81 FR 57469 - Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Shipbuilding Antifoulant Coatings
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 163 (August 23, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 163 (August 23, 2016)
| Page Range | 57469-57473 | |
| FR Document | 2016-20016 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 23, 2016)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 57469-57473] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-20016] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0523; FRL-9950-84-Region 5] Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Shipbuilding Antifoulant Coatings AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving, as a revision to the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP), a submittal by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) dated July 17, 2015. The submittal contains a new volatile organic compound (VOC) limit for antifoulant coatings used in shipbuilding and ship repair facilities located in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter counties. The submittal also includes a demonstration that this revision satisfies the anti-backsliding provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The submittal additionally removes obsolete dates and clarifies a citation. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective October 24, 2016, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 22, 2016. 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. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05- OAR-2015-0523 at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to [email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Svingen, Environmental Engineer, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR- 18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-4489, [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section is arranged as follows: I. What is the background of this SIP revision? II. What is EPA's analysis of the State's submittal? III. What action is EPA taking? IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is the background of this SIP revision? On July 17, 2015, IDEM submitted to EPA a request to incorporate into Indiana's SIP a revised version of 326 Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 8-12-4, ``Volatile organic compound emissions limiting requirements,'' with an effective date of June 21, 2015. Indiana's rulemaking adds, at 326 IAC 8-12-4(a)(1)(D), a VOC limit of 3.33 lbs VOC per gallon for antifoulant coatings used in shipbuilding and ship repair facilities located in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter counties. In 326 IAC 8-12-3(22)(C), an ``antifoulant specialty coating'' is defined as any coating that is applied to the underwater portion of a vessel to prevent or reduce the attachment of biological organisms and that is registered with the EPA as a pesticide under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The same definition is provided in EPA's Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations (Surface Coating) (61 FR 44050, August 27, 1996). Clark and Floyd counties are part of the Louisville, KY-IN maintenance area for the 1997 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), and Lake and Porter counties are part of the Chicago- Naperville, IL-IN-WI nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and the Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN maintenance area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Before IDEM added the revised VOC limit of 3.33 lbs VOC per gallon in 326 IAC 8-12-4(a)(1)(D), antifoulant coatings were limited by the specialty coating limit of 2.83 lbs VOC per gallon at 326 IAC 8-12- 4(a)(1)(E), which IDEM has moved to 326 IAC 8-12-4(a)(1)(F) in this revision. The revised limit of 3.33 lbs VOC per gallon is consistent with the limit in Table 1-1 of EPA's Alternative Control Techniques (ACT) Document: Surface Coating Operations at Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Facilities (EPA-453/R-94-032, April 1994). In addition, it is consistent with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair (Surface Coating) at 40 CFR part 63, subpart II. EPA's CTG identifies the limit from the ACT as Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT), and states that the NESHAP can be used as a model rule for shipbuilding and ship repair facilities. In Indiana's rulemaking, 326 IAC 8-12-4 is also revised to remove obsolete dates and clarify a reference to EPA's NESHAP for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair (Surface Coating) at 40 CFR 63, subpart II. This SIP revision relies on offsets generated by the Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) coatings rule at 326 IAC 8-14 to compensate for the increase in allowable VOC emissions. II. What is EPA's analysis of the State's submittal? Revisions to SIP-approved control measures must meet the requirements of, among other statutory provisions, section 110(l) of the CAA in order to be approved by EPA. Section 110(l), known as EPA's anti-backsliding provision, states: ``The Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171), or any other applicable requirement of this Act.'' In the absence of an attainment demonstration, to demonstrate no interference with any applicable NAAQS or requirement of the CAA under section 110(l), states may substitute equivalent emissions reductions to compensate for any change to a SIP-approved program, as long as actual emissions are not increased. ``Equivalent'' emissions reductions mean reductions