

[Federal Register: December 15, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 240)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 74259-74262]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15de05-21]                         

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2005-ME-0003; A-1-FRL-8008-8]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Maine; Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings 
Regulation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revision submitted by the State of Maine. This revision establishes 
requirements to reduce volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from 
architectural and industrial maintenance coatings. The intended effect 
of this action is to propose approval of these requirements. This 
action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 17, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in 
EDocket (RME) ID Number R01-OAR-2005-ME-0003 by one of the following 
methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ Regional Material 

in EDocket (RME), EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, 
will be replaced by an enhanced federal-wide electronic docket 
management and comment system located at http://www.regulations.gov. On 

November 28, 2005, when that occurs, you will be redirected to that 
site to access the docket EPA-R01-OAR-2005-ME-0003 and submit comments. 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    3. E-mail: conroy.dave@epa.gov.
    4. Fax: (617) 918-0661.
    5. Mail: ``RME ID Number R01-OAR-2005-ME-0003,'' David Conroy, 
Chief, Air Programs Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 
New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code 
CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023.
    6. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: David 
Conroy, Chief, Air Programs Branch, Office of Ecosystem Protection, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 
One

[[Page 74260]]

Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours 
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are 
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Regional Material in EDocket 
(RME) ID Number R01-OAR-2005-ME-0003. EPA's policy is that all comments 
received will be included in the public docket without change and may 
be made available online at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, including 

any personal information provided, unless the comment includes 
information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not 
submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected 
through Regional Material in EDocket (RME), regulations.gov, or e-mail. 
The EPA RME Web site and the federal regulations.gov Web site are 
``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through RME or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
Regional Material in EDocket (RME) index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/.
 Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available 
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are 
available either electronically in RME or in hard copy at Office of 
Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New 
England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA. 
EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your 
inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday 
through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne Arnold, Air Quality Planning 
Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional 
Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023, 
(617) 918-1047, arnold.anne@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information

A. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    In addition to the publicly available docket materials available 
for inspection electronically in Regional Material in EDocket, and the 
hard copy available at the Regional Office, which are identified in the 
ADDRESSES section above, copies of the state submittal and EPA's 
technical support document are also available for public inspection 
during normal business hours, by appointment at the Bureau of Air 
Quality Control, Department of Environmental Protection, First Floor of 
the Tyson Building, Augusta Mental Health Institute Complex, Augusta, 
ME 04333-0017.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your 
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide any technical information and/or data you used that 
support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate.
    5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
    6. Offer alternatives.
    7. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline 
identified.
    8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate 
regional file/rulemaking identification number in the subject line on 
the first page of your response. It would also be helpful if you 
provided the name, date, and Federal Register citation related to your 
comments.

II. Rulemaking Information

    This section is organized as follows:

A. What action is EPA taking?
B. What are the requirements of Maine's new regulation?
C. Why is EPA proposing to approve this regulation?
D. What is the process for EPA to approve this SIP revision?

A. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to approve Maine's Chapter 151, ``Architectural 
and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings,'' and to incorporate this 
regulation into the Maine SIP.

B. What are the requirements of Maine's new regulation?

    Maine's Chapter 151 applies to any person who supplies, sells, 
offers for sale, or manufactures, any architectural coating for use 
within the State of Maine and to any person who applies, or solicits 
the application of, any architectural coating within the State of 
Maine. The rule includes VOC content limits for several categories of 
architectural coatings such as roof coatings, swimming pool coatings, 
and traffic marking coatings. Aerosol coating products, as well as 
architectural coatings sold in a container with a volume of one liter 
or less, are exempt from the regulation.
    In addition, Chapter 151 includes the appropriate testing and 
recordkeeping requirements to ensure compliance with the specified 
performance standards. Specifically, the rule requires the use of EPA 
test methods and test procedures adopted by ASTM, South Coast AQMD, and 
Bay Area AQMD. The rule also allows the use of alternative test methods 
that have been approved by the Maine DEP and EPA. Finally, the rule 
requires compliance with the specified VOC content limits by January 1, 
2006 (with one exception).\1\ Coatings manufactured prior to January 1, 
2006, however, may be sold, supplied, offered for sale, or applied 
after January 1, 2006, so long as the coating complied with the 
standards in effect at the time the coating was manufactured.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The rule includes both a January 1, 2006 and a January 1, 
2011 emission limit for varnishes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Why is EPA proposing to approve this regulation?

    EPA has evaluated Maine's Chapter 151 and has found that this 
regulation is generally consistent with EPA guidance and the Ozone 
Transport Commission (OTC) model rule for AIM coatings. The specific 
requirements of the regulation and EPA's evaluation of these 
requirements are detailed in a

[[Page 74261]]

memorandum dated November 10, 2005, entitled ``Technical Support 
Document--Maine--Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings 
Regulation'' (TSD). The TSD and Maine's Chapter 151 are available in 
the docket supporting this action.
    The OTC has developed model rules for several VOC source 
categories, and the OTC states, including Maine, have signed a 
memorandum of understanding (MOU) committing to adopt these model 
rules. One of the categories for which a model rule has been developed 
is architectural coatings. (See ``OTC Model Rule for Architectural and 
Industrial Maintenance Coatings,'' issued March 28, 2001.)
    Several other OTC states have also recently adopted an AIM coatings 
rule based on the OTC model rule, and EPA has already approved some of 
these states' rules.\2\ The OTC model rule and Maine's rule include 
emission limits that are at least as stringent as, and in some cases 
more stringent than, EPA's AIM coatings rule.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For example, EPA approved Pennsylvania's AIM coatings rule 
on November 23, 2004 (69 FR 68080), and New York's AIM rule on 
December 13, 2004 (69 FR 72118).
    \3\ See ``National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards 
for Architectural Coatings,'' 40 CFR Part 59, Subpart D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It should be noted, however, that there are two cases where the 
emission limits in Maine's Chapter 151 differ from the limits in the 
OTC model rule. Specifically, the OTC rule includes a 350 g VOC per 
liter emission limit for varnishes. In contrast, Maine's rule includes 
two emission limits for varnishes: (1) a 450 g VOC per liter emission 
limit with a January 1, 2006 compliance date; and (2) a 350 g VOC per 
liter limit with a January 1, 2011 compliance date. Maine's emission 
limits are acceptable, however, because Maine's 2006 limit for 
varnishes is consistent with EPA's limit for varnishes. Also, the 
emission limits for stains in Maine's rule differ from those in the OTC 
model rule. The OTC rule includes a 250 g VOC per liter limit for 
stains. Maine's rule includes an emission limit of 550 g VOC per liter 
for interior wood clear and semitransparent stains and a 250 g VOC per 
liter limit for all other stains. Thus, Maine's rule is less stringent 
for interior wood clear and semitransparent stains than the OTC rule. 
Maine's 550 g VOC per liter limit is, however, acceptable since it is 
consistent with the limit for interior wood clear and semitransparent 
stains in EPA's rule.
    EPA is aware that concerns have been raised about the achievability 
of VOC content limits of some of the product categories under the Maine 
AIM coatings rule. Although we are approving this rule today, the 
Agency is concerned that if the rule's limits make it impossible for 
manufacturers to produce coatings that are desirable to consumers, 
there is a possibility that users may misuse the products by adding 
additional solvent, thereby circumventing the rule's intended VOC 
emission reductions. We intend to work with Maine and manufacturers to 
explore ways to ensure that the rule achieves the intended VOC emission 
reductions, and we intend to address this issue in evaluating the 
amount of VOC emission reduction credit attributable to the rule. EPA 
has issued an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking to solicit 
comments, data, and information for determining the emission reductions 
achieved from architectural coating rules. (See 70 FR 51694; August 31, 
2005.)
    Maine did not submit its Chapter 151 SIP submittal to meet any 
specific control requirements under the Clean Air Act. However, 
subsequently, on June 9, 2005, Maine submitted its 5 percent increment 
of progress plan which relies on reductions from Chapter 151. In 
today's action, EPA is proposing to approve Chapter 151 because it will 
strengthen Maine's SIP, and we are not deciding what level of emissions 
reductions the rule will achieve. EPA will evaluate the reductions 
Maine is claiming from Chapter 151 in its 5 percent increment of 
progress plan when the Agency takes action on that plan.

D. What is the process for EPA to approve this SIP revision?

    EPA is proposing to approve Maine's AIM coatings rule and is 
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this proposal or 
on other relevant matters. These comments will be considered before EPA 
takes final action. Interested parties may participate in the Federal 
rulemaking procedure by submitting written comments to the EPA New 
England Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this 
proposal, or by submitting comments electronically, by mail, or through 
hand delivery/courier following the directions in the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION, I. General Information section of this proposal.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve Maine's Chapter 151, ``Architectural 
and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings,'' and to incorporate this 
regulation into the Maine SIP.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the National Government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a state rule 
implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
state to use voluntary consensus

[[Page 74262]]

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission 
for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable 
law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a 
SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air 
Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology 
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. 
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: December 5, 2005.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 05-24076 Filed 12-14-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
