[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 8, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52848-52850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-25787]



[[Page 52847]]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





Environmental Protection Agency





_______________________________________________________________________



40 CFR Part 51



Air Quality: Volatile Organic Compounds Definition Revision; Exclusion 
of HFC 43-10mee, HCFC 225ca, and cb; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 8, 1996 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 52848]]



ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 51

[FRL-5466-9]


Air Quality: Revision to Definition of Volatile Organic 
Compounds--Exclusion of HFC 43-10mee and HCFC 225ca and cb

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action revises EPA's definition of volatile organic 
compounds (VOC) for purposes of preparing State implementation plans 
(SIP's) to attain the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 
for ozone under title I of the Clean Air Act (Act) and for the Federal 
implementation plan (FIP) for the Chicago ozone nonattainment area. 
This action adds HFC 43-10mee and HCFC 225ca and cb to the list of 
compounds excluded from the definition of VOC on the basis that these 
compounds have negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. 
These compounds are solvents which could be used in electronics and 
precision cleaning.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective November 7, 1996.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a public docket for this action, A-
95-37, which is available for public inspection and copying between 8 
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, at EPA's Air and Radiation 
Docket and Information Center, (6102), 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 
20460. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Johnson, Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division 
(MD-15), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, phone (919) 541-5245.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated entities. Entities potentially 
regulated by this action are those which use and emit VOC's and States 
which have programs to control VOC emissions.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Examples of regulated   
                 Category                             entities          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..................................  Industries that do solvent  
                                             cleaning, e.g. electronics 
                                             or precision cleaning.     
States....................................  States which have           
                                             regulations to control     
                                             volatile organic compounds.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by State 
regulation initiated pursuant to this action. States may use this 
revised definition of VOC in promulgating new or revising existing 
reasonably available control technology requirements for stationary 
sources. If you have further questions regarding the applicability of 
this action to a particular entity, you may consult the person listed 
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice or 
contact your State or local air pollution control agency.

I. Background

    Petitions have been received from two organizations asking for 
certain compounds to be added to the list of compounds which are 
considered to be negligibly reactive in the definition of VOC at 40 CFR 
51.100(s). On December 12, 1994, Asahi Glass America, Inc., submitted a 
petition for HCFC 225ca and cb isomers. These compounds are chemically 
named 3,3-dichloro-1,1,1,2,2-pentafluoropropane (CAS number 422-56-0) 
and 1,3-dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane (CAS number 507-55-1), 
respectively. On March 13, 1995, the E.I. du Pont de Nemours and 
Company submitted a petition for the compound HFC 43-10mee. This 
compound has the chemical name 1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,5-decafluoropentane 
(CAS number 138495-42-8).
    In support of their petitions, these organizations supplied 
information on the photochemical reactivity of the individual 
compounds. This information consisted mainly of the rate constant for 
the reaction of the compound with the hydroxyl (OH) radical. This rate 
constant (kOH value) is commonly used as one measure of the 
photochemical reactivity of compounds. The petitioners compared the 
rate constants with that of other compounds which have already been 
listed as photochemically, negligibly reactive (e.g., ethane which is 
the compound with the highest kOH value that is currently regarded 
as negligibly reactive). Reported kOH rate constants for ethane 
and the compounds for which petitions were submitted are listed in 
Table 1.

Table 1.--Reaction Rate Constants With OH Radical Reported Rate Constant
                               at 25 deg.C                              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Compound                         cm3/molecule/sec      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ethane...................................  2.4 x 10-13                  
HCFC-225ca...............................  2.5 x 10-14                  
HCFC-225cb...............................  8.6 x 10-15                  
HFC 43-10mee.............................  3.87 x 10-15                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The scientific information which the petitioners have submitted in 
support of their petitions has been added to the docket for this 
rulemaking. This information includes references for the journal 
articles where the rate constant values are published.
    In regard to the petition for HCFC 225ca and HCFC 225cb, existing 
data support that the reactivities of these compounds with respect to 
reaction with OH radicals in the atmosphere are considerably lower than 
that of ethane. This would indicate that these compounds are less 
reactive than ethane which is already classified as negligibly 
reactive. Similarly, for HFC 43-10mee, the rate constant of reaction 
with the OH radical is considerably less than that for ethane.
    In each of the above petitions, the petitioners did not submit 
reactivity data with respect to other VOC loss reactions (such as 
reaction with O-atoms, nitrogen trioxide (NO3)-radicals, and ozone 
(O3), and for photolysis). However, there is ample evidence in the 
literature that halogenated paraffinic VOC, such as these compounds, do 
not participate in such reactions significantly.

II. Comments on the Proposal and EPA Responses

    Based on a review of the scientific material submitted by the 
petitioners, EPA published a notice in the Federal Register on May 1, 
1996 (61 FR 19231) which proposed to revise EPA's definition of VOC to 
add HFC 43-10mee and HCFC 225ca and cb to the list of compounds which 
are considered to be negligibly photochemically reactive. In the 
proposal, EPA summarized the technical basis for its preliminary 
decision to add these compounds to this list. That notice asked for 
comments from the public on the proposal and provided a 30-day comment 
period which ended May 31, 1996. In accordance with section 307(d) of 
the Act, today's action is accompanied by a response to the significant 
comments, criticisms, and new data submitted in written or oral 
presentations during the public comment period. During the comment 
period, written comments

[[Page 52849]]

were received from one company in response to EPA's May 1, 1996 
proposal. This comment letter supported the proposed action. A copy of 
that comment letter is located in the docket (A-95-37) for this action.
    In the proposal for today's action, EPA indicated that interested 
persons could request that EPA hold a public hearing on the proposed 
action (see section 307(d)(5)(ii) of the Act). During the comment 
period, no one requested a public hearing, therefore none was held.

III. Final Action

    Based on its review of the material in Docket No. A-95-37, the EPA 
hereby amends its definition of VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s) to exclude HCFC 
43-10mee, HCFC 225ca and HCFC 225cb as VOC for ozone SIP and ozone 
control purposes. The revised definition also applies in the Chicago 
ozone nonattainment area pursuant to the 40 CFR 52.741(a)(3) definition 
of volatile organic material or VOC. States are not obligated to 
exclude from control as a VOC those compounds that EPA has found to be 
negligibly reactive. However, States should not include these compounds 
in their VOC emissions inventories for determining reasonable further 
progress under the Act (e.g., section 182(b)(1)) and may not take 
credit for controlling these compounds in their ozone control strategy.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

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

B. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether a regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review 
and the requirements of this Executive Order. 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.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that this rule is not ``significant'' because none of the 
listed criteria apply to this action. Consequently, this action was not 
submitted to OMB for review under Executive Order 12866.

C. Unfunded Mandates Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Unfunded 
Mandates Act) (signed into law on March 22, 1995) requires that the 
Agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule 
that includes a Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by 
State, local, and tribal governments, in aggregate, or by the private 
sector of $100 million or more in any 1 year. Section 204 requires the 
Agency to establish a plan for obtaining input from and informing, 
educating, and advising any small governments that may be significantly 
or uniquely affected by the rule.
    Under section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, the Agency must 
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives 
before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact statement must 
be prepared. The Agency must select from those alternatives the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that 
achieves the objectives of the rule, unless the Agency explains why 
this alternative is not selected or the selection of this alternative 
is inconsistent with law.
    Because this rule is estimated to result in the expenditure by 
State, local and tribal governments or the private sector of less than 
$100 million in any 1 year, the Agency has not prepared a budgetary 
impact statement or specifically addressed the selection of the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative. Because 
small governments will not be significantly or uniquely affected by 
this rule, the Agency is not required to develop a plan with regard to 
small governments.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    For proposed and final rules, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 
1980 requires the Agency to perform a regulatory flexibility analysis, 
identifying the economic impact of the rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 
601 et. seq. In the alternative, if the Agency determines that the rule 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities, the Agency can make a certification to that effect. 
Because this rule relieves a restriction, it will not impose and any 
adverse economic impact on small entities. Therefore, pursuant to 5 
U.S.C. 605(b), I hereby certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
because it relaxes current regulatory requirements rather than imposing 
new ones.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not change any information collection requirements 
subject to OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.

F. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

    Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report 
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, 
the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the 
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's 
Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Intergovernmental relations, 
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 27, 1996.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    For reasons set forth in the preamble, part 51 of chapter I of 
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

[[Page 52850]]

PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF 
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

    1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7641q.

    2. Section 51.100 is amended by revising paragraph (s) introductory 
text and paragraph (s)(1) to read as follows:


51.100  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (s) Volatile organic compounds (VOC) means any compound of carbon, 
excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic 
carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, which participates in 
atmospheric photochemical reactions.
    (1) This includes any such organic compound other than the 
following, which have been determined to have negligible photochemical 
reactivity: methane; ethane; methylene chloride (dichloromethane); 
1,1,1-trichloroethane (methyl chloroform); 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-
trifluoroethane (CFC-113); trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11); 
dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12); chlorodifluoromethane (HCFC-22); 
trifluoromethane (HFC-23); 1,2-dichloro 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (CFC-
114); chloropentafluoroethane (CFC-115); 1,1,1-trifluoro 2,2-
dichloroethane (HCFC-123); 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a); 1,1-
dichloro 1-fluoroethane (HCFC-141b); 1-chloro 1,1-difluoroe- thane 
(HCFC-142b); 2-chloro-1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HCFC-124); 
pentafluoroethane (HFC-125); 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134); 
1,1,1-trifluoroethane (HFC-143a); 1,1-difluoroethane (HFC-152a); 
parachlorobenzotrifluoride (PCBTF); cyclic, branched, or linear 
completely methylated siloxanes; acetone; perchloroethylene 
(tetrachloroethylene); 3,3-dichloro-1,1,1,2,2-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-
225ca); 1,3-dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225cb); 
1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,5-decafluoropentane (HFC 43-10mee); and 
perfluorocarbon compounds which fall into these classes:
    (i) Cyclic, branched, or linear, completely fluorinated alkanes,
    (ii) Cyclic, branched, or linear, completely fluorinated ethers 
with no unsaturations,
    (iii) Cyclic, branched, or linear, completely fluorinated tertiary 
amines with no unsaturations, and
    (iv) Sulfur containing perfluorocarbons with no unsaturations and 
with sulfur bonds only to carbon and fluorine.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-25787 Filed 10-7-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P