA rule for which a 

written statement is needed, section 205 

of the UMRA generally requires the EPA 

to identify and consider a reasonable 

number of regulatory alternatives and 

adopt the least-costly, most costeffective, or least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule. The provisions of section 

205 do not apply when they are 

inconsistent with applicable law. 

Moreover, section 205 allows the EPA to 

adopt an alternative other than the leastcostly, most cost effective, or leastburdensome alternative if the 

Administrator publishes with the final 

rule an explanation why that alternative 

was not adopted. Before the EPA 

establishes any regulatory requirements 

that may significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments, including tribal 

governments, it must have developed 

under section 203 of the UMRA a small 

government agency plan. The plan must 

provide for notifying potentially 

affected small governments to have 

meaningful and timely input in the 

development of EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising 

small governments on compliance with 

the regulatory requirements. 

The EPA has determined that the 

direct final rule amendments do not 

contain a Federal mandate that may 

result in expenditures of $100 million or 

more for State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or the 

private sector in any 1 year. The direct 

final rule amendments apply only to 

affected sources in the leather finishing 

industry and clarify the frequency for 

categorizing leather product process 

types, modify the definition of 

‘‘specialty leather,’’ add a definition for 

‘‘vacuum mulling,’’ and add an 

alternative procedure for determining 

the actual monthly solvent loss from an 

affected source and, therefore, impose 

no additional burden on sources. 

Therefore, the direct final rule 

amendments are not subject to the 

requirements of sections 202 and 205 of 

the UMRA. 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999) requires the EPA to 

develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies 

that have federalism implications’’ are 

defined in the Executive Order to 

include regulations that has ‘‘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.’’

The direct final rule amendments do 

not have federalism implications. They 

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. The 

direct final rule amendments apply only 

to affected sources in the leather 

finishing industry and clarify the 

frequency for categorizing leather 

product process types, modify the 

definition of ‘‘specialty leather,’’ add a 

definition for ‘‘vacuum mulling,’’ and 

add an alternative procedure for 

determining the actual monthly solvent 

loss from an affected source and, 

therefore, impose no additional burden 

on sources. Thus, Executive Order 

13132 does not apply to the direct final 

rule amendments. 

In the spirit of Executive Order 13132 

and consistent with EPA policy to 

promote communications between the 

EPA, State and local governments, the 

EPA specifically solicits comment on 

the direct final rule amendments from 

State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000) requires the EPA to 

develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

tribal officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications.’’ The direct final rule 

amendments do not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. The direct final rule 

amendments apply only to affected 

sources in the leather finishing industry 

and clarify the frequency for 

categorizing leather product process 

types, modify the definition of 

‘‘specialty leather,’’ add a definition for 

‘‘vacuum mulling,’’ and add an 

alternative procedure for determining 

the actual monthly solvent loss from an 

affected source and, therefore, impose 

no additional burden on sources. Thus, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply 

to the direct final rule amendments. 

The EPA specifically solicits 

additional comment on the direct final 

rule amendments from tribal officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: 

(1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically 

significant’’ as defined under Executive 

Order 12866 and (2) concerns and 

6360 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 24 / Monday, February 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

environmental health or safety risk that 

the EPA has reason to believe may have 

a disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

the EPA must evaluate the 

environmental health or safety effects of 

the planned rule on children, and 

explain why the planned regulation is 

preferable to other potentially effective 

and reasonably feasible alternatives 

considered by the EPA. 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that are based on 

health or safety risks, such that the 

analysis required under section 5–501 of 

the Executive Order has the potential to 

influence the regulation. Today’s direct 

final rule amendments are not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because they are 

based on technology performance, not 

health or safety risks. Furthermore, the 

direct final rule amendments have been 

determined not to be ‘‘economically 

significant’’ as defined under Executive 

Order 12866. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

The direct final rule amendments are 

not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because they 

are not a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 

104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), 

directs the 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. The NTTAA directs 

the EPA to provide Congress, through 

OMB, explanations when the Agency 

decides not to use available and 

applicable voluntary consensus 

standards. 

No new standard requirements are 

cited in the direct final rule 

amendments. Therefore, the EPA is not 

proposing or adopting any voluntary 

consensus standards in the direct final 

rule amendments. 

