81 FR 63104 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Colorado; Second Ten-Year PM10

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 178 (September 14, 2016)

Page Range		63104-63105
FR Document		2016-21755

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Colorado. On May 13, 2013, the Governor of Colorado's designee submitted to the EPA a revised maintenance plan for the Lamar area for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 microns (PM<INF>10</INF>). The EPA is approving the revised maintenance plan with the exception of one aspect of the plan's contingency measures.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 178 (Wednesday, September 14, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 14, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63104-63105]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-21755]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0042; FRL-9952-09-Region 8]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
State of Colorado; Second Ten-Year PM10 Maintenance Plan for 
Lamar

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Colorado. 
On May 13, 2013, the Governor of Colorado's designee submitted to the 
EPA a revised maintenance plan for the Lamar area for the National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an 
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 microns 
(PM10). The EPA is approving the revised maintenance plan 
with the exception of one aspect of the plan's contingency measures.

DATES: This final rule is effective on October 14, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0042. All documents in the docket are 
listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in 
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain 
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the 
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, 
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. The EPA requests that if at all possible, 
you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the 
hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., 
excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Hou, Air Program, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop 
Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6210, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    The Lamar area was designated nonattainment for PM10 and 
classified as moderate by operation of law upon enactment of the Clean 
Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990. See 56 FR 56694, 56705, 56736 
(November 6, 1991). EPA approved Colorado's nonattainment area SIP for 
the Lamar PM10 nonattainment area on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 
29732).
    On May 13, 2013, the Governor of Colorado's designee submitted the 
second 10-year update of the PM10 maintenance plan for the 
Lamar area to the EPA. On June 1, 2016, the EPA published a proposed 
rulemaking in which we proposed to approve the 10-year update because 
it demonstrates continued maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS 
through 2025.

II. Response to Comments

    We received one comment letter during the public comment period, 
which was submitted anonymously.
    Comment: Given the high number of high wind occurrences, and given 
the consistently windy nature of the Lamar area, the EPA cannot rely on 
the Exceptional Events Rule (EER) to ignore PM10 
exceedances. In doing so, the EPA is failing to provide environmental 
justice for people in rural areas, by failing to provide them with 
clean air.
    Response: 55 exceedances between two monitors over the course of 14 
years were reported by the City of Lamar. The EPA notes that high wind 
events do not have to be rare to be considered an exceptional event. 
Quoting from the ``Interim Guidance on the Preparation of 
Demonstrations in Support of Requests to Exclude Ambient Air Quality 
Data Affected by High Winds Under the Exceptional Events Rule,'' U.S. 
EPA May 2013 page 20, it states,

    The EPA will use a weight-of-evidence approach to assess each 
demonstration and comparison of the concentrations during event(s) 
in question with historical concentration data on a case-by-case 
basis. The EPA acknowledges that natural events, such as high wind 
dust events, can recur and still be eligible for exclusion under the 
EER. Therefore, events do not necessarily have to be rare to satisfy 
this element.


[[Page 63105]]


Of the 34 out of 55 flagged PM10 high wind monitored values, 
which the EPA has concurred with, each event has met the criteria set 
forth under the EER. Having satisfied these requirements, and having 
obtained concurrence from the EPA, we find that the exclusion of these 
data from regulatory decisions is appropriate. Additionally, the EPA's 
review and concurrence with the 34 of 55 flagged PM10 high 
wind monitored values is consistent with the EER, and such analysis is 
applied uniformly throughout the state.

III. Final Action

    We are approving the revised Lamar PM10 Maintenance Plan 
that was submitted to us on May 13, 2013, with one exception. We are 
not acting on the submitted update to the Natural Events Action Plan 
(NEAP), as the NEAP is not part of the SIP. We are approving the 
remainder of the revised maintenance plan because it demonstrates 
maintenance through 2025 as required by CAA section 175A(b), retains 
the control measures from the initial PM10 maintenance plan 
that the EPA approved on October 25, 2005, and meets other CAA 
requirements for a section 175A maintenance plan. We are excluding from 
use in determining that Lamar continues to attain the PM10 
NAAQS, exceedances of the PM10 NAAQS that were recorded at 
the Lamar Power Plant PM10 monitor on February 9, 2002; 
March 7, 2002; May 21, 2002; June 20, 2002; April 5, 2002; May 22, 
2008; January 19, 2009; April 3, 2011; and November 5, 2011, because 
the exceedances meet the criteria for exceptional events caused by high 
wind natural events.
    Additionally, the EPA is proposing to exclude from use in 
determining that Lamar continues to attain the PM10 NAAQS, 
exceedances of the PM10 NAAQS that were recorded at the 
Municipal Complex PM10 monitor on May 21, 2002; June 20, 
2002; April 5, 2005; January 19, 2009; February 8, 2013; March 18, 
2012; April 2, 2012; April 9, 2013; May 1, 2013; May 24, 2013; May 25, 
2013; May 28, 2013; December 24, 2013; February 16, 2014; March 11, 
2014; March 15, 2014; March 18, 2014; March 29, 2014; March 30, 2014; 
March 31, 2014; April 23, 2014; April 29, 2014; November 10, 2014; 
April 1, 2015; and April 2, 2015, because the exceedances meet the 
criteria for exceptional events caused by high wind natural events. We 
are also approving the revised maintenance plan's 2025 transportation 
conformity motor vehicle emission budget for PM10 of 764 
lbs/day.

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the 
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E) 
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not 
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those 
imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of 
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the 
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have 
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is 
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions 
of the CAA and applicable federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is 
to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the 
CAA. Accordingly, these actions merely approve state law as meeting 
federal requirements and do not impose additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by state law. For this reason, these actions:
     Are not significant regulatory actions 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);
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are 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.);
     Do 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);
     Do not have federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not economically significant regulatory actions based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are 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
     Do not provide the 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).
    In addition, the SIP does not apply on any Indian reservation land 
or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated 
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian Country, the 
final rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by November 14, 2016. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action 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 CAA section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compounds.

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

    Dated: August 26, 2016.
Debra H. Thomas,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2016-21755 Filed 9-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

63104 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

Dated: August 8, 2016. PART 52—APPROVAL AND Subpart UU—Vermont
H. Curtis Spalding, PROMULGATION OF
Regional Administrator, EPA New England. IMPLEMENTATION PLANS ■ 2. In § 52.2370(c), the table ‘‘EPA
Approved Vermont Regulations’’ is
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the amended by revising the state citation
Code of Federal Regulations is amended ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows: entries for Table 2 and Table 3 to read
as follows: as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
§ 52.2370 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *

EPA-APPROVED VERMONT REGULATIONS
State effective
State citation Title/subject EPA approval date Explanations
date

* * * * * * *
Table 2 .................................... Table 2—PSD increments ..... 7/5/2014 9/14/2016, [Insert Federal Added increment thresholds
Register citation]. for PM2.5.
Table 3 .................................... Table 3—Levels of significant 7/5/2014 9/14/2016, [Insert Federal Added levels for PM2.5.
impact. Register citation].

* * * * * * *

[FR Doc. 2016–21881 Filed 9–13–16; 8:45 am] information is not publicly available, maintenance plan for the Lamar area to
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P e.g., CBI or other information whose the EPA. On June 1, 2016, the EPA
disclosure is restricted by statute. published a proposed rulemaking in
Certain other material, such as which we proposed to approve the 10-
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION copyrighted material, is not placed on year update because it demonstrates
AGENCY the Internet and will be publicly continued maintenance of the PM10
available only in hard copy form. NAAQS through 2025.
40 CFR Part 52 Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through II. Response to Comments
[EPA–R08–OAR–2015–0042; FRL–9952–09–
Region 8] http://www.regulations.gov or in hard We received one comment letter
copy at the Air Program, Environmental during the public comment period,
Approval and Promulgation of Air Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, which was submitted anonymously.
Quality Implementation Plans; State of 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado Comment: Given the high number of
Colorado; Second Ten-Year PM10 80202–1129. The EPA requests that if at high wind occurrences, and given the
Maintenance Plan for Lamar all possible, you contact the individual consistently windy nature of the Lamar
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION area, the EPA cannot rely on the
AGENCY: Environmental Protection CONTACT section to view the hard copy
Agency (EPA). Exceptional Events Rule (EER) to ignore
of the docket. You may view the hard PM10 exceedances. In doing so, the EPA
ACTION: Final rule. copy of the docket Monday through is failing to provide environmental
Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding justice for people in rural areas, by
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
federal holidays. failing to provide them with clean air.
Agency (EPA) is approving State
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Response: 55 exceedances between
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the State of Colorado. On James Hou, Air Program, U.S. two monitors over the course of 14 years
May 13, 2013, the Governor of Environmental Protection Agency, were reported by the City of Lamar. The
Colorado’s designee submitted to the Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 EPA notes that high wind events do not
EPA a revised maintenance plan for the Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado have to be rare to be considered an
Lamar area for the National Ambient Air 80202–1129, (303) 312–6210, exceptional event. Quoting from the
hou.james@epa.gov. ‘‘Interim Guidance on the Preparation of
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for
particulate matter with an aerodynamic SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Demonstrations in Support of Requests
diameter less than or equal to 10 I. Background to Exclude Ambient Air Quality Data
microns (PM10). The EPA is approving Affected by High Winds Under the
The Lamar area was designated
the revised maintenance plan with the Exceptional Events Rule,’’ U.S. EPA
nonattainment for PM10 and classified
exception of one aspect of the plan’s May 2013 page 20, it states,
as moderate by operation of law upon
contingency measures. enactment of the Clean Air Act (CAA) The EPA will use a weight-of-evidence
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES

DATES: This final rule is effective on Amendments of 1990. See 56 FR 56694, approach to assess each demonstration and
October 14, 2016. 56705, 56736 (November 6, 1991). EPA comparison of the concentrations during
event(s) in question with historical
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a approved Colorado’s nonattainment area concentration data on a case-by-case basis.
docket for this action under Docket ID SIP for the Lamar PM10 nonattainment The EPA acknowledges that natural events,
No. EPA–R08–OAR–2015–0042. All area on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29732). such as high wind dust events, can recur and
documents in the docket are listed on On May 13, 2013, the Governor of still be eligible for exclusion under the EER.
the http://www.regulations.gov Web Colorado’s designee submitted the Therefore, events do not necessarily have to
site. Although listed in the index, some second 10-year update of the PM10 be rare to satisfy this element.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:49 Sep 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\14SER1.SGM 14SER1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 63105

Of the 34 out of 55 flagged PM10 high IV. Statutory and Executive Orders appropriate, disproportionate human
wind monitored values, which the EPA Review health or environmental effects, using
has concurred with, each event has met Under the CAA, redesignation of an practicable and legally permissible
the criteria set forth under the EER. area to attainment and the methods, under Executive Order 12898
Having satisfied these requirements, and accompanying approval of a (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
having obtained concurrence from the In addition, the SIP does not apply on
maintenance plan under section
EPA, we find that the exclusion of these any Indian reservation land or in any
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
data from regulatory decisions is other area where the EPA or an Indian
status of a geographical area and do not
appropriate. Additionally, the EPA’s tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has
impose any additional regulatory
review and concurrence with the 34 of jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
requirements on sources beyond those Country, the final rule does not have
55 flagged PM10 high wind monitored imposed by state law. A redesignation to
values is consistent with the EER, and tribal implications and will not impose
attainment does not in and of itself substantial direct costs on tribal
such analysis is applied uniformly create any new requirements, but rather
throughout the state. governments or preempt tribal law as
results in the applicability of specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
III. Final Action requirements contained in the CAA for FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
areas that have been redesignated to The Congressional Review Act, 5
We are approving the revised Lamar attainment. Moreover, the Administrator
PM10 Maintenance Plan that was U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
is required to approve a SIP submission Business Regulatory Enforcement
submitted to us on May 13, 2013, with that complies with the provisions of the
one exception. We are not acting on the Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
CAA and applicable federal regulations. that before a rule may take effect, the
submitted update to the Natural Events See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Action Plan (NEAP), as the NEAP is not agency promulgating the rule must
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the submit a rule report, which includes a
part of the SIP. We are approving the EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
remainder of the revised maintenance copy of the rule, to each House of the
provided that they meet the criteria of Congress and to the Comptroller General
plan because it demonstrates the CAA. Accordingly, these actions
maintenance through 2025 as required of the United States. The EPA will
merely approve state law as meeting submit a report containing this action
by CAA section 175A(b), retains the federal requirements and do not impose and other required information to the
control measures from the initial PM10 additional requirements beyond those U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
maintenance plan that the EPA imposed by state law. For this reason, Representatives, and the Comptroller
approved on October 25, 2005, and these actions: General of the United States prior to
meets other CAA requirements for a • Are not significant regulatory publication of the rule in the Federal
section 175A maintenance plan. We are actions subject to review by the Office Register. A major rule cannot take effect
excluding from use in determining that of Management and Budget under until 60 days after it is published in the
Lamar continues to attain the PM10 Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, Federal Register. This action is not a
NAAQS, exceedances of the PM10 October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
NAAQS that were recorded at the Lamar January 21, 2011); 804(2).
Power Plant PM10 monitor on February • Do not impose an information Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
9, 2002; March 7, 2002; May 21, 2002; collection burden under the provisions petitions for judicial review of this
June 20, 2002; April 5, 2002; May 22, of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 action must be filed in the United States
2008; January 19, 2009; April 3, 2011; U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Court of Appeals for the appropriate
and November 5, 2011, because the • Are certified as not having a circuit by November 14, 2016. Filing a
exceedances meet the criteria for significant economic impact on a petition for reconsideration by the
exceptional events caused by high wind substantial number of small entities Administrator of this final rule does not
natural events. under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 affect the finality of this action for the
Additionally, the EPA is proposing to U.S.C. 601 et seq.); purposes of judicial review nor does it
exclude from use in determining that • Do not contain any unfunded extend the time within which a petition
Lamar continues to attain the PM10 mandate or significantly or uniquely for judicial review may be filed, and
NAAQS, exceedances of the PM10 affect small governments, as described shall not postpone the effectiveness of
NAAQS that were recorded at the in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act such rule or action. This action may not
Municipal Complex PM10 monitor on of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); be challenged later in proceedings to
May 21, 2002; June 20, 2002; April 5, • Do not have federalism implications enforce its requirements. (See CAA
2005; January 19, 2009; February 8, as specified in Executive Order 13132 section 307(b)(2)).
2013; March 18, 2012; April 2, 2012; (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
April 9, 2013; May 1, 2013; May 24, • Are not economically significant List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
2013; May 25, 2013; May 28, 2013; regulatory actions based on health or Environmental protection, Air
December 24, 2013; February 16, 2014; safety risks subject to Executive Order pollution control, Incorporation by
March 11, 2014; March 15, 2014; March 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); reference, Intergovernmental relations,
18, 2014; March 29, 2014; March 30, • Are not significant regulatory Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
2014; March 31, 2014; April 23, 2014; actions subject to Executive Order matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
April 29, 2014; November 10, 2014; 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); requirements, Volatile organic
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES

April 1, 2015; and April 2, 2015, • Are not subject to requirements of compounds.
because the exceedances meet the section 12(d) of the National Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
criteria for exceptional events caused by Technology Transfer and Advancement
high wind natural events. We are also Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Dated: August 26, 2016.
approving the revised maintenance application of those requirements would Debra H. Thomas,
plan’s 2025 transportation conformity be inconsistent with the CAA; and Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
motor vehicle emission budget for PM10 • Do not provide the EPA with the [FR Doc. 2016–21755 Filed 9–13–16; 8:45 am]
of 764 lbs/day. discretionary authority to address, as BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:49 Sep 13, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\14SER1.SGM 14SER1

Document Created: 2016-09-14 02:27:07
Document Modified: 2016-09-14 02:27:07

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Rules and Regulations
Action		Final rule.
Dates		This final rule is effective on October 14, 2016.
Contact		James Hou, Air Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6210, [email protected]
FR Citation		81 FR 63104
CFR Associated		Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Particulate Matter; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Volatile Organic Compounds