which are equal to or greater than those reductions achieved by the control measure approved in the SIP. To show that [[Page 57470]] compensating emissions reductions are equivalent, modeling or adequate justification must be provided. The compensating, equivalent reductions must represent actual, new emissions reductions achieved in a contemporaneous time frame to the change of the existing SIP control measure, in order to preserve the status quo level of emissions in the air. As described in EPA's memorandum ``Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs'' published in January 2001 (EPA-452/R-01- 001), the equivalent emissions reductions must also be permanent, enforceable, quantifiable, and surplus to be approved into the SIP. Indiana's revisions to 326 IAC 8-12-4 increase the allowable VOC content of antifoulant coatings used in shipbuilding or ship repair facilities from 2.83 lbs VOC per gallon to 3.33 lbs VOC per gallon. VOCs contribute to the formation of ground-level ozone. Thus, the potential increase in VOC needs to be offset with equivalent (or greater) emissions reductions from another VOC control measure in order to demonstrate non-interference with the 1997 ozone NAAQS or 2008 ozone NAAQS. Indiana's SIP submittal includes a 110(l) demonstration that relies on equivalent emission reductions to compensate for allowable emission increases resulting from the new VOC limit for antifoulant coatings. 326 IAC 8-12-4(a)(1)(D) currently applies to only one source, Jeffboat LLC, which operates a stationary shipbuilding and repair facility at 1030 E. Market St., Jeffersonville, Indiana, and is permitted under Title V Operating Permit T019-29304-0006. Jeffboat is located within Clark County and the Louisville, KY-IN maintenance area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. IDEM's 110(l) demonstration consists of a calculation of the maximum possible increase in VOC emissions from this source under the revised emission limit, followed by an identification of available offsets from the AIM rule at 326 IAC 8-14. Indiana's submittal includes calculations illustrating the maximum possible increase in VOC emissions resulting from revisions to 326 IAC 8-12-4. Based on the maximum number of barges requiring antifoulant coatings, Jeffboat may use up to 2,580 gallons per year of coatings. At the original limit of 2.83 lbs VOC per gallon coating, the source may emit 3.65 tons VOC per year. In order to correctly determine the difference in resulting emissions, the original and revised limits must be compared on a solids basis; 2.83 lbs VOC per gallon coating equates to 4.6 lbs VOC per gallon solids, and 3.33 lbs VOC per gallon coating equates to 6.08 lbs VOC per gallon solids. From these figures, the revised limit is 32% higher than the original limit. A 32% increase from 3.65 tons VOC per year amounts to an increase in emissions of 1.17 tons VOC per year, or 0.004167 tons VOC per summer day. IDEM's section 110(l) demonstration states that offsets of this amount from Indiana's AIM coatings rule are needed to compensate for the increase in allowable emissions. IDEM's calculations are more conservative than the approach recommended by EPA. Because Jeffboat operates six days per week, or 312 days per year, 1.17 tons VOC per year amounts to 0.00375 tons VOC per summer day. However, in this rulemaking, IDEM has requested to offset the revised limit in 326 IAC 8-12-4 with credits from Indiana's AIM rule in the amount of 0.004167 tons VOC per summer day. Indiana's AIM rule goes above and beyond the Federal AIM rule by adopting a rule that is similar to the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) model rule ``Architectural & Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings'' updated October 13, 2014. According to a 2006 Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) white paper, the OTC model rule provides an up to 60.5% reduction in VOC emissions compared to uncontrolled 2002 base case emissions, while the Federal AIM rule alone only provides a 20% reduction compared to base case. The Indiana AIM rule was approved into the SIP on August 30, 2012 (77 FR 52606). Indiana was not required to adopt an AIM coatings rule, but did so as a multi-state effort to help reduce ozone levels at the regional level. Indiana did not adopt the AIM rule to comply with any Indiana SIP planning requirements and has not taken credit for it in air quality plans, nor has it been included in maintenance year horizons or rate of further progress (RFP) inventories. Therefore, these SIP approved AIM limits can be used as offsets for other purposes, such as this SIP revision. Table 1 shows additional reductions available due to the OTC model rule and Indiana AIM rule. In the table, emission estimates are based on 2011 National Emission Inventory (NEI) data, which is the most recent NEI data currently available. Total reductions, as well as summer day calculations based on average daily emissions using a multiplier of 1.3, are based on the LADCO white paper. Indiana's 110(l) demonstration shows available offsets from the AIM rule of 0.292 tons VOC per summer day. Table 1--Clark and Floyd Counties Offset Analysis -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total County Coating category Tons/year Ton/summday reductions Federal AIM Additional Offset (AIM and OTC) reduction reduction -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Clark............................. Architectural....... 128.97 0.4594 0.388 0.2 0.24 0.108 Clark............................. Traffic Markings.... 