J. 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. The EPA will 

submit a report containing the direct 

final 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 direct 

final rule in the Federal Register. The 

direct final rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Hazardous 

substances, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: February 1, 2005. 

Stephen L. Johnson, 

Acting Administrator.

■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, 

title 40, chapter I, part 63 of the Code of 

the Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows:

PART 63—[AMENDED]

■ 1. The authority citation for part 63 

continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart TTTT—[AMENDED]

■ 2. Section 63.5335(b) is revised to read 

as follows:

§ 63.5335 How do I determine the actual 

HAP loss?

* * * * *

(b) Use one of the procedures listed in 

either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this 

section for determining the actual HAP 

loss from your affected sources. 

Regardless of which procedure is used 

to determine HAP loss, each source is 

still required to maintain a written or 

printed log that documents the total 

quantity of solvents/finishes used each 

month in the process and the mass 

fraction of HAP in each solvent/finish. 

(1) Measure Finish as Applied. Use a 

finish inventory log to record the 

pounds of each type of finish applied 

for each leather product process 

operation and the mass fraction of HAP 

in each applied finish. Figure 1 of this 

subpart shows an example log for 

recording the minimum information 

necessary to determine your finish 

usage and HAP loss. The finish 

inventory log must contain, at a 

minimum, the information for each type 

of finish applied listed in paragraphs 

(b)(1)(i) through (vii) of this section: 

(i) Finish type; 

(ii) Pounds (or density and volume) of 

each finish applied to the leather; 

(iii) Mass fraction of HAP in each 

applied finish; 

(iv) Date of the recorded entry; 

(v) Time of the recorded entry; 

(vi) Name of the person recording the 

entry; 

(vii) Product process operation type. 

(2) Chemical Inventory Mass Balance. 

Determine the actual monthly HAP loss 

from your affected source through mass 

balance calculations. You must follow 

your detailed mass balance procedures 

and calculations in your plan for 

demonstrating compliance in 

accordance with § 63.5325. The HAP 

mass balance must be based on a 

detailed inventory of stored chemicals 

at the beginning and end of each month, 

and business purchasing records to 

indicate additions to the inventory of 

chemical supplies. The net loss of 

chemicals used for finish applications is 

determined by subtracting the end of the 

month chemical inventory from the 

beginning of the month chemical 

inventory and adding the quantities of 

all chemicals purchased during the 

same 1-month period. In situations 

when an excess amount of finish is 

formulated, you must have documented 

procedures on how the excess amount is 

accounted for in the mass balance.

* * * * *

■ 3. Section 63.5345 is amended by 

adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 63.5345 How do I distinguish between 

the two upholstery product process 

operations?

* * * * *

(d) For each leather product with a 

unique finish application, you must 

maintain records to support how the 

leather product was categorized to a 

product process operations type. You 

must repeat the leather product 

categorization to a product process 

operation type no less frequently than 

once every 5 years if the applied finish 

chemical characteristics of the leather 

product have not changed, or when the 

applied finish chemical characteristics 

of the leather product change, 

whichever is sooner.

■ 4. Section 63.5350 is amended as 

follows:

■ a. adding paragraph (b)(3),

■ b. revising paragraphs (c) introductory 

text and (c)(2), and

■ c. adding paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(4).

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 24 / Monday, February 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 6361

1 Group I areas were areas that, at the time the 

particulate matter indicator was changed from total 

suspended particulate (TSP) to PM–10, were 

estimated to have a high probability of exceeding 

the PM–10 NAAQS.

§ 63.5350 How do I distinguish between 

the water-resistant/specialty and nonwaterresistant leather product process 

operations?

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(3) For each leather product with a 

unique finish application, you must 

maintain records to support how the 

leather product was categorized to a 

product process operations type. You 

must repeat the leather product 

categorization to a product process 

operation type no less frequently than 

once every 5 years if the applied finish 

chemical characteristics of the leather 

product have not changed, or when the 

applied finish chemical characteristics 

of the leather product do change, 

whichever is sooner. 

(c) To determine whether your 

product process operation produces 

specialty leather, you must meet the 

criteria in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2), or 

(c)(3) of this section:

* * * * *

(2) The leather must be retanned 

through the application of grease, 

waxes, and oil in quantities greater than 

12 percent of the dry leather weight. 

