Requirements
for
Preparation,
Adoption
and
Submittal
of
Implementation
Plans;
Approval
and
Promulgation
of
Implementation
Plans
Federal
Register,
Volume:
57
,
Issue:
22
,
Page:
3941
(
57
FR
3941)
,
Monday,
February
3,
1992
Agency:
Environmental
Protection
Agency­­(
EPA);
Office
of
Air
and
Radiation­­(
OAR);
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards­­(
OAQPS)
Document
Type:
Rules
and
Regulations
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
(
CFR):
40
CFR
Part
51
52
Numbers:
No.
FRL­
4031­
7
Dates:
Effective:
19920304
Contact
Information:
Kent
Berry,
919­
541­
5505;
FTS­
629­
5505
Action:
Final
rule
Internal
Data:
(
FR
Doc.
92­
2035
Filed
1­
31­
92;
8:
45
am)
SUMMARY:
This
action
adds
a
general
definition
of
volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
to
EPA's
regulations
governing
the
preparation
of
State
implementation
plans
(
SIP's)
which
are
required
under
title
I
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
Act).
Today's
action
also
incorporates
this
definition
into
various
SIP­
related
rules,

including
EPA's
new
source
review
rules
and
the
Federal
implementation
plan
(
FIP)
rules
for
the
Chicago
area.
The
definition
excludes
a
number
of
organic
compounds
from
the
definition
of
VOC
on
the
basis
that
they
are
negligibly
reactive
and
do
not
contribute
to
tropospheric
ozone
formation.

­­­­­­­­­­

ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Parts
51
and
52
(
FRL­
4031­
7)

Requirements
for
Preparation,
Adoption
and
Submittal
of
Implementation
Plans;
Approval
and
Promulgation
of
Implementation
Plans
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).

ACTION:
Final
rule.

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

SUMMARY:
This
action
adds
a
general
definition
of
volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
to
EPA's
regulations
governing
the
preparation
of
State
implementation
plans
(
SIP's)
which
are
required
under
title
I
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
Act).
Today's
action
also
incorporates
this
definition
into
various
SIP­
related
rules,

including
EPA's
new
source
review
rules
and
the
Federal
implementation
plan
(
FIP)
rules
for
the
Chicago
area.
The
definition
excludes
a
number
of
organic
compounds
from
the
definition
of
VOC
on
the
basis
that
they
are
negligibly
reactive
and
do
not
contribute
to
tropospheric
ozone
formation.

EFFECTIVE
DATE:
This
rule
is
effective
March
4,
1992.

ADDRESSES:
Docket:
Pursuant
to
section
307(
d)(
1)
(
B),
(
I),
and
(
U)
of
the
Act,
42
U.
S.
C.
7607(
d)(
1)
(
B),
(
I),
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
90­
27,
which
is
available
for
public
inspection
and
copying
between
8:
30
a.
m.­
12
p.
m.
and
1:
30
p.
m­
3:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
at
EPA's
Central
Docket
Section,
South
Conference
Center,
room
4,
401
M
Street,
SW.,
Washington,
DC.
A
reasonable
fee
may
be
charged
for
copying.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Kent
Berry,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Air
Quality
Management
Division
(
MD­
15),
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27711,
phone
(
FTS)
629­
5505,
(
919)
541­
5505.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
On
June
28,
1989
(
54
FR
27286),
EPA
promulgated
changes
to
its
new
source
review
rules
at
40
CFR
51.165
(
Permit
Requirements);
51.166
(
Prevention
of
Significant
Deterioration
of
Air
Quality);
Part
51,
Appendix
S
(
Emission
Offset
Interpretative
Ruling);
52.21
(
Prevention
of
Significant
Deterioration
of
Air
Quality);
and
52.24
(
Statutory
Restriction
on
New
Souces).
One
of
the
changes
made
was
to
amend
the
definition
of
VOC
in
these
rules
to
exlude
the
compounds
EPA
had
previously
determined
to
be
negligibly
reactive
(
see
42
FR
35314,
July
8,
1977;
44
FR
32043,
June
4,
1979;
45
FR
32424,

May
15,
1980;
45
FR
48941,
July
22,
1980;
54
FR
1987,
January
18,
1989).
On
August
18,
1989,
the
Minnesota
Mining
and
Manufacturing
Company
(
3M)
filed
a
petition
for
review
(
Minnesota
Mining
and
Manufacturing
Company
v.
EPA,
(
D.
C.
Circuit
No.
89­
1500))
of
these
rules
for
EPA's
failure
to
add
certain
perfluorocarbon
(
PFC)
compounds
to
the
list
of
exempt
compounds
that
are
negligibly
reactive.
On
February
16,
1990,
3M
submitted
a
rulemaking
petition
requesting
EPA
to
take
a
number
of
associated
actions
with
regard
to
PFC's.

On
December
27,
1989
(
54
FR
53088)
and
June
29,
1990
(
55
FR
26814),
as
a
result
of
a
court
order
and
Illinois'
failure
to
adopt
reasonably
available
control
technology
(
RACT)
for
VOC
sources
in
the
Chicago
area
as
required
by
the
Act,
EPA
published
proposed
and
final
Federal
RACT
rules
for
the
Chicago
area
of
Illinois
(
Cook,
Dupage,
Kane,
Lake,
McHenry,
and
Will
Counties).
The
rulemaking
contained
a
definition
of
volatile
organic
material
or
volatile
organic
compound
which,
in
effect,
exluded
from
that
definition
certain
organic
compounds
that
EPA
had
determined
in
previously­
issued
policy
statements
were
negligibly
reactive
and
do
not
contribute
to
violations
of
the
national
ambient
air
quality
standards
(
NAAQS)
for
ozone.

On
March
18,
1991
(
56
FR
11418),
EPA
revised
the
previously­
issued
policy
statements
and
added
five
halocarbon
compounds
and
four
classes
of
perfluorocarbon
compounds
to
the
list
of
organic
compounds
which
are
considered
negligibly
reactive,
do
not
contribute
to
violations
of
the
ozone
NAAQS,
and
may
be
excluded
from
SIP
control
measures
intended
to
attain
and
maintain
the
ozone
NAAQS.
The
compounds
added
to
the
negligibly­
reactive
list
are
listed
in
Table
1.

Table
1
Compound
Chemical
name
CAS
No.

HCFC
124
Ethane,
2­
chloro­
1,1,1,2­
tetrafluoro­
2837­
89­
0
HFC
125
Ethane,
pentafluoro­
354­
33­
6
HFC
134
Ethane,
1,1,2,2,­
tetrafluoro­
359­
35­
3
HFC
143a
Ethane,
1,1,1­
trifluoro­
420­
46­
2
HFC
152a
Ethane,
1,1­
difluoro
75­
37­
6
Four
Classes
of
Perfluorocarbon
Compounds
1.
Cyclic,
branched,
or
linear,
completely
fluorinated
alkanes.

2.
Cyclic,
branched,
or
linear,
completely
fluorinated
ethers
with
no
unsaturations.

3.
Cyclic,
branched,
or
linear,
completely
fluorinated
tertiary
amines
with
no
unsaturations.

4.
Sulfur
containing
perfluorocarbons
with
no
unsaturations
and
with
sulfur
bonds
only
to
carbon
and
fluorine.

Proposed
Actions
The
EPA
has
determined
that
with
respect
to
tropospheric
ozone
formation,
the
potential
health
and
environmental
impacts
of
the
compounds
that
the
Agency
has
determined
to
be
negligibly­
photochemically
reactive
(
as
reflected
in
March
18,
1991
revised
policy
statement)
do
not
vary
by
location
or
use.
Consequently,
EPA
believes
that
no
purpose
would
be
served
by
leaving
the
reactivity
issue
open
to
debate
in
individual
SIP
proceedings
with
respect
to
the
compounds
listed
in
the
revised
policy
statement.
Therefore,
on
March
18,
1991
(
56
FR
11387),
EPA
also
proposed
to
add
a
general
definition
of
VOC
to
40
CFR
part
51
(
Requirements
for
Preparation,
Adoption
and
Submittal
of
Implementation
Plans)
to
be
used
in
all
cases
for
developing
SIP's
to
attain
the
ozone
NAAQS.
The
proposed
definition,
to
be
codified
at
40
CFR
51.100(
s),
tracked
the
definition
of
VOC
currently
promulgated
in
various
sections
of
both
parts
51
and
52
(
51.165;
51.166;
part
51,
appendix
S;
52.21;
52.24;
52.741)
by
excluding
the
15
chemicals
EPA
has
previously
determined
to
be
negligibly
reactive
and
by
adding
the
chemicals
listed
in
Table
1
to
the
negligibly­
reactive
list.
In
addition,
EPA
proposed
that
the
definition
of
VOC
in
each
of
the
above
sections
be
replaced
by
a
reference
to
the
general
definition
at
section
51.100(
s).
As
indicated
in
the
March
18,
1991
proposal,
compounds
that
EPA
has
determined
to
be
negligibly
reactive
may
not
be
used
for
emissions
netting
(
see,
e.
g.,
40
CFR
51.166(
b)(
2)(
i)),
offsetting
(
see
40
CFR
part
51,
appendix
S),
or
trading
(
see
Emissions
Trading
Policy
Statement,
51
FR
43814,
December
4,
1986)
with
reactive
VOC's
for
ozone
purposes.
Likewise,
increases
or
decreases
of
the
listed
negligibly­
reactive
compounds
are
to
be
ignored
completely
in
any
new
source
review
(
NSR)
applicability
determinations.
Finally,
the
proposal
indicated
that
if
the
proposed
general
definition
were
finally
adopted,
EPA
would
then
withdraw
as
moot
its
revised
policy
statement
on
VOC
reactivity.

The
proposed
revision
to
the
Chicago
FIP
rules
also
proposed
to
delete
a
provision
for
a
1­
year
exclusion
for
four
perfluorocarbon
classes
at
the
3M
Bedford
Park
facility
in
Cook
County,
Illinois.
The
provision
which
was
proposed
to
be
deleted
from
40
CFR
52.741(
a)(
3)
states:

In
addition,
for
the
3M
Bedford
Park
facility
in
Cook
County,
the
following
compounds
shall
not
be
considered
as
volatile
organic
material
or
volatile
organic
compounds
(
and
are,
therefore,
to
be
treated
as
water
for
the
purpose
of
calculating
the
"
less
water"
part
of
the
coating
or
ink
composition)
for
a
period
of
time
not
to
exceed
one
year
after
the
date
EPA
acts
on
3M's
petition,
pending
as
of
the
date
promulgation
of
this
rule,
which
seeks
to
have
these
compounds
classified
as
exempt
compounds:
cyclic,
branched,
or
linear,
completely
fluorinated
alkanes,
cyclic,
branched,
or
linear,
completely
fluorinated
ethers
with
no
unsaturations,
cyclic
branched,
or
linear,
completely
fluorinated
tertiary
amines
with
no
unsaturations,
and
sulfur
containing
perfluorocarbons
with
no
unsaturations
and
with
sulfur
bonds
only
to
carbon
and
fluorine.

The
proposal
indicated
that
upon
final
action
on
the
proposed
revision
to
the
Chicago
FIP,
the
exclusion
for
this
facility
will
no
longer
be
necessary
since
the
proposed
revision
to
the
VOC
definition
allows
these
compounds
to
be
excluded
at
all
facilities
in
the
counties
covered
by
the
FIP
rules.
Comments
on
Proposal
and
EPA
Responses
In
accordance
with
section
307(
d)
of
the
amended
Act,
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.
Seven
commenters
submitted
written
comments
in
response
to
EPA's
March
18,
1991
proposal.
Any
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
amended
Act).
The
EPA
received
no
such
requests
for
a
public
hearing
and,
therefore,
did
not
hold
one.

Comment:
One
commenter
noted
that
EPA's
concern
about
the
difficulties
in
measuring
exempt
VOC's
used
in
paints
and
other
coatings
is
not
applicable
to
PFC's
since
current
uses
of
PFC's
do
not
include
coatings.

Response:
While
this
fact
may
reduce
EPA's
concern
about
the
examples
illustrating
potential
measurement
difficulties
that
were
discussed
in
the
proposal,
the
Agency
still
believes
that
it
is
necessary
for
the
purpose
of
determining
compliance
with
today's
action
and
other
related
actions
to
retain
the
proposed
provisions
allowing
EPA
or
a
State
to
require
a
source
owner
to
provide
monitoring
methods
and
monitoring
results
demonstrating
the
amount
of
negligibly­
reactive
compounds
in
the
source's
emission.
The
commenter
also
urged
EPA
to
carry
forward
the
VOC
definition
to
other
related
ozone
SIP
actions.
As
indicated
above,
this
is
the
Agency's
intent.

Comment:
Another
commenter
urged
that
EPA
finalize
its
proposal
of
October
24,
1983
(
48
FR
49097)
to
add
perchloroethylene
to
the
list
of
negligibly­
reactive
VOC's.
The
commenter
further
asserted
that
"(
t)
here
is
no
justification
for
control
of
this
substance
as
a
smog
precursor."
Response:
The
March
18,
1991
proposed
rule
and
simultaneous
revision
to
EPA's
negligible
reactivity
policy
statement
were
largely
in
response
to
administrative
petitions
by
3M
and
the
Alliance
for
Responsible
CFC
Policy
(
see
56
FR
11387
and
56
FR
11418).
Thus,
EPA
expressly
indicated
that
the
proposed
rule
was
"
strictly
limited
to
whether
EPA
should
codify
in
regulatory
form
its
current
reactivity
policy"
and
"
does
not
extend
to
compounds
not
presently
listed
as
negligibly
reactive"
(
see
56
FR
11388,
col.
3).
Therefore,
the
commenter's
request
that
EPA
review
the
negligible
reactivity
of
a
compound
not
presently
included
in
the
existing
reactivity
policy
is
outside
the
scope
of
the
proposed
rule
and
today's
final
action.

There
are
additional
impediments
to
addressing
perchloroethylene
in
today's
action.
The
1983
"
proposal"
referenced
by
the
commenter
was
a
proposed
revision
to
EPA's
policy
statement
on
negligibly
reactive
VOC's.
No
regulatory
language
was
proposed,
and
EPA
did
not
suggest
that
it
would
adopt
any
final
regulation
pursuant
to
the
notice.
As
such,
the
1983
action
was
published
in
the
notices
section
of
the
Federal
Register.
Also,
as
suggested,
EPA's
then­
existing
policy
statement
was
never
finally
revised
to
include
perchloroethylene
among
the
negligibly­
reactive
VOC's.
In
comparison,
today's
action
promulgated
a
recently­
proposed
regulation
addressing
negligibly­
reactive
VOC's
consistent
with
EPA's
existing
policy
and
codifies
appropriate
regulatory
language,
including
a
formal
definition
of
VOC's.
Thus,
EPA
could
not
take
final
regulatory
action
on
the
1983
proposed
revision
to
a
policy
statement
in
today's
final
rulemaking.
Rather,
EPA
would
have
to
first
re­
propose
a
regulatory
definition
of
VOC's
that
excluded
perchloroethylene.
Such
a
course
would
interpose
significant
delay
in
this
rulemaking.
The
EPA
declines
to
take
this
path.

In
sum,
EPA
limited
the
scope
of
this
rulemaking
to
codification
of
its
existing
policy.
If
in
this
rulemaking,
and
in
similar
circumstances,
EPA
was
required
to
address
as
a
final
regulatory
matter
every
potentially
related
issue,
Agency
action
would
become
increasingly
intractable
and
in
some
cases
virtually
stymied
(
see
also
Group
Against
Smog
&
Pollution
v.
U.
S.
EPA,
665,
F.
2d
1284
(
D.
C.
Cir.

1981)
(
affirming
EPA's
discretion
to
limit
reasonably
the
scope
of
rulemaking
proceedings).
Further,
as
discussed
below,
an
administrative
remedy
exists
for
those
seeking
treatment
of
compounds
as
negligibly
reactive.

Comment:
One
commenter
requested
that
the
VOC
definition
(
1)
specify
a
test
method
for
determining
negligible
photochemical
reactivity
for
the
purpose
of
excluding
other
substances,
(
2)
specify
a
vapor
pressure
cutoff
(
e.
g.,
0.1
mm
of
mercury
at
standard
conditions)
for
exclusion
of
VOC's
on
the
basis
of
their
low
volatility
without
regard
to
their
atmospheric
chemistry,
and
(
3)
allow
for
comparison
of
reactivity
constants,
i.
e,
kOH,
with
ethane
to
determine
negligible
reactivity.
As
noted
previously,
the
March
1991
proposal
was
limited
to
formal
codification
of
EPA's
existing
policy
statement
on
negligibly­
reactive
compounds
(
see
previous
discussion
and
56
FR
at
11388,
col.
3
(
March
18,
1991)).

The
EPA
did
not
intend
to
place
into
question
in
this
rulemaking
the
consideration
of
whether
additional
compounds
are
negligibly
reactive
or
its
policy
approach
for
determining
what
qualifies
as
a
negligibly­
reactive
compound.
The
commenter
has
requested
a
fundamental
revision
of
EPA's
present
policy.
The
commenter
noted
that
EPA's
proposed
definition
of
VOC's
included
any
compounds
which
participate
in
atmospheric
photochemical
reactions
and
excluded
from
regulation
as
VOC's
only
specified
organic
compounds.
The
commenter
asserted
that
this
definition
exceeds
the
Agency's
statutory
authority
and
requested
instead
that
EPA
codify
a
definition
of
VOC's
which
allows
for
the
exclusion
of
any
compounds
meeting,
for
example,
certain
vapor
pressure
cutoffs
or
other
tests.

The
EPA
disagrees
with
the
commenter's
suggestion
that
EPA's
definition
of
VOC
exceeds
its
statutory
authority
to
regulate
ozone
precursors.
The
EPA's
definition
embodies
a
reasonable
policy
choice
to
regulate
organic
compounds
as
VOC's
absent
an
adequate
showing
and
determination
by
EPA
that
a
particular
compound
is
negligibly
reactive.
There
are
tens
of
thousands
of
organic
compounds
in
commerce.
Further,
almost
every
organic
compound
in
the
ambient
air
in
a
gaseous
form
is
reactive.
Only
a
very
small
percentage
of
the
thousands
of
volatile
organic
compounds
in
commerce
may
be
negligibly
reactive.
While
it
may
be
theoretically
possible
to
craft
a
definition
of
VOC
that
includes
test
methods,
vapor
pressures,
or
other
indicia
of
reactivity,
this
effort
would
involve
a
significant
commitment
of
EPA's
time
and
resources,
including
significant
technical
and
policy
analyses.
The
commenter
himself
did
not
present
any
technical
data
supporting
his
recommendations.
The
EPA
has
carefully
weighed
the
prudence
of
revisiting
its
policy
in
today's
final
action
considering,
for
example,
the
potential
public
resources
involved
and
competing
Agency
priorities.
Because
there
are
thousands
of
organic
compounds
at
issue
and
because
a
very
small
fraction
of
these
compounds
may
be
reactive,
EPA
has
concluded
that
it
is
an
administrative
necessity
and
reasonable
to
define
VOC
to
include
all
organic
compounds
except
those
EPA
has
determined
to
be
negligibly
reactive.
The
EPA's
policy
choice
also
was
informed
by
the
reasonable
avenue
for
recourse
available
to
those
who
disagree
with
EPA's
policy
approach.
As
the
commenter
acknowledged,
EPA
has
reviewed
and
granted
administrative
petitions
or
formal
requests
seeking
treatment
of
compounds
as
negligibly
reactive.
In
fact,
today's
action
effectively
codifies
in
regulatory
form
EPA's
approval
of
several
such
requests
(
see,
e.
g.,
56
FR
11418
(
March
18,
1991)
revising
EPA's
then­
existing
policy
on
negligibly­
reactive
VOC's
in
light
of
two
formal
requests
from
3M
and
the
Alliance
for
Responsible
CFC
Policy).
Now
that
EPA's
existing
policy
has
been
formally
codified,
those
seeking
treatment
of
compounds
as
negligibly
reactive
could
file
an
administrative
petition
with
EPA
requesting
revision
of
the
regulatory
definition
of
VOC's
(
see
5
U.
S.
C.
553(
e)).
The
EPA's
balancing
of
complex
policy
considerations
here
is
precisely
the
type
of
inquiry
EPA
has
been
charged
with
in
carrying
out
its
many
statutory
duties.
In
sum,
the
policy
approach
embodied
in
EPA's
definition
of
VOC
is
reasonably
related
to
the
statutory
goal
of
ensuring
attainment
and
maintenance
of
the
ozone
NAAQS
and
is
a
policy
choice
clearly
within
the
Agency's
discretion.

Comment:
Two
commenters
urged
that
EPA
make
clear
that
it
will
be
reviewing
ozone
SIP's
with
a
view
to
assuring
that
"
excluded"
compounds,
however
they
may
be
regulated
under
State
or
local
law,
are
not
regulated
as
VOC's
as
part
of
a
federally­
approved
SIP.

Response:
As
EPA
has
stated
previously
(
45
FR
48941,
July
22,
1980),
the
Agency
will
not
approve
or
enforce
measures
controlling
substances
EPA
has
determined
to
be
negligibly
reactive
as
part
of
a
federally­
approved
ozone
SIP.
However,
EPA
will
not
disapprove
a
plan
regulating
negligibly­
reactive
substances
or
otherwise
seek
to
require
States
to
exclude
chemicals
on
EPA's
list
of
negligibly­
reactive
compounds
from
their
ozone
SIP's.
Under
section
116
of
the
Act,
States
generally
have
the
authority
to
go
beyond
the
minimum
Federal
requirements
of
the
Act.
Accordingly,
if
a
State
chooses
to
regulate
negligibly­
reactive
compounds
as
VOC's,
such
rules
will
still
be
enforceable
by
the
State,
but
not
by
EPA.

Comment:
The
definition
should
provide
further
clarification
of
whether
certain
carbon
compounds
fall
within
the
scope
of
the
VOC
definition
by
incorporating
the
definition
of
"
organic
compound"
currently
promulgated
under
40
CFR
52.741(
a).

Response:
The
EPA
agrees
with
this
suggestion
and
has
included
in
the
definition
an
exclusion
for
carbon
monoxide,
carbon
dioxide,
carbonic
acid,
metallic
carbides
and
carbonates,
and
ammonium
carbonate,
which
are
effectively
excluded
by
the
definitions
under
40
CFR
52.741(
a).
This
is
not
a
substantive
change
but
merely
a
clarification
of
what
carbon
compounds
are
well
understood
by
the
scientific
community
not
to
be
considered
as
organic,
and,
therefore,
could
not
be
volatile
organic
compounds.
Similarly,
minor
technical
changes
have
been
made
to
identify
the
specific
chemical
name
and
structure
of
several
of
the
listed
compounds.

Comment:
The
definition
should
require
that
any
compounds
excluded
from
any
VOC
emission
limit
compliance
determination
be
adequately
quantified.
Also,
the
provision
allowing
EPA
or
the
State
to
require
a
source
owner
to
submit
monitoring
methods
or
testing
methods
and
results
in
order
to
exclude
negligibly­
reactive
compounds
should
be
dropped
as
long
as
the
"
adequately
quantified"
test
is
met.

Response:
The
EPA
agrees
with
the
first
comment
but,
as
noted
above,
continues
to
believe
that
the
provision
allowing
the
enforcement
authority
to
place
the
burden
for
adequate
quantification
on
the
source
owner
is
an
appropriate
mechanism
for
ensuring
that
emissions
are
adequately
quantified.
This
authority
is
discretionary,
so
that
if
the
enforcement
authority
believes
that
the
excluded
compounds
are
being
adequately
quantified
or
wants
to
quantify
the
excluded
compounds
itself,
the
authority
need
not
be
exercised.
Comment:
The
definition
need
not
require
that
a
test
method
for
excluding
negligibly­
reactive
compounds
be
submitted
as
a
SIP
revision
because,
among
other
reasons,
it
is
unnecessary
for
issuing
new
source
permits
and
operating
permits.
Instead,
the
definition
could
indicate
that
EPA
will
not
be
bound
by
a
State
determination
if
the
determination
has
not
been
approved
as
part
of
the
SIP.

Response:
The
EPA
agrees
with
this
suggestion
and
has
modified
the
definition
to
indicate
that
EPA
will
not
be
bound
by
a
State
determination
unless
it
is
reflected
in
the
applicable
EPA­
approved
SIP,
a
construction
permit
issued
pursuant
to
a
new
source
review
program
approved
or
promulgated
under
title
I
of
the
Act,
an
operating
permit
issued
pursuant
to
a
program
approved
or
promulgated
under
title
V,
or
under
other
regulations
adopted
by
EPA
pursuant
to
the
Act
(
e.
g.,
40
CFR
part
60,
New
Source
Performance
Standards).

Comment:
One
commenter
noted
that
the
proposed
definition
contained
some
confusion
about
the
roles
of
the
source
owner,
the
Administrator,
and
the
State
in
excluding
compounds
for
compliance
determinations,
including
requiring
and
approving
monitoring
data
for
such
purposes.

Response:
The
EPA
agrees
with
this
comment
and
has
revised
the
definition
of
VOC's
so
as
not
to
limit
who
may
exclude,
for
the
purpose
of
determining
compliance,
compounds
EPA
has
determined
to
be
negligibly
reactive.
Also,
the
authority
to
require
and
approve
monitoring
data
for
determining
the
amount
of
negligibly­
reactive
compounds
is
left
to
the
"
enforcement
authority."
The
roles
of
EPA
and
the
State
have
been
clarified
in
the
change
discussed
immediately
above
which
provides
that
(
where
the
State
is
the
enforcement
authority)
EPA
will
not
be
bound
by
a
State
determination
regarding
monitoring
or
test
methods
appropriate
for
determining
compliance
unless
the
method
is
reflected
in
one
of
the
EPA­
approved
or
promulgated
provisions
noted.

Comment:
The
definition
should
not
indicate
that
VOC
will
be
measured
by
the
test
method
in
the
approved
SIP
because
test
methods
in
the
SIP's
vary.

Response:
The
EPA
does
not
agree
with
this
comment.
The
VOC
definition
should
be
implemented
through
the
provisions
in
the
approved
SIP.
In
fact,
this
commenter's
suggested
language
for
the
VOC
definition
continues
to
incorporate
this
provision.
Finally,
if
EPA
determines
that
a
nationally­
uniform
test
method
is
appropriate
to
implement
a
particular
program,
it
can
so
specify
at
that
time.

Final
Action
Today's
final
action
is
based
upon
the
material
in
Docket
No.
A­
90­
27
and
EPA's
review
and
consideration
of
all
comments
received
during
the
public
comment
period.
As
provided
in
EPA's
March
1991
proposal
and
as
modified
in
response
to
comments
described
above,
the
new
definition
of
VOC
at
40
CFR
51.100(
s)
will
now
govern
EPA's
consideration
of
negligibly­
reactive
VOC's
in
ozone
SIP's.
Thus,
EPA
hereby
withdraws
its
prior
policy
statements
regarding
reactivity
of
VOC's
in
ozone
SIP's
as
being
moot.
States
are
not
obligated
to
exclude
from
control
as
a
VOC
those
compounds
that
EPA
has
found
to
be
negligibly
reactive.
However,
EPA
will
neither
approve
nor
enforce
measures
controlling
negligibly­
reactive
compounds
as
part
of
a
federally­
approved
ozone
SIP.
In
addition,
States
should
not
include
these
compounds
in
their
VOC
emission
inventories
and
may
not
take
credit
for
controlling
these
compounds
in
their
ozone
control
strategy.
Further,

negligibly­
reactive
compounds
may
not
be
used
for
emissions
netting
(
see,
e.
g.,
40
CFR
51.166(
b)(
2)(
c)),
offsetting
(
see
40
CFR
appendix
S),
or
trading
with
reactive
VOC's
(
see
Emission
Trading
Policy
Statement,
51
FR
43814,
December
4,
1986).

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.
This
final
rule
was
submitted
to
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
as
required
by
Executive
Order
(
E.
O.)
12291.
The
E.
O.
12291
requires
each
Federal
agency
to
determine
if
a
regulation
is
a
"
major"
rule
as
defined
by
the
E.
O.
and
"
to
the
extent
permitted
by
law,"
to
prepare
and
consider
a
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis
in
connection
with
every
major
rule.
Because
this
rule
relaxes
regulatory
requirements,
it
is
not
"
major"
within
the
meaning
of
E.
O.
12291.
Drafts
submitted
to
OMB
for
review,
any
written
comments
from
OMB
or
other
agencies,
and
any
EPA
written
responses
to
those
comments
are
included
in
the
Docket.
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.).
This
notice
has
no
Federalism
implications
under
E.
O.
12612
since
it
imposes
no
new
requirements
on
States
or
sources.
Instead,
it
provides
additional
flexibility
to
States
to
exempt
certain
compounds
from
ozone
SIP
control
programs
and
provides
similar
exemptions
involving
FIP
and
Federal
NSR
rules.

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
the
rule
promulgated
today
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
40
CFR
Part
51
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.

40
CFR
Part
52
Air
pollution
control,
Carbon
monoxide,
Intergovernmental
relations,
Lead,
Nitrogen
dioxide,
Ozone,
Particulate
matter,
Reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements,
Sulfur
oxides,
Volatile
organic
compounds.

Dated:
January
21,
1992.

William
K.
Reilly,
Administrator.

For
reasons
set
forth
in
the
preamble,
parts
51
and
52
of
chapter
I
of
title
40
of
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
are
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:
Sections
101(
b)
(
1),
110,
160­
169,
171­
178,
301(
a)
and
501­
507
of
the
Clean
Air
Act,
42
U.
S.
C.
7401(
b)
(
1),
7410,
7470­
7479,
7501­
7508,
7601(
a),
and
7661­
7661f.

2.
Section
51.100
is
amended
by
adding
paragraph
(
s)
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);

1,1,1­
trichloro­
2,2,2­
trifluoroethane
(
CFC­
113);
trichlorofluoromethane
(
CFC­
11);
dichlorodifluoromethane
(
CFC­
12);
chlorodifluoromethane
(
CFC­
22);
trifluoromethane
(
FC­
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);
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.

(
2)
For
purposes
of
determining
compliance
with
emissions
limits,
VOC
will
be
measured
by
the
test
methods
in
the
approved
State
implementation
plan
(
SIP)
or
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A,
as
applicable.
Where
such
a
method
also
measures
compounds
with
negligible
photochemical
reactivity,
these
negligibility­
reactive
compounds
may
be
excluded
as
VOC
if
the
amount
of
such
compounds
is
accurately
quantified,
and
such
exclusion
is
approved
by
the
enforcement
authority.

(
3)
As
a
precondition
to
excluding
these
compounds
as
VOC
or
at
any
time
thereafter,
the
enforcement
authority
may
require
an
owner
or
operator
to
provide
monitoring
or
testing
methods
and
results
demonstrating,
to
the
satisfaction
of
the
enforcement
authority,
the
amount
of
negligibly­
reactive
compounds
in
the
source's
emissions.

(
4)
For
purposes
of
Federal
enforcement
for
a
specific
source,
the
EPA
shall
use
the
test
methods
specified
in
the
applicable
EPA­
approved
SIP,
in
a
permit
issued
pursuant
to
a
program
approved
or
promulgated
under
title
V
of
the
Act,
or
under
40
CFR
part
51,
subpart
I
or
appendix
S,
or
under
40
CFR
parts
52
or
60.
The
EPA
shall
not
be
bound
by
any
State
determination
as
to
appropriate
methods
for
testing
or
monitoring
negligibly­
reactive
compounds
if
such
determination
is
not
reflected
in
any
of
the
above
provisions.

*
*
*
*
*

3.
Section
51.165
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
a)
(
1)
(
xix)
to
read
as
follows:

Sec.
51.165
Permit
requirements.

(
a)
*
*
*
(
1)
*
*
*
(
xix)
Volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
is
as
defined
in
Sec.
51.100(
s)
of
this
part.

*
*
*
*
*

4.
Section
51.166
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
b)
(
29)
to
read
as
follows:

Sec.
51.166
Prevention
of
significant
deterioration
of
air
quality.

*
*
*
*
*

(
b)
*
*
*
(
29)
Volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
is
as
defined
in
Sec.
51.100(
s)
of
this
part.

*
*
*
*
*

5.
Appendix
S
to
part
51
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
II.
A.
20
to
read
as
follows:

Appendix
S
to
Part
51­­
Emission
Offset
Interpretative
Ruling
*
*
*
*
*

II.
*
*
*
A.
*
*
*
20.
Volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
is
as
defined
in
Sec.
51.100(
s)
of
this
part.

*
*
*
*
*

PART
52­­
APPROVAL
AND
PROMULGATION
OF
IMPLEMENTATION
PLANS
1.
The
authority
citation
for
part
52
continues
to
read
as
follows:

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
7401­
7642.

2.
Section
52.21
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
b)(
30)
to
read
as
follows:

Sec.
52.21
Prevention
of
significant
deterioration
of
air
quality.

*
*
*
*
*

(
b)
*
*
*
(
30)
Volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
is
as
defined
in
Sec.
51.100(
s)
of
this
chapter.

*
*
*
*
*

3.
Section
52.24
is
amended
by
revising
paragraph
(
f)(
18)
to
read
as
follows:

Sec.
52.24
Statutory
restriction
on
new
sources.
*
*
*
*
*

(
f)
*
*
*
(
18)
Volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
is
as
defined
in
Sec.
51.100(
s)
of
this
chapter.

*
*
*
*
*

3.
Subpart
O­­
Illinois,
Sec.
52.741
is
amended
by
revising
the
definition
of
"
volatile
organic
material
(
VOM)
or
volatile
organic
compound
(
VOC),"
in
paragraph
(
a)(
3)
to
read
as
follows:

Sec.
52.741
Control
strategy:
Ozone
control
measures
for
Cook,
Dupage,
Kane,
Lake,
McHenry
and
Will
Counties.

(
a)
*
*
*
(
3)
*
*
*
Volatile
organic
material
(
VOM)
or
volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
is
as
defined
in
Sec.
51.100(
s)
of
this
chapter.

*
*
*
*
*

(
FR
Doc.
92­
2035
Filed
1­
31­
92;
8:
45
am)

BILLING
CODE
6560­
50­
M
Legal
Publications:
Pub.
Law
95­
95
SEC.
307
127
129
­­
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1977
Pub.
Law
90­
148
SEC.
2
­­
Air
Quality
Act
of
1967;
National
Emissions
Standards
Act
(
Act
of
11/
21/
67)
Pub.
Law
84­
159
SEC.
307
116
317
101
110
301
160
171
501
­­
Air
Pollution
Control
Act
(
Act
of
7/
14/
55)
Pub.
Law
88­
206
SEC.
1
­­
Clean
Air
Act
of
1963
Pub.
Law
101­
549
SEC.
501
­­
Clean
Air
Act,
Amendments
(
11/
15/
90)
Pub.
Law
91­
604
SEC.
12
4
­­
Noise
Pollution
and
Abatement
Act
of
1970;
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1970
Pub.
Law
999­
12612
­­
Federalism
(
Executive
Order
of
10/
26/
87)
Federal
Register
¤
format
only
2004
Dialog,
a
Thomson
business.
All
rights
reserved.
Dialog
«
File
Number
180
Accession
Number
2254557
