1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-; Significant New Use Rule, 65987-65994 [2010-27166]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023–01 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded this action is one of a
category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically
excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule
involves establishing, disestablishing, or
changing Regulated Navigation Areas
and security or safety zones. An
environmental analysis checklist and a
categorical exclusion determination are
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, and
Waterways.
■ For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR
1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add temporary § 165.T11–367 to
read as follows:
■
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
(a) Location. This temporary safety
zone is established for the waters of San
Francisco Bay 1,000 yards off Epic
Roasthouse Restaurant, San Francisco,
CA. The fireworks launch site will be
located in position 37° 46′35.30″ N, 122°
23′13.33″ W (NAD 83).
From 10:45 a.m. until 8:45 p.m. on
November 5, 2010, the temporary safety
zone applies to the navigable waters
around the fireworks site within a
radius of 100 feet. From 8:45 p.m. until
9:30 p.m. on November 5, 2010, the area
to which the temporary safety zone
applies will increase in size to
15:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
Dated: October 15, 2010.
C.L. Stowe,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2010–27114 Filed 10–26–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
§ 165.T11–367 Safety zone; Epic
Roasthouse Private Party, San Francisco,
CA.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
encompass the navigable waters around
the fireworks site within a radius of
1,000 feet.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section, ‘‘designated representative’’
means a Coast Guard Patrol
Commander, including a Coast Guard
coxswain, petty officer, or other officer
on a Coast Guard vessel or a Federal,
State, or local officer designated by or
assisting the Captain of the Port San
Francisco (COTP) in the enforcement of
the safety zone.
(c) Regulations.
(1) Under the general regulations in
§ 165.23 of this title, entry into,
transiting, or anchoring within this
safety zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the COTP or the COTP’s
designated representative.
(2) The safety zone is closed to all
vessel traffic, except as may be
permitted by the COTP or a designated
representative.
(3) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the safety zone must
contact the COTP or a designated
representative to obtain permission to
do so. Vessel operators given permission
to enter or operate in the safety zone
must comply with all directions given to
them by the COTP or the designated
representative. Persons and vessels may
request permission to enter the safety
zone on VHF–16 or through the 24-hour
Command Center at telephone 415–399–
3547.
(d) Effective period. This section is
effective from 10:45 a.m. through 9:30
p.m. on November 5, 2010.
40 CFR Parts 9 and 721
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2008–0918; FRL–8846–8]
RIN 2070–AB27
1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-;
Significant New Use Rule
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is issuing a significant
new use rule (SNUR) under section
5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA) for the chemical substance
identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3tetrafluoro- (CAS No. 754–12–1) which
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
65987
was the subject of premanufacture
notice (PMN) P–07–601. This action
requires persons who intend to
manufacture, import, or process the
chemical substance for a use that is
designated as a significant new use by
this final rule to notify EPA at least 90
days before commencing that activity.
EPA believes that this action is
necessary because the chemical
substance may be hazardous to human
health. The required notification would
provide EPA with the opportunity to
evaluate the intended use and, if
necessary, to prohibit or limit that
activity before it occurs.
DATES: This final rule is effective
November 26, 2010.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPPT–2008–0918. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
(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 in the electronic docket at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPPT
Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm.
3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number of
the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the OPPT Docket is (202)
566–0280. Docket visitors are required
to show photographic identification,
pass through a metal detector, and sign
the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are
processed through an X-ray machine
and subject to search. Visitors will be
provided an EPA/DC badge that must be
visible at all times in the building and
returned upon departure.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical information contact: Kenneth
Moss, Chemical Control Division
(7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (202) 564–9232; e-mail address:
moss.kenneth@epa.gov.
For general information contact: The
TSCA–Hotline, ABVI–Goodwill, 422
E:\FR\FM\27OCR1.SGM
27OCR1
65988
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
II. Background
South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY
14620; telephone number: (202) 554–
1404; e-mail address: TSCAHotline@epa.gov.
A. What action is the agency taking?
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
I. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you manufacture, import,
process, or use the chemical substance
contained in this final rule: 1-Propene,
2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN P–07–601;
CAS No. 754–12–1). Potentially affected
entities may include, but are not limited
to:
Manufacturers, importers, or
processors of the subject chemical
substance (NAICS codes 325 and
324110), e.g., chemical manufacturing
and petroleum refineries.
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. To determine whether
you or your business may be affected by
this action, you should carefully
examine the applicability provisions in
§ 721.5. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult the
technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
This action may also affect certain
entities through pre-existing import
certification and export notification
rules under TSCA. Chemical importers
are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15
U.S.C. 2612) import certification
requirements promulgated at 19 CFR
12.118 through 12.127; see also 19 CFR
127.28. Chemical importers must certify
that the shipment of the chemical
substance complies with all applicable
rules and orders under TSCA. For
importers of the chemical substance
subject to this SNUR those requirements
include the SNUR. The EPA policy in
support of import certification appears
at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. In
addition, any persons who export or
intend to export the chemical substance
that is the subject of this final rule on
or after November 26, 2010 are subject
to the export notification provisions of
TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b))
(see § 721.20) and must comply with
the export notification requirements in
40 CFR part 707, subpart D.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
EPA is finalizing a SNUR under TSCA
section 5(a)(2) for the chemical
substance identified as 1-Propene,
2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN P–07–601;
CAS No. 754–12–1; aka HFO–1234yf).
This action requires persons who intend
to manufacture, import, or process the
chemical substance for an activity that
is designated as a significant new use by
this final rule to notify EPA at least 90
days before commencing that activity.
Previously, in the Federal Register of
February 1, 2010 (75 FR 4983) (FRL–
8438–4), EPA issued a direct final SNUR
for the chemical substance. However,
EPA received notices of intent to submit
adverse comments on this SNUR.
Therefore, as required by
§ 721.170(d)(4)(i), in the Federal
Register of April 2, 2010 (75 FR 16670)
(FRL–8816–9), EPA withdrew the direct
final SNUR on this chemical substance
and subsequently proposed a SNUR
using notice and comment procedures
in the Federal Register of April 2, 2010
(75 FR 16706) (FRL–8818–2). More
information on the chemical substance
subject to this final rule can be found in
the direct final or proposed SNUR. The
record for the direct final and proposed
SNUR on this chemical substance was
established in the docket under docket
ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2008–0918.
That docket includes information
considered by the Agency in developing
the direct final rule and this final rule,
including comments on the proposed
rule. The chemical substance addressed
under this final SNUR is also being
reviewed under the Clean Air Act (CAA)
to determine whether it may be listed as
an acceptable substitute for CFC–12 in
motor vehicle air conditioning systems.
See ‘‘Protection of Stratospheric Ozone:
New Substitute in the Motor Vehicle Air
Conditioning Sector under the
Significant New Alternatives Policy
(SNAP) Program’’ (74 FR 53445, October
19, 2009) (FRL–8969–7).
EPA received six comments on the
proposed SNUR and two comments on
the original direct final SNUR. A full
discussion of EPA’s response to these
comments is included in Unit V. of this
document. After consideration of these
comments, EPA is issuing a modified
final rule on the chemical substance
that:
1. Clarifies the significant new use
provisions by organizing them under the
following paragraphs of § 721.80:
• Section 721.80(j) (use other than as
a refrigerant in motor vehicle air
conditioning systems in new passenger
cars and vehicles).
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• Section 721.80(m) (commercial use
other than in new passenger cars and
vehicles in which the charging of motor
vehicle air conditioning systems with
the PMN substance was done by the
motor vehicle original equipment
manufacturer (OEM)).
• Section 721.80(o) (distribution in
commerce of products intended for use
by a consumer for the purpose of
servicing, maintenance, and disposal
involving the PMN substance).
2. Removes the following significant
new use provisions:
• All servicing, maintenance, and
disposal involving the PMN substance
will be done only by CAA section 609
certified technicians using CAA section
609 certified refrigerant handling
equipment.
• Uses in which the chemical
substance will be sold or distributed in
other than 20-pound (net weight)
containers or larger (this significant new
use is now encompassed by § 721.80(o)).
Furthermore, EPA has provided in the
docket to this rule additional human
health information to supplement EPA’s
findings under § 721.170(d)(3)(i) and
EPA’s findings in the proposed rule. See
Unit IV. of the proposed rule in the
Federal Register of April 2, 2010 (75 FR
16706) for a discussion of EPA’s
findings.
B. What is the agency’s authority for
taking this action?
Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C.
2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to determine
that a use of a chemical substance is a
‘‘significant new use.’’ EPA must make
this determination by rule after
considering all relevant factors,
including those listed in TSCA section
5(a)(2). Once EPA determines that a use
of a chemical substance is a significant
new use, TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B)
requires persons to submit a significant
new use notice (SNUN) to EPA at least
90 days before they manufacture,
import, or process the chemical
substance for that use. Persons who
must report are described in § 721.5.
C. Applicability of General Provisions
General provisions for SNURs appear
in 40 CFR part 721, subpart A. These
provisions describe persons subject to
the rule, recordkeeping requirements,
exemptions to reporting requirements,
and applicability of the rule to uses
occurring before the effective date of the
final rule. Provisions relating to user
fees appear at 40 CFR part 700.
According to § 721.1(c), persons subject
to this SNUR must comply with the
same notice requirements and EPA
regulatory procedures as submitters of
PMNs under TSCA section 5(a)(1)(A). In
E:\FR\FM\27OCR1.SGM
27OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
particular, these requirements include
the information submission
requirements of TSCA section 5(b) and
5(d)(1), the exemptions authorized by
TSCA section 5(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and
(h)(5), and the regulations at 40 CFR
part 720. Once EPA receives a SNUN,
EPA may take regulatory action under
TSCA section 5(e), 5(f), 6, or 7 to control
the activities for which it has received
the SNUN. If EPA does not take action,
EPA is required under TSCA section
5(g) to explain in the Federal Register
its reasons for not taking action.
Chemical importers are subject to the
TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612)
import certification requirements
promulgated in Customs and Border
Patrol regulations at 19 CFR 12.118
through 12.127; see also 19 CFR 127.28.
Chemical importers must certify that the
shipment of the chemical substance
complies with all applicable rules and
orders under TSCA. For importers of the
chemical substance subject to this final
SNUR those requirements include the
SNUR. The EPA policy in support of
import certification appears at 40 CFR
part 707, subpart B. In addition, any
persons who export or intend to export
the chemical substance identified in this
final SNUR are subject to the export
notification provisions of TSCA section
12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611 (b)) (see § 721.20)
and must comply with the export
notification requirements in 40 CFR part
707, subpart D.
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
III. Rationale and Objectives of the Rule
A. Rationale
During the review of the chemical
substance PMN P–07–601—as discussed
in the proposed rule—based on test data
on the PMN substance, EPA identified
health concerns for developmental
toxicity and lethality to workers and
consumers if they were exposed to a
significant amount of the PMN
substance via inhalation. EPA
determined that one or more of the
criteria of concern established at
§ 721.170 were met. EPA did not find
that the use scenarios described in the
PMN triggered the determination set
forth under section 5(e) of TSCA. EPA
did, however, determine that certain
changes from the use scenario described
in the PMN could result in increased
exposures, thereby constituting a
‘‘significant new use.’’ EPA has
determined that activities proposed as a
‘‘significant new use’’ satisfy the two
requirements stipulated in
§ 721.170(c)(2), i.e., these significant
new use activities: ‘‘(i) Are different
from those described in the
premanufacture notice for the
substance, including any amendments,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
deletions, and additions of activities to
the premanufacture notice, and (ii) may
be accompanied by changes in exposure
or release levels that are significant in
relation to the health or environmental
concerns identified’’ for the PMN
substance.
B. Objectives
EPA is issuing this final SNUR for a
chemical substance that has undergone
premanufacture review because the
Agency wants to achieve the following
objectives with regard to the significant
new uses designated in this final rule:
• EPA will receive notice of any
person’s intent to manufacture, import,
or process a listed chemical substance
for the described significant new use
before that activity begins.
• EPA will have an opportunity to
review and evaluate data submitted in a
SNUN before the notice submitter
begins manufacturing, importing, or
processing a listed chemical substance
for the described significant new use.
• EPA will be able to regulate
prospective manufacturers, importers,
or processors of a listed chemical
substance before the described
significant new use of that chemical
substance occurs, provided that
regulation is warranted pursuant to
TSCA sections 5(e), 5(f), 6, or 7.
Issuance of a SNUR for a chemical
substance does not signify that the
chemical substance is listed on the
TSCA Inventory. Guidance on how to
determine if a chemical substance is on
the TSCA Inventory is available on the
Internet at https://www.epa.gov/opptintr/
newchems/pubs/invntory.htm.
IV. Significant New Use Determination
Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA states that
EPA’s determination that a use of a
chemical substance is a significant new
use must be made after consideration of
all relevant factors, including:
• The projected volume of
manufacturing and processing of a
chemical substance.
• The extent to which a use changes
the type or form of exposure of human
beings or the environment to a chemical
substance.
• The extent to which a use increases
the magnitude and duration of exposure
of human beings or the environment to
a chemical substance.
• The reasonably anticipated manner
and methods of manufacturing,
processing, distribution in commerce,
and disposal of a chemical substance.
In addition to these factors
enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2), the
statute authorizes EPA to consider any
other relevant factors.
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
65989
To determine what would constitute a
significant new use for HFO–1234yf,
EPA considered relevant information—
in the docket and discussed further in
Unit V. of this document—about the
toxicity of the chemical substance,
likely human exposures and
environmental releases associated with
possible uses, taking into consideration
the four bulleted TSCA section 5(a)(2)
factors listed in this unit, and the
regulations at § 721.170 for issuing a
SNUR after receipt of a PMN.
V. Response to Comments on Proposed
SNUR on 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoroEPA received comments from a
number of submitters on the proposed
rule for the chemical substance
identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3tetrafluoro- (PMN P–07–601; CAS No.
754–12–1; aka HFO–1234yf). These
comments, many of which covered
similar issues, have been grouped under
general headings. Many of the
comments stated that EPA’s risk
assessment for the PMN substance
overstates both the potential hazards of
the chemical substance and the
potential exposures from ‘‘do-ityourself’’ (DIY) consumer use, and uses
a health effects endpoint from a toxicity
study that is inappropriate given the
duration of exposure that could result
from DIY consumer use. These
commenters evaluated EPA’s risk
assessment and conducted their own
quantitative risk assessments for single,
short-term exposure scenarios, using
where possible the same information
and approach used in EPA’s Risk
Assessment for the PMN Substance (Ref.
4). A discussion of the comments
received and the Agency’s responses
follows.
A. Risk Assessment: Toxicity
Commenters stated that adverse
health impacts from use of HFO–1234yf
under the conditions specified would
not be expected for car occupants,
servicing personnel, or DIY consumers.
The comments relate to the choice of the
point of departure (POD) for the
Agency’s risk assessment of singleexposure (DIY consumers) use scenarios
and to the Agency’s use of a Margin of
Exposure (MOE), as opposed to Hazard
Index (HI), approach to evaluate the
chemical substance.
Comment: Why didn’t the Agency use
the 200,000 parts per million (ppm)
effect level from a 4-hour rat study on
HFO–1234yf to select the POD for the
risk assessment?
Response: This acute 4-hour exposure
study in rats showed some lung effects
at approximately 200,000 ppm, the
lowest exposure level in the study.
E:\FR\FM\27OCR1.SGM
27OCR1
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
65990
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Thus, EPA considers 200,000 ppm to be
a LOAEL (low observed adverse effect
level). If a LOAEL were used in the risk
assessment instead of a NOAEL (no
observed adverse effect level), EPA
would use an uncertainty factor to
estimate a NOAEL, which would result
in a lower POD than what was used.
Instead, EPA used the NOAEL for a
subacute 14-day study on the chemical
substance as the endpoint, because the
LOAEL from the acute 4-hour study is
an effect endpoint which is
inappropriate for developing safe
exposure levels for humans. Some of the
animals in the 4-hour acute study had
grey, discolored lungs at both exposure
levels in the study, and EPA considered
this an adverse effect. Therefore, EPA
could not determine a NOAEL from the
acute 4-hour study. It is Agency policy
to use the NOAEL where available,
because of greater assurance of a ‘‘safe’’
level. Where only the LOAEL is
available, that will be used along with
any necessary additional uncertainty
factors. For example, if EPA had started
with the LOAEL of 200,000 ppm, it
would have required an additional MOE
of 10 to estimate a NOAEL from a
LOAEL, for a total MOE of 300 instead
of 30. This would have resulted in a
more conservative risk assessment than
using the NOAEL from the 14-day
subacute study.
Comment: Why didn’t the Agency use
the cardiac sensitization study in dogs
as the POD?
Response: Cardiac sensitization
studies are for very short durations—on
the order of 10 minutes—and they only
address cardiac sensitization. The PMN
chemical does not induce cardiac
sensitization. EPA selected the acute
POD from a multiple-exposure, twoweek rat inhalation study on the PMN
substance, reasoning that if no effects
were seen in the duration of the study,
then no effects would be seen from a
single exposure.
Comment: Why did EPA use the MOE
rather than HI approach for risk
assessment of HFO–1234yf?
Response: Where available, it is EPA
policy to use a NOAEL for the POD.
This is the highest exposure level that
did not cause an adverse health effect in
a study. In this case, EPA selected the
POD from an animal (rat 2-week
inhalation) study. Because animals may
respond to different exposure levels
than humans, there is some uncertainty
when extrapolating from animals to
humans. For this reason, an Uncertainty
Factor (UF) is applied when
extrapolating from animals to humans—
typically a factor of 10 is used but, in
this case, since there was a reasonable
estimate of the pharmacokinetic
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
component of the uncertainty, this UF
was reduced to 3. An additional UF is
applied to account for variation in the
human population response to a
chemical exposure—in this case, a UF of
10 was used. The two UFs give a
resultant UF of 30 to yield an acceptable
level of health risk. EPA’s policy for
review of new chemicals under TSCA is
to divide the POD by the exposure level
to obtain the MOE. For this PMN
substance, the ‘‘acceptable level of
health risk’’ would be an MOE of 30 or
greater.
One commenter proposed dividing
the estimated exposure to the PMN
chemical by the POD levels to obtain a
HI. If the exposure is less than the POD,
the HI is <1 and this would be
considered an ‘‘acceptable level of
health risk.’’ This HI approach, however,
does not factor in uncertainties about
extrapolating from animal to human
responses, nor does it address
variability within the human population
with regard to thresholds of response to
chemical exposures. EPA has
consistently applied the MOE approach
to PMN evaluations (and for other risk
assessments) in order to account for
these uncertainties. This is the rationale
for EPA continuing to use the MOE
approach for this chemical substance.
Perhaps most important to EPA’s
position on this final SNUR is that EPA
has uncertainties about using available
single-exposure studies on HFO–1234yf
to determine the MOEs for different
exposure scenarios. As a result of
concerns with these studies, EPA
calculated single exposure MOEs from
the NOAEL in the 2-week inhalation
toxicity study of the PMN chemical in
rats. There are some additional
uncertainties in the single exposure
(acute) assessments because of the
observation of lethality in rabbit dams
after multiple exposures in a
developmental study to the PMN
substance. For these reasons, as
mentioned in Unit IV. of the proposed
SNUR, EPA recommends a rabbit acute
inhalation toxicity study to address the
question of whether pregnant rabbits
would die from a single exposure.
Rabbits should be exposed for one hour,
using the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) 403
test guideline. Pregnant rabbits should
be exposed on gestational day 12 (this
is within the time-frame that pregnant
rabbits started dieing in the
developmental study).
B. Risk Assessment: Exposure
Comment: Commenter stated that
EPA’s assessment, using the Gradient
Report (Ref. 6), overstates the potential
exposures from consumer DIY use of
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
HFO–1234yf to refill MVAC systems.
The commenter asserted that EPA’s
methodology to estimate the exposure
levels associated with the DIY use
greatly exaggerates the exposure that
could be experienced in actual use
conditions. The specific exposure
parameters that the commenters
questioned were assumptions regarding:
• Garage volume.
• Time the user spent under the hood
during recharging operations.
• The size of the space where any
leaking gas would disperse.
• The air exchange rate in a service
area that should be well-ventilated
when the engine is running.
• Use of the refrigerant in a closed
garage with no ventilation.
• The amount of refrigerant used
during recharge operations.
During the comment period for the
proposed SNUR, the PMN submitter
conducted a simulated vehicle service
leak testing, using HFC–134a as a
surrogate, indicating that exposures
from use of a 12-oz can during
consumer DIY use are below the
Agency’s level of concern for HFO–
1234yf (Ref. 7).
Response: After reviewing the
submitted consumer DIY use exposure
study, EPA responded with a list of
clarifying questions (Ref. 5), to which
the PMN submitter subsequently
responded (Ref. 8). Although the PMN
submitter’s responses were helpful, EPA
still has concerns about potential
exposures to consumers during DIY use
and the inherent toxicity of HFO–
1234yf. Therefore, the Agency has
decided to retain requirements in the
final rule for notification to the Agency
prior to distribution in commerce of
products intended for use by DIY
consumers, while waiting for data from
the acute inhalation toxicity study in
rabbits described in Unit V.A. With
regards to exposure, the peak
concentration values from the submitted
study are as high as 3% by volume,
equivalent to 30,000 ppm. These peaks
appeared to occur in the first one or two
minutes of each emission. Accordingly,
EPA would need exposure data
presented and averaged out over shorter
Time Weighted Averages (TWAs) than
the 30 minutes currently in the study,
because it would appear that a number
of these early exposure peaks could
result in TWA values that would result
in MOEs less than the acceptable
Agency level of 30 (see Unit V.A.). This
is important because the data on HFO–
1234yf are insufficient to differentiate
whether the toxicity is due to blood
level alone from an acute exposure, is
due to accumulated exposure over time
(area under the curve), or is due to some
E:\FR\FM\27OCR1.SGM
27OCR1
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
combination of both. Since blood
equilibrium levels are reached within
minutes, a high level of exposure in a
short duration could result in blood
levels exceeding a threshold if the mode
of action is due to blood levels.
Additional TWAs of 3, 5, and 10
minutes are recommended.
The Agency’s chief concern during its
analysis of the submitted exposure
study, and generally when estimating
potential consumer exposure to HFO–
1234yf, is that even if there is a low
likelihood of the types of exposure
scenarios assessed in this study
occurring, there are estimates of 11
million DIY consumer recharging events
per year in the United States (Ref. 1)
(this is not necessarily 11 million
people as some individuals recharge
more than once). The Clodic survey
commissioned by the California Air
Resources Board (Ref. 3) indicated that
10% of DIY consumers released 100 g or
more of refrigerant during servicing,
including 2% releasing more than 500 g,
and another 15% of DIY consumers
released 50 to 100 g during servicing,
due to faulty recharging equipment and
poor technique. Both these percentages
and the overall number of DIY
consumer recharging events indicate
that a substantial number of events
could have significant leaks. The
Agency recognizes that commenters
have suggested, as an alternative to the
container size limitation contained in
the proposed SNUR, that the reductions
in emissions and exposures can be
accomplished by restricting sales and
use of all refrigerants to qualified
technicians, or by using DIY consumer
containers and charging equipment that
minimize the potential for releases (e.g.,
having a resealable/leak control device
on all containers and using charging
connection equipment that has a quick
coupler with a moving rod to open the
low pressure refrigerant valve on the
vehicle). For example, CARB’s
‘‘Certification Procedures for Small
Containers of Automotive Refrigerant,’’
effective March 10, 2010 (Ref. 2),
mandates a self-sealing valve with
leakage rate in storage of ≤3.0 g/yr,
container labeling requirements, and
education materials requirements.
However, commenters provided
insufficient information on these
approaches for EPA to assess whether,
for HFO–1234yf, they would reduce
exposures during DIY consumer use and
thus eliminate the potential toxicity
risk. Consequently, the Agency has
removed the specific container size
limitation proposed as a significant new
use, and replaced it with a description
that directly addresses the issue of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
potential exposure to DIY consumers by
clarifying that significant new use,
found at 40 CFR 721.80(o) (‘‘use in a
consumer product’’), as ‘‘distribution in
commerce of products intended for use
by a consumer for the purpose of
servicing, maintenance, and disposal
involving the PMN substance.’’
Information on such techniques or
equipment to minimize potential
exposures to DIY consumers should
accompany any SNUN submitted in
response to this final SNUR that
requests use of HFO–1234yf in DIY
consumer products. Other information
submitted with such a SNUN should
include data that quantifies exposures
for durations shorter than the 30-minute
TWA presented in the exposure study
submitted by the PMN submitter, in
particular, TWAs for 3 minutes, 5
minutes, and 10 minutes, in addition to
30 minutes.
C. CAA Section 609 Certification
Comment: One commenter stated that
the training and equipment
requirements currently in CAA section
609 relative to other refrigerants would
not be necessary for environmentally
safe usage of HFO–1234yf during initial
charging in an automobile assembly
plant. The commenter stated that a CAA
section 609 certification is not currently
required for automobile assembly plants
workers or equipment; manufacturers
perform their own training programs;
and Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) requirements
for handling flammable substances
already fully address the flammabilityrelated HFO–1234yf worker safety
issues in automobile assembly facilities.
Response: EPA recognizes that the
requirements for certification contained
in CAA section 609 are reserved only for
the MVAC servicing sector, i.e., ‘‘service
for consideration,’’ which includes
technicians or mechanics being paid
either with cash, credit, goods, or
services when they perform a service in
a vehicle involving a refrigerant in an
air conditioning system (40 CFR 82.32
(g)).
The following scenarios are not
covered under CAA section 609:
• Initial charge of an MVAC by
OEMs.
• The action of disposing or
disassembling an MVAC in a disposal
facility in accordance with 40 CFR
82.152 and 40 CFR 82.156 (f). The
action of extracting or recovering
refrigerant from an MVAC at a disposal
facility does not require CAA section
608 or 609 certification (40 CFR 82.34
(d)); however, such processing does
require the use of an approved
refrigerant handling equipment meeting
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
65991
the requirements of 40 CFR 82.36 (i.e.,
CAA section 609 equipment).
• Servicing on gratitude (service done
for free). For example, a DIY individual
if not being paid with cash, credits,
goods, or service would not be covered
under CAA section 609 requirements.
Furthermore, intentionally venting
any refrigerant is prohibited under
section 608 of the CAA and under 40
CFR 82.154 (a)(1).
EPA expects, in accordance with 40
CFR 82.34, that all servicing and
maintenance of the MVAC involving the
PMN substance will be done only by
CAA section 609-certified technicians
using CAA section 609-certified
refrigerant handling equipment, and
that extraction or recovery of the PMN
substance from MVAC bound for
disposal and located at a motor vehicle
disposal facility will be done with CAA
section 609-approved refrigerant
recovery equipment. In 2011, EPA
expects to propose regulations under
CAA section 609 that specifically
address requirements for servicing using
HFO–1234yf (e.g., certification of
refrigerant handling equipment). EPA
also expects that during initial charging
by OEM, general industry requirements
under OSHA 29 CFR 1910 for personal
protective equipment, training and other
measures for working with chemicals
that may pose risks to their health and
safety, are already applicable and any
further restrictions under this final
SNUR would be redundant and
unnecessary.
Therefore, EPA agrees with the
commenter and has modified the
relevant language in the regulatory text
of the proposed rule to remove specific
references to the CAA section 609
certification.
D. Use of HFO–1234yf as a Delivery
Agent
Comment: One commenter expressed
concern that HFC–134a refrigerant has
been used to deliver chemicals into
MVAC systems for the advertised
purpose of increasing system-cooling
performance and/or injecting oil, trace
dyes, sealants to stop refrigerant system
leakage, etc. The commenter requests
that EPA not allow use of HFO–1234yf
as transfer/delivery agent for such
purposes. Another commenter requested
that HFO–1234yf not be allowed for this
use due to health concerns.
Response: Prior to marketing HFO–
1234yf as a delivery agent, a person
would need to submit notices to EPA
under both the CAA SNAP program and
under TSCA. If a person plans to market
HFO–1234yf as a ‘‘delivery agent’’ in
cans, rather than as a refrigerant for
MVAC, then they must submit a SNAP
E:\FR\FM\27OCR1.SGM
27OCR1
65992
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
information notice to EPA for use of
HFO–1234yf as an aerosol propellant.
Under the SNAP program, the person
would be allowed to market HFO–
1234yf as an aerosol propellant 90 days
after submission of a complete notice.
Similarly, under the SNUR, that person
would also need to submit a SNUN 90
days before engaging in a use other than
as a refrigerant in MVAC, such as a
delivery agent. In many cases, EPA
responds to a SNUN by amending the
SNUR to allow companies other than
the SNUN submitter (such as the
submitter’s processor customers) to
engage in the newly approved use(s).
VI. Applicability of Rule to Uses
Occurring Before Effective Date of the
Final Rule
As discussed in the Federal Register
of April 24, 1990 (55 FR 17376), EPA
has decided that the intent of TSCA
section 5(a)(1)(B) is best served by
designating a use as a significant new
use as of the date of publication of the
proposed SNUR rather than as of the
effective date of the final rule. If uses
begun after publication were considered
ongoing, rather than new, it would be
difficult for EPA to establish SNUR
notice requirements because a person
could defeat the SNUR by initiating the
proposed significant new use before the
rule became effective, and then argue
that the use was ongoing as of the
effective date of the final rule.
Any person who began commercial
manufacture, import, or processing of 1–
Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN P–
07–601; CAS No. 754–12–1; aka HFO–
1234yf) for any of the significant new
uses designated in the proposed SNUR
after the date of publication of the
proposed SNUR must stop that activity
before the effective date of this final
rule. Persons who ceased those
activities will have to meet all SNUR
notice requirements and wait until the
end of the notification review period,
including all extensions, before
engaging in any activities designated as
significant new uses. If, however,
persons who began manufacture,
import, or processing of the chemical
substance between the date of
publication of the proposed SNUR and
the effective date of this final SNUR
meet the conditions of advance
compliance as codified at § 721.45(h),
those persons would be considered to
have met the final SNUR requirements
for those activities.
VII. Test Data and Other Information
EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5
does not require the development of any
particular test data before submission of
a SNUN. There are two exceptions:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
1. Development of test data is
required where the chemical substance
subject to the SNUR is also subject to a
test rule under TSCA section 4 (see
TSCA section 5(b)(1)).
2. Development of test data may be
necessary where the chemical substance
has been listed under TSCA section
5(b)(4) (see TSCA section 5(b)(2)).
In the absence of a section 4 test rule
or a section 5(b)(4) listing covering the
chemical substance, persons are
required only to submit test data in their
possession or control and to describe
any other data known to or reasonably
ascertainable by them (see 40 CFR
720.50). However, upon review of PMNs
and SNUNs, the Agency has the
authority to require appropriate testing.
In this case, EPA recommends a rabbit
acute inhalation toxicity study to
address human health concerns. EPA
strongly encourages persons, before
performing any testing, to consult with
the Agency pertaining to protocol
selection. The OECD test guidelines are
available from the OECD Bookshop at
https://www.oecdbookshop.org or
SourceOECD at https://
www.sourceoecd.org.
The recommended tests may not be
the only means of addressing the
potential risks of the chemical
substance. However, SNUNs submitted
without any test data may increase the
likelihood that EPA will respond by
taking action under TSCA section 5(e),
particularly if satisfactory test results
have not been obtained from a prior
PMN or SNUN submitter. EPA
recommends that potential SNUN
submitters contact EPA early enough so
that they will be able to conduct the
appropriate tests.
SNUN submitters should be aware
that EPA will be better able to evaluate
SNUNs which provide detailed
information on the following:
• Human exposure and
environmental release that may result
from the significant new use of the
chemical substance.
• Potential benefits of the chemical
substance.
• Information on risks posed by the
chemical substance compared to risks
posed by potential substitutes.
VIII. SNUN Submissions
As stated in Unit II.C. of this
document, according to § 721.1(c),
persons submitting a SNUN must
comply with the same notice
requirements and EPA regulatory
procedures as persons submitting a
PMN, including submission of test data
on health and environmental effects as
described in 40 CFR 720.50. SNUNs
must be submitted to EPA on EPA Form
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
No. 7710–25 in accordance with the
procedures set forth in § 721.25 and
§ 720.40. This form is available from
the Environmental Assistance Division
(7408M), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001. Forms
and information are also available online at https://www.epa.gov/opptintr/
newchems.
IX. Economic Analysis
EPA evaluated the potential costs of
establishing SNUN requirements for
potential manufacturers, importers, and
processors of the chemical substance
during the development of the direct
final rule. The Agency’s complete
Economic Analysis is available in the
docket under docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPPT–2008–0918.
X. References
The following is a listing of those
documents used to prepare the
preamble to this final rule. Additional
information for this final rule can be
located under docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPPT–2008–0918, which is
available for inspection as specified
under ADDRESSES.
1. CARB 2008. Technical Support
Document Staff Analysis on Emissions
and Economic Impact of Proposed
Regulation for Small Containers of
Automotive Refrigerant. Appendix G to
CARB, 2010 (Ref. 2).
2. CARB 2010. Certification
Procedures for Small Containers of
Automotive Refrigerant. California Air
Resources Board, effective March 10,
2010. Document incorporated by
reference in California Code of
Regulations (CCR), title 17, sections
95360 through 9537. Available on-line
at https://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/
hfc09/hfc09.htm.
3. Clodic et al. 2008. Clodic, D,
Tremoulet, A, Riachi, Y, et al.
Evaluation of the Potential Impact of
Emissions of HFC–134a from Non
Professional Servicing of Motor Vehicle
Air Conditioning Systems. Prepared
under CARB Agreement No. 06–341.
December 2008.
4. EPA 2009. Risk Assessment: PMN
07–0601; Reflecting Deliberations and
Decisions From the 03/04/09 RAD
Dispo. Docket ID number: EPA–HQ–
OPPT–2008–0918–0034.
5. EPA 2010. EPA Questions to
Honeywell on Submitted Exposure
Study. Docket ID number: EPA–HQ–
OPPT–2008–0918.
6. Gradient 2009. Risk Assessment for
Alternative Refrigerant HFO–1234yf.
Gradient Corporation, Seattle,
Washington. April 3, 2009. Prepared for
SAE International, Cooperative Research
Program 1234.
E:\FR\FM\27OCR1.SGM
27OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
7. Honeywell 2010a. Comment on
EPA Proposed Rule. Simulated Vehicle
Service Leak Testing and Exposure
Study. Docket ID number: EPA–HQ–
OPPT–2008–0918–0088.
8. Honeywell 2010b. Honeywell
Response to EPA Questions on
Submitted Exposure Study. Docket ID
number: EPA–HQ–OPPT–2008–0918.
XI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866
This final rule establishes a SNUR for
a chemical substance that was the
subject of a PMN. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866,
entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
According to the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., an Agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information
that requires OMB approval under the
PRA, unless it has been approved by
OMB and displays a currently valid
OMB control number. The OMB control
numbers for EPA’s regulations in title 40
of the CFR, after appearing in the
Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR
part 9, and included on the related
collection instrument or form, if
applicable. EPA is amending the table in
40 CFR part 9 to list the OMB approval
number for the information collection
requirements contained in this final
rule. This listing of the OMB control
numbers and their subsequent
codification in the CFR satisfies the
display requirements of PRA and OMB’s
implementing regulations at 5 CFR part
1320. This Information Collection
Request (ICR) was previously subject to
public notice and comment prior to
OMB approval, and given the technical
nature of the table, EPA finds that
further notice and comment to amend it
is unnecessary. As a result, EPA finds
that there is ‘‘good cause’’ under section
553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative
Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), to
amend this table without further notice
and comment.
The information collection
requirements related to this action have
already been approved by OMB
pursuant to PRA under OMB control
number 2070–0012 (EPA ICR No. 574).
This action does not impose any burden
requiring additional OMB approval. If
an entity were to submit a SNUN to the
Agency, the annual burden is estimated
to average between 30 and 170 hours
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
65993
per response. This burden estimate
includes the time needed to review
instructions, search existing data
sources, gather and maintain the data
needed, and complete, review, and
submit the required SNUN.
Send any comments about the
accuracy of the burden estimate, and
any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including through
the use of automated collection
techniques, to the Director, Collection
Strategies Division, Office of
Environmental Information (2822T),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001. Please remember to
include the OMB control number in any
correspondence, but do not submit any
completed forms to this address.
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency hereby
certifies that promulgation of this SNUR
will not have a significant adverse
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The rationale
supporting this conclusion is discussed
in this unit. The requirement to submit
a SNUN applies to any person
(including small or large entities) who
intends to engage in any activity
described in the final rule as a
‘‘significant new use.’’ Because these
uses are ‘‘new,’’ based on all information
currently available to EPA, it appears
that no small or large entities presently
engage in such activities. A SNUR
requires that any person who intends to
engage in such activity in the future
must first notify EPA by submitting a
SNUN. Although some small entities
may decide to pursue a significant new
use in the future, EPA cannot presently
determine how many, if any, there may
be. However, EPA’s experience to date
is that, in response to the promulgation
of over 1,400 SNURs, the Agency
receives on average only 5 notices per
year. Of those SNUNs submitted from
2006–2008, only one appears to be from
a small entity. In addition, the estimated
reporting cost for submission of a SNUN
(see Unit IX.) is minimal regardless of
the size of the firm. Therefore, EPA
believes that the potential economic
impacts of complying with these SNURs
are not expected to be significant or
adversely impact a substantial number
of small entities. In a SNUR that
published in the Federal Register of
June 2, 1997 (62 FR 29684) (FRL–5597–
1), the Agency presented its general
determination that final SNURs are not
expected to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities, which was provided to the
E. Executive Order 13132
This action will not have a substantial
direct effect on States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999).
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Based on EPA’s experience with
proposing and finalizing SNURs, State,
local, and Tribal governments have not
been impacted by these rulemakings,
and EPA does not have any reasons to
believe that any State, local, or Tribal
government will be impacted by this
final rule. As such, EPA has determined
that this rule does not impose any
enforceable duty, contain any unfunded
mandate, or otherwise have any affect
on small governments subject to the
requirements of sections 202, 203, 204,
or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L.
104–4).
F. Executive Order 13175
This final rule does not have Tribal
implications because it is not expected
to have substantial direct effects on
Indian Tribes. This does not
significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian Tribal
governments, nor does it involve or
impose any requirements that affect
Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), do not apply
to this final rule.
G. Executive Order 13045
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045, entitled Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because this is not an
economically significant regulatory
action as defined by Executive Order
12866, and this action does not address
environmental health or safety risks
disproportionately affecting children.
H. Executive Order 13211
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, entitled Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001), because this action is not
expected to affect energy supply,
E:\FR\FM\27OCR1.SGM
27OCR1
65994
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: October 14, 2010.
Wendy C. Hamnett,
Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics.
distribution, or use and because this
action is not a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
In addition, since this action does not
involve any technical standards, section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), does not
apply to this action.
J. Executive Order 12898
This action does not entail special
considerations of environmental justice
related issues as delineated by
Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994).
XII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will
submit 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 United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 9
Environmental protection, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 721
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
Environmental protection, Chemicals,
Hazardous substances, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
Therefore, 40 CFR parts 9 and 721 are
amended as follows:
■
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and
2625(c).
4. Add § 721.10182 to subpart E to
read as follows:
■
§ 721.10182
1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-.
(a) Chemical substance and
PART 9—[AMENDED]
significant new uses subject to reporting.
(1) The chemical substance identified as
■ 1. The authority citation for part 9
1-propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN P–
continues to read as follows:
07–601; CAS No. 754–12–1; also known
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136–136y;
as HFO–1234yf) is subject to reporting
15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2601–2671;
under this section for the significant
21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33
new uses described in paragraph (a)(2)
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1318,
of this section.
1321, 1326, 1330, 1342, 1344, 1345 (d) and
(e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR,
(2) The significant new uses are:
1971–1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241,
(i) Industrial, commercial, and
242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 300g–1, 300g–2,
consumer activities. Requirements as
300g–3, 300g–4, 300g–5, 300g–6, 300j–1,
specified in § 721.80(j) (use other than
300j–2, 300j–3, 300j–4, 300j–9, 1857 et seq.,
as a refrigerant in motor vehicle air
6901–6992k, 7401–7671q, 7542, 9601–9657,
conditioning systems in new passenger
11023, 11048.
cars and vehicles (i.e., as defined in 40
■ 2. The table in § 9.1 is amended by
CFR 82.32 (c) and (d)); § 721.80 (m)
adding the following section in
(commercial use other than in new
numerical order under the undesignated passenger cars and vehicles in which
center heading ‘‘Significant New Uses of the charging of motor vehicle air
Chemical Substances’’ to read as
conditioning systems with the PMN
follows:
substance was done by the motor
§ 9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork vehicle original equipment
manufacturer (OEM)); and § 721.80(o)
Reduction Act.
(distribution in commerce of products
*
*
*
*
*
intended for use by a consumer for the
40 CFR Citation
OMB Control No. purpose of servicing, maintenance, and
disposal involving the PMN substance).
(ii) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Specific requirements. The
provisions of subpart A of this part
Significant New Uses of Chemical
apply to this section except as modified
Substances
by this paragraph.
(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping
requirements as specified in § 721.125
*
*
*
*
*
721.10182 .......................
2070–0012 (a), (b), (c), and (i) are applicable to
manufacturers, importers, and
*
*
*
*
*
processors of this chemical substance.
(2) Limitations or revocation of
*
*
*
*
*
certain notification requirements. The
provisions of § 721.185 apply to this
PART 721—[AMENDED]
section.
[FR Doc. 2010–27166 Filed 10–26–10; 8:45 am]
■ 3. The authority citation for part 721
continues to read as follows:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\27OCR1.SGM
27OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 27, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65987-65994]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27166]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 9 and 721
[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918; FRL-8846-8]
RIN 2070-AB27
1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-; Significant New Use Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a significant new use rule (SNUR) under section
5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for the chemical
substance identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (CAS No. 754-
12-1) which was the subject of premanufacture notice (PMN) P-07-601.
This action requires persons who intend to manufacture, import, or
process the chemical substance for a use that is designated as a
significant new use by this final rule to notify EPA at least 90 days
before commencing that activity. EPA believes that this action is
necessary because the chemical substance may be hazardous to human
health. The required notification would provide EPA with the
opportunity to evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit
or limit that activity before it occurs.
DATES: This final rule is effective November 26, 2010.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (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 in the electronic
docket at https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in the EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room hours of operation
are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202)
566-0280. Docket visitors are required to show photographic
identification, pass through a metal detector, and sign the EPA visitor
log. All visitor bags are processed through an X-ray machine and
subject to search. Visitors will be provided an EPA/DC badge that must
be visible at all times in the building and returned upon departure.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact:
Kenneth Moss, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 564-9232; e-mail address: moss.kenneth@epa.gov.
For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422
[[Page 65988]]
South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-
1404; e-mail address: TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture,
import, process, or use the chemical substance contained in this final
rule: 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1).
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
Manufacturers, importers, or processors of the subject chemical
substance (NAICS codes 325 and 324110), e.g., chemical manufacturing
and petroleum refineries.
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability provisions in Sec. 721.5. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
This action may also affect certain entities through pre-existing
import certification and export notification rules under TSCA. Chemical
importers are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612) import
certification requirements promulgated at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127;
see also 19 CFR 127.28. Chemical importers must certify that the
shipment of the chemical substance complies with all applicable rules
and orders under TSCA. For importers of the chemical substance subject
to this SNUR those requirements include the SNUR. The EPA policy in
support of import certification appears at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B.
In addition, any persons who export or intend to export the chemical
substance that is the subject of this final rule on or after November
26, 2010 are subject to the export notification provisions of TSCA
section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)) (see Sec. [emsp14]721.20) and must
comply with the export notification requirements in 40 CFR part 707,
subpart D.
II. Background
A. What action is the agency taking?
EPA is finalizing a SNUR under TSCA section 5(a)(2) for the
chemical substance identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN
P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1; aka HFO-1234yf). This action requires
persons who intend to manufacture, import, or process the chemical
substance for an activity that is designated as a significant new use
by this final rule to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing
that activity.
Previously, in the Federal Register of February 1, 2010 (75 FR
4983) (FRL-8438-4), EPA issued a direct final SNUR for the chemical
substance. However, EPA received notices of intent to submit adverse
comments on this SNUR. Therefore, as required by Sec.
721.170(d)(4)(i), in the Federal Register of April 2, 2010 (75 FR
16670) (FRL-8816-9), EPA withdrew the direct final SNUR on this
chemical substance and subsequently proposed a SNUR using notice and
comment procedures in the Federal Register of April 2, 2010 (75 FR
16706) (FRL-8818-2). More information on the chemical substance subject
to this final rule can be found in the direct final or proposed SNUR.
The record for the direct final and proposed SNUR on this chemical
substance was established in the docket under docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPPT-2008-0918. That docket includes information considered by the
Agency in developing the direct final rule and this final rule,
including comments on the proposed rule. The chemical substance
addressed under this final SNUR is also being reviewed under the Clean
Air Act (CAA) to determine whether it may be listed as an acceptable
substitute for CFC-12 in motor vehicle air conditioning systems. See
``Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: New Substitute in the Motor
Vehicle Air Conditioning Sector under the Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) Program'' (74 FR 53445, October 19, 2009) (FRL-8969-7).
EPA received six comments on the proposed SNUR and two comments on
the original direct final SNUR. A full discussion of EPA's response to
these comments is included in Unit V. of this document. After
consideration of these comments, EPA is issuing a modified final rule
on the chemical substance that:
1. Clarifies the significant new use provisions by organizing them
under the following paragraphs of Sec. 721.80:
Section 721.80(j) (use other than as a refrigerant in
motor vehicle air conditioning systems in new passenger cars and
vehicles).
Section 721.80(m) (commercial use other than in new
passenger cars and vehicles in which the charging of motor vehicle air
conditioning systems with the PMN substance was done by the motor
vehicle original equipment manufacturer (OEM)).
Section 721.80(o) (distribution in commerce of products
intended for use by a consumer for the purpose of servicing,
maintenance, and disposal involving the PMN substance).
2. Removes the following significant new use provisions:
All servicing, maintenance, and disposal involving the PMN
substance will be done only by CAA section 609 certified technicians
using CAA section 609 certified refrigerant handling equipment.
Uses in which the chemical substance will be sold or
distributed in other than 20-pound (net weight) containers or larger
(this significant new use is now encompassed by Sec. 721.80(o)).
Furthermore, EPA has provided in the docket to this rule additional
human health information to supplement EPA's findings under Sec.
721.170(d)(3)(i) and EPA's findings in the proposed rule. See Unit IV.
of the proposed rule in the Federal Register of April 2, 2010 (75 FR
16706) for a discussion of EPA's findings.
B. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?
Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to
determine that a use of a chemical substance is a ``significant new
use.'' EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all
relevant factors, including those listed in TSCA section 5(a)(2). Once
EPA determines that a use of a chemical substance is a significant new
use, TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) requires persons to submit a significant
new use notice (SNUN) to EPA at least 90 days before they manufacture,
import, or process the chemical substance for that use. Persons who
must report are described in Sec. 721.5.
C. Applicability of General Provisions
General provisions for SNURs appear in 40 CFR part 721, subpart A.
These provisions describe persons subject to the rule, recordkeeping
requirements, exemptions to reporting requirements, and applicability
of the rule to uses occurring before the effective date of the final
rule. Provisions relating to user fees appear at 40 CFR part 700.
According to Sec. 721.1(c), persons subject to this SNUR must comply
with the same notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as
submitters of PMNs under TSCA section 5(a)(1)(A). In
[[Page 65989]]
particular, these requirements include the information submission
requirements of TSCA section 5(b) and 5(d)(1), the exemptions
authorized by TSCA section 5(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and (h)(5), and the
regulations at 40 CFR part 720. Once EPA receives a SNUN, EPA may take
regulatory action under TSCA section 5(e), 5(f), 6, or 7 to control the
activities for which it has received the SNUN. If EPA does not take
action, EPA is required under TSCA section 5(g) to explain in the
Federal Register its reasons for not taking action.
Chemical importers are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C.
2612) import certification requirements promulgated in Customs and
Border Patrol regulations at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127; see also 19
CFR 127.28. Chemical importers must certify that the shipment of the
chemical substance complies with all applicable rules and orders under
TSCA. For importers of the chemical substance subject to this final
SNUR those requirements include the SNUR. The EPA policy in support of
import certification appears at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. In
addition, any persons who export or intend to export the chemical
substance identified in this final SNUR are subject to the export
notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611 (b)) (see
Sec. 721.20) and must comply with the export notification requirements
in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D.
III. Rationale and Objectives of the Rule
A. Rationale
During the review of the chemical substance PMN P-07-601--as
discussed in the proposed rule--based on test data on the PMN
substance, EPA identified health concerns for developmental toxicity
and lethality to workers and consumers if they were exposed to a
significant amount of the PMN substance via inhalation. EPA determined
that one or more of the criteria of concern established at Sec.
721.170 were met. EPA did not find that the use scenarios described in
the PMN triggered the determination set forth under section 5(e) of
TSCA. EPA did, however, determine that certain changes from the use
scenario described in the PMN could result in increased exposures,
thereby constituting a ``significant new use.'' EPA has determined that
activities proposed as a ``significant new use'' satisfy the two
requirements stipulated in Sec. 721.170(c)(2), i.e., these significant
new use activities: ``(i) Are different from those described in the
premanufacture notice for the substance, including any amendments,
deletions, and additions of activities to the premanufacture notice,
and (ii) may be accompanied by changes in exposure or release levels
that are significant in relation to the health or environmental
concerns identified'' for the PMN substance.
B. Objectives
EPA is issuing this final SNUR for a chemical substance that has
undergone premanufacture review because the Agency wants to achieve the
following objectives with regard to the significant new uses designated
in this final rule:
EPA will receive notice of any person's intent to
manufacture, import, or process a listed chemical substance for the
described significant new use before that activity begins.
EPA will have an opportunity to review and evaluate data
submitted in a SNUN before the notice submitter begins manufacturing,
importing, or processing a listed chemical substance for the described
significant new use.
EPA will be able to regulate prospective manufacturers,
importers, or processors of a listed chemical substance before the
described significant new use of that chemical substance occurs,
provided that regulation is warranted pursuant to TSCA sections 5(e),
5(f), 6, or 7.
Issuance of a SNUR for a chemical substance does not signify that
the chemical substance is listed on the TSCA Inventory. Guidance on how
to determine if a chemical substance is on the TSCA Inventory is
available on the Internet at https://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems/pubs/invntory.htm.
IV. Significant New Use Determination
Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA states that EPA's determination that a use
of a chemical substance is a significant new use must be made after
consideration of all relevant factors, including:
The projected volume of manufacturing and processing of a
chemical substance.
The extent to which a use changes the type or form of
exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.
The extent to which a use increases the magnitude and
duration of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical
substance.
The reasonably anticipated manner and methods of
manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of a
chemical substance.
In addition to these factors enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2),
the statute authorizes EPA to consider any other relevant factors.
To determine what would constitute a significant new use for HFO-
1234yf, EPA considered relevant information--in the docket and
discussed further in Unit V. of this document--about the toxicity of
the chemical substance, likely human exposures and environmental
releases associated with possible uses, taking into consideration the
four bulleted TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors listed in this unit, and the
regulations at Sec. 721.170 for issuing a SNUR after receipt of a PMN.
V. Response to Comments on Proposed SNUR on 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-
tetrafluoro-
EPA received comments from a number of submitters on the proposed
rule for the chemical substance identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-
tetrafluoro- (PMN P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1; aka HFO-1234yf). These
comments, many of which covered similar issues, have been grouped under
general headings. Many of the comments stated that EPA's risk
assessment for the PMN substance overstates both the potential hazards
of the chemical substance and the potential exposures from ``do-it-
yourself'' (DIY) consumer use, and uses a health effects endpoint from
a toxicity study that is inappropriate given the duration of exposure
that could result from DIY consumer use. These commenters evaluated
EPA's risk assessment and conducted their own quantitative risk
assessments for single, short-term exposure scenarios, using where
possible the same information and approach used in EPA's Risk
Assessment for the PMN Substance (Ref. 4). A discussion of the comments
received and the Agency's responses follows.
A. Risk Assessment: Toxicity
Commenters stated that adverse health impacts from use of HFO-
1234yf under the conditions specified would not be expected for car
occupants, servicing personnel, or DIY consumers. The comments relate
to the choice of the point of departure (POD) for the Agency's risk
assessment of single-exposure (DIY consumers) use scenarios and to the
Agency's use of a Margin of Exposure (MOE), as opposed to Hazard Index
(HI), approach to evaluate the chemical substance.
Comment: Why didn't the Agency use the 200,000 parts per million
(ppm) effect level from a 4-hour rat study on HFO-1234yf to select the
POD for the risk assessment?
Response: This acute 4-hour exposure study in rats showed some lung
effects at approximately 200,000 ppm, the lowest exposure level in the
study.
[[Page 65990]]
Thus, EPA considers 200,000 ppm to be a LOAEL (low observed adverse
effect level). If a LOAEL were used in the risk assessment instead of a
NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level), EPA would use an uncertainty
factor to estimate a NOAEL, which would result in a lower POD than what
was used. Instead, EPA used the NOAEL for a subacute 14-day study on
the chemical substance as the endpoint, because the LOAEL from the
acute 4-hour study is an effect endpoint which is inappropriate for
developing safe exposure levels for humans. Some of the animals in the
4-hour acute study had grey, discolored lungs at both exposure levels
in the study, and EPA considered this an adverse effect. Therefore, EPA
could not determine a NOAEL from the acute 4-hour study. It is Agency
policy to use the NOAEL where available, because of greater assurance
of a ``safe'' level. Where only the LOAEL is available, that will be
used along with any necessary additional uncertainty factors. For
example, if EPA had started with the LOAEL of 200,000 ppm, it would
have required an additional MOE of 10 to estimate a NOAEL from a LOAEL,
for a total MOE of 300 instead of 30. This would have resulted in a
more conservative risk assessment than using the NOAEL from the 14-day
subacute study.
Comment: Why didn't the Agency use the cardiac sensitization study
in dogs as the POD?
Response: Cardiac sensitization studies are for very short
durations--on the order of 10 minutes--and they only address cardiac
sensitization. The PMN chemical does not induce cardiac sensitization.
EPA selected the acute POD from a multiple-exposure, two-week rat
inhalation study on the PMN substance, reasoning that if no effects
were seen in the duration of the study, then no effects would be seen
from a single exposure.
Comment: Why did EPA use the MOE rather than HI approach for risk
assessment of HFO-1234yf?
Response: Where available, it is EPA policy to use a NOAEL for the
POD. This is the highest exposure level that did not cause an adverse
health effect in a study. In this case, EPA selected the POD from an
animal (rat 2-week inhalation) study. Because animals may respond to
different exposure levels than humans, there is some uncertainty when
extrapolating from animals to humans. For this reason, an Uncertainty
Factor (UF) is applied when extrapolating from animals to humans--
typically a factor of 10 is used but, in this case, since there was a
reasonable estimate of the pharmacokinetic component of the
uncertainty, this UF was reduced to 3. An additional UF is applied to
account for variation in the human population response to a chemical
exposure--in this case, a UF of 10 was used. The two UFs give a
resultant UF of 30 to yield an acceptable level of health risk. EPA's
policy for review of new chemicals under TSCA is to divide the POD by
the exposure level to obtain the MOE. For this PMN substance, the
``acceptable level of health risk'' would be an MOE of 30 or greater.
One commenter proposed dividing the estimated exposure to the PMN
chemical by the POD levels to obtain a HI. If the exposure is less than
the POD, the HI is <1 and this would be considered an ``acceptable
level of health risk.'' This HI approach, however, does not factor in
uncertainties about extrapolating from animal to human responses, nor
does it address variability within the human population with regard to
thresholds of response to chemical exposures. EPA has consistently
applied the MOE approach to PMN evaluations (and for other risk
assessments) in order to account for these uncertainties. This is the
rationale for EPA continuing to use the MOE approach for this chemical
substance.
Perhaps most important to EPA's position on this final SNUR is that
EPA has uncertainties about using available single-exposure studies on
HFO-1234yf to determine the MOEs for different exposure scenarios. As a
result of concerns with these studies, EPA calculated single exposure
MOEs from the NOAEL in the 2-week inhalation toxicity study of the PMN
chemical in rats. There are some additional uncertainties in the single
exposure (acute) assessments because of the observation of lethality in
rabbit dams after multiple exposures in a developmental study to the
PMN substance. For these reasons, as mentioned in Unit IV. of the
proposed SNUR, EPA recommends a rabbit acute inhalation toxicity study
to address the question of whether pregnant rabbits would die from a
single exposure. Rabbits should be exposed for one hour, using the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 403 test
guideline. Pregnant rabbits should be exposed on gestational day 12
(this is within the time-frame that pregnant rabbits started dieing in
the developmental study).
B. Risk Assessment: Exposure
Comment: Commenter stated that EPA's assessment, using the Gradient
Report (Ref. 6), overstates the potential exposures from consumer DIY
use of HFO-1234yf to refill MVAC systems. The commenter asserted that
EPA's methodology to estimate the exposure levels associated with the
DIY use greatly exaggerates the exposure that could be experienced in
actual use conditions. The specific exposure parameters that the
commenters questioned were assumptions regarding:
Garage volume.
Time the