[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 68 (Thursday, April 9, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17331-17333]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-9247]



[[Page 17331]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 51

[FRL-5992-4]
RIN 2060-AH27


Air Quality: Revision to Definition of Volatile Organic 
Compounds--Exclusion of Methyl Acetate

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 any Federal 
implementation plan (FIP) for an ozone nonattainment area. This 
revision adds methyl acetate to the list of compounds excluded from the 
definition of VOC on the basis that this compound has negligible 
contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. This compound has 
potential for use as a solvent in paints, inks and adhesives.

DATES: This rule is effective May 11, 1998.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a public docket for this action, A-
97-32, 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 and States which have programs to control VOC emissions.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Examples of regulated   
                 Category                             entities          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..................................  Industries that manufacture 
                                             and use paints, inks and   
                                             adhesives.                 
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 regulated by this 
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware 
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities 
not listed in the table could also be regulated. If you have questions 
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, 
consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section.

I. Background

    On July 30, 1996, Eastman Chemical Company submitted a petition to 
the EPA which requested that methyl acetate 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). The petitioner based the request 
on a comparison of the reactivity of methyl acetate to that of ethane 
which has been listed since 1977 as having negligible reactivity. In a 
number of cases in the past, EPA has accepted compounds with lower 
reactivity than ethane as negligibly reactive (see, e.g., 61 FR 4588 
(February 7, 1996), 61 FR 52848 (October 8, 1996), and 62 FR 44900 
(August 25, 1997)).
    As indicated in the proposal, a study was performed comparing the 
reactivity of methyl acetate to ethane on a ``per gram'' basis. The EPA 
also calculated the results of this study on a ``per mole'' 
basis.1 Under both sets of tests, the reactivity of methyl 
acetate was comparable to or less than that for ethane. Based on these 
results, EPA concluded that existing scientific evidence does not 
support a methyl acetate reactivity higher than that of ethane. 
Therefore, EPA proposed on August 25, 1997 (62 FR 44926) to add methyl 
acetate to the list of negligibly reactive compounds in EPA's 
definition of VOC found in 40 CFR 51.100(s). The proposal provided for 
a 30-day public comment period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\  The EPA has evaluated most VOC exemption considerations in 
the past using kOH values expressed in units of 
cm3 molecule-1 sec-1 which is 
consistent with a per mole basis. However, in one recent case, EPA 
examined a reactivity petition solely on a weight or ``per gram'' 
basis (60 FR 31633 (June 16, 1995) (exempting acetone from the 
definition of VOC)). The use of a reactivity per mole basis is a 
more strict basis for comparison to the reactivity of ethane for 
compounds whose molecular weight is greater than ethane. Given the 
relatively low molecular weight of ethane, use of the per gram basis 
tends to result in more compounds falling into the ``negligibly 
reactive'' class. Because methyl acetate is less reactive than 
ethane based on a per mole basis, EPA is not addressing today 
whether it should continue to exempt compounds based on a per gram 
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Comments on the Proposal and EPA Response

    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). There were no requests 
for a public hearing.
    The EPA received written comments on the proposal from four 
organizations. The comments were from the petitioner, one industry 
trade association, and two manufacturing companies. Two commenters 
supported the action, one opposed the action, and one commenter raised 
the issue of banked credits for previous reductions in methyl acetate. 
Copies of these comments have been added to the docket (A-97-32) for 
this action. Substantial comments and EPA's responses are listed below.
    Comment: One commenter found the proposed exclusion troubling as 
they understood that EPA is reconsidering the method for determining 
photochemical reactivity of VOC and the baseline used to determine 
negligible reactivity.
    Response: The EPA is beginning a process of evaluating its 
reactivity policy in view of scientific information which has been 
gained since 1977 when the VOC policy was first published. This 
evaluation process, which will involve model development, modeling 
studies and collection of new information, is expected to take several 
years. However, the EPA has decided to proceed with approving the 
methyl acetate petition now even though the Agency is anticipating a 
review of its reactivity policy. Methyl acetate shows reactivity 
comparable to ethane on a per mole basis. There is currently no valid 
scientific support for not exempting this compound at this time, and 
the commenter has not provided the Agency with an adequate scientific 
basis for not exempting methyl acetate.
    Comment: One commenter stated that fundamental organic 
photochemistry and oxidation chemistry imply that methyl acetate will 
contribute to the photochemical generation of ozone in the troposphere. 
Specifically, the photolysis of methyl acetate caused by the light 
absorption at wavelengths up to about 230 nanometers (nm) would result 
in the production of radicals and should be an efficient photochemical 
process. The commenter further states that methyl acetate may absorb 
energy and transfer this energy to other molecules to form radicals.
    Response: The commenter's claim that methyl acetate participates in 
atmospheric photochemical reactions by virtue of light absorption at 
wavelengths up to about 230 nm and photolysis into free radicals is 
contrary to current understanding of photolytic processes occurring in 
the atmosphere. Specifically, the photolytic activity

[[Page 17332]]

attributed by the commenter to methyl acetate can occur outside but not 
inside the troposphere. It is a well known fact that, inside the 
troposphere, photolysis of chemical compounds is restricted to the 
wavelength region above 290 nm. Furthermore, the study of methyl 
acetate by Dr. William P.L. Carter of the University of California at 
Riverside, which was submitted with the petition, did not result in 
evidence of any effects due to photolysis. Finally, Dr. Carter's 
results and conclusion were supported by smog chamber data obtained by 
a competent experimentalist, and were agreed with by a reactivity 
expert peer reviewer. Such experimental and peer review support of a 
reactivity measurement are accepted by the reactivity scientific 
community as being reliable, and, therefore, justify EPA's decision to 
accept the measurement result.
    Comment: A commenter stated that ethane is unreactive in radical 
reactions, that ethane is not usually used in chemical feedstocks, and 
that methyl acetate is easily destroyed using catalytic oxidation, 
while ethane is not.
    Response: The evidence for methyl acetate's low reactivity reported 
in Dr. Carter's study indicates that the items in this comment are not 
significant when comparing the photochemical reactivity of methyl 
acetate to that of ethane.
    Comment: One commenter expressed concern that the exclusion of 
methyl acetate as a VOC will have a deleterious effect on netting, 
offsetting and trading of existing emissions reduction ``credits'' at 
their facilities that have already made substantial reductions in 
methyl acetate emissions over the past few years. At the time they made 
the reductions, they did so with the understanding that they could be 
applied to future expansions at their facilities or could be used for 
trading and/or offsetting. They are concerned that EPA's proposal might 
be interpreted as obviating these emissions credits.
    Response: This is an important concern, but it should not determine 
whether a compound, such as methyl acetate, is recognized as being 
negligibly reactive. This decision should rest only on the scientific 
evidence of the photochemical reactivity of the compound. How to treat 
banked credits of a compound that has subsequently been determined to 
be negligibly reactive and not to be counted toward VOC reductions in 
the future is an issue that transcends this methyl acetate action 
alone. The EPA's current policy is to allow States to decide how they 
will handle situations within their jurisdictions in a case-by-case 
manner.

III. Final Action

    Today's action is based on EPA's review of the material in Docket 
No. A-97-32. The EPA hereby amends its definition of VOC at 40 CFR 
51.100(s) to exclude methyl acetate as a VOC for ozone SIP and ozone 
control for purposes of attaining the ozone national ambient air 
quality standard. The revised definition also applies for purposes of 
any Federal implementation plan for ozone nonattainment areas (e.g., 40 
CFR 52.741(a)(3)). 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 should not take credit for 
controlling these compounds in their ozone control strategy. EPA, 
however, urges States to continue to inventory the emissions of methyl 
acetate for use in photochemical modeling to assure that such emissions 
are not having a significant effect on ambient ozone levels.

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: (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) (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

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. 
L. 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
1 year. Before promulgation of an EPA rule for which a written 
statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to 
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives 
and adopt the least costly, most cost effective, or least burdensome 
alternative that achieves the objective of the rule, unless EPA 
publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that alternative 
was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements 
that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments including 
tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the 
UMRA a small government plan which informs, educates and advises small 
governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements. Finally, 
section 204 provides that for any proposed or final rule that imposes a 
mandate on a State, local or tribal government of $100 million or more 
annually, the Agency must provide an opportunity for such governmental 
entities to provide input in development of the rule.
    Since today's rulemaking is deregulatory in nature and does not 
impose any mandate on governmental entities or the private sector, EPA 
has determined that sections 202, 203, 204 and 205 of the UMRA do not 
apply to this action.

[[Page 17333]]

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 requires the 
identification of potentially adverse economic impacts of Federal 
regulations upon small business entities. The Act specifically requires 
the completion of an RFA analysis in those instances where the 
regulation would impose a substantial economic impact on a significant 
number of small entities. The RFA analysis is for the purpose of 
determining the economic impact imposed by the terms of the regulation 
being adopted. Because this rule is deregulatory in nature, no economic 
impacts are imposed by its terms. Therefore, because this rulemaking 
imposes no adverse economic impacts within the meaning of the RFA, an 
analysis has not been conducted. Pursuant to the provision of 5 U.S.C. 
605(b), I hereby certify that this rule will not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities because no additional 
costs will be incurred.

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: April 1, 1998.
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:

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 republishing (s) introductory text 
and revising paragraph (s)(1) to read as follows:


Sec. 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-difluoroethane (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); difluoromethane (HFC-32); ethylfluoride (HFC-161); 
1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoropropane (HFC-236fa); 1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane 
(HFC-245ca); 1,1,2,3,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC-245ea); 1,1,1,2,3-
pentafluoropropane (HFC-245eb); 1,1,1,3,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC-
245fa); 1,1,1,2,3,3-hexafluoropropane (HFC-236ea); 1,1,1,3,3-
pentafluorobutane (HFC-365mfc); chlorofluoromethane (HCFC-31); 1 
chloro-1-fluoroethane (HCFC-151a); 1,2-dichloro-1,1,2-trifluoroethane 
(HCFC-123a); 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4-nonafluoro-4-methoxy-butane 
(C4F9OCH3); 2-(difluoromethoxymethyl)-
1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane 
((CF3)2CFCF2OCH3); 1-
ethoxy-1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4-nonafluorobutane 
(C4F9OC2H5); 2-
(ethoxydifluoromethyl)-1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane 
((CF3)2CFCF2OC2H5
); methyl acetate 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. 98-9247 Filed 4-8-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P