Specialty leather is also finished with 

higher solvent-based finishes that 

provide rich color, luster, or an oily/

tacky feel. Specialty leather products 

may include, but are not limited to, 

specialty shoe leather and top grade 

football leathers. 

(3) The leather must be a high-quality 

dress or performance shoe leather that 

can withstand one of the visual tests in 

paragraph (c)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section: 

(i) Moisture injection into the leather 

using vacuum mulling without signs of 

blistering. 

(ii) Prolonged ironing at 200° F for 

smoothing out surface roughness 

without finish lift off. 

(4) For each leather product with a 

unique finish application, you must 

maintain records to support how the 

leather product was categorized to a 

product process operations type. You 

must repeat the leather product 

categorization to a product process 

operation type no less frequently than 

once every 5 years if the applied finish 

chemical characteristics of the leather 

product have not changed, or when the 

applied finish chemical characteristics 

of the leather product do change, 

whichever is sooner.

■ 5. Section 63.5460 is amended by 

revising the definition for the term 

‘‘Specialty leather’’, and adding, in 

alphabetical order, a definition for the 

term ‘‘Vacuum mulling’’ to read as 

follows:

§ 63.5460 What definitions apply to this 

subpart?

* * * * *

Specialty leather means a select grade 

of chrome tanned, bark retanned, or fat 

liquored leather that is retanned through 

the application of grease, waxes, and oil 

in quantities greater than 12 percent of 

the dry leather weight or high-quality 

dress or performance shoe leather that 

can withstand one or more of the 

following visual tests: moisture 

injection into the leather using vacuum 

mulling without signs of blistering, or 

prolonged ironing at 200° F for 

smoothing out surface roughness 

without finish lift off. Specialty leather 

is also finished with higher solventbased finishes that provide rich color, 

luster, or an oily/tacky feel. Specialty 

leather products are generally low 

volume, high-quality leather, such as 

specialty shoe leather and top grade 

football leathers.

* * * * *

Vacuum mulling means the injection 

of water into the leather substrate using 

a vacuum process to increase the 

moisture content of the leather.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 05–2303 Filed 2–4–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[WA–04–005; FRL–7866–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes: Washington; Yakima 

County Nonattainment Area Boundary 

Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency is taking final action to correct 

an error in the initial delineation of the 

boundary of the Yakima County 

nonattainment area (Yakima NAA) for 

particulate matter with an aerodynamic 

diameter less than or equal to a nominal 

10 micrometers (PM–10). This 

correction revises the boundary of the 

Yakima NAA to exclude a small portion 

that lies within the exterior boundary of 

the Yakama Indian Reservation. The 

excluded area will revert to an 

unclassifiable designation, consistent 

with the original and current 

designation of the Yakama Indian 

Reservation.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on 

March 9, 2005.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. WA–04–005. Publicly available 

docket materials are available in hard 

copy at EPA Region 10, Office of Air, 

Waste, and Toxics (AWT–107), 1200 

Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 

98101. This Docket facility is open from 

8:30–4, Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gina 

Bonifacino, Office of Air, Waste and 

Toxics (OAWT–107), EPA Region 10, 

1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 

98101, (206) 553–2970, or e-mail 

address: bonifacino.gina@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, wherever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. Information is organized as 

follows:

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. What Comments Did EPA Receive on the 

Proposed Action? 

III. Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background 

On November 29, 2004, EPA solicited 

public comment on a proposal to correct 

the boundary of the Yakima County 

nonattainment area (Yakima NAA) for 

particulate matter with an aerodynamic 

diameter less than or equal to a nominal 

10 micrometers (PM–10) by excluding 

approximately six square miles of 

Yakama Indian Reservation land. 

Section 107(d)(4)(B) of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA or the Act) sets out the general 

process by which areas were to be 

designated nonattainment for the 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS) for PM–10 upon enactment of 

the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments. 

The Act states that each area that had 

been identified by EPA as a PM–10 

Group I area 1 prior to the 1990 CAA 

Amendments is designated 

nonattainment for PM–10 by operation 

of the law upon enactment of the 1990 

CAA Amendments. Prior to enactment 

of the 1990 CAA amendments, EPA 

published technical corrections 

clarifying the boundaries of concern for 

some of the areas previously identified 

as Groups I and II areas. See 55 FR 

45799. October 31, 1990. With this 

action, the Yakima County Group I area 

was revised to correspond to a 

rectangular study area that encompassed