Document ID: EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0838-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Tennessee; Volatile Organic Compounds Definition Rule Revision for Chattanooga
Posted Date: 2019-05-20T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 97 (Monday, May 20, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22786-22787]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10346]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0838; FRL-9993-74-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; TN; Volatile Organic Compounds Definition Rule 
Revision for Chattanooga

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the Chattanooga portion of the Tennessee State 
Implementation Plan (SIP), provided by the Tennessee Department of 
Environment and Conservation on behalf of the Chattanooga-Hamilton 
County Air Pollution Control Bureau through a letter dated September 
12, 2018. The revision makes changes to the definition of volatile 
organic compounds (VOC) that are consistent with changes to state and 
federal regulations. EPA is proposing to approve the changes because 
they are consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 19, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2018-0838 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment 
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment 
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general 
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Evan Adams of the Air Regulatory 
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and 
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is 
(404) 562-9009. Mr. Adams can also be reached via electronic mail at 
adams.evan@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Tropospheric ozone, commonly known as smog, occurs when VOC and 
nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the atmosphere in the 
presence of sunlight. Because of the harmful health effects of ozone, 
EPA and state governments limit the amount of VOC and NOX 
that can be released into the atmosphere. VOC are those compounds of 
carbon (excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, 
metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate) that form 
ozone through atmospheric photochemical reactions. Compounds of carbon 
(or organic compounds) have different levels of reactivity; they do not 
react at the same speed or do not form ozone to the same extent.
    Section 302(s) of the CAA specifies that EPA has the authority to 
define the meaning of ``VOC,'' and hence what compounds shall be 
treated as VOC for regulatory purposes. It has been EPA's policy that 
compounds of carbon with negligible reactivity need not be regulated to 
reduce ozone and should be excluded from the regulatory definition of 
VOC. See 42 FR 35314 (July 8, 1977), 70 FR 54046 (September 13, 2005). 
EPA determines whether a given carbon compound has ``negligible'' 
reactivity by comparing the compound's reactivity to the reactivity of 
ethane. EPA lists these compounds in its regulations at 40 CFR 
51.100(s) and excludes them from the definition of VOC. The chemicals 
on this list are often called ``negligibly reactive.'' EPA may 
periodically revise the list of negligibly reactive compounds to add or 
delete compounds.
    In this rulemaking, EPA is proposing action to approve 
Chattanooga's SIP revision which amends the definition of ``Volatile 
Organic Compounds'' in the Chattanooga City Code, Part II, Chapter 4, 
Section 4-2, Definitions. This SIP revision amends paragraphs 1 and 2 
to make the Chattanooga portion consistent with changes to Federal and 
other similar SIP-approved regulations.1 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA approved similar revisions to the Tennessee SIP on April 
13, 2006, and September 26, 2018. See 71 FR 19124 and 83 FR 48547, 
respectively.
    \2\ With respect to all of the compounds added to those excluded 
from the Chattanooga SIP's definition of VOC, EPA has issued final 
rules revising the Federal definition of VOC to exclude the 
compounds as negligibly reactive compounds: EPA added 
1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3-methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane 
(HFE-7300) on January 18, 2007. See 72 FR 2193. EPA added propylene 
carbonate and dimethyl carbonate on January 21, 2009. See 74 FR 
3437. EPA added trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene on June 22, 2012. 
See 77 FR 37610. EPA added HCF2OCF2H (also 
known as HFE-134), HCF2OCF2OCF2H 
(also known as HFE-236cal2), 
HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (also 
known as HFE-338pcc13), and 
HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2
 H (also known as H-Galden 1040X or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or 180)) 
on February 12, 2013. See 78 FR 923. EPA added trans-1-chloro-3,3,3-
trifluoroprop-1-ene on August 28, 2013. See 78 FR 53029. EPA added 
2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene on October 22, 2013. See 78 FR 62451. EPA 
added 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol on March 27, 2014. See 79 FR 
17037.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Analysis of State's Submittal

    On September 12, 2018, Tennessee submitted a SIP revision to EPA 
for review and approval amending the definition of VOC found in Part 
II, Chapter 4, Section 4-2, of the Chattanooga Code.\3\ Specifically, 
the revision adds the following compounds to the list of negligibly 
reactive compounds to be consistent with additions to federal and other 
similar

[[Page 22787]]

SIP-approved regulations: 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3-methoxy-4-
(trifluoromethyl)pentane (HFE-7300); propylene carbonate; dimethyl 
carbonate; trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene; 
HCF2OCF2H (HFE-134); 
HCF2OCF2OCF2H (HFE-236cal2); 
HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (HFE-
338pcc13); 
HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2
H (H-Galden 1040x or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or 180)); trans-1-chloro-
3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-ene; 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene; and 2-amino-2-
methyl-1-propanol. These compounds are excluded from the VOC definition 
on the basis that each of these compounds makes a negligible 
contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. EPA is proposing to 
approve this revision because it is consistent with revisions to the 
Federal definition of VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s). EPA is also proposing to 
approve this revision because, as noted in Section I, above, it is 
consistent with other similar SIP-approved regulations. The revision 
also includes the following minor, administrative changes: Spelling 
corrections to certain compounds already listed in paragraph 1 and a 
spelling correction that changes ``negligibility'' to ``negligibly'' in 
paragraph 2 of Part II, Chapter 4, Section 4-2, of the Chattanooga 
Code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA notes that the Agency received the SIP revision on 
September 18, 2018, along with other SIP revisions from Tennessee. 
EPA will consider the other SIP revisions in a separate rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to CAA section 110(l), the Administrator shall not approve 
a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any 
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further 
progress (as defined in CAA section 171), or any other applicable 
requirement of the Act. The County's addition of exemptions from the 
definition of VOC in paragraph 1 in the Chattanooga City Code, Part II, 
Chapter 4, Section 4-2, Definitions, of the are approvable under 
section 110(l) because they reflect changes to federal regulations 
based on findings that the aforementioned compounds are negligibly 
reactive and make a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone 
formation.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule 
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference Part II, Chapter 4, Section 4-2, of the Chattanooga City 
Code, state effective January 23, 2017, which revised the definition of 
VOC so that it better aligns with the federal regulations. EPA has 
made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available 
through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 office (please 
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section of this preamble for more information).

IV. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the aforementioned changes to the 
Chattanooga portion of the Tennessee SIP because the changes are 
consistent with section 110 of the CAA and meet the regulatory 
requirements of the Act. EPA views these changes as being consistent 
with the CAA and does not believe that these changes will result in a 
change in emissions.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. This action merely 
proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does 
not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     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);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or 
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does 
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: May 6, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2019-10346 Filed 5-17-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P