[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 245 (Wednesday, December 22, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71666-71670]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-32858]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[TX-115-1-7434a; FRL-6504-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Control 
of Air Pollution From Volatile Organic Compounds, Miscellaneous 
Industrial Sources, Cutback Asphalt

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final action on revisions to the 
Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern Control 
of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), Miscellaneous 
Industrial Sources, specifically, asphaltic operations in the Nueces 
County and the ozone nonattainment areas. The EPA is approving these 
revisions to regulate emissions of VOCs in accordance with the 
requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on February 22, 2000, without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by January 21, 2000. If EPA 
receives such comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the 
Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take 
effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr. 
Thomas H. Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), at the EPA Region 
6 Office listed below. Copies of documents relevant to this action, 
including the Technical Support Document (TSD), are available for 
public inspection during normal business hours at the following 
locations. Anyone wanting to examine these documents should make an 
appointment with the appropriate office at least two working days in 
advance.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Office of Air Quality, 
12124 Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Alan Shar, P.E., Air Planning 
Section (6PD-L), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733, telephone (214) 665-6691.

Table of Contents

    1. What action is EPA taking?
    2. What is cutback asphalt?
    3. Why do we regulate VOCs?
    4. Where can I find EPA guidelines on cutback asphalt?
    5. What are the asphalt rule changes?
    6. What is a nonattainment area?
    7. What is a State Implementation Plan?
    8. What is the Federal approval process for a SIP?
    9. What does Federal approval of a SIP mean to me?
    10. What are advantages of adopting this rule?
    11. What test methods will Texas use to determine compliance 
with the VOC content requirements?
    12. What are the Subchapter F requirements for cutback asphalt?

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and 
``our'' means EPA.

[[Page 71667]]

1. What Action Is EPA Taking?

    On August 31, 1999, the Governor of Texas submitted the Subchapter 
F, ``Miscellaneous Industrial Sources,'' of Chapter 115, ``Control of 
Air Pollution From Volatile Organic Compounds,'' as a revision to the 
SIP. This rule making will specifically approve revisions to sections 
115.512 concerning Control Requirements, 115.513 concerning Alternate 
Control Requirements, 115.515 concerning Testing Requirements, and 
115.516 concerning Recordkeeping Requirements. Also, we are approving a 
new section 115.510 concerning definitions of ``cutback asphalt,'' 
``conventional cutback asphalt,'' ``exempt cutback asphalt,'' and 
``asphalt emulsion.'' In this document we are approving revisions to 
the Texas SIP concerning control of VOC emissions from asphaltic 
operations in Nueces County and ozone nonattainment areas. The County 
of Nueces is not classified as a nonattainment area for ozone. The 
ozone nonattainment areas include the Houston/Galveston (H/G), 
Beaumont/Port Arthur (B/PA), Dallas Fort Worth (DFW), and El Paso (EP). 
For more information on the SIP revision and EPA's evaluation, please 
refer to our TSD dated October 1999.
    In the ``Final Action'' section of this document we state that we 
are publishing this rule without prior proposal and EPA is planning to 
approve this action without further notice.

2. What Is Cutback Asphalt?

    If you liquify paving asphalt (asphaltic cement) with petroleum 
distillates, you will have cutback asphalt (liquified asphalt). Cutback 
asphalt contains a significant amount of light petroleum solvents such 
as kerosene, diesel, or naphtha. These solvents or diluents are added 
to the asphalt either at the refinery or the asphalt plant. As a 
result, cutback asphalt can be a significant source of VOCs.

3. Why Do We Regulate VOCs?

    Oxygen in the atmosphere reacts with VOCs and Oxides of Nitrogen to 
form ozone, a key component of urban smog. Inhaling even low levels of 
ozone can trigger a variety of health problems including chest pains, 
coughing, nausea, throat irritation, and congestion. It also can worsen 
bronchitis and asthma. Exposure to ozone can also reduce lung capacity 
in healthy adults.

4. Where Can I Find EPA Guidelines on Cutback Asphalt?

    You can find our guidelines on cutback asphalt in the document 
number EPA-450/2-77-037--``Control of Volatile Organic Compounds from 
Use of Cutback Asphalt.''

5. What Are the Asphalt Rule Changes?

    The intended purpose of this rule is to reduce VOC emissions. 
Specifically, this rule revision applies to sources located or 
operating in the Nueces county, Texas. The county of Nueces is 
classified as an attainment area for ozone. This rule will limit the 
VOC volume on cutback use in the Nueces county from 8 to 7 percent. 
This revision will make the volume limitation for cutback use in the 
Nueces county more consistent with the volume limitation for cutback 
use in the ozone nonattainment areas.
    This rule will replace the term ``emulsified asphalt'' with the 
term ``alternative asphalt'' for sources located or operating in both 
the DFW, EP, B/PA, and H/G ozone nonattainment areas and the Nueces 
county. See section 115.510.
    Control requirements in section 115.512 for the DFW, EP, B/PA, and 
H/G ozone nonattainment areas remain the same as the control 
requirements in the existing federally approved SIP for Texas. The only 
change to the control requirements in section 115.512 is lowering of 
the volume limitation for cutback use in the Nueces county.
    If you are in the Nueces county or any of the above-mentioned 
nonattainment areas, you should refer to the rule to determine if and 
how this rule will affect you.
    For detailed evaluation of the asphalt rule changes, please see 
pages 2 and 3 of our TSD dated October 1999.

6. What Is a Nonattainment Area?

    A nonattainment area is a geographic area in which the level of a 
criteria air pollutant is higher than the level allowed by Federal 
standards. A single geographic area may have acceptable levels of one 
criteria air pollutant but unacceptable levels of one or more other 
criteria air pollutants; thus, a geographic area can be attainment for 
one criteria pollutant and nonattainment for another criteria pollutant 
at the same time. It has been estimated that 60 percent of Americans 
live in nonattainment areas. The H/G, DFW, EP, and B/PA are 
nonattainment areas for ozone.

7. What Is a State Implementation Plan?

    Section 110 of the Act requires states to develop air pollution 
regulations and control strategies to ensure that State air quality 
meets the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) established by 
the EPA. The NAAQS are established under section 109 of the Act to 
protect public health, and they address six criteria pollutants. These 
criteria pollutants are: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, 
lead, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.
    Each State must submit these regulations and control strategies to 
us for approval and incorporation into the federally enforceable SIP. 
Each State has a SIP designed to protect air quality. These SIPs can be 
extensive, containing State regulations or other enforceable documents 
and supporting information such as emission inventories, monitoring 
networks, and modeling demonstrations.

8. What Is the Federal Approval Process for a SIP?

    In order for State regulations to be incorporated into the 
federally enforceable SIP, States must formally adopt the regulations 
and control strategies consistent with State and Federal requirements. 
This process includes a public notice, a public hearing, a public 
comment period, and a formal adoption by a state-authorized rulemaking 
body.
    Once a State rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the 
State may submit the adopted provisions to us and request that these 
provisions be included in the federally enforceable SIP. We must then 
decide on an appropriate Federal action, provide public notice on this 
action, and seek additional public comment regarding this action. If 
adverse comments are received, we must address them prior to a final 
action.
    All State regulations and supporting information approved by us 
under section 110 of the Act are incorporated into the federally 
approved SIP. Records of these SIP actions are maintained in the Code 
of Federal Regulations (CFR) at Title 40, part 52, entitled ``Approval 
and Promulgation of Implementation Plans.'' The actual State 
regulations which were approved are not reproduced in their entirety in 
the CFR but are ``incorporated by reference,'' which means that we have 
approved a given State regulation with a specific effective date.

9. What Does Federal Approval of a SIP Mean to Me?

    Enforcement of the State regulation before and after it is 
incorporated into federally approved SIP is primarily a State function. 
However, once the regulation is federally approved, we and the public 
may take enforcement action

[[Page 71668]]

against violators of these regulations if the State fails to do so.

10. What Are Advantages of Adopting This Rule?

    Adopting this rule will have the following advantages: (1) Reduces 
the VOC content of the asphalt, for Nueces county, from 8 percent of 
the total annual volume to 7 percent. The total annual volume 
percentage for the asphalt use is calculated over a two-year period, 
(2) makes the VOC content requirement for asphalt in the Nueces county 
more consistent with that of nonattainment areas, (3) allows use of 
alternative asphalt mixes with equal or less VOC emissions, and (4) 
offers more operational flexibility for a source to meet the market 
demands.

11. What Test Methods Will Texas Use To Determine Compliance With 
the VOC Content Requirements?

    According to section 115.515, Texas will apply the following test 
methods to determine compliance with this VOC rule: (1) American 
Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Method D 244, ``Standard 
Test Methods for Emulsified Asphalts, Sections 11 to 15, Residue and 
Oil Distillate by Distillation,'' as published in the 1997 edition of 
the Annual Book of ASTM Standards, for determining VOC content of 
asphalt emulsions; or (2) ASTM Test Method D 402, ``Standard Test 
Method for Distillation of Cut-Back Asphaltic Products,'' as published 
in the 1997 edition of the Annual Book of ASTM Standards, for 
determining the VOC content of cutback asphalt.

12. What Are the Subchapter F Requirements for Cutback Asphalt?

    The following table contains a summary of the requirements in 
Subchapter F for the H/G, the B/PA, the DFW, and the EP areas and the 
Nueces county concerning VOC contents in cutback asphalt and asphalt 
emulsion.

  Table 1.--Asphaltic VOC Content Requirements and Their Corresponding
                             Areas in Texas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Location                 Requirement           Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
H/G, B/PA, DFW, EP areas and  VOC content 7         For paving roadways,
 Nueces county.                percent or less of    driveways, or
                               total volume,         parking lots.
                               averaged over 2-
                               year period.
H/G, B/PA, DFW, EP areas....  No cutback asphalt..  From April 16 to
                                                     September 15 of any
                                                     year
H/G, B/PA, DFW, EP areas and  Asphalt emulsion 0.5  By weight percent.
 Nueces county.                percent for seal
                               coats.
H/G, B/PA, DFW, EP areas and  3.0 percent for chip  By weight percent
 Nueces county.                seals when dusty or   for asphaltic
                               dirty aggregate       emulsion.
                               used.
H/G, B/PA, DFW, EP areas and  8.0 percent for       By weight percent
 Nueces county.                mixing with open      for asphaltic
                               graded aggregate      emulsion.
                               containing less
                               than 1 percent of
                               dust or clay-like
                               materials.
H/G, B/PA, DFW, EP areas and  12.0 percent for      by weight percent
 Nueces county.                mixing with dense     for asphaltic
                               graded aggregate      emulsion.
                               when used to
                               produce a mix
                               designed to have 10
                               percent or less
                               voids when fully
                               compacted.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

When more than one asphaltic VOC content requirement from the above 
table applies to an asphaltic emulsion, one must use the most stringent 
requirement. See section 115.512(3).

Final Action

    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because we 
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse 
comments. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal 
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will 
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments 
are received. This rule will be effective on February 22, 2000, without 
further notice unless we receive adverse comment by January 21, 2000. 
If EPA receives adverse comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal 
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not 
take effect. We will address all public comments in a subsequent final 
rule based on the proposed rule. We will not institute a second comment 
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so 
at this time.

Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from E.O. 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review.''

B. Executive Order 13132

    Executive 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 10, 
1999) revokes and replaces E.O. 12612, ``Federalism,'' and E.O. 12875, 
``Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership.'' Executive Order 13132 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by State and local officials in the development of 
regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies 
that have federalism implications'' is defined in the E.O. to include 
regulations that 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.'' Under E.O. 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that 
has federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance 
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA consults with 
State and local officials early in the process of developing the 
proposed regulation. The EPA also may not issue a regulation that has 
federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the Agency 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    This final rule will 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 E.O. 13132. Thus, the 
requirements of section 6 of the E.O. do not apply to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 
1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically 
significant'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an

[[Page 71669]]

environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may 
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action 
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health 
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    The EPA interprets E.O. 13045 as applying only to those regulatory 
actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that the 
analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the potential to 
influence the regulation. This final rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 
because it approves a State program.

D. Executive Order 13084

    Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those 
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, E.O. 13084 requires EPA to 
provide to the OMB, in a separately identified section of the preamble 
to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation 
with representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the 
nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue 
the regulation. In addition, E.O. 13084 requires EPA to develop an 
effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
    Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve 
or impose any requirements that affect Indian tribes. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., generally 
requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 
rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the 
agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities 
include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small 
governmental jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals 
under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Act do not create any 
new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is 
already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not 
create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the 
Act, preparation of a flexibility analysis would constitute Federal 
inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The Act 
forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. See 
Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 
7410(a)(2).

F. Unfunded Mandates

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 
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 annual costs to State, 
local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 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 informing and advising any small 
governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    The EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does 
not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs 
of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments 
in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action 
approves pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and 
imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, 
local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from 
this action.

G. 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. The EPA will submit 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 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). This rule will be effective February 22, 2000.

H. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by February 22, 2000. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this rule 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 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, Asphalt, 
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, and Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: November 19, 1999.
Jerry Clifford,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart SS--Texas

    2. Section 52.2270 is amended under Chapter 115, Subchapter F, by 
removing the entry for section 115.512 to 115.519 and inserting in its 
place individual entries for section 115.510 through section 115.519 
reading as follows:


Sec. 52.2270  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

[[Page 71670]]



                                    EPA Approved Regulations in the Texas SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       State submittal/
         State citation              Title/subject       approval date     EPA approval date      Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Chapter 115 (Regulation 5)--Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Subchapter F  Miscellaneous Industrial Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Cutback Asphalt
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 115.510.................  Definitions.......  August 18, 1999/    December 22, 1999   ..................
                                                       August 31, 1999.    and 64 FR 71670.
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
Section 115.512.................  Control             August 18, 1999/    December 22, 1999   ..................
                                   Requirements.       August 31, 1999.    and Federal
                                                                           Register cite.
Section 115.513.................  Alternative         August 18, 1999/    December 22, 1999   ..................
                                   Control             August 31, 1999.    and 64 FR 71670.
                                   Requirements.
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
Section 115.515.................  Testing             August 18, 1999/    December 22, 1999   ..................
                                   Requirements.       August 31, 1999.    and 64 FR 71670.
Section 115.516.................  Recordkeeping       August 18, 1999/    December 22, 1999   ..................
                                   Requirements.       August 31, 1999.    and 64 FR 71670.
Section 115.517.................  Exemptions........  05/08/92..........  03/07/95 60 FR      Ref
                                                                           12438.              52.2299(c)(88).
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
Section 115.519.................  Counties and        05/08/92..........  03/07/95 60 FR      Ref
                                   Compliance                              12438.              52.2299(c)(88).
                                   Schedules.
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 99-32858 Filed 12-21-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U