83 FR 39600 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Adoption of Control Techniques Guidelines for Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Miscellaneous Metal Parts Surface Coating, Miscellaneous Plastic Parts Surface Coating, and Pleasure Craft Surface Coatings
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 155 (August 10, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 155 (August 10, 2018)
| Page Range | 39600-39605 | |
| FR Document | 2018-17078 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 155 (Friday, August 10, 2018)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 39600-39605] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-17078] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0437; FRL-9981-97--Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Adoption of Control Techniques Guidelines for Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Miscellaneous Metal Parts Surface Coating, Miscellaneous Plastic Parts Surface Coating, and Pleasure Craft Surface Coatings AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's state implementation plan (SIP). The revision includes amendments to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection's (PADEP) regulations and addresses the requirement to adopt reasonably available control technology (RACT) for sources covered by EPA's control techniques guidelines (CTG) standards for the following categories: Miscellaneous metal parts surface coating, miscellaneous plastic parts surface coating, and pleasure craft surface coatings, as well as related cleaning activities. The SIP revision also amends regulations for graphic arts systems and mobile equipment repair and refinishing as well as making general administrative changes. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). DATES: This final rule is effective on September 10, 2018. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0437. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory A. Becoat, (215) 814 2036, or by email at [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 18, 2016, PADEP submitted a revision to the Pennsylvania SIP concerning the adoption of EPA's CTG for miscellaneous metal parts surface coating processes, miscellaneous plastic parts surface coating processes, and pleasure craft surface coatings. Specifically, PADEP has amended 25 Pennsylvania Code (Pa. Code) Chapter 129 (relating to standards for sources) to address RACT and further reduce volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions in Pennsylvania. In accordance with sections 172(c)(1), 182(b)(2)(A) and 184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, Pennsylvania's SIP revision submittal establishes VOC emission limitations and other requirements consistent with the recommendations of EPA's 2008 Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings (MMPP) (Publication No. EPA 453/R-08-003; September 2008) and Control Techniques Guidelines for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings for these sources in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Publication No. EPA 453/R-08-006). [[Page 39601]] I. Background Ground level ozone is formed in the atmosphere by photochemical reactions between volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOX ), and carbon monoxide (CO) in the presence of sunlight. In order to reduce ozone concentrations in the ambient air, the CAA requires all nonattainment areas to apply controls on VOC and NOX emission sources to achieve emission reductions. Among effective control measures, RACT controls significantly reduce VOC and NOX emissions from major stationary sources. NOX and VOC are referred to as ozone precursors and are emitted by many types of pollution sources, including motor vehicles, power plants, industrial facilities, and area wide sources, such as consumer products and lawn and garden equipment. Scientific evidence indicates that adverse public health effects occur following exposure to ozone. These effects are more pronounced in children and adults with lung disease. Breathing air containing ozone can reduce lung function and inflame airways, which can increase respiratory symptoms and aggravate asthma or other lung diseases. RACT is defined as the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility. 44 FR 53761 at 53762 (September 17, 1979). Section 182 of the CAA sets forth two separate RACT requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. The first requirement, contained in section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, and referred to as RACT fix-up, requires the correction of RACT rules for which EPA identified deficiencies before the CAA was amended in 1990. Pennsylvania previously corrected its deficiencies under the 1-hour ozone standard and has no further deficiencies to correct under this section of the CAA. The second requirement in section 182(b)(2) of the CAA applies to moderate (or worse) ozone nonattainment areas, and pursuant to section 184(b)(1)(B), to all areas in a state that are included in an ozone transport region (OTR). Section 184 of the CAA includes all of Pennsylvania in the OTR. Sections 182(b)(2) and 184(b) require these areas to implement RACT controls on all major VOC and NOX emission sources and on all sources and source categories covered by a CTG issued by EPA.\1\ See CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 184(b). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ CTGs are documents issued by EPA intended to provide state and local air pollution control authorities information to assist them in determining RACT for VOC from various sources. The recommendations in the CTG are based upon available data and information and may not apply to a particular situation based upon the circumstances. States can follow the CTG and adopt state regulations to implement the recommendations contained therein, or they can adopt alternative approaches. In either case, states must submit their RACT rules to EPA for review and approval as part of the SIP process. Pursuant to section 184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, all areas in the OTR must implement RACT with respect to sources of VOCs in the state covered by a CTG issued before or after November 15, 1990. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In subsequent Federal Register notices, EPA has addressed how states can meet the RACT requirements of the CAA. EPA developed the CTG for MMPP in September 2008 (Publication No. EPA 453/R-08-003) that provides guidelines with regard to feasible emission limitations and operating practices for a number of different surface coatings used within this large and diverse source category. The 2008 MMPP CTG recommends separate sets of emission limits for metal parts coatings, plastic parts coatings, automotive/transportation and business machine plastic parts, and pleasure craft, depending on the type of coating used by a particular source. The miscellaneous metal product and plastic parts surface coatings categories identified pursuant to section 183(e) of the CAA include the coatings that are applied to the surfaces of a varied range of metal and plastic parts and products. Such parts or products are constructed either entirely or partially from metal or plastic. These miscellaneous metal products and plastic parts include, but are not limited to, metal and plastic components of the following types of products as well as the products themselves: Fabricated metal products, molded plastic parts, small and large farm machinery, commercial and industrial machinery and equipment, automotive or transportation equipment, interior or exterior automotive parts, construction equipment, motor vehicle accessories, bicycles and sporting goods, toys, recreational vehicles, pleasure craft (recreational boats), extruded aluminum structural components, railroad cars, heavier vehicles, lawn and garden equipment, business machines, laboratory and medical equipment, electronic equipment, steel drums, metal pipes, and numerous other industrial and household products. The pleasure craft coating category does not include coatings that are a part of other product categories listed under Section 183(e) of the CAA for which CTGs have been published or included in other CTGs. For pleasure craft surface coatings, EPA took into account California regulations when developing the 2008 MMPP CTG. California was the only state at that time with regulations governing VOC emissions from pleasure craft surface coatings. After EPA finalized the 2008 MMPP CTG, the pleasure craft coatings industry asserted to EPA that three of the VOC emission limits in the CTG were too low considering the performance requirements of the pleasure craft coatings and that the VOC emission limits recommended did not represent RACT for the National pleasure craft coatings industry. On September 14, 2009, EPA was contacted by the pleasure craft coatings industry to reconsider some of the VOC emission limits recommended in the final 2008 MMPP CTG. In response, EPA issued a memorandum on June 1, 2010, entitled ``Control Technique Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Part Coatings--Industry Request for Reconsideration,'' recommending that the pleasure craft industry work with state agencies during their RACT rule development process to assess what is reasonable for the specific sources regulated. EPA has stated that states can use the recommendations from the MMPP CTG to form their own determinations as to what constitutes RACT for pleasure craft coating operations. CTGs impose no legally binding requirements on any entity, including pleasure craft coating facilities. As stated in the memorandum, EPA will evaluate state- developed RACT rules and determine whether the submitted rules meet the RACT requirements of the CAA. II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis On November 18, 2016, PADEP submitted a SIP revision which adopted the recommendations contained in the 2008 MMPP CTG with respect to sources in the miscellaneous metal products coatings and plastic parts coatings product categories. For the pleasure craft coating industry, after evaluating what is reasonable for this source category, PADEP determined that three VOC content limits in the CTG should be revised from the limits in the CTG to represent RACT for the pleasure craft coating industry. This is based on EPA's memorandum that the pleasure craft industry should work with state agencies during their RACT rule development process to assess what is reasonable for the specific sources regulated. The SIP revision includes an amendment to 25 Pa. Code Chapter 129-- (relating to standards for sources) as follows: (1) Amended section 129.51(a)--(relating to general) in order [[Page 39602]] to extend applicability; (2) added section 129.52d--``Control of VOC emissions from miscellaneous metal parts surface coating processes, miscellaneous plastic parts surface coating processes and pleasure craft surface coatings,'' in order to regulate VOC emissions from these three categories; (3) amended section 129.52(g)--(relating to surface coating processes) in order to clarify record keeping and reporting requirements; (4) added section 129.52 subsection (k) in order to clarify the applicability of the requirements of section 129.52, Table I, Category 10 in 25 Pa. Code Chapter 129; (5) amended section 129.67 (relating to graphic arts systems) in order to extend applicability; and (6) amended section 129.75 (relating to mobile equipment repair and refinishing) in order to specify exceptions for those who apply surface coating to mobile equipment already subject to requirements of sections 129.52 and 129.52d. More detailed information on these provisions as well as a detailed summary of EPA's review and rationale for approving these SIP revisions can be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this action, which is available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0437. After evaluating the SIP revision submittal, EPA concluded that it meets CAA requirements under sections 110, 172(c)(1), 182(b)(2)(A), and 184(b)(1) by adopting EPA's CTG and continuing to address and minimize VOC emissions in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as discussed in more detail in EPA's TSD for this rulemaking action. PADEP is adopting without change most of the requirements recommended by the MMPP CTG but adopting the pleasure craft industry recommendations for the following three coating categories: Antifouling Sealer/Tiecoat; Other Substrate Antifoulant; and Extreme High Gloss. For these three categories, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania reviewed industry data and determined that for the purpose of functionality, cost, and VOC emissions, the alternative limits adopted for these three coating categories constitute RACT. EPA concludes that Pennsylvania's approach is consistent with the guidance memorandum entitled, ``Control Technique Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Part Coatings--Industry Request for Reconsideration,'' and therefore, concludes that these regulations reflect RACT given costs and VOC emissions. The revised VOC content limits for the pleasure craft surface coatings proposed by PADEP are expected to have a de minimis impact on the amount of VOC emission reductions from the implementation of the revised VOC limits due to having no facilities with the potential to emit VOC emissions for pleasure craft surface coatings. EPA notes that under 25 Pa. Code Sec. Sec. 129.52d, PADEP is allowing the provisions of 25 Pa. Code Sec. 129.52d to supersede the requirements of a RACT permit previously issued under 