0.14 0.0005 0.564 0.2 0.46 0.0002 Clark............................. Industrial 33.24 0.1184 0.605 0.2 0.51 0.060 Maintenance. Clark............................. Special Purpose..... 3.53 0.0126 0.605 0.2 0.51 0.006 Floyd............................. Architectural....... 87.26 0.3108 0.388 0.2 0.24 0.073 Floyd............................. Traffic Markings.... 0.08 0.0003 0.564 0.2 0.46 0.000 Floyd............................. Industrial 22.49 0.0801 0.605 0.2 0.51 0.041 Maintenance. Floyd............................. Special Purpose..... 2.39 0.0085 0.605 0.2 0.51 0.004 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total......................... .................... .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 0.292 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 57471]] IDEM's section 110(l) demonstration identifies available offsets from Indiana's AIM rule of 0.292 tons VOC per summer day, and Indiana's revisions to 326 IAC 8-12-4 require offsets of less than 0.004167 tons VOC per summer day. Therefore, the VOC emissions increase associated with the revisions of 326 IAC 8-12-4 are more than offset by the VOC emission reductions attributed to reductions in AIM coatings emissions. In an earlier submittal, Indiana requested to use a separate portion of available offsets from Indiana's AIM rule to offset removal of Stage II gasoline vapor recovery requirements for the years 2014 and 2015. EPA finalized approval of that SIP submittal on June 9, 2016 (81 FR 37160). For the year 2014, EPA's final rulemaking relevant to the Stage II rule uses offsets from Indiana's AIM rule of 0.001829695 tons VOC per summer day, and for 2015, that same rulemaking uses offsets from Indiana's AIM rule of 0.002250149 tons VOC per summer day. That rulemaking relevant to Stage II uses no offsets for 2016 or future years. Indiana's revised version of 326 IAC 8-12-4 has an effective date of June 21, 2015, so offsets are necessary for 2015 and future years. For 2015, IDEM identifies available offsets from Indiana's AIM rule of 0.292 tons VOC per summer day, EPA's proposed rulemaking relevant to Stage II uses offsets of 0.002250149 tons VOC per summer day, and this rulemaking relevant to 326 IAC 8-12-4 uses offsets of 0.004167 tons VOC per summer day. Therefore, offsets from Indiana's AIM rule of 0.285582851 tons VOC per summer day remain available for future use. For 2016 and future years, IDEM identifies available offsets from Indiana's AIM rule of 0.292 tons VOC per summer day, EPA's proposed rulemaking relevant to Stage II uses no offsets, and this rulemaking relevant to 326 IAC 8-12-4 uses offsets of 0.004167 tons VOC per summer day. Therefore, offsets from Indiana's AIM rule of 0.287833 tons VOC per summer day remain available for future use. Based on the use of permanent, enforceable, contemporaneous, surplus emissions reductions achieved through the offsets from VOC reductions in AIM coatings emissions in Clark and Floyd counties, EPA has concluded that the revisions of 326 IAC 8-12-4 do not interfere with southeast Indiana's ability to demonstrate compliance with the 1997 ozone NAAQS or 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA also examined whether the revisions of 326 IAC 8-12-4 will interfere with attainment of any other air quality standards. Lake and Porter counties are designated attainment for all standards other than ozone, including sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. Clark and Floyd counties are designated attainment for all standards other than ozone and particulate matter.\1\ For the reasons discussed above, EPA has no reason to believe that the revisions will cause the areas to become nonattainment for any of these pollutants. In addition, EPA believes that the revisions will not interfere with the areas' ability to meet any other CAA requirement. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Clark and Floyd counties are currently designated nonattainment for the 1997 Annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ) standard. While VOC is one of the precursors for particulate matter (NAAQS) formation, studies have indicated that in the southeast, which includes the Louisville, KY-IN maintenance area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, emissions of direct PM2.5 and the precursor sulfur oxides are more significant to ambient summertime PM2.5 concentrations than emissions of nitrogen oxides and anthropogenic VOC. See, e.g., Journal of Environmental Engineering-Quantifying the sources of ozone, fine particulate matter, and regional haze in the Southeastern United States (June 24, 2009), available at: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-ofenvironmental-management. Currently, Clark and Floyd counties are not designated nonattainment for any of the other criteria pollutants (i.e. sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, lead or carbon monoxide) and those pollutants are not affected by the removal of Stage II requirements. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Based on the above discussion and the state's section 110(l) demonstration, EPA has concluded that the revisions to 326 IAC 8-12-4 will not interfere with attainment or maintenance in the Louisville, KY-IN maintenance area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the Chicago- Naperville, IL-IN-WI nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, or the Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN maintenance area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, and would not interfere with any other applicable requirement of the CAA, and thus, are approvable under CAA section 110(l). Also, as stated in the previous section, the antifouling coating limit satisfies RACT. III. What action is EPA taking? EPA finds that the revision will not interfere with any applicable CAA requirement. For that reason, EPA is approving, as a revision to the Indiana ozone SIP, a revised version of 326 IAC 8-12-4 submitted by IDEM on July 17, 2015. We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse written comments are filed. This rule will be effective October 24, 2016 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written comments by September 22, 2016. If we receive such comments, we will withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective October 24, 2016. IV. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Indiana Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the State implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.\2\ EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- V. 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 approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not [[Page 57472]] impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 24, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: August 5, 2016. Robert A. Kaplan, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 0 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 0 2. In Sec. 52.770 the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising the entry for 8-12-4 under ``Article 8. Volatile Organic Compound Rules'' ``Rule 12. Shipbuilding or Ship Repair Operations in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties'' to read as follows: Sec. 52.770 Identification of plan. * * * * * (c) * * * EPA-Approved Indiana Regulations ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Indiana effective Indiana citation Subject date EPA Approval date Notes ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Article 8. Volatile Organic Compound Rules ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 12. Shipbuilding or Ship Repair Operations in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * 8-12-4.......................... Volatile organic 06/21/2015 08/23/2016, ................... compound [insert Federal emissions Register limiting citation]. requirements. * * * * * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 57473]] * * * * * [FR Doc. 2016-20016 Filed 8-22-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 57469
* * * * * outside of the primary submission (i.e. maintenance area for the 1997 ozone
[FR Doc. 2016–19888 Filed 8–22–16; 8:45 am] on the web, cloud, or other file sharing NAAQS.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
system). For additional submission Before IDEM added the revised VOC
methods, please contact the person limit of 3.33 lbs VOC per gallon in 326
identified in the FOR FURTHER IAC 8–12–4(a)(1)(D), antifoulant
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the coatings were limited by the specialty
AGENCY full EPA public comment policy, coating limit of 2.83 lbs VOC per gallon
information about CBI or multimedia at 326 IAC 8–12–4(a)(1)(E), which IDEM
40 CFR Part 52 submissions, and general guidance on has moved to 326 IAC 8–12–4(a)(1)(F) in
making effective comments, please visit this revision. The revised limit of 3.33
[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0523; FRL–9950–84–
Region 5] http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ lbs VOC per gallon is consistent with
commenting-epa-dockets. the limit in Table 1–1 of EPA’s
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Alternative Control Techniques (ACT)
Shipbuilding Antifoulant Coatings Svingen, Environmental Engineer, Document: Surface Coating Operations
Attainment Planning and Maintenance at Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Facilities (EPA–453/R–94–032, April
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Agency (EPA). 1994). In addition, it is consistent with
Environmental Protection Agency,
ACTION: Direct final rule. the National Emission Standards for
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–4489, Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
svingen.eric@epa.gov. Shipbuilding and Ship Repair (Surface
Agency (EPA) is approving, as a revision
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Coating) at 40 CFR part 63, subpart II.
to the Indiana State Implementation
Throughout this document whenever EPA’s CTG identifies the limit from the
Plan (SIP), a submittal by the Indiana
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean ACT as Reasonably Available Control
Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) dated July 17, EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Technology (RACT), and states that the
2015. The submittal contains a new section is arranged as follows: NESHAP can be used as a model rule for
volatile organic compound (VOC) limit shipbuilding and ship repair facilities.
I. What is the background of this SIP In Indiana’s rulemaking, 326 IAC 8–
for antifoulant coatings used in revision?
12–4 is also revised to remove obsolete
shipbuilding and ship repair facilities II. What is EPA’s analysis of the State’s
submittal? dates and clarify a reference to EPA’s
located in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter
III. What action is EPA taking? NESHAP for Shipbuilding and Ship
counties. The submittal also includes a
IV. Incorporation by Reference Repair (Surface Coating) at 40 CFR 63,
demonstration that this revision satisfies
the anti-backsliding provisions of the
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews subpart II.
This SIP revision relies on offsets
Clean Air Act (CAA). The submittal I. What is the background of this SIP
generated by the Architectural and
additionally removes obsolete dates and revision?
Industrial Maintenance (AIM) coatings
clarifies a citation. On July 17, 2015, IDEM submitted to rule at 326 IAC 8–14 to compensate for
DATES: This direct final rule will be EPA a request to incorporate into the increase in allowable VOC
effective October 24, 2016, unless EPA Indiana’s SIP a revised version of 326 emissions.
receives adverse comments by Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 8–
September 22, 2016. If adverse 12–4, ‘‘Volatile organic compound II. What is EPA’s analysis of the State’s
comments are received, EPA will emissions limiting requirements,’’ with submittal?
publish a timely withdrawal of the an effective date of June 21, 2015. Revisions to SIP-approved control
direct final rule in the Federal Register Indiana’s rulemaking adds, at 326 IAC measures must meet the requirements
informing the public that the rule will 8–12–4(a)(1)(D), a VOC limit of 3.33 lbs of, among other statutory provisions,
not take effect. VOC per gallon for antifoulant coatings section 110(l) of the CAA in order to be
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, used in shipbuilding and ship repair approved by EPA. Section 110(l), known
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– facilities located in Clark, Floyd, Lake, as EPA’s anti-backsliding provision,
OAR–2015–0523 at http:// and Porter counties. In 326 IAC 8–12– states:
www.regulations.gov or via email to 3(22)(C), an ‘‘antifoulant specialty ‘‘The Administrator shall not approve
aburano.douglas@epa.gov. For coating’’ is defined as any coating that a revision of a plan if the revision would
comments submitted at Regulations.gov, is applied to the underwater portion of interfere with any applicable
follow the online instructions for a vessel to prevent or reduce the requirement concerning attainment and
submitting comments. Once submitted, attachment of biological organisms and reasonable further progress (as defined
comments cannot be edited or removed that is registered with the EPA as a in section 171), or any other applicable
from Regulations.gov. For either manner pesticide under the Federal Insecticide, requirement of this Act.’’
of submission, EPA may publish any Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The In the absence of an attainment
comment received to its public docket. same definition is provided in EPA’s demonstration, to demonstrate no
Do not submit electronically any Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) interference with any applicable
information you consider to be for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair NAAQS or requirement of the CAA
Confidential Business Information (CBI) Operations (Surface Coating) (61 FR under section 110(l), states may
or other information whose disclosure is 44050, August 27, 1996). Clark and substitute equivalent emissions
restricted by statute. Multimedia Floyd counties are part of the Louisville, reductions to compensate for any
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be KY-IN maintenance area for the 1997 change to a SIP-approved program, as
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
accompanied by a written comment. ozone National Ambient Air Quality long as actual emissions are not
The written comment is considered the Standard (NAAQS), and Lake and Porter increased. ‘‘Equivalent’’ emissions
official comment and should include counties are part of the Chicago- reductions mean reductions which are
discussion of all points you wish to Naperville, IL-IN-WI nonattainment area equal to or greater than those reductions
make. EPA will generally not consider for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and the achieved by the control measure
comments or comment contents located Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN approved in the SIP. To show that
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:39 Aug 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM 23AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_57632/page/1.svg)
![57472 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
impose additional requirements beyond methods, under Executive Order 12898 objections to this direct final rule are
those imposed by state law. For that (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). encouraged to file a comment in
reason, this action: In addition, the SIP is not approved response to the parallel notice of
• Is not a significant regulatory action to apply on any Indian reservation land proposed rulemaking for this action
subject to review by the Office of or in any other area where EPA or an published in the proposed rules section
Management and Budget under Indian tribe has demonstrated that a of today’s Federal Register, rather than
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of file an immediate petition for judicial
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, Indian country, the rule does not have review of this direct final rule, so that
January 21, 2011); tribal implications and will not impose EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
• Does not impose an information substantial direct costs on tribal and address the comment in the
collection burden under the provisions governments or preempt tribal law as proposed rulemaking. This action may
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 not be challenged later in proceedings to
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); FR 67249, November 9, 2000). enforce its requirements. (See section
The Congressional Review Act, 5 307(b)(2).)
