[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 104 (Friday, May 30, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29297-29299]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-14196]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[TX-73-1-7316a, FRL-5830-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Plans, Texas; Alternate
Reasonably Available Control Technology Demonstration for Bell
Helicopter Textron, Incorporated; Bell Plant 1 Facility
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a site specific revision to the Texas
State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Bell Helicopter Textron,
Incorporated (Bell) of Fort Worth. This revision was submitted by the
Governor on April 18, 1996, to establish an alternate reasonably
available control technology (ARACT) demonstration to control volatile
organic compounds (VOC) for the surface coating processes at the Bell
Plant 1 facility. The EPA has determined that the control strategy,
solvent and coating emission limits, submitted by Bell and the Texas
Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC), demonstrate
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for the Bell Plant 1
facility. This ARACT demonstration is approvable because Bell has
demonstrated that it is not cost effective to control their VOC
emissions to the presumptive norm set forth in the EPA's Control
Technique Guidelines (CTG) document (EPA 450/2-78-015), and the
alternate emission rate at the facility is the lowest that is
economically reasonable and technically feasible.
DATES: This action is effective on July 29, 1997, unless notice is
received by June 30, 1997 that someone wishes to submit adverse or
critical comments. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will
be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the State's request and other information relevant
to this action are available for inspection during normal hours at the
following locations:
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning Section (6PD-
L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Office of Air Quality,
12124 Park 35 Circle, Austin, Texas 78753.
Anyone wishing to review this petition at the EPA office is asked
to contact the person below to schedule an appointment 24 hours in
advance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lt. Mick Cote, Air Planning Section
(6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-7219.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Part D of the Clean Air Act (the Act) requires ozone nonattainment
plans to include regulations providing for VOC emission reductions from
existing sources through the adoption of RACT. The EPA defined RACT in
a September 17, 1979, Federal Register notice (44 FR 53762)as:
The lowest emission limitation that a particular source is
capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is
reasonably available considering technological and economic
feasibility.
Through the publication of CTG documents, EPA has identified
pollution control levels that EPA presumes to constitute RACT for
various categories of sources. Where the State finds the presumptive
norm applicable to an individual source or group of sources, the State
typically adopts requirements consistent with the presumptive norm.
However, States may develop case-by-case RACT determinations. The EPA
will approve these RACT determinations as long as the State
demonstrates they will satisfy the Act's RACT requirements based on
adequate documentation of the technical and economical circumstances of
the particular source being regulated. Texas adopted the CTG, entitled
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products, as the presumptive norm for VOC
limits on aerospace surface coating processes.
These VOC limits were adopted as part of 30 TAC Sec. 115.421,
Emission Specifications. The presumptive norm for the exterior of
aircraft in Dallas and Tarrant Counties is 6.7 pounds per gallon of
solids delivered to the application system.
The EPA developed a guidance document entitled Guidance for
Developing an Alternate Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
Demonstration for the Tulsa Aerospace Industry, dated October 2, 1989.
This document applies to the aerospace industry and was applicable to
Bell's ARACT analysis as well. This document was issued for States and
industries to follow in developing documents to justify deviation from
the recommended CTG approach. The EPA has reviewed the Bell ARACT
proposal based on this guidance.
Bell manufactures helicopters and helicopter parts for private,
commercial, and military use at its Fort Worth, Texas facility, also
known as Bell Plant 1. As part of its manufacturing operations, Bell
coats helicopters, rotors, and helicopter parts with extreme
performance coatings.
Bell was issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) by the TNRCC Region 4
Office on September 25, 1992, for exceeding 6.7 pounds of VOC per
gallon of solids limit on an individual line basis. Bell submitted an
ARACT application on December 22, 1993, as allowed under 30 TAC Chapter
115, section 115.423(a)(4) to resolve the NOV. An Agreed Order was
signed on November 18, 1994, which requires Bell to obtain this ARACT.
On April 18, 1996, the State of Texas submitted to the EPA its request
for an ARACT approval for surface coating operations at the Bell Plant
1 facility. This site-specific SIP revision was submitted to meet RACT
for Bell's surface coating operations. The EPA believes that Bell and
the State of Texas have provided adequate documentation that the
emission limits developed under this site-specific SIP revision are
RACT based on consideration of economical reasonableness and technical
feasibility. Since case-by-case RACT determinations are allowable under
EPA's definition of RACT, Bell and the State opted for this ARACT
approach to fulfill compliance requirements.
II. Alternate RACT Analysis
Bell investigated the options available for reducing emissions from
its surface coating operations. Among those were coating reformulation,
enhanced application techniques that would improve transfer efficiency,
facility redesign, and add-on control equipment to reduce VOC
emissions.
Bell has evaluated control options for the ARACT sources. Bell has
already put VOC emissions control devices on two booths which are the
most reasonable sources to be controlled. Bell installed a carbon
incineration system (KPR), which achieves an overall VOC destruction
efficiency of 90 percent, to control the VOC emissions from the Blade
Paint Shop (see Provision 17). The emissions from the Blade Paint Shop,
if released uncontrolled to the
[[Page 29298]]
atmosphere, would represent nearly half of the total ARACT source VOC
emissions. The controlled VOC emissions from this shop now represent
only 7.7 percent of the total ARACT source VOC emissions. In addition
to the KPR system, Bell installed four carbon canisters in the Rotor
Touch-Up Booth, which has a manufacturer guaranteed minimum VOC removal
efficiency of 85 percent. The emissions from Rotor Touch-Up Booth are
small compared to the emissions from the Blade Paint Shop, but in case
of KPR failure, the work load from the Blade Paint Shop will be routed
through the Rotor Touch-Up Booth and the emissions will be controlled
by the carbon canisters.
Bell has submitted a cost summary for a number of add-on control
options for further add-on controls. The least expensive option for an
individual painting booth is estimated to have an annualized cost of
$22,424 per ton of VOC emissions reduced, and therefore, considered
cost prohibitive. Besides the add-on control options, Bell also
evaluated several facility redesign options such as, the recirculation
of exhausts, the reduction of air flows and the consolidation of ARACT
sources, which all turned out to be technically or economically
infeasible at this time.
Bell has, and will continue to, investigate and test compliant
coatings to replace currently utilized non-compliant coatings and
implement them when feasible. To date, Bell has found some possible
substitutes in lacquers, epoxy primers and urethane enamels coating
categories and has been successful in its efforts to replace epoxy
primers, which represents 20 percent of the total coatings used at
Bell, with water-based primers.
Bell has demonstrated in their application that the coatings being
used at the facility have the lowest feasible VOC contents. Safety,
performance and specifications prevent Bell using all compliant
coatings at their facility. The coating operation which has the largest
VOC emission rate is the Adhesive Prime Booth, in which coating
materials are used to hold the helicopter's metal rotor blades
together. These coatings must have special physical properties in order
to ensure the safety of helicopters. Bell's helicopters are required to
have a specific operating temperature range from -67 deg.F to 180 deg.F
which very few commercially-available coatings meet. Finally, most of
the coating activities at Bell are conducted in support of the military
production line and coating parameters are strictly regulated by
military specifications.
The VOC limitations on each coating are governed by Provision 11
and Table II of the State submittal. As this ARACT must be reviewed
every two years, EPA or TNRCC may, at that time, request information on
any new, lower VOC coatings that may have been developed during the
interim.
III. Other Measures To Reduce Emissions
Bell will be implementing several equipment, coatings and solvent
changes to reduce VOC emissions as far as possible without more add-on
controls. Bell will purchase and install 10 enclosed gun cleaners for
the washing of ARACT source spray equipment within three months of the
final ratification of this ARACT. Bell will also purchase and install
plural component mixing systems at the Conveyor Prime and Blade Paint
Shop within six months of the final ratification of this ARACT. These
mixing systems will replace both the existing pressure pot system at
the Conveyor Prime Booth and the prime and topcoat pressure pot systems
at the Blade Paint Shop. The new mixing systems will provide
substantial savings in both paint and thinner use. Bell indicated in
their application that high transfer efficiency application equipment
is used to apply the coatings at their facility when feasible. Bell
currently uses high volume/low pressure, electrostatic and air brush
application equipment all with a transfer efficiency of at least 60
percent which reduces the amount of coatings used, and subsequently
reduced the VOC emissions.
Bell will substitute low vapor pressure solvents for the higher
vapor pressure solvents currently used for the wipedown of parts and
assemblies in some of the booths, where feasible. Bell will begin
production testing of low vapor pressure (<5 mmhg)="" solvents="" as="" soon="" as="" permit="" r-1996="" is="" approved.="" the="" epa="" aerospace="" national="" emission="" standards="" for="" hazardous="" air="" pollutants="" (neshap)="" for="" aerospace="" manufacturing="" and="" rework="" facilities="" allows="" wipe="" solvents="" up="" to="" 45="" mmhg="" vapor="" pressure="" to="" be="" used.="" bell="" will="" be="" expected="" to="" comply="" with="" the="" primer,="" topcoat,="" and="" operating="" practices="" included="" in="" this="" neshap="" (60="" fr="" 45948).="" iv.="" final="" rulemaking="" action="" the="" epa="" has="" reviewed="" the="" information="" developed="" by="" bell="" and="" agrees="" that="" the="" majority="" of="" the="" costs="" should="" not="" be="" considered="" cost="" effective="" in="" this="" situation="" relative="" to="" the="" cost="" effectiveness="" assumed="" in="" the="" ctg="" for="" miscellaneous="" metal="" parts="" and="" products.="" the="" epa's="" review="" of="" the="" information="" submitted="" by="" both="" the="" state="" of="" texas="" and="" bell="" indicates="" that,="" at="" this="" time,="" low="" voc="" coatings="" for="" certain="" applications="" and="" processes="" are="" not="" commercially="" available.="" furthermore,="" the="" cost="" effectiveness="" of="" controls="" on="" emissions="" from="" certain="" processes="" at="" this="" facility="" are="" not="" economically="" feasible.="" the="" epa="" finds="" that="" the="" requirements="" in="" the="" recommended="" ctg="" are="" not="" reasonable="" for="" certain="" processes="" and="" that="" the="" proposed="" source="" specific="" alternate="" ract="" determinations="" in="" the="" sip="" submittal="" should="" be="" considered="" ract="" in="" this="" case.="" in="" this="" final="" action,="" epa="" is="" approving="" the="" revision="" to="" the="" texas="" sip="" and="" adopting="" the="" bell="" site-specific="" sip="" revision="" as="" ract="" for="" the="" bell="" plant="" 1="" facility.="" this="" revision="" was="" submitted="" by="" the="" governor="" to="" epa="" by="" letter="" dated="" april="" 18,="" 1996.="" nothing="" in="" this="" action="" should="" be="" construed="" as="" permitting="" or="" allowing="" or="" establishing="" a="" precedent="" for="" any="" future="" request="" for="" revision="" to="" any="" sip.="" each="" request="" for="" revision="" to="" the="" sip="" shall="" be="" considered="" separately="" in="" light="" of="" specific="" technical,="" economic,="" and="" environmental="" factors="" and="" in="" relation="" to="" relevant="" statutory="" and="" regulatory="" requirements.="" v.="" administrative="" requirements="" a.="" executive="" order="" (e.o.)="" 12866="" this="" action="" has="" been="" classified="" for="" signature="" by="" the="" regional="" administrator="" under="" the="" procedures="" published="" in="" the="" federal="" register="" on="" january="" 19,="" 1989="" (54="" fr="" 2214-2225),="" as="" revised="" by="" a="" july="" 10,="" 1995,="" memorandum="" from="" mary="" nichols,="" assistant="" administrator="" for="" air="" and="" radiation.="" the="" office="" of="" management="" and="" budget="" has="" exempted="" this="" regulatory="" action="" from="" e.o.="" 12866="" review.="" b.="" regulatory="" flexibility="" act="" under="" the="" regulatory="" flexibility="" act,="" 5="" u.s.c.="" 600="" et="" seq.,="" epa="" must="" prepare="" a="" regulatory="" flexibility="" analysis="" assessing="" the="" impact="" of="" any="" proposed="" or="" final="" rule="" on="" small="" entities.="" see="" 5="" u.s.c.="" 603="" and="" 604.="" alternatively,="" epa="" may="" certify="" that="" the="" rule="" will="" not="" have="" a="" significant="" impact="" on="" a="" substantial="" number="" of="" small="" entities.="" small="" entities="" include="" small="" businesses,="" small="" not-for-profit="" enterprises,="" and="" government="" entities="" with="" jurisdiction="" over="" populations="" of="" less="" than="" 50,000.="" the="" sip="" approvals="" under="" section="" 110="" and="" subchapter="" i,="" part="" d="" of="" the="" act="" do="" not="" create="" any="" new="" requirements="" but="" simply="" approve="" requirements="" that="" the="" state="" is="" already="" imposing.="" therefore,="" because="" the="" federal="" sip="" approval="" does="" not="" impose="" any="" new="" requirements,="" i="" [[page="" 29299]]="" certify="" that="" it="" does="" not="" have="" a="" significant="" impact="" on="" any="" small="" entities="" affected.="" moreover,="" due="" to="" the="" nature="" of="" the="" federal-state="" relationship="" under="" the="" act,="" preparation="" of="" a="" flexibility="" analysis="" would="" constitute="" federal="" inquiry="" into="" the="" economic="" reasonableness="" of="" state="" action.="" the="" act="" forbids="" epa="" to="" base="" its="" actions="" concerning="" sips="" on="" such="" grounds.="" see="" union="" electric="" co.="" v.="" u.s.="" epa,="" 427="" u.s.="" 246,="" 255-66="" (1976);="" 42="" u.s.c.="" 7410(a)(2).="" c.="" unfunded="" mandates="" under="" section="" 202="" of="" the="" unfunded="" mandates="" reform="" act="" of="" 1995,="" signed="" into="" law="" on="" march="" 22,="" 1995,="" epa="" must="" prepare="" a="" budgetary="" impact="" statement="" to="" accompany="" any="" proposed="" or="" final="" rule="" that="" includes="" a="" federal="" mandate="" that="" may="" result="" in="" estimated="" costs="" to="" state,="" local,="" or="" tribal="" governments="" in="" the="" aggregate;="" or="" to="" the="" private="" sector,="" of="" $100="" million="" or="" more.="" under="" section="" 205,="" epa="" must="" select="" the="" most="" cost-="" effective="" and="" least="" burdensome="" alternative="" that="" achieves="" the="" objectives="" of="" the="" rule="" and="" is="" consistent="" with="" statutory="" requirements.="" section="" 203="" requires="" epa="" to="" establish="" a="" plan="" for="" informing="" and="" advising="" any="" small="" governments="" that="" may="" be="" significantly="" or="" uniquely="" impacted="" by="" the="" rule.="" the="" epa="" has="" determined="" that="" the="" approval="" action="" promulgated="" does="" not="" include="" a="" federal="" mandate="" that="" may="" result="" in="" estimated="" costs="" of="" $100="" million="" or="" more="" to="" either="" state,="" local,="" or="" tribal="" governments="" in="" the="" aggregate,="" or="" to="" the="" private="" sector.="" this="" federal="" action="" approves="" preexisting="" requirements="" under="" state="" or="" local="" law,="" and="" imposes="" no="" new="" federal="" requirements.="" accordingly,="" no="" additional="" costs="" to="" state,="" local,="" or="" tribal="" governments,="" or="" to="" the="" private="" sector,="" result="" from="" this="" action.="" d.="" submission="" to="" congress="" and="" the="" general="" accounting="" office="" under="" 5="" u.s.c.="" sec.="" 801(a)(1)(a)="" as="" added="" by="" the="" small="" business="" regulatory="" enforcement="" fairness="" act="" of="" 1996,="" epa="" submitted="" a="" report="" containing="" this="" rule="" and="" other="" required="" information="" to="" the="" u.s.="" senate,="" the="" u.s.="" house="" of="" representatives="" and="" the="" comptroller="" general="" of="" the="" general="" accounting="" office="" prior="" to="" publication="" of="" this="" rule="" in="" today's="" federal="" register.="" this="" rule="" is="" not="" a="" ``major="" rule''="" as="" defined="" by="" 5="" u.s.c.="" sec.="" 804(2).="" e.="" petitions="" for="" judicial="" review="" under="" section="" 307(b)(1)="" of="" the="" act,="" petitions="" for="" judicial="" review="" of="" this="" action="" must="" be="" filed="" in="" the="" united="" states="" court="" of="" appeals="" for="" the="" appropriate="" circuit="" by="" july="" 29,="" 1997.="" filing="" a="" petition="" for="" reconsideration="" by="" the="" administrator="" of="" this="" final="" rule="" does="" not="" affect="" the="" finality="" of="" this="" rule="" for="" the="" purposes="" of="" judicial="" review="" nor="" does="" it="" extend="" the="" time="" within="" which="" a="" petition="" for="" judicial="" review="" may="" be="" filed,="" and="" shall="" not="" postpone="" the="" effectiveness="" of="" such="" rule="" or="" action.="" this="" action="" may="" not="" be="" challenged="" later="" in="" proceedings="" to="" enforce="" its="" requirements.="" see="" section="" 307(b)(2)="" of="" the="" act.="" list="" of="" subjects="" in="" 40="" cfr="" part="" 52="" environmental="" protection,="" air="" pollution="" control,="" hydrocarbons,="" incorporation="" by="" reference,="" intergovernmental="" regulations,="" ozone,="" reporting="" and="" recordkeeping,="" and="" volatile="" organic="" compounds.="" dated:="" february="" 12,="" 1997.="" jerry="" clifford,="" acting="" regional="" administrator.="" 40="" cfr="" part="" 52="" is="" amended="" as="" follows:="" part="" 52--[amended]="" 1.="" the="" authority="" citation="" for="" part="" 52="" continues="" to="" read="" as="" follows:="" authority:="" 42="" u.s.c.="" 7401-7671q.="" subpart="" ss--texas="" 2.="" section="" 52.2270="" is="" amended="" by="" adding="" paragraph="" (c)="" (100)="" to="" read="" as="" follows:="" sec.="" 52.2270="" identification="" of="" plan.="" *="" *="" *="" *="" *="" (c)="" *="" *="" *="" (100)="" a="" revision="" to="" the="" texas="" state="" implementation="" plan="" (sip)="" to="" adopt="" an="" alternate="" control="" strategy="" for="" the="" surface="" coating="" processes="" at="" the="" bell="" helicopter="" textron,="" incorporated="" (bell)="" plant="" 1="" facility.="" (i)="" incorporation="" by="" reference.="" (a)="" texas="" natural="" resource="" conservation="" commission="" agreed="" order="" for="" docket="" no.="" 95-1642-sip,="" issued="" and="" effective="" april="" 2,="" 1996,="" for="" bell's="" plant="" 1="" facility.="" (b)="" a="" letter="" from="" the="" governor="" of="" texas="" dated="" april="" 18,="" 1996,="" submitting="" to="" the="" epa="" the="" agreed="" order="" and="" the="" site-specific="" sip="" revision="" for="" bell.="" (ii)="" additional="" material.="" (a)="" the="" site-specific="" revision="" to="" the="" texas="" state="" implementation="" plan="" for="" bell,="" dated="" january="" 16,="" 1996.="" (b)="" the="" alternate="" reasonably="" available="" control="" technology="" demonstration="" prepared="" by="" bell,="" dated="" december="" 1995.="" *="" *="" *="" *="" *="" [fr="" doc.="" 97-14196="" filed="" 5-29-97;="" 8:45="" am]="" billing="" code="" 6560-50-p="">