25 Pa. Code Sec. Sec. 129.91-129.95 if the permit was issued prior to January 1, 2017, to the owner or operator of a source subject to section 129.52d(a), except to the extent the RACT permit contains more stringent requirements. EPA further notes that the RACT permits issued under 25 Pa. Code Sec. Sec. 129.91-129.95 were issued for previous RACT determinations on a case-by-case basis; these permits were then submitted to EPA as source-specific SIP revisions and were previously acted on by EPA and would have been approved into the Pennsylvania SIP. If EPA approved those source-specific RACT determinations as meeting the requirements of RACT under the CAA, then the permits associated with those determinations were approved into the SIP as listed in 40 CFR 52.2020(d). The requirements of the source-specific RACT determination which EPA approved into the Pennsylvania SIP remain applicable requirements for the specific source unless and until Pennsylvania seeks to remove the limits from the SIP in accordance with CAA section 110(l). To the extent that the provisions of 25 Pa. Code Sec. 129.52d are more stringent than those of a previous SIP-approved permit, PADEP will need to make a source-specific determination as to whether the requirements of the previous RACT permit apply, or those of Sec. 129.52d, and submit that determination to EPA as a SIP revision in order to remove the previously approved permit from the SIP. Until such a SIP revision is made, EPA cannot remove the source-specific permits from the SIP and EPA is not taking such action in this rulemaking. Thus, the requirements of a previously SIP-approved permit are not superseded under the SIP. In accordance with section 110 of the CAA including 110(a) and 110(l), EPA determines that approval of this PADEP SIP revision will not interfere with reasonable further progress, attainment of any NAAQS or any other applicable CAA requirements. On October 16, 2017 (82 FR 48034 and 82 FR 47988), EPA simultaneously published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) and a direct final rule (DFR) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania approving the SIP revision. EPA received five adverse comments on the rulemaking and withdrew the DFR prior to the effective date of December 15, 2017. III. Response to Comments During the comment period, EPA received several anonymous comments on the rulemaking. Of the comments, one comment generally discussed greenhouse gas from electric vehicles, a second comment generally discussed wildfires and wildland fire management policy, and a third comment generally discussed the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. EPA believes these three comments are not germane to this rulemaking action, thus no further response is provided. The following is a summary of the comments pertinent to this rulemaking action and EPA's response to those comments. Comment #1: The first commenter stated that EPA did not address a March 28, 2017 Executive Order (E.O.) regarding the promotion of energy independence and economic growth.\2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ Based on the comment, EPA assumes the E.O. in question is E.O. 13783, Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth, signed March 28, 2017. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Response #1: EPA disagrees with the commenter's assertion that this rulemaking action required evaluation mandated under the E.O.. The E.O. in question pertains to reviewing existing regulations, orders, guidance documents, policies, and any other similar agency actions (collectively, agency actions) that potentially burden the development or use of domestically produced energy resources, with particular attention to oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy. First, EPA does not believe this E.O. applies to this rulemaking action because, to the extent this rulemaking is considered an agency action under the E.O., this action was not an existing agency action as of March 28, 2017, the date the E.O. was signed. Second, assuming arguendo, that this rulemaking action is considered an agency action under the E.O., this rulemaking action does not create a burden as that term is defined in the E.O.. As defined in the E.O., the term ``burden'' means, ``to unnecessarily obstruct, delay, curtail, or otherwise impose significant cost on the siting, permitting, production, utilization, transmission, or delivery of energy resources.'' This rulemaking action does not affect the siting, permitting, production, utilization, transmission, or delivery of energy resources because this action merely approves Pennsylvania's submission as meeting [[Page 39603]] certain necessary CTG requirements under the CAA, thus any required review under this E.O. is not applicable. Finally, EPA does not have discretion to disapprove the state's SIP submission if it meets the applicable CAA requirements. CAA section 110(k)(3) requires that EPA ``shall'' approve the SIP submission ``as a whole'' if it meets the applicable requirements in the CAA. Pennsylvania's submission adopts RACT for sources identified in EPA's CTG, as required by CAA section 184(b). Thus, considering the plain language of CAA section 110(k)(3), EPA cannot consider disapproving or requiring changes to a state's SIP submittal based on a particular E.O. or statutory reviews. Comment #2: The second commenter asserted that EPA should review its CTG and Alternative Control Technology (ACT) guidance documents to ``make sure they aren't too costly.'' The commenter further asserted that VOC reductions in Pennsylvania are not needed and EPA should only require RACT reductions in areas with ``bad air.'' The commenter concluded by stating EPA should withdraw the rule in its entirety to enable economic growth and promote jobs. Response #2: EPA disagrees with the commenter that this rulemaking should be withdrawn and that EPA's CTGs and ACTs should be reviewed. The CTG at issue in this rulemaking was issued in 2008. This rulemaking action concerns only EPA's action approving Pennsylvania's SIP submission adopting the CTG requirements, and thus comments about the CTG itself are outside the scope of this action. In any case, EPA considered the cost of installing controls when developing the CTG and concluded, ``The recommended VOC emission rates described [in the CTG] reflect the control measures that are currently being implemented by these facilities. Consequently, there is no additional cost to implement the CTG recommendations for coatings.'' Further, the CTG went on to state the following for the work practices being recommended: ``The CTG also recommends work practices for reducing VOC emissions from both coatings and cleaning materials. We believe that our work practice recommendations in the CTG will result in a net cost savings. Implementing