[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 26 (Wednesday, February 7, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4587-4591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-2495]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 4588]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 51
[FRL-5416-7]
Air Quality; Revision to Definition of Volatile Organic
Compounds--Exclusion of Perchloroethylene
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 perchloroethylene (perc), also known as
tetrachloroethylene, to the list of compounds excluded from the
definition of VOC on the basis that it has negligible photochemical
reactivity. Perc is a solvent commonly used in dry cleaning, maskant
operations, and degreasing operations. This rule results in more
accurate assessment of ozone formation potential and will assist States
in avoiding exceedances for the ozone health standard. The rule does
this by causing control efforts to focus on compounds which are actual
ozone precursors, rather than giving credit for control of a compound
which has negligible photochemical reactivity.
Perc will continue to be regulated as a hazardous air pollutant
under section 112 of the Clean Air Act. EPA has already issued
regulations limiting emissions of perc from dry cleaning and
halogenated solvent cleaning and as a feedstock in the organic chemical
manufacturing industry.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective March 8, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Pursuant to section 307(d)(1) (B), (J), and (U) of the Act,
42 U.S.C. section 7607(d)(1) (B), (J), and (U), this action is subject
to the procedural requirements of section 307(d). Therefore, EPA has
established a public docket for this action, A-92-09, which is
available for public inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 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: Mr. 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:
I. Background
On July 8, 1977, EPA published a recommended policy on control of
VOC (42 FR 3513) which discussed the photochemical reactivity of
organic compounds and their role in the formation of tropospheric
ozone. This policy statement identified several compounds that are
considered to be of negligible photochemical reactivity and which are
not required to be controlled in order to prevent the formation of
tropospheric ozone. The policy was subsequently amended on June 4, 1979
(44 FR 32042), May 16, 1980 (45 FR 32424), July 22, 1980 (45 FR 48941),
January 18, 1989 (54 FR 1988), and March 18, 1991 (56 FR 11418) to add
compounds to those already recognized by EPA as having negligible
photochemical reactivity.
On October 24, 1983, EPA proposed to add perc to the list of
negligibly-reactive compounds which would be exempt from regulation
under SIP's to attain the NAAQS for ozone. This proposal was based upon
a laboratory testing program that investigated perc's role in the
tropospheric ozone problem. The study concluded that perc contributes
less to the ambient ozone problem than equal concentrations of ethane
(one of the negligibly-reactive organic compounds previously exempted
from ozone SIP controls). The details of this investigation are
contained in the EPA report, ``Photochemical Reactivity of
Perchloroethylene,'' EPA-600/3-83-001, January 1983. A copy has been
placed in the docket (A-92-09) for today's action.
In the October 24, 1983 proposal, comments were solicited on the
proposed action. The EPA received 20 comments on the proposal. None of
the commenters questioned the technical judgment that perc is
negligibly reactive and has an insignificant impact on ozone formation.
However, there was quite a divergence of opinion as to the action EPA
should take in response to the new findings on the reactivity of perc,
many of which related to concerns about perc as a toxic air pollutant.
Because of these concerns, EPA determined at that time to take no final
action on the proposal.
Subsequently, the Act as amended listed perc as a hazardous air
pollutant (HAP) under section 112(b). Pursuant to section 112(d), EPA
has issued national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
(NESHAP) for two major perc source categories: perc dry cleaning,
September 22, 1993 (58 FR 49354), and halogenated solvent cleaning,
December 2, 1994 (59 FR 61801). Additional releases which may result
from perc production or use as a feedstock are addressed by the NESHAP
for the hazardous organics (chemicals) industry promulgated April 22,
1994 (59 FR 19402). These two applications, together with the use of
perc as feedstock in chemical production, account for 90% of current
perc production. Pursuant to section 112(e) of the amended Act, the EPA
will be issuing hazardous pollutant emissions standards for various
other categories including several other perc sources through November
15, 2000. On January 28, 1992, the Halogenated Solvents Industry
Alliance (HSIA) petitioned EPA to exempt perc from regulation as an
ozone precursor under the Act. This request was based on HSIA's
contention that perc is negligibly photochemically reactive and does
not contribute to tropospheric ozone formation. The HSIA identified, as
the technical basis for its contention that perc is negligibly
reactive, the October 24, 1983 proposal (48 FR 49097) by EPA to amend
its ``Recommended Policy on Control of Organic Compounds'' to exempt
perc from regulation on the basis of its negligible photochemical
reactivity.
On February 3, 1992 (57 FR 3941), pursuant to a proposed rule
issued March 18, 1991 (56 FR 11418), EPA promulgated a general
definition of VOC (40 CFR 51.100(s)) as part of EPA's regulations
governing the development of SIP's. That action also incorporated the
VOC definition into various SIP-related rules, including EPA's new
source review rules and the FIP rules for the Chicago area. This 1992
regulatory definition superseded the July 8, 1977 policy statement as
well as the subsequent revisions to that policy. In accordance with the
policy on which it was based, the regulatory definition excludes a
number of organic compounds from the definition of VOC on the basis
that they are negligibly photochemically reactive and therefore
contribute negligibly to tropospheric ozone formation. This list of
negligibly-reactive compounds contained the compounds originally
identified in the 1977 policy statement plus other compounds that have
been recognized by EPA subsequent to the 1977 policy statement as
having negligible photochemical reactivity. Further, EPA has revised
this definition twice through rulemaking (59 FR 50693 and 60 FR
[[Page 4589]]
31633). Perc was not included in the list of negligibly photochemically
reactive compounds in this definition.
On October 26, 1992, EPA proposed to revise its definition of VOC
(40 CFR 51.100(s)) by adding perc to the list of compounds that are
regarded as negligibly photochemically reactive. Final action based on
that October 26, 1992 proposal is being taken today.
II. Comments on Proposal and EPA Responses
In accordance with section 307(d) of the Act, as amended in 1990,
today's action is accompanied by a response to each of the significant
comments, criticisms, and new data submitted in written or oral
presentations during the comment period. Eight commenters (a labor
union, an environmental organization, a municipal government, two trade
associations, and three manufacturing companies) submitted written
comments in response to EPA's October 26, 1992 proposal. Most of the
comments support the proposed action. Copies of these comments are
located in the docket (A-92-09) for this action. Significant comments
and EPA's responses are summarized below. Finally, 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). The EPA did not receive any such requests
for a public hearing and, therefore, did not hold one.
Comment: Two commenters suggested that the proposal should be
delayed or withdrawn until it has been established that the public
health is adequately protected by controls on emissions of perc from
all sources. This concern is brought about, in part, by the fact that
perc is listed as a HAP in section 112 of the Act. These commenters
refer to the toxicity hazard of the compound and to the possibility
that it may be a human carcinogen. One of these commenters stated that
there are sources of perc, other than dry cleaning, for which EPA has
not yet proposed NESHAP which would define the maximum available
control technology level of control for the source. Such sources
include degreasing, use in paints and architectural coatings,
adhesives, use for maskants in the aerospace industry, and
miscellaneous uses in the manufacture of aerosol spray paints and
cleaners, pharmaceuticals, textiles, printing inks, and dielectric
fluids for power transformers. These sources will not be controlled as
VOC sources if perc is excluded from the definition of VOC.(Note--The
NESHAP for halogenated solvent cleaning had not yet been promulgated
when this comment was submitted.)
Response: The EPA's purpose in promulgation of the general
definition of VOC (40 CFR 51.100(s)) is for use in the preparation of
SIP's designed to achieve and maintain the NAAQS for ozone. That
definition of VOC lists several compounds which are considered to have
negligible photochemical reactivity and, therefore, are exempt from the
VOC definition. Based on the criteria used to judge the reactivity of
compounds for this list, EPA has determined that perc should be added
to the list of compounds as not contributing substantially to the
formation of ground level ozone. Further, EPA believes that based on
perc's non-reactivity it is inappropriate to allow States to continue
to take credit for perc reductions in ozone non-attainment planning.
Compounds that are defined as being HAP are required to be
controlled under section 112 of the Act which calls for EPA to develop
a NESHAP for sources of the listed compounds. Perc is listed as a HAP
in section 112 of the Act. The EPA believes that the control of HAP,
including perc, under section 112 of the Act is the proper approach to
controlling these emissions. EPA shares the concerns regarding perc's
toxicity. Acute and chronic inhalation exposure to perc results in
central nervous system effects. Further, EPA's science advisory board
(SAB) has advised the Agency that perc should be classified as a
carcinogen; the SAB found that the scientific evidence of
carcinogenicity falls on the continuum between ``B2'' probable and a
``C'' possible. For these reasons EPA believes that regulation under
section 112 of the Clean Air Act is appropriate. As noted previously,
EPA already has taken steps to regulate the great majority of perc
emissions and plans to issue further regulations for the remaining
major sources which release perc to the atmosphere. Further, EPA has
the authority to regulate additional source categories--if EPA
identifies any such sources. EPA today reaffirms its intention to
ensure that adequate public health protection from perc emissions is
provided through these programs.
Today's action improves our ability to provide public health
protection from the effects of ground level ozone. The rule does this
by causing control efforts to focus on compounds which are actual ozone
precursors, rather than giving credit for control of a compound which
has negligible photochemical reactivity. And since the Agency already
has made substantial progress in issuing necessary NESHAPs, EPA does
not agree that the proposal to add perc to the negligibly reactive list
in the definition of VOC should be delayed until all evaluations of
perc emissions under section 112 of the Act are complete. Further,
representatives of trade associations for manufacturers and end-users
of perchloroethylene have stated that they believe that
perchloroethylene consumption in consumer products and related products
(and therefore associated emissions) will not increase dramatically as
a result of this action. We have received commitments from industry
associations to survey or otherwise track how consumption of
perchloroethylene in these kinds of products changes. Should EPA become
aware of significant increases in perchloroethylene emissions or in
public exposure from such sources, EPA will then consider appropriate
regulatory action.
Comment: One commenter noted that exempting perc as a VOC would
mean that the control techniques guideline (CTG) for perc dry cleaning
(``Control of Volatile Organics Emissions from Perchloroethylene Dry
Cleaning Systems''; EPA 450/2-78-050, December 1978) would no longer
apply. In addition, the proposed NESHAP for the dry cleaning industry
(56 FR 64382, December 9, 1991) would exempt many small sources that
the CTG covers. Therefore, the public will have greater exposure to a
suspected carcinogen than if perc continues to be controlled as a VOC
for purposes of meeting reasonably available control technology.
(Note--Since these comments were received, the dry cleaning NESHAP has
been promulgated.)
Response: EPA is confident that the recently promulgated NESHAP
increases public health protection above levels achieved by the
formerly applicable CTG. It is true that the NESHAP for dry cleaning
exempts small-sized dry cleaners from additional control requirements
for process emissions, albeit fewer small sources than initially
proposed. The decision to limit requirements on these smallest sources
was made based on deliberations considering the extreme impacts of the
control costs on these very small sources. All sources must now comply
with pollution prevention requirements such as leak detection and
repair. EPA further notes that the control requirements for most
sources are considerably more stringent under the recent NESHAP than
under the CTG. The NESHAP results in nationwide decreases in perc
emissions of 32,400 Mg (35,700 T) each year beyond controls existing
due to the CTG or other State rules.
[[Page 4590]]
Comment: One commenter cited as unfair the section of the proposed
rule change that would prohibit the use of perc emission reduction
credits (ERC) which were achieved prior to the proposed revision as VOC
offsets or in netting transactions. The commenter asserted that such a
prohibition would have a negative financial impact on companies that
spent money in good faith to reduce perc emissions and to bank
emissions credits prior to the rule change. A second commenter
suggested that treating perc as a VOC may interfere with attainment of
the ozone NAAQS. This second commenter attached a January 8, 1992
letter from the San Diego Air Pollution Control District to EPA which
took a critical view of having to issue ERC for substantial reductions
in emissions of perc. This letter said:
Under the existing VOC definition, these ERC's may now be used
to offset emission increases from the new sources of VOC whose
photochemical reactivity is not negligible, resulting in a net
increase in ozone precursors. The use of perchloroethylene ERC's as
offsets exacerbates the District's severe ozone nonattainment
problem since the emission increase in reactive compounds would not
be truly offset.
Response: The EPA is deferring its decision concerning whether
credits for perc, which were banked prior to today's action, may be
used in future netting, offsetting or trading transactions with
reactive VOC. Because of the potential impact that banked emissions
could have on attainment demonstrations and reasonable further progress
showings, EPA needs to conduct further discussions with States on this
issue.
Comment: One commenter supported the withdrawal of the appropriate
CTG's simultaneously with any final rulemaking.
Response: There are two CTG's which refer to perc, the solvent
metal cleaning CTG and the perc dry cleaning CTG (``Control of Volatile
Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning,'' EPA-450/2-77-022,
November 1977, and ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Systems,'' EPA-450/2-78-050, December
1978). The solvent metal cleaning CTG discusses a number of other
solvents in addition to perc, and the technology discussed in this CTG
would often apply to any of several solvents that are used for
degreasing. The perc dry cleaning CTG is aimed specifically at
controlling perc.
Today's action in promulgating this final rule means that, for
purposes of ozone control, the perc dry cleaning CTG no longer has the
legal status of a CTG. The solvent metal cleaning CTG is no longer
considered to be a CTG for controlling perc emissions. However, the
solvent metal cleaning CTG is still applicable as a CTG in regards to
all other solvents which are VOC. Although these two documents are no
longer regarded as CTG's as related to perc, they remain effective as
technical guidance documents; States may still use the documents as
sources of technical information when developing rules to control toxic
materials.
III. Final Action
Today's final action is based upon the material in Docket No. A-92-
09 and EPA's review and consideration of all comments received during
the public comment period. As provided in EPA's October 26, 1992
proposal and as modified in response to comments described above, EPA
hereby amends its definition of VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s) to exclude
perchloroethylene (also known as tetrachloroethylene) as a VOC for
ozone SIP purposes. The revised definition will also apply in the
Chicago ozone nonattainment area pursuant to the 40 CFR 52.741(a)(3)
definition of volatile organic material or volatile organic compounds.
States are not obligated to exclude from control as a VOC those
compounds that EPA has found to be negligibly reactive. However, after
the effective date of this final action, EPA will not enforce measures
controlling perc as part of a federally-approved ozone SIP. In
addition, after the effective date of this final action, States may not
take credit for controlling perc in their ozone control strategies.
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. The EPA has determined that this rule is not
``significant'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is,
therefore, not subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review.
This action does not contain any information collection requirements
subject to OMB review under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22,
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed
or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to
State, local and/or tribal government(s) in the aggregate. Since
today's action is deregulatory in nature and does not impose any
mandate upon any source, the cost of such mandates will not result in
estimated annual costs of $100 million or more.
Assuming this rulemaking is subject to section 317 of the Act, the
Administrator concludes, weighing the Agency's limited resources and
other duties, that it is not practicable to conduct an extensive
economic impact assessment of today's action since this rule will relax
current regulatory requirements. Accordingly, the Administrator simply
notes that any costs of complying with today's action, any inflationary
or recessionary effects of the regulation, and any impact on the
competitive standing of small businesses, on consumer costs, or on
energy use, will be less than or at least not more than the impact that
existed before today's action.
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: January 26, 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:
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. 7401-7671q.
2. Section 51.100 is amended by revising paragraph (s)(1)
introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 51.100 Definitions.
* * * * *
(s) * * *
(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);
[[Page 4591]]
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) and perfluorocarbon compounds
which fall into these classes:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-2495 Filed 2-6-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P