[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 66 (Thursday, April 7, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17640-17643]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-6944]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[R06-OAR-2004-TX-0014; FRL-7896-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Texas; Rules for the Control of Highly Reactive Volatile Organic 
Compounds in the Houston/Galveston (HGA) Ozone Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are proposing to approve rules adopted by the Texas 
Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for the control of highly 
reactive Volatile Organic Compounds (HRVOCs) in the Houston/Galveston 
ozone nonattainment area. These rules for the control of HRVOCs 
supplement Texas' existing rules for controlling volatile organic 
compounds (VOC) by providing more extensive requirements for certain 
equipment in HRVOC service. These additional controls of HRVOC 
emissions will help to attain and maintain the national ambient air 
quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone in HGA. Inhaling even low levels of 
ozone can trigger a variety of health problems including chest pains, 
coughing, nausea, throat irritation, and congestion. It can also worsen 
bronchitis, asthma and reduce lung capacity.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 9, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in 
EDocket (RME) ID No. R06-OAR-2004-TX-0014, by one of the following 
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ Regional 
Material in EDocket (RME), EPA's electronic public docket and comment 
system, is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Once in the 
system, select ``quick search,'' then key in the appropriate RME Docket 
identification number. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting 
comments.
     U.S. EPA Region 6 ``Contact Us'' Web site: http://epa.gov/region6/r6coment.htm. Please click on ``6PD'' (Multimedia) and select 
``Air'' before submitting comments.
     E-mail: Mr. Thomas Diggs at [email protected]. Please 
also cc the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section below.
     Fax: Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), at fax number 214-665-7263.
     Mail: Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, 
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
     Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air 
Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross 
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Such deliveries are 
accepted only between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. weekdays except 
for legal holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries 
of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Regional Material in EDocket 
(RME) ID No. R06-OAR-2004-TX-0014. EPA's policy is that all comments 
received will be included in the public file 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

[[Page 17641]]

the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit 
information through Regional Material in EDocket (RME), 
regulations.gov, or e-mail if you believe that it is CBI or otherwise 
protected from disclosure. The EPA RME website and the Federal 
regulations.gov 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 file 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. Guidance on preparing comments is given in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document under the General 
Information heading.
    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 the official file which is 
available at the Air Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection 
Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. The file 
will be made available by appointment for public inspection in the 
Region 6 FOIA Review Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. 
weekdays except for legal holidays. Contact the person listed in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph below or Mr. Bill Deese at 
(214) 665-7253 to make an appointment. If possible, please make the 
appointment at least two working days in advance of your visit. There 
will be a 15 cent per page fee for making photocopies of documents. On 
the day of the visit, please check in at the EPA Region 6 reception 
area at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas.
    The State submittal is also available for public inspection at the 
State Air Agency listed below during official business hours by 
appointment:
    Texas Commission on Environmental Quailty, Office of Air Quality, 
12124 Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Guy R. Donaldson, Air Planning Section 
(6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-7242; fax 
number 214-665-7263; e-mail address [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

What Action Are We Taking?

    We are proposing to approve portions of revisions to the SIP 
submitted by the State of Texas in letters dated January 23, 2003, 
November 7, 2003, March 26, 2004, and December 17, 2004. We are 
approving the portions of these revisions that pertain to the control 
of HRVOCs. These rules, which are codified at 30 TAC Chapter 115, 
Subchapter H, apply to facilities in the Houston/Galveston ozone 
nonattainment area. We are also proposing to approve the associated 
revisions to the definitions section of 30 Texas Administrative Code 
(TAC) 115.10. We are not proposing any action, at this time, regarding 
the other revisions that were submitted in these letters. We are 
approving these additional rules pursuant to sections 110, 116 and part 
D of the Federal Clean Air Act (the Act).

What General Requirements Do the Rules Establish?

    The rules establish improved monitoring requirements for flares, 
cooling towers, process vents and pressure relief valves. For sources 
in Harris county, the source monitoring provides the information 
necessary for sources to demonstrate compliance with annual and short 
term caps on emissions of HRVOCs from cooling tower, process vents, 
pressure relief devices and flares. The annual cap for each facility 
will be established based on processes outlined in 30 TAC chapter 101. 
The short term cap is 1200 lbs/hr.
    Because of the difficulty in their quantification, fugitive 
emissions are not included in the long and short term cap. Instead, the 
current work practice rules have been made more comprehensive and more 
stringent to achieve additional reduction in HRVOCs.

Why Are We Approving These Rules?

    The addition of these rules for the control of HRVOCs will 
supplement Texas' existing rules controlling volatile organic compounds 
(VOC) and provide improvements to the Texas SIP's VOC Reasonably 
Available Control Technology (RACT) rules. These additional controls of 
HRVOC emissions will help to attain and maintain the national ambient 
air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone in HGA. Today's proposal, when 
finally approved, will make the revised regulations Federally 
enforceable.

What Are Highly Reactive VOCs?

    First, Volatile Organic Compounds are a class of compounds that 
react in the atmosphere with oxides of nitrogen and oxygen in the 
presence of sunlight to form ozone. HRVOC is a term used to refer to 
chemicals that because of their very high propensity to form ozone have 
been targeted for additional control beyond the level of control that 
has been established for controlling VOCs in general. These HRVOCs have 
been found to contribute a disproportionate amount to the formation of 
ozone in the HGA. Further, ambient measurements from both airplanes and 
ground based monitors have shown that current emissions estimates for 
HRVOCs are substantially underestimated. Therefore, there is a need to 
improve the emissions estimates of HRVOCs through better source 
monitoring.
    HRVOCs have been defined in chapter 115.10 as:
    In Harris County, one or more of the following volatile organic 
compounds (VOCs): 1,3-butadiene; all isomers of butene (e.g., isobutene 
(2-methylpropene or isobutylene), alpha-butylene (ethylethylene), and 
beta-butylene (dimethylethylene, including both cis- and trans-
isomers)); ethylene; and propylene.
    In Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Liberty, Montgomery 
and Waller Counties, one or more of the following VOCs: ethylene and 
propylene.

What Processes Will Be Impacted by These Rules?

    TCEQ has targeted the following emission sources with these rules: 
Flares, process vents, cooling tower heat exchange systems and fugitive 
emissions. These sources are believed to generate the greatest amount 
of HRVOC emissions. Also, flares, cooling towers and fugitive emissions 
are believed to

[[Page 17642]]

suffer the greatest error in reported emissions. The improved source 
monitoring requirements included in the rules will greatly enhance the 
accuracy of the source emissions estimates.

What Are the Requirements for Flares?

    Flares are used in a wide variety of applications both for the 
control of continuous vent emissions and for the control of 
intermittent emissions during start up, shutdowns and malfunctions. The 
ability of flares to safely handle a wide range of flow rates and 
chemicals makes them a popular choice for vent gas disposal. Because 
flares are not enclosed combustion devices, it is extremely difficult 
to measure the exhaust emissions from flares. EPA has established 
requirements for the proper operation of flares for its New Source 
Performance Standards at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 60.18. 
Texas has adopted, by reference, these performance requirements for 
flares in HRVOC service. The requirements establish limits for the 
minimum heating value for the inlet gas to a flare and for maximum gas 
velocity at the flare tip.
    In addition, the Texas rules establish flow and composition 
monitoring requirements for flares that facilities will use to show 
compliance with the flare operation requirements of 40 CFR 60.18. Also, 
using the flow data and an assumed destruction efficiency for a 
properly operated flare, a company can estimate the HRVOC emission rate 
to be used for determining compliance with the short and long term 
caps. Flares in compliance with 40 CFR 60.18 are allowed to assume a 
98% destruction efficiency for most VOCs and a 99% destruction 
efficiency for ethylene and propylene. Flares not operated in 
compliance with 40 CFR 60.18 are required to assume a destruction 
efficiency of 93%. Texas has based these assumed destruction 
efficiencies on EPA studies of flare destruction efficiencies.
    For flares that are used as a continuous control device, the 
monitoring requirements call for continuous flow and hydrocarbon 
monitoring of the streams being sent to the flare. For flares that are 
used more intermittently such as flares for control of loading 
operations, emergency flares or flares used only for control during 
start up/shutdown and maintenance, the Texas rules allow various 
alternative practices that are described in the rule. We have reviewed 
the monitoring requirements for flares and believe they will be 
adequate to establish compliance with the requirements of 40 CFR 60.18, 
the annual cap and the short term cap. For a more complete description 
of the requirements, see the technical support document for this action 
available in the RME.

What Are the Monitoring Requirements for Cooling Towers?

    Facilities are required to continuously monitor the flow and 
concentration of VOCs to cooling towers. The samples must be collected 
before the water comes in contact with the atmosphere and must be taken 
in a location that insures the rate all of the HRVOCs going into the 
cooling tower is measured. Streams containing only non-highly reactive 
VOCs are not required to be sampled. If the concentration in the stream 
exceeds 50ppb total VOCs, the company is required to collect an 
additional sample to determine speciated and total HRVOC. These 
additional samples must be taken each day until the concentration of 
strippable VOC is reduced below 50 ppb. Cooling towers with capacities 
less than 8000 gallons/minute are required to monitor flow 
continuously, but only have to take samples at least twice per week 
with an interval of at least 48 hours between samples.
    EPA has reviewed the monitoring requirements for cooling tower heat 
exchange systems and believes them sufficient to demonstrate compliance 
with the annual and short term cap. For a more complete description of 
the cooling tower requirements, see the technical support document for 
this action available in the RME.

What Are the Monitoring Requirements for Process Vents?

    For process vents, facilities are required to establish a maximum 
potential emission rate using a performance test. During the 
performance test, a process parameter or parameters is to be identified 
that is affected by the emission rate from the process vent. The 
performance test must establish an operational limit for the process 
parameter(s). For every hour the process parameter(s) remains within it 
its operational limit, a facility would report the maximum potential 
emission rate for determining compliance with the annual and short term 
cap. Instead of assuming the maximum potential emission rate, sources 
have the option of installing continuous emission monitors and flow 
monitors to directly determine emissions. During time periods when the 
process parameter is outside the operational limit, companies must use 
engineering estimates and process information to determine emissions 
for compliance with the annual and short term caps. Texas has made 
clear that time periods outside the operational limits are violations 
of the rule. We have reviewed the monitoring requirements for vents and 
believe that they will provide sufficient information to determine 
compliance with the annual and short term caps. For a more complete 
description of the process vent requirements, see the technical support 
document for this action available in the RME.

What Is the Short Term Cap?

    As mentioned previously, these rules establish a limit of 1200 lbs/
hr of HRVOCs in Harris County. This limit has been established because 
recent modeling information indicates that releases of this magnitude 
in the right place at the right time can impact peak ozone levels 1-2 
parts per billion.

What Are the Monitoring Requirements for Fugitive Emissions?

    TCEQ, for a number of years, has implemented a leak detection and 
repair program as part of its program to control volatile organic 
compounds. When TCEQ determined that additional reductions of HRVOCs 
were needed, they established a number of new requirements for their 
leak detection and repair. These include among other things:
     Inclusion of connectors in the program.
     Inclusion of other non-traditional potential leak sources 
such as heat exchanger heads and man way covers.
     Elimination of allowances for skipping leak detection 
periods for valves.
     Requirement for third party audits to help insure that 
effective leak survey and repairs are conducted.
     Requirement that ``extra-ordinary'' efforts be used to 
repair valves before putting them on the delay of repair list.
    EPA has reviewed the additional requirements for control of HRVOC 
fugitive emissions and determined these measures will result in 
additional emission reductions of HRVOCs.
    Final Action: EPA is proposing to approve for inclusion in the 
federally enforceable State Implementation Plan the rules contained in 
30 TAC Chapter 115, Subchapter H for the control of HRVOCs, first 
submitted in a letter dated January 23, 2003 and revised in letters 
dated November 7, 2003, March 26, 2004 and December 17, 2004. We are 
also approving revisions to the definition section in the State Rules 
30 TAC 115.10 as the definitions are necessary for the implementation 
of the rules. We are proposing to approve these rules because they 
strengthen the

[[Page 17643]]

State Implementation Plan by improving monitoring requirements and 
reducing emissions of HRVOCs in the Houston area. EPA is proposing to 
approve these revisions to the HGA SIP under part D of the Act because 
they supplement and improve the existing SIP-approved VOC rules and 
they are consistent with the RACT requirements and guidance for ozone 
nonattainment areas. Reductions achieved by these rules will contribute 
to attainment of the ozone standard.

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed 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 
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this proposed 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 proposes to approve 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 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This proposed 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). This action 
merely proposes to approve 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 
proposed 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 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 proposed 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, Hydrocarbons, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 
oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: March 24, 2005.
Lawrence Starfield,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 05-6944 Filed 4-6-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P