• Is certified as not having a
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
significant economic impact on a List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Business Regulatory Enforcement
substantial number of small entities
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides Environmental protection, Air
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
that before a rule may take effect, the pollution control, Incorporation by
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
agency promulgating the rule must reference, Intergovernmental relations,
• Does not contain any unfunded submit a rule report, which includes a
mandate or significantly or uniquely Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
copy of the rule, to each House of the requirements, Volatile organic
affect small governments, as described Congress and to the Comptroller General
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act compounds.
of the United States. EPA will submit a
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Dated: August 5, 2016.
report containing this action and other
• Does not have Federalism required information to the U.S. Senate, Robert A. Kaplan,
implications as specified in Executive the U.S. House of Representatives, and Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, the Comptroller General of the United 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
1999); States prior to publication of the rule in
• Is not an economically significant the Federal Register. A major rule PART 52—APPROVAL AND
regulatory action based on health or cannot take effect until 60 days after it PROMULGATION OF
safety risks subject to Executive Order is published in the Federal Register. IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
• Is not a significant regulatory action ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). continues to read as follows:
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
28355, May 22, 2001); petitions for judicial review of this Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
• Is not subject to requirements of action must be filed in the United States ■ 2. In § 52.770 the table in paragraph
Section 12(d) of the National Court of Appeals for the appropriate (c) is amended by revising the entry for
Technology Transfer and Advancement circuit by October 24, 2016. Filing a 8–12–4 under ‘‘Article 8. Volatile
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because petition for reconsideration by the Organic Compound Rules’’ ‘‘Rule 12.
application of those requirements would Administrator of this final rule does not Shipbuilding or Ship Repair Operations
be inconsistent with the CAA; and affect the finality of this action for the in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter
• Does not provide EPA with the purposes of judicial review nor does it Counties’’ to read as follows:
discretionary authority to address, as extend the time within which a petition
appropriate, disproportionate human for judicial review may be filed, and § 52.770 Identification of plan.
health or environmental effects, using shall not postpone the effectiveness of * * * * *
practicable and legally permissible such rule or action. Parties with (c) * * *
EPA-APPROVED INDIANA REGULATIONS
Indiana effective
Indiana citation Subject EPA Approval date Notes
date
* * * * * * *
Article 8. Volatile Organic Compound Rules
* * * * * * *
Rule 12. Shipbuilding or Ship Repair Operations in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter Counties:
* * * * * * *
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
8–12–4 ............................. Volatile organic compound emissions limiting re- 06/21/2015 08/23/2016, [insert Fed-
quirements. eral Register citation].
* * * * * * *
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:39 Aug 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM 23AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_57632/page/4.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 57473
* * * * * Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room non-technical closed captioning quality
[FR Doc. 2016–20016 Filed 8–22–16; 8:45 am] CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. standards on (VPDs) while
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Document FCC 16–17 can also be simultaneously releasing the Closed
downloaded in Word or Portable Captioning Quality Further Notice to
Document Format (PDF) at: https:// seek comment on, among other issues,
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS www.fcc.gov/general/disability-rights- extending some of the responsibilities
COMMISSION office-headlines. To request materials in for complying with the closed
accessible formats for people with captioning quality standards to other
47 CFR Part 79 disabilities (Braille, large print, entities involved in the production and
[CG Docket No. 05–231; FCC 16–17]
electronic files, audio format), send an delivery of video programming. On
email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the December 15, 2014, the Commission
Closed Captioning of Video Consumer and Governmental Affairs released a Second Further Notice
Programming; Telecommunications for Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202– seeking to supplement the record in this
the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Inc., 418–0432 (TTY). proceeding in response to comments
Petition for Rulemaking received on the Closed Captioning
Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Quality Further Notice. Closed
AGENCY: Federal Communications Analysis
Captioning of Video Programming;
Commission. Document FCC 16–17 contains new Telecommunications for the Deaf and
ACTION: Final rule. and modified information collection Hard of Hearing, Inc., Petition for
requirements. The Commission, as part Rulemaking, Second Further Notice of
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal of its continuing effort to reduce Proposed Rulemaking, published at 79
Communications Commission paperwork burdens, will invite the FR 78768, December 31, 2014 (Closed
(Commission) allocates the general public to comment on the Captioning Quality Second Further
responsibilities of video programming information collection requirements Notice).
distributors (VPDs) and video contained in document FCC 16–17 as 2. Responsibilities of VPDs and Video
programmers with respect to the required by the Paperwork Reduction Programmers. In its 1997 Closed
provision and quality of closed captions Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. Captioning Report and Order, the
on television programming, with each In addition, the Commission notes that, Commission placed sole responsibility
entity responsible for closed captioning pursuant to the Small Business for compliance with its television closed
issues that are primarily within its Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public captioning rules on VPDs. Closed
control; amends the Commission’s Law 107–198, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Captioning and Video Description of
captioning complaint procedures to Commission previously sought Video Programming, Implementation of
include video programmers in the comment on how the Commission might Section 305 of the Telecommunications
handling of complaints; and requires ‘‘further reduce the information Act of 1996, Video Programming
video programmers to register contact collection burden for small business Accessibility, Report and Order,
information and certify compliance with concerns with fewer than 25 published at 62 FR 48487, September
captioning obligations directly with the employees.’’ See Closed Captioning of 16, 1997 (1997 Closed Captioning
Commission. Video Programming; Report and Order). At that time, the
DATES: Effective September 22, 2016, Telecommunications for the Deaf and Commission concluded that holding
except for 47 CFR 79.1(g)(1) through (9), Hard of Hearing, Inc., Petition for VPDs responsible would most
(i)(1) through (3), (j)(1) and (4), (k)(1)(iv), Rulemaking, Report and Order, expeditiously increase the availability of
and (m) of the Commission’s rules, Declaratory Ruling, and Further Notice television programming with closed
which contain information collection of Proposed Rulemaking, published at captions and promote efficiency in the
requirements that are not effective until 79 FR 17093, March 27, 2014 (Further Commission’s monitoring and
approved by the Office of Management Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) and 79 enforcement of its captioning rules. At
and Budget (OMB). The Commission FR 17911, March 31, 2014 (Report and the same time, the Commission
will publish a document in the Federal Order) (references are to the Closed recognized the Commission’s
Register announcing the effective date Captioning Quality Order when jurisdiction, under section 713 of the
for those sections. discussing parts of the Report and Act, over both video programming
Order, and to the Closed Captioning providers and owners to ensure the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eliot
Quality Further Notice when discussing provision of closed captioning of video
Greenwald, Disability Rights Office, parts of the Further Notice of Proposed programming, and noted its expectation
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Rulemaking). that both ‘‘owners and producers will be
Bureau, at phone: (202) 418–2235 or involved in the captioning process.’’
email: Eliot.Greenwald@fcc.gov. Synopsis 3. In the Closed Captioning Quality
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 1. Closed captioning is a technology Order, the Commission similarly placed
summary of the Commission’s Closed that provides visual access to the audio the responsibility for compliance with
Captioning of Video Programming; content of video programs by displaying the non-technical closed captioning
Telecommunications for the Deaf and this content as printed words on the quality standards on VPDs. However,
Hard of Hearing, Inc., Petition for television screen. In 1997, the recognizing that the creation and
Rulemaking Second Report and Order Commission, acting pursuant to section delivery of quality closed captioning is
(Second Report and Order), document 713 of the Communications Act (the not solely within the control of VPDs
FCC 16–17, adopted on February 18, Act), 47 U.S.C. 713, adopted rules and that video programmers play a
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
2016, and released on February 19, regarding closed captioning on ‘‘critical role’’ in providing closed
2016. The full text of document FCC 16– television. On February 24, 2014, the captions to viewers, the Commission
17 will be available for public Commission adopted the Closed stated that it would allow a VPD to
inspection and copying via ECFS, and Captioning Quality Order in which, satisfy its obligations with respect to the
during regular business hours at the among other things, it placed caption quality rules by obtaining or
FCC Reference Information Center, responsibility for compliance with the making best efforts to obtain
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:39 Aug 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23AUR1.SGM 23AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_57632/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-09 11:40:25
Document Modified: 2018-02-09 11:40:25
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Direct final rule. | |
| Dates | This direct final rule will be effective October 24, 2016, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 22, 2016. 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. | |
| Contact | Eric Svingen, Environmental Engineer, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR- 18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-4489, [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 57469 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Ozone; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR