Assessment of Public Comment The agency received no public comment.



# Department of Environmental
Conservation

NOTICE OF ADOPTION

Emissions of NOx from the Drying Process at Hot Mix Asphalt
Production Plants

I.D. No. ENV-51-09-00008-A Filing No. 903 Filing Date: 2010-08-31

Effective Date: 30 days after filing

PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Procedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following action:

Action taken: Amendment of Part 212 of Title 6 NYCRR. Statutory authority: Environmental Conservation Law, sections 1-0101, 1-0303, 3-0301, 19-0103, 19-0105, 19-0107, 19-0301, 19-0303, 19-0305, 19-0311, 71-2103 and 71-2105 Subject: Emissions of NOx from the drying process at hot mix asphalt production plants. Purpose: Require work practices and the potential installation of add-on control technology to reduce NOx emissions. Text or summary was published in the December 23, 2009 issue of the Register, I.D. No. ENV-51-09-00008-P. Final rule as compared with last published rule: No changes. Revised rule making(s) were previously published in the State Register

on June 16, 2010. Text of rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from: Scott Griffin, NYSDEC, Division of Air Resources, 625 Broadway, Albany, NY 12233-3251, (518) 402-8396, email: airregs@gw.dec.state.ny.us Additional matter required by statute: Pursuant to Article 8 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, a Short Environmental Assessment Form, a Negative Declaration and a Coastal Assessment Form have been prepared and are on file. This rule was approved by the Environmental Board. Revised Regulatory Impact Statement No revisions were made to the Regulatory Impact Statement. Revised Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESSES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation(Department) proposes to revise 6 NYCRR Part 212, ‘‘General Process Emission Sources,’’ to include control requirements for hot mixasphalt production plants. These control requirements will be specifically aimed at reducing emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) resulting from combustion during the aggregate drying and heating process. The Department finds that reducing NOx emissions from hot mix asphalt plants is a necessary step in attaining ambient concentrations of ozone and fine particulate matter that are in compliance with the national ambient air quality standards.

The current NOx requirements under Part 212 affect only major facilities. Most, if not all, hot mix asphalt plants in New York State are minor sources. These new requirements will therefore be targetedprimarily at minor sources. Approximately 200 hot mix asphalt production plants exist throughout the state, though not all are currently in service. While some asphalt production plants have consolidated under common ownership, many of these could be considered small businesses.

The Department has identified two local government entities that will be affected by the proposed requirements of Part 212. The NewYork City Department of Transportation (NYC DOT) has been operating a hot mix plant in Brooklyn, and just recently took over a plant in Queens. The City of Syracuse Department of Public Works (DPW) also owns a hot mix plant. The requirements placed on these municipally-owned plants under the proposed revisions will not differ in any way from the requirements placed on other subject plants.

COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS The new compliance requirements under Part 212 apply uniformly statewide. Under the proposed requirements, owners and operators of hot mix asphalt production plants must comply with NOx reduction practices and the possible application of low NOx burner control technology. Annual burner tune-ups will be required in order to increase the efficiency of the dryer burner. Plants will also be requiredto implement methods of reducing the moisture content in their aggregate stockpiles, which will have the effect of requiring less drying time and therefore requiring less fuel to be burned.

The owners or operators of plants will also be required to analyze the economic feasibility of installing a low NOx burner when theircurrent burner is due to be replaced (though no later than 2020). In instances where it proves feasible, the installation of a low NOx burner will be required. The cost effectiveness calculation contained in AirGuide 20 will be utilized, with a threshold that represents the dollarper-ton value of Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) at the time the analysis is done, in order to determine economic feasibility.

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Burner technicians will be utilized to comply with the annual tune-up requirements. Plant owners or operators will need to obtain low NOx burner specifications from manufacturers to complete the economic analysis. In the event that a low NOx burner is found to be economically feasible, the installation will be performed by burner manufacturer staff.

COMPLIANCE COSTS The Department will be requiring plants to conduct annual burner tune-ups to ensure efficient combustion for the drying and heating process. Such tune-ups increase the efficiency of the burner, resulting in decreased fuel use and an associated decrease in emissions of NOx and other pollutants. Periodic tune-ups are already a common practicebecause of the fuel savings that can be obtained. Requiring such tuneups annually can yield 10 percent reductions in NOx at an approximate cost of $1,000 per ton reduced, and can have a direct payback to plant owners from decreased fuel consumption.

The Department is also requiring facilities to investigate the best method by which to reduce moisture in aggregate stockpiles. This may simply be a continuation of current practice if such measures arealready being taken. By reducing the moisture content of the aggregate before it reaches the dryer, the amount of fuel required to dry and heat the aggregate can be considerably reduced. This could result in significant fuel savings for the plant. Costs will vary depending upon the method selected and the plant's site characteristics, and whether such methods are already employed. A technical paper released by Astec, Inc. (a manufacturer of asphalt plant equipment) proposes an example in which a plant with production volume of 150,000 tons per year could offset the cost of paving under its stockpile in just five to six months due to savings in materials, fuel, and loader operation1

. Any money saved after this payback period would be a direct benefit.

Beginning January 1, 2012, the Department will also require the owner or operator of an asphalt plant to investigate the feasibility of installing a low NOx burner when it comes time for replacement of the burner currently in use. By January 1, 2020, all plants must have submitted such an analysis to the Department. Low NOx burners have the potential to reduce NOx emissions by 25 to 40 percent. The cost effectiveness calculation contained in Air Guide 20 will be utilized, with a threshold that represents the dollar-per-ton value of Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) at the time the analysis is done, in order to determine economic feasibility.

MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACTBecause these proposed requirements are targeted toward minor facilities, a number of small businesses will be affected, as well as the Syracuse DPW, which owns one plant, and the NYC DOT, which owns two. The Department is requiring a combination of operating 

## NYS Register/September 15, 2010 Rule Making Activities

**16**practices and the analysis of control equipment to reduce NOxemissions. In this manner, it hopes to achieve sufficient NOx reductions while minimizing the effects on businesses. The annual burner tune-ups and reduction in aggregate moisture content will reduce NOx at moderate cost while making the plant operate more efficiently and reduce fuel use. The Department is requiring plants to utilize the cost effectiveness threshold value for RACT in conducting the low NOx burner analysis. In instances where the installation of a low NOx burner would be too costly, it would not be required.

SMALL BUSINESS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION

The proposed addition of NOx control requirements to Part 212 results from a candidate control measure developed by member states of the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC). This proposed measure was presented to industry stakeholders at the November 2, 2006 OTC Control Strategy meeting in Baltimore, MD. These stakeholders were given the opportunity to express their impressions and concerns of the candidate control measure. Additionally, a representative from the National Asphalt Pavement Association was present at the 2006 OTC Fall Meeting in Richmond, VA, where this proposed measure was also discussed.

The Department held a public comment period for the initially proposed revisions to Part 212, as well as public hearings on February 8, 9, and 10, 2010, as required by the State Administrative Procedures Act. On February 8, 2010, Department staff met with representativesof the New York Construction Materials Association, Inc. (NYMaterials) to discuss the requirements of the proposed revision. The Department is taking into consideration the comments received during the comment period and the views of NYMaterials in re-proposing these requirements. The Department will be holding an additional publiccomment period on these latest revisions, and will again take any comments received into consideration.

ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL FEASIBILITYThe various proposed requirements are all expected to be technically feasible methods of reducing NOx at hot mix asphalt production plants, and apply equally to all plants. The annual burner tune-up requirement comes at a cost of approximately $1,000 per ton of NOx reduced, and the resulting increase in efficiency can lead to savings infuel use. Similarly, the costs expended in performing stockpile maintenance can be recouped through reduced fuel use, as less energy would be required to dry the aggregate.

The Department is utilizing a cost threshold to determine the feasibility of installing low NOx burners when the currently installed burners have reached the end of their useful life. The low NOx emissions from some plants may preclude them from finding low NOx burners to be cost effective, though larger plants are likely to see enough of areduction in NOx to make the application of such technology economically feasible.

—— —

—

— 1 Technical Paper T-129, “Stockpiles” by George H. Simmons, Jr. Available on www.astecinc.com. Revised Rural Area Flexibility Analysis

TYPES AND ESTIMATED NUMBERS OF RURAL AREAS AFFECTED

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation(Department) proposes to revise 6 NYCRR Part 212, ‘‘General Process Emission Sources.’’ The proposed revision will include the addition of nitrogen oxide (NOx) control requirements for hot mix asphalt production plants under new section 212.12. Approximately 200 hot mix asphalt production plants exist throughout the state, though not allof these are in service. All such plants throughout the state will be affected, regardless of location. Rural areas are not disproportionately affected by these new control requirements under Part 212.

COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS The new compliance requirements under Part 212 apply uniformly statewide. Under the proposed requirements, owners and operators of hot mix asphalt production plants must comply with NOx reduction practices and the possible application of low NOx burner control technology. Annual burner tune-ups will be required to increase the efficiency of the dryer burner. Plants will also be required to implement methods of reducing the moisture content in their aggregate stockpiles, which will have the effect of requiring less drying time and therefore requiring less fuel to be burned.

Owners and operators of plants will also be required to analyze theeconomic feasibility of installing a low NOx burner when their current burner is due to be replaced (though no later than 2020). In instances where it proves feasible, the installation of a low NOx burner will be required. This analysis will utilize the cost effectiveness calculation contained in the Department's Air Guide 20 guidance document. Additionally, a low NOx burner will be required at any new hot mix asphalt production plant.

COSTS The Department will be requiring plants to conduct an annual burner tune-up to ensure efficient combustion for the drying and heating process. Such tune-ups increase the efficiency of the burner, resulting in decreased fuel use and an associated decrease in emissions of NOx and other pollutants. Periodic tune-ups are already a common practicebecause of the fuel savings that can be obtained. Requiring such tuneups annually can yield 10 percent reductions in NOx at an approximate cost of $1,000 per ton reduced, and can have a direct payback to plant owners from decreased fuel consumption.

The Department is also requiring facilities to investigate the best method by which to reduce moisture in aggregate stockpiles. This may simply be a continuation of current practice if such measures arealready being taken. By reducing the moisture content of the aggregate before it reaches the dryer, the amount of fuel required to dry and heat the aggregate can be considerably reduced. This could result in significant fuel savings for the plant. Costs will vary depending upon the method selected and the plant's site characteristics, and whether such methods are already employed. A technical paper released by Astec, Inc. (a manufacturer of asphalt plant equipment) proposes an example in which a plant with production volume of 150,000 tons per year could offset the cost of paving under its stockpile in just five to six months due to savings in materials, fuel, and loader operation1

. Any money saved after this payback period would be a direct benefit.

Beginning January 1, 2012, the Department will also require the owner or operator of an asphalt plant to investigate the feasibility of installing a low NOx burner when it comes time for replacement of the burner currently in use. By January 1, 2020, all plants must have submitted such an analysis to the Department. Low NOx burners have the potential to reduce NOx emissions by 25 to 40 percent. The cost effectiveness calculation contained in Air Guide 20 will be utilized, with a threshold that represents the dollar-per-ton value of Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) at the time the analysis is done, in order to determine economic feasibility.

MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACT The Department does not expect any adverse impacts on rural areas. Because the proposed asphalt plant requirements are applicable to sources statewide, no rural area will be affected disproportionately.

The Department is requiring a combination of operating practices and the analysis of control equipment to reduce NOx emissions. In this manner, it hopes to achieve sufficient NOx reductions while minimizing the effects on businesses. The annual burner tune-ups and reduction in aggregate moisture content will reduce NOx emissions at moderate cost while making the plant operate more efficiently and reducing fuel use. The Department is requiring plants to utilize the cost effectiveness threshold value for RACT in conducting the low NOx burner analysis. In instances where the cost of installation of a low NOx burner would exceed the RACT threshold, the installation of such equipment would not be required.

There will be positive environmental impacts from the regulation in rural areas. Rural areas containing applicable sources, as well as rural areas downwind of such sources, should be subject to a decrease in ground-level ozone, airborne particulate matter, and acid deposition due to the reduction in NOx emissions.

RURAL AREA PARTICIPATION The proposed addition of NOx control requirements to Part 212 results from a candidate control measure developed by member states 

## NYS Register/September 15, 2010 Rule Making Activities

**17**of the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC). This proposed measure was presented to industry stakeholders at the November 2, 2006 OTC Control Strategy meeting in Baltimore, MD. These stakeholders were given the opportunity to express their impressions and concerns of the candidate control measure. Additionally, a representative from the National Asphalt Pavement Association was present at the 2006 OTC Fall Meeting in Richmond, VA, where this proposed measure was also discussed.

The Department held a public comment period for the initially proposed revisions to Part 212, as well as public hearings on February 8, 9, and 10, 2010, as required by the State Administrative Procedures Act. On February 8, 2010, Department staff met with representativesof the New York Construction Materials Association, Inc. (NYMaterials) to discuss the requirements of the proposed revision. The Department is taking into consideration the comments received during the comment period and the views of NYMaterials in re-proposing these requirements. The Department will be holding an additional publiccomment period on these latest revisions, and will again take any comments received into consideration.

—— —

—

— 1 Technical Paper T-129, “Stockpiles” by George H. Simmons, Jr. Available on www.astecinc.com. Revised Job Impact Statement No revisions were made to the Job Impact Statement. Assessment of Public Comment

Comments received from June 16, 2010 through 5:00PM, July 16,
2010

Comment: The redrafted regulations require that beginning January 1, 2012, the owner or operator must ‘‘analyze the economic feasibility of installing a low NOx burner when it comes time for their current burner to be replaced.’’ Does this mean that an economic feasibility analysis must be submitted in 2012 for all hot mix asphalt (HMA)plants? Or, is an economic feasibility study required at the time a facility is going to replace a burner after January 1, 2012? Commenter:
1 Response: The approach required by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (Department) is reflected in the commenter's latter statement: anytime after January 1, 2012, when an HMA facility is preparing to replace its burner, they must provide the Department with an economic feasibility study for a low NOx burner.

Comment: In some instances, it may not be necessary to perform an economic feasibility analysis to determine if a low NOx burner can be installed. The regulations should allow facilities the option to foregothe economic feasibility analysis, which would be costly and timeconsuming, and install a low NOx burner if the company and/or burner manufacturer has determined it to be economically feasible. In somecases, the preparation and submittal of an economic feasibility analysis may place an unnecessary financial burden on the owner/operator, and impede business operations by the need to prepare the analysis report and wait for Department approval. Commenter: 1

Response: In instances where an HMA plant voluntarily installs a low NOx burner because of its belief that such equipment would provefeasible, the economic analysis will not be a requirement. The preparation and submission of such a plan would be superfluous, and the plant could proceed with the installation without having to wait for Department approval. Of course, for HMA plants intending to show that a low NOx burner is not economically feasible, an analysis will be required in all cases.

Comment: The re-proposed regulations clarify that the Department will accept the manufacturer's classification of a burner as ‘‘low NOx.’’ Some facilities have recently installed ‘‘low NOx’’ burners as classified by the manufacturer. These burners should be exempted from the January 1, 2020 deadline for the completion of an economic feasibility analysis and installation of a low NOx burner. Given that the re-proposed regulations will require annual burner tune-ups, these burners can have an effective life well beyond January 1, 2020. Therefore, facilities already operating with low NOx burners should not be forced to replace a perfectly functional low NOx burner if its useful life expectancy is beyond January 1, 2020. Commenter: 1

Response: In cases where an HMA plant has already installed a low NOx burner according to manufacturer classifications, the Department will support the commenter's proposed approach. Because the purpose of the analysis is to determine whether a low NOx burner would be feasible, such an analysis would not be logical for plants thatalready operate such equipment. In lieu of the economic analysis, a facility owner should document the existence of a low NOx burner and submit it to the applicable Regional office by the January 1, 2020 deadline.

Comment: The revised regulations call for facilities to prepare andsubmit to the Department their ‘‘intended practices plan’’ for reducing moisture in aggregate stockpiles by March 1, 2011. The regulations, however, do not specify which practices are available and allowable. How will this part of the regulations be enforced without any specific requirements? Commenter: 1

Response: In the Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) for the Part 212 re-proposal, the Department indicates that the ‘‘primary ways by which aggregate moisture content could be reduced are by covering the stockpile to shield it from rain, either with a tarp or physical structure, or by paving under and sloping the pile to allow water todrain away.’’ These methods were specifically mentioned in the comments by the National Asphalt Pavement Association (NAPA) to the Ozone Transport Commission on its original proposal, and also reflect methods discussed in the Astec technical paper (referenced in the RIS) and brought up in communications with the New York Construction Materials Association (NYMaterials). The Department believes that these two methods are practical and effective for the stated purpose of reducing moisture content, should be feasible at most plants, and should therefore be the starting point for HMA plants in drafting their ‘‘intended practices plans.’’ The Department decided not to impose specific requirements for reducing moisture in aggregate piles because, as noted by NAPA, ‘‘Best Practices are plant- and geographic locale-specific.’’ The Department is relying on each HMA facility to inform us of the best approach for their plant.

Comment: As currently proposed, the requirements for the ‘‘intended practices plan’’ are too vague and would subject regulated facilities to widespread variety in enforcement, interpretation, etc., bythe Regions as well as different inspectors in the same Region. Facilities could be at a competitive disadvantage or unknowingly be in violation, if one region or inspector requires a particular management practice (e.g., paving or covering) and another region does not.
Commenter: 1

Response: As stated in the regulation, RIS, and in the comment above, the Department is not enforcing a particular management practice such as paving or covering a stockpile. The interpretation and enforcement of this requirement will be based on the plan submitted by each HMA facility. The Department therefore expects each plant to be thorough in its description of their intended practice, and to follow its stated practice thereafter. In doing so, the Department and its Regional staff will be able to successfully enforce such requirements.

Comment: The regulations should be more specific to indicate the acceptable moisture reduction practices, but should provide for operational flexibility. For example, it may be physically and/or operationally infeasible to cover stockpiles, pave beneath them, etc. Therefore, these should not be mandatory requirements. Commenter:
1 Response: The Department understands the commenter's concerns, and avoided the inclusion of mandatory requirements in Part 212 forthese reasons. While the Department suggested two of the most oftcited and effective means in the RIS as a starting point, it must defer to industry experts to determine what means are most reasonable in instances where covering or paving under stockpiles are not feasible. Because effective reduction of moisture in aggregate stockpiles can be directly beneficial to an HMA plant (potentially reducing fuel use by10 to 15 percent, according to NAPA), the Department believes facilities will identify methods that can most appropriately be tailored totheir plant, thus reducing NOx emissions while resulting in fuel savings for the plant.

Comment: Due to the wide variability in site and operational conditions, as well as the moisture reduction options available from site to site, the requirement for an ‘‘intended practices plan’’ and submittal 

## NYS Register/September 15, 2010 Rule Making Activities

**18**of an associated permit modification should be removed from the regulations. As many facilities currently employ some form(s) ofmoisture management, this component seems better suited for a guidance document rather than a vague regulation that will be extremely difficult to comply with and enforce uniformly throughout New York State because of its ambiguity. Commenter: 1

Response: As noted by the commenter, many facilities currently employ some form(s) of moisture management. Such measures resultin the burning of less fuel, and are therefore accepted means of reducing NOx emissions where feasible. Placing this requirement in a regulation form will encourage those operators who do not presently practice moisture management to assess whether this is a feasible means of reducing emissions. Placing the requirement in a guidance document will carry less weight.

Comment: The re-proposed regulations state that a permit modification application must be submitted by March 1, 2011, presumably for the ‘‘intended practices plan.’’ The preparation and implementation of management practices for moisture control in aggregate stockpiles does not appear to be a significant facility modification that requires a modification to an air permit or registration under the existing regulations. Since the new requirements will apply uniformly to allcurrent permitted facilities, the Department should issue a Departmentinitiated modification to all existing permits rather than create unnecessary paperwork, as well as eliminate the unneeded time-consuming process of preparing and reviewing the numerous applications throughout New York State. Commenter: 1

Response: The revisions to Section 212.12 will be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for inclusion in New York's State Implementation Plan (SIP). As such, it becomes a federal applicable requirement and will need to be addressed in each facility's permit (depending on the type it has) as required under 6 NYCRR Part 201. The Department may consider a mechanism by which the new requirements could be applied to multiple facilities to the extent allowed under Part 201.

Comment: Part 212.12(b) goes well beyond the 57 months established in the Final Implementation Rule for Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) implementation. New York should tighten the compliance schedule allowed for facilities to implementRACT to a more expeditious timeframe before the 2020 date established in the re-proposed rule (i.e., within 18 months from effectivedate of regulation or 1 year from when compliance plans are duewhichever is sooner).

Part 212.12(b) is also unacceptable because it does not provide for increments of progress nor sufficient time from when the economic analyses are to be submitted to when controls are to be installed. If New York were to adopt a compliance date beyond 18 months or 1 year from when compliance plans are due then New York should include in the regulation, increments of progress similar to those identified in 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart F-Procedural Requirements, Section 51.100(q), with specific dates.

New York's proposed Part 212 rule contains generic RACT provisions applicable to asphalt production. New York should commit to submit the case-by-case RACT determinations approved by the Department to EPA as SIP revisions by a date certain. In 212.12(b), we understand that facilities will be required to perform an annual tune-up on the dryer-burners and also reduce the moisture content of the aggregate stockpile. While both of these practices will help reduce facility NOx emissions, New York should establish a facility wide NOx reduction level as prescribed RACT (i.e., an overall reduction of 35 percent of NOx emissions at each facility not already equipped with NOx controls). Facilities may achieve this by utilizing the best practices mentioned above in conjunction with installation of a low NOx burner or establish emission limits that reflect the application of the suggested control technology, with the option of alternate RACT (i.e., using warm mix asphalt).[2]

Response: Applying RACT on an approximately six month timeframe isn't feasible for the proposed requirements to hot mix asphalt plants. The Department heard from many commenters on the initial Part 212 proposal on this issue. Commenters' primary concerns were that facilities which had just replaced their burners would potentially be required to replace them again within a very short timeframe, and that additional time was needed for plants to budget accordingly. The requirements for best practices go into effect as quickly as possible (next operating year), but a longer timeframe for the low NOx burner assessment and installation was necessary.

The commenter refers to the continued application of Clean Air ActSections 182(b)(2) and 182(f) as the basis for these comments regarding RACT. Section 182(f) specifically refers to major sources of NOx: ‘‘The plan provisions required under this subpart for major stationary sources of volatile organic compounds shall also apply to major stationary sources...of oxides of nitrogen.’’ (Section 182(b)(2) refersonly to volatile organic compound sources.) Because these requirements target minor sources of NOx, the Section 182(f) requirements do not apply. Hot mix asphalt plants that are major sources of NOx would already have been captured by the general RACT requirements under the Department's Section 212.10.

Comment: 212.12(c) should be revised to read as follows: The RACT determinations, including the economic feasibility analyses, which are acceptable to the Department will be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency for review and approval as a revision to the State Implementation Plan. Commenter: 2

Response: In their comments on the initial proposal of Part 212 in December, 2009, EPA suggested the addition of a clause very similar to the above. Because the Department already incorporated EPA's language into the rule for the re-proposal, EPA's suggested revisions to their own statement will not be made.

List of Commenters 1. Hanson Aggregates New York LLC 2. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2



### NOTICE OF ADOPTION

Emissions of Ozone Precursor VOCs From Commercial and
Industrial Adhesives and Sealants

I.D. No. ENV-51-09-00010-A Filing No. 902 Filing Date: 2010-08-31

Effective Date: 30 days after filing

PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Procedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following action:

Action taken: Amendment of Parts 200 and 228 of Title 6 NYCRR. Statutory authority: Environmental Conservation Law, sections 1-0101, 1-0303, 3-0301, 19-0103, 19-0105, 19-0107, 19-0301, 19-0305, 71-2103 and 71-2105 Subject: Emissions of ozone precursor VOCs from commercial and industrial adhesives and sealants. Purpose: To lower levels of ozone in New York State and decrease adverse public health and welfare effects. Substance of final rule: 6 NYCRR Part 228 is being renumbered as Subpart 228-1. Internal references in the existing Part are being revised to reflect this renumbering. 6 NYCRR Part 200.9 is being amended to include documents incorporated by reference in new Subpart 228-2 and to reflect the renumbering of existing Part 228.

The addition of 6 NYCRR Subpart 228-2, Commercial and Industrial Adhesives, Sealants and Primers, and its associated references inPart 200, General Provisions, applies to any person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, or manufactures commercial or industrial adhesives, sealants and primers, three months after the effective date of this rule, for use in the State of New York. Subpart 228-2 does not apply to: any commercial or industrial adhesive, sealant or primer manufactured in New York State for shipment and use outside of NewYork State, or units of any adhesive, sealant or primer product, packing excluded, which weigh less than one pound and consist of less than 16 ounces.

The revisions are based on the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) 2006 model rule for commercial and industrial adhesives and sealants, which, in turn, is based on the reasonably available control technology(RACT) and best available retrofit control technology (BARCT) determination by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) developed 

## NYS Register/September 15, 2010 Rule Making Activities

**19**