[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 112 (Monday, June 12, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30817-30819]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-13923]



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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63

[FRL-5217-5]


Methods for the Polymers and Resins I Rule; Appendix A, Test 
Methods 310, 312, 313

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Methods 310, 312, and 313 are being proposed in conjunction 
with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 
(NESHAP) for the Manufacture of Major Elastomers, commonly referred to 
as the Polymers and Resins I Rule. The proposed methods were adapted 
from industrial methods submitted by the facilities in the polymers and 
resins industry and reviewed by the EPA. After consideration of public 
comments, the methods will be promulgated, in conjunction with the 
Polymers and Resins I rule, as EPA methods 310, 312, and 313, 40 CFR 
part 63, appendix A. [[Page 30818]] 
    Method 310 is applicable for determining the residual amount of 
solvent (hexane being the most commonly used solvent) and diene monomer 
in ethylene-propylene terpolymer (EPDM) as produced in the solution 
polymerization process. Method 312 is applicable for determining the 
residual amount of styrene in styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR) as 
produced in the emulsion polymerization process. Method 313 is 
applicable for determining the residual amount of toluene, dimer, and 
styrene in polybutadiene rubber (PBR) and SBR crumb as produced in the 
solution polymerization process. All three-method analysis is through 
the use of gas chromatography.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before August 11, 
1995.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a 
public hearing by July 3, 1995, a public hearing will be held on July 
12, 1995 beginning at 10 a.m. Persons interested in attending the 
hearing should call Ms. Marguerite Thweatt at (919) 541-5607 to verify 
that a hearing will be held.
    Request to Speak at Hearing. Persons wishing to present oral 
testimony must contact the EPA by July 3, 1995 by contacting Ms. 
Marguerite Thweatt, Organic Chemicals Group (MD-13), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, 
telephone number (919) 541-5607.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments should be submitted (in duplicate, if 
possible) to: Air Docket Section (LE-131), Attention: Docket No. A-92-
44, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington, 
DC 20460. The EPA requests that a separate copy also be sent to the 
contact person listed below. The public hearing, if required, will be 
held at the EPA's Office of Administration Auditorium, Research 
Triangle Park, North Carolina.
    The docket is located at the above address in room M-1500, 
Waterside Mall (ground floor), and may be inspected from 8 a.m. to 4 
p.m., Monday through Friday; telephone number (202) 382-7548. A 
reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning the 
methods, contact Mr. Solomon Ricks at (919) 541-5242, Emission 
Measurement Center, Emission Monitoring and Analysis Division (MD-19), 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North 
Carolina 27711.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed regulatory text of the proposed 
rule is not included in this Federal Register document. The regulatory 
text is available in Docket No. A-92-44; or a limited number of copies 
of the regulatory text are available from the EPA contact person 
designated in this document. This document with the proposed regulatory 
language is also available on the Technology Transfer Network (TTN) on 
the EPA's electronic bulletin boards. The TTN provides information and 
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. The 
service is free, except for the cost of a telephone call. Dial (919) 
541-5742 for up to a 14,400 bps modem. If more information on TTN is 
needed, call the HELP line at (919) 541-5384.
    Other materials related to this rulemaking are available for review 
in the docket.

I. Introduction

    These methods will apply to ethylene-propylene elastomers 
production, polybutadiene rubber production, and styrene-butadiene 
rubber and latex production, using stripping technology as the method 
of compliance. As stated in the Polymers and Resins I rule, if 
compliance is to be demonstrated by sampling, samples of the stripped 
wet crumb or stripped latex must be taken immediately after the 
stripper and analyzed to determine the residual HAP content.

II. Summary of Proposed Methods
A. Method 310

    The proposed method is adapted from a test method submitted to the 
EPA by the Exxon Chemical Company. The basic principle of the method is 
dissolving an EPDM crumb rubber sample in a polymer dissolving stock 
solution with an internal heptane standard. The solution is then 
analyzed for hexane and diene using a gas chromatograph (GC) with a 
flame ionization detector (FID). The solvent actually used in the 
production of the rubber is determined by the manufacturer. The 
particular solvent used by Exxon is hexane, therefore the proposed 
method is aimed towards the determination of residual hexane in the 
crumb rubber.

B. Method 312

    The proposed method is adapted from a test method submitted to the 
EPA by the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. The basic principle of the 
method is coagulating the SBR latex sample with an internal standard 
and analyzing the extract to determine styrene concentration using a GC 
with a FID. The internal standard is prepared by mixing alpha-
methylstyrene with either ethyl alcohol or isopropyl alcohol.

C. Method 313

    The proposed method is adapted from a test method submitted to the 
EPA by the American Synthetic Rubber Corporation (ASRC). The basic 
principle of the method involves the use of a headspace analyzer in 
determining the residual amount of toluene, dimer, and styrene in PBR 
and SBR samples. As is the case with Method 310, the solvent used in 
the production of the rubber is determined by the manufacturer. ASRC 
uses toluene as its manufacturing solvent, therefore this proposed 
method highlights the determination of residual toluene as the solvent.

III. Adminstrative Requirements

A. Public Hearing

    In accordance with section 307(d)(5) of the Clean Air Act as 
amended by Pub. L. 101-549, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, a 
public hearing will be held, if requested, to discuss the proposed 
methods. Persons wishing to make oral presentations should contact EPA 
at the address given in the ADDRESSES section of the preamble in the 
Polymers and Resins I rule. Oral presentations will be limited to 15 
minutes each. Any member of the public may file a written statement 
with the EPA before, during, or within 30 days after the hearing. 
Written statements should be addressed to the Air Docket Section 
address given in the ADDRESSES section of the Polymers and Resins I 
rule.
    A verbatim transcript of the hearing and written statements will be 
available for public inspection and copying during normal working hours 
at EPA's Air Docket Section in Washington, D.C.

B. Docket

    The docket is an organized and complete file for all information 
submitted or otherwise considered by EPA in the development of this 
proposed rulemaking. The principal purposes of the docket are: (1) To 
allow interested parties to identify and locate documents so that they 
can effectively participate in the rulemaking process, and (2) to serve 
as the record in case of judicial review (except for interagency review 
materials) (Clean Air Act section 307(d)(7)(A)).

C. Office of Management and Budget Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 October 4, 1993)), the EPA 
is required to judge whether a regulation is ``significant'' and 
therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget 
[[Page 30819]] (OMB) review and the requirements of this Executive 
Order to prepare a regulatory impact analysis (RIA). The Order defines 
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a 
rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million 
or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of 
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere 
with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter 
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan 
programs, or the rights and obligation of recipients thereof; or (4) 
raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the 
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive 
Order.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act Compliance

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 requires the 
identification of potentially adverse impacts of Federal regulations 
upon small business entities. The RFA specifically requires the 
completion of an analysis in those instances where small business 
impacts are possible. This rulemaking does not impose emission 
measurement requirements beyond those specified in the current 
regulations, nor does it change any emission standard. Because this 
rulemaking imposes no adverse economic impacts, an analysis has not 
been conducted.
    Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 
U.S.C. 605(b), the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have 
a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because 
no additional cost will be incurred by such entities.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The rule does not change any information collection requirements 
subject of Office of Management and Budget review under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

F. Unfunded Mandates

    Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA 
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with 
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan 
for significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the action proposed today does not include 
a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or 
more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or 
to the private sector. Therefore, the requirements of the Unfunded 
Mandates Act do not apply to this action.

G. Statutory Authority

    The statutory authority for this proposal is provided by section 
112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C., 7412.

    Dated: May 30, 1995.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-13923 Filed 6-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P