work practices reduces the amount of coating and cleaning materials used by decreasing evaporation.'' Thus, EPA did consider cost when issuing this CTG in a prior rulemaking. EPA further disagrees with the commenter's assertion that VOC reductions are not needed in the entire Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and disagrees that the state or EPA has any discretion to not implement those reductions. First, the commenter provided no evidence supporting a claim that VOC reductions are only needed in areas with ``bad air'' (EPA assumes this is a reference to nonattainment areas). Second, Congress has dictated through the CAA that VOC RACT is required to be implemented throughout the entire Commonwealth. CAA section 182(b)(2)(A) requires that, for each ozone nonattainment area classified as Moderate or above, the area must revise their SIPs to include RACT for each category of VOC sources covered by CTG documents issued between November 15, 1990 and the date of attainment. CAA section 184(a) further establishes a single OTR which includes the entire Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and section 184(b)(1)(B) requires all OTR states to submit SIPs implementing RACT with respect to all sources of VOC in the state that are covered by a CTG. Finally, Pennsylvania and EPA are not permitted to ignore statutory mandates for any policy reason, including to promote jobs or to enable economic growth. Thus, the requirements of the CAA require Pennsylvania to revise its SIP in order to implement VOC RACT for all CTGs issued, including the automobile and light-duty truck assembly coating category. As an OTR state, Pennsylvania is required to reduce VOCs by implementing RACT and CTGs. IV. Final Action EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's November 2016 SIP revision submittal, which adopts EPA's CTG for miscellaneous metal parts surface coating, miscellaneous plastic parts surface coating, and pleasure craft surface coatings, and which makes other related administrative changes, because the revision meets the requirements of CAA sections 110, 172(c)(1), 182(b)(2)(A), and 184(b)(2). V. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Pennsylvania rule discussed in section II of this preamble. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through http://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region III Office (please contact the person identified in the ``For Further Information Contact'' section of this preamble for more information). Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.\3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866. does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4); does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement [[Page 39604]] Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). C. Petitions for Judicial Review Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 9, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action, which approves Pennsylvania's SIP revision adopting CTGs for miscellaneous metal parts surface coating, miscellaneous plastic parts surface coating, and pleasure craft surface coatings, as well as general administrative changes related to cleaning activities, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (See section 307(b)(2)). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: July 26, 2018. Cecil Rodrigues, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 0 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart NN--Pennsylvania 0 2. In Sec. 52.2020, the table in paragraph (c)(1) is amended by: 0 i. Revising the entries for Section 129.51 and Section 129.52; 0 ii. Adding an entry for Section 129.52d; and 0 iii. Revising the entries for Section 129.67, and Section 129.75. The additions and revisions read as follows: Sec. 52.2020 Identification of plan. * * * * * (c) * * * (1) * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State Additional State citation Title/subject effective EPA approval date explanation/ Sec. date 52.2063 citation ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Title 25--Environmental Protection Article III--Air Resources ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * Section 129.51................... General............. 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Revised Section Federal Register 129.51(a). citation]. Section 129.52................... Surface coating 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Revised 129.52(g) processes. Federal Register and added citation]. Subsection 129.52(k). * * * * * * * Section 129.52d.................. Control of VOCs from 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert New section 129.52d Miscellaneous Metal Federal Register is added. This Parts Surface citation]. section does not Coating Processes, remove or replace Miscellaneous any permits Plastic Parts approved under Surface Coating 52.2020(d). Processes and Pleasure Craft Surface Coatings. * * * * * * * Section 129.67................... Graphic arts systems 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Revised Subsection Federal Register 129.67(a)(1). citation]. * * * * * * * Section 129.75................... Mobile equipment 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Revised Subsection repair and Federal Register 129.75(b)(1). refinishing. citation]. Previous approval 8/ 14/00 (c) 148. * * * * * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 39605]] * * * * * [FR Doc. 2018-17078 Filed 8-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![39600 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Coast Guard in complying with the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his Miscellaneous metal parts surface
National Environmental Policy Act of designated on-scene representative. coating, miscellaneous plastic parts
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have (2) This safety zone is closed to all surface coating, and pleasure craft
determined that this action is one of a vessel traffic, except as may be surface coatings, as well as related
category of actions that do not permitted by the Captain of the Port cleaning activities. The SIP revision also
individually or cumulatively have a Buffalo or his designated on-scene amends regulations for graphic arts
significant effect on the human representative. systems and mobile equipment repair
environment. This rule involves (3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of and refinishing as well as making
establishment of a safety zone. It is the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any general administrative changes. This
categorically excluded from further Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or action is being taken under the Clean
review under paragraph L60(a) of petty officer who has been designated Air Act (CAA).
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act
Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 01. A on his behalf. DATES:This final rule is effective on
Record of Environmental Consideration (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter September 10, 2018.
supporting this determination is or operate within the safety zone must ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
available in the docket where indicated contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo docket for this action under Docket ID
under ADDRESSES. or his on-scene representative to obtain Number EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0437. All
permission to do so. The Captain of the documents in the docket are listed on
G. Protest Activities
Port Buffalo or his on-scene the http://www.regulations.gov website.
The Coast Guard respects the First representative may be contacted via Although listed in the index, some
Amendment rights of protesters. VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given information is not publicly available,
Protesters are asked to contact the permission to enter or operate in the e.g., confidential business information
person listed in the FOR FURTHER safety zone must comply with all (CBI) or other information whose
INFORMATION CONTACT section to directions given to them by the Captain disclosure is restricted by statute.
coordinate protest activities so that your of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene Certain other material, such as
message can be received without representative. copyrighted material, is not placed on
jeopardizing the safety or security of Dated: August 6, 2018. the internet and will be publicly
people, places or vessels. available only in hard copy form.
Joseph S. Dufresne,
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Publicly available docket materials are
Port Buffalo. available through http://
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation www.regulations.gov, or please contact
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping [FR Doc. 2018–17181 Filed 8–9–18; 8:45 am]
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
requirements, Security measures, BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
Waterways. additional availability information.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
CFR part 165 as follows: AGENCY Gregory A. Becoat, (215) 814 2036, or by
email at becoat.gregory@epa.gov.
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 40 CFR Part 52
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS [EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0437; FRL–9981– November 18, 2016, PADEP submitted a
97—Region 3] revision to the Pennsylvania SIP
■ 1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows: concerning the adoption of EPA’s CTG
Approval and Promulgation of Air
for miscellaneous metal parts surface
Authority: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 Quality Implementation Plans;
coating processes, miscellaneous plastic
U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, Pennsylvania; Adoption of Control
and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security parts surface coating processes, and
Techniques Guidelines for Control of
Delegation No. 0170.1. pleasure craft surface coatings.
Volatile Organic Compound Emissions
2. Add § 165.T09–0635 to read as Specifically, PADEP has amended 25
■ From Miscellaneous Metal Parts
follows: Pennsylvania Code (Pa. Code) Chapter
Surface Coating, Miscellaneous Plastic
129 (relating to standards for sources) to
Parts Surface Coating, and Pleasure
§ 165.T09–0635 Safety Zone; Ski Show address RACT and further reduce
Sylvan Beach; Fish Creek, Oneida, NY.
Craft Surface Coatings
volatile organic compounds (VOC)
(a) Location. The safety zone will AGENCY: Environmental Protection emissions in Pennsylvania. In
encompass all waters of Fish Creek in Agency (EPA). accordance with sections 172(c)(1),
Oneida, NY, starting at position ACTION: Final rule. 182(b)(2)(A) and 184(b)(1)(B) of the
43°11′36.6″ N, 75°43′53.8″ W then South CAA, Pennsylvania’s SIP revision
to 43°11′33.7″ N, 75°43′51.2″ W then SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection submittal establishes VOC emission
East to 43°11′42.4″ N, 75°43′38.6″ W Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to limitations and other requirements
then North to 43°11′44.5″ N, 75°43′39.7″ the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s consistent with the recommendations of
W then returning to the point of origin state implementation plan (SIP). The EPA’s 2008 Control Techniques
(NAD 83). revision includes amendments to the Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and
(b) Enforcement period. This rule is Pennsylvania Department of Plastic Parts Coatings (MMPP)
Environmental Protection’s (PADEP) (Publication No. EPA 453/R–08–003;
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
effective from 12:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m.
on August 12, 2018. regulations and addresses the September 2008) and Control
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with requirement to adopt reasonably Techniques Guidelines for Automobile
the general regulations in § 165.23 of available control technology (RACT) for and Light-Duty Truck Assembly
this part, entry into, transiting, or sources covered by EPA’s control Coatings for these sources in the
anchoring within this safety zone is techniques guidelines (CTG) standards Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
prohibited unless authorized by the for the following categories: (Publication No. EPA 453/R–08–006).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:07 Aug 09, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR1.SGM 10AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_39755/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 39603
certain necessary CTG requirements Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Therefore, these materials have been
under the CAA, thus any required disagrees that the state or EPA has any approved by EPA for inclusion in the
review under this E.O. is not applicable. discretion to not implement those SIP, have been incorporated by
Finally, EPA does not have discretion to reductions. First, the commenter reference by EPA into that plan, are
disapprove the state’s SIP submission if provided no evidence supporting a fully federally enforceable under
it meets the applicable CAA claim that VOC reductions are only sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of
requirements. CAA section 110(k)(3) needed in areas with ‘‘bad air’’ (EPA the effective date of the final rulemaking
requires that EPA ‘‘shall’’ approve the assumes this is a reference to of EPA’s approval, and will be
SIP submission ‘‘as a whole’’ if it meets nonattainment areas). Second, Congress incorporated by reference in the next
the applicable requirements in the CAA. has dictated through the CAA that VOC update to the SIP compilation.3
Pennsylvania’s submission adopts RACT is required to be implemented
RACT for sources identified in EPA’s throughout the entire Commonwealth. VI. Statutory and Executive Order
CTG, as required by CAA section 184(b). CAA section 182(b)(2)(A) requires that, Reviews
Thus, considering the plain language of for each ozone nonattainment area A. General Requirements
CAA section 110(k)(3), EPA cannot classified as Moderate or above, the area
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
consider disapproving or requiring must revise their SIPs to include RACT
required to approve a SIP submission
changes to a state’s SIP submittal based for each category of VOC sources
covered by CTG documents issued that complies with the provisions of the
on a particular E.O. or statutory reviews.
Comment #2: The second commenter between November 15, 1990 and the CAA and applicable federal regulations.
asserted that EPA should review its CTG date of attainment. CAA section 184(a) 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
and Alternative Control Technology further establishes a single OTR which Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
(ACT) guidance documents to ‘‘make includes the entire Commonwealth of EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
sure they aren’t too costly.’’ The Pennsylvania, and section 184(b)(1)(B) provided that they meet the criteria of
commenter further asserted that VOC requires all OTR states to submit SIPs the CAA. Accordingly, this action
reductions in Pennsylvania are not implementing RACT with respect to all merely approves state law as meeting
needed and EPA should only require sources of VOC in the state that are federal requirements and does not
RACT reductions in areas with ‘‘bad covered by a CTG. Finally, Pennsylvania impose additional requirements beyond
air.’’ The commenter concluded by and EPA are not permitted to ignore those imposed by state law. For that
stating EPA should withdraw the rule in statutory mandates for any policy reason, this action:
its entirety to enable economic growth reason, including to promote jobs or to • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
and promote jobs. enable economic growth. Thus, the action’’ subject to review by the Office
Response #2: EPA disagrees with the requirements of the CAA require of Management and Budget under
commenter that this rulemaking should Pennsylvania to revise its SIP in order Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
be withdrawn and that EPA’s CTGs and to implement VOC RACT for all CTGs October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
ACTs should be reviewed. The CTG at issued, including the automobile and January 21, 2011);
issue in this rulemaking was issued in light-duty truck assembly coating • is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
2008. This rulemaking action concerns category. As an OTR state, Pennsylvania FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
only EPA’s action approving is required to reduce VOCs by action because SIP approvals are
Pennsylvania’s SIP submission adopting implementing RACT and CTGs. exempted under Executive Order 12866.
the CTG requirements, and thus • does not impose an information
comments about the CTG itself are IV. Final Action collection burden under the provisions
outside the scope of this action. In any EPA is approving the Commonwealth of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
case, EPA considered the cost of of Pennsylvania’s November 2016 SIP U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
installing controls when developing the revision submittal, which adopts EPA’s • is certified as not having a
CTG and concluded, ‘‘The CTG for miscellaneous metal parts significant economic impact on a
recommended VOC emission rates surface coating, miscellaneous plastic substantial number of small entities
described [in the CTG] reflect the parts surface coating, and pleasure craft under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
control measures that are currently surface coatings, and which makes other U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
being implemented by these facilities. related administrative changes, because • does not contain any unfunded
Consequently, there is no additional the revision meets the requirements of mandate or significantly or uniquely
cost to implement the CTG CAA sections 110, 172(c)(1), affect small governments, as described
recommendations for coatings.’’ Further, 182(b)(2)(A), and 184(b)(2). in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
the CTG went on to state the following of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
V. Incorporation by Reference • does not have federalism
for the work practices being
recommended: ‘‘The CTG also In this rule, EPA is finalizing implications as specified in Executive
recommends work practices for regulatory text that includes Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
reducing VOC emissions from both incorporation by reference. In 1999);
coatings and cleaning materials. We accordance with requirements of 1 CFR • is not an economically significant
believe that our work practice 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation regulatory action based on health or
recommendations in the CTG will result by reference of the Pennsylvania rule safety risks subject to Executive Order
in a net cost savings. Implementing discussed in section II of this preamble. 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
work practices reduces the amount of EPA has made, and will continue to • is not a significant regulatory action
make, these materials generally
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
coating and cleaning materials used by subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
decreasing evaporation.’’ Thus, EPA did available through http:// 28355, May 22, 2001);
consider cost when issuing this CTG in www.regulations.gov and at the EPA • is not subject to requirements of
a prior rulemaking. Region III Office (please contact the Section 12(d) of the National
EPA further disagrees with the person identified in the ‘‘For Further Technology Transfer and Advancement
commenter’s assertion that VOC Information Contact’’ section of this
reductions are not needed in the entire preamble for more information). 3 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:07 Aug 09, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR1.SGM 10AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_39755/page/4.svg)
![39604 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because the Comptroller General of the United reference, Ozone, Reporting and
application of those requirements would States prior to publication of the rule in recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
be inconsistent with the CAA; and the Federal Register. A major rule organic compounds.
• does not provide EPA with the cannot take effect until 60 days after it Dated: July 26, 2018.
discretionary authority to address, as is published in the Federal Register. Cecil Rodrigues,
appropriate, disproportionate human This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
health or environmental effects, using defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
practicable and legally permissible C. Petitions for Judicial Review 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, PART 52—APPROVAL AND
petitions for judicial review of this PROMULGATION OF
In addition, this rule does not have action must be filed in the United States
tribal implications as specified by IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, circuit by October 9, 2018. Filing a
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
petition for reconsideration by the continues to read as follows:
not approved to apply in Indian country Administrator of this final rule does not
located in the state, and EPA notes that affect the finality of this action for the Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
it will not impose substantial direct purposes of judicial review nor does it
costs on tribal governments or preempt Subpart NN—Pennsylvania
extend the time within which a petition
tribal law. for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of ■ 2. In § 52.2020, the table in paragraph
B. Submission to Congress and the (c)(1) is amended by:
Comptroller General such rule or action. This action, which
approves Pennsylvania’s SIP revision ■ i. Revising the entries for Section
The Congressional Review Act, 5 adopting CTGs for miscellaneous metal 129.51 and Section 129.52;
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small parts surface coating, miscellaneous ■ ii. Adding an entry for Section
Business Regulatory Enforcement plastic parts surface coating, and 129.52d; and
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides pleasure craft surface coatings, as well ■ iii. Revising the entries for Section
that before a rule may take effect, the as general administrative changes 129.67, and Section 129.75.
agency promulgating the rule must related to cleaning activities, may not be
submit a rule report, which includes a challenged later in proceedings to The additions and revisions read as
copy of the rule, to each House of the enforce its requirements (See section follows:
Congress and to the Comptroller General 307(b)(2)). § 52.2020 Identification of plan.
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 * * * * *
required information to the U.S. Senate, Environmental protection, Air (c) * * *
the U.S. House of Representatives, and pollution control, Incorporation by (1) * * *
State Additional explanation/
State citation Title/subject effective EPA approval date § 52.2063 citation
date
Title 25—Environmental Protection
Article III—Air Resources
* * * * * * *
Section 129.51 ......................... General ................................... 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Federal Reg- Revised Section 129.51(a).
ister citation].
Section 129.52 ......................... Surface coating processes ..... 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Federal Reg- Revised 129.52(g) and added
ister citation]. Subsection 129.52(k).
* * * * * * *
Section 129.52d ....................... Control of VOCs from Mis- 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Federal Reg- New section 129.52d is
cellaneous Metal Parts Sur- ister citation]. added. This section does
face Coating Processes, not remove or replace any
Miscellaneous Plastic Parts permits approved under
Surface Coating Processes 52.2020(d).
and Pleasure Craft Surface
Coatings.
* * * * * * *
Section 129.67 ......................... Graphic arts systems .............. 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Federal Reg- Revised Subsection
ister citation]. 129.67(a)(1).
* * * * * * *
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Section 129.75 ......................... Mobile equipment repair and 10/22/16 8/10/18 [Insert Federal Reg- Revised Subsection
refinishing. ister citation]. 129.75(b)(1).
Previous approval 8/14/00 (c)
148.
* * * * * * *
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:07 Aug 09, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR1.SGM 10AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_39755/page/5.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 155 / Friday, August 10, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 39605
* * * * * pesticide manufacturer. The following information you consider to be CBI or
[FR Doc. 2018–17078 Filed 8–9–18; 8:45 am] list of North American Industrial other information whose disclosure is
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Classification System (NAICS) codes is restricted by statute.
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather • Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
provides a guide to help readers Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION determine whether this document DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
AGENCY applies to them. Potentially affected NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001.
entities may include: • Hand Delivery: To make special
40 CFR Part 180 • Crop production (NAICS code 111). arrangements for hand delivery or
• Animal production (NAICS code delivery of boxed information, please
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0429; FRL–9980–47]
112). follow the instructions at http://
Picoxystrobin; Pesticide Tolerances • Food manufacturing (NAICS code www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
311). Additional instructions on
AGENCY: Environmental Protection • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS commenting or visiting the docket,
Agency (EPA). code 32532). along with more information about
ACTION: Final rule. dockets generally, is available at http://
B. How can I get electronic access to www.epa.gov/dockets.
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes other related information?
tolerances for residues of picoxystrobin You may access a frequently updated II. Summary of Petitioned-For
in or on multiple commodities that are electronic version of EPA’s tolerance Tolerance
identified and discussed later in this regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through In the Federal Register of November
document. E.I. DuPont De Nemours and the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR 27, 2017 (82 FR 56017) (FRL–9968–55),
Company requested these tolerances site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text- EPA issued a document pursuant to
under the Federal Food, Drug, and idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/ FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP test 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
DATES: This regulation is effective guidelines referenced in this document pesticide petition (PP 7F8557) by E.I. Du
August 10, 2018. Objections and electronically, please go to http:// Pont De Nemours and Company,
requests for hearings must be received www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ‘‘Test Chestnut Run Plaza, 974 Centre Road,
on or before October 9, 2018, and must Methods and Guidelines.’’ Wilmington, DE 19805. The petition
be filed in accordance with the requested 40 CFR 180.669 be amended
C. How can I file an objection or hearing by establishing tolerances for residues of
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
request? the fungicide picoxystrobin, methyl
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 (aE)-a-(methoxymethylene)-2-[[[6-
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an (trifluoromethyl)-2-
identified by docket identification (ID) objection to any aspect of this regulation pyridinyl]oxy]methyl]benzeneacetate, in
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0429, is and may also request a hearing on those or on alfalfa, forage at 4 parts per
available at http://www.regulations.gov objections. You must file your objection million (ppm); alfalfa, hay at 5 ppm;
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs or request a hearing on this regulation alfalfa, seed at 9 ppm; almond hulls at
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in accordance with the instructions 15 ppm; cotton, gin by-products at 40
in the Environmental Protection Agency provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure ppm; cottonseed (Crop Subgroup 20C) at
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William proper receipt by EPA, you must 4 ppm; grass, forage (Grown for Seed) at
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 identify docket ID number EPA–HQ– 40 ppm; grass, hay (Grown for Seed) at
OPP–2017–0429 in the subject line on 80 ppm; head lettuce at 7 ppm; onion,
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC
the first page of your submission. All bulb (Crop Subgroup 3–07A) at 0.8 ppm;
20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
objections and requests for a hearing onion, green (Crop Subgroup 3–07B) at
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
must be in writing, and must be 15 ppm; pea and bean, succulent
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
received by the Hearing Clerk on or shelled (Crop Subgroup 6B) at 3 ppm;
holidays. The telephone number for the
before October 9, 2018. Addresses for peanut at 0.1 ppm; peanut, hay at 40
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
mail and hand delivery of objections ppm; sunflower (Crop Subgroup 20B) at
and the telephone number for the OPP
and hearing requests are provided in 40 3 ppm; tree nut except hulls (Crop
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
CFR 178.25(b). Group 14–12) at 0.15 ppm; vegetable,
the visitor instructions and additional
In addition to filing an objection or brassica head and stem (Crop Group 5–
information about the docket available
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk 16) at 5 ppm; vegetable, cucurbit (Crop
at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please Group 9) at 0.7 ppm; vegetable, fruiting
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
submit a copy of the filing (excluding (Crop Group 8–10) at 1.5 ppm;
Michael L. Goodis, P.E., Registration vegetable, leaf petiole (Crop Subgroup
any Confidential Business Information
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide 22B) at 40 ppm; vegetable, leafy except
(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket.
Programs, Environmental Protection head lettuce (Crop Group 4–16) at 60
Information not marked confidential
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, ppm; vegetable, leaves of root and tuber
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be
Washington, DC 20460–0001; main (Crop Group 2) at 40 ppm; vegetable,
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior
telephone number: (703) 305–7090; legume, edible podded (Crop Subgroup
notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your
email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov. 6A) at 4 ppm; vegetable, root (Crop
objection or hearing request, identified
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Subgroup 1A) at 0.6 ppm; and vegetable,
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
I. General Information 2017–0429, by one of the following tuberous and corm (Crop Subgroup 1C)
methods: at 0.06 ppm. That document referenced
A. Does this action apply to me? • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// a summary of the petition prepared by
You may be potentially affected by www.regulations.gov. Follow the online E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company,
this action if you are an agricultural instructions for submitting comments. the registrant, which is available in the
producer, food manufacturer, or Do not submit electronically any docket, http://www.regulations.gov.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:07 Aug 09, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10AUR1.SGM 10AUR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_39755/page/6.svg)
Document Created: 2018-08-10 01:56:14
Document Modified: 2018-08-10 01:56:14
| 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 | Final rule. | |
| Dates | This final rule is effective on September 10, 2018. | |
| Contact | Gregory A. Becoat, (215) 814 2036, or by email at [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 39600 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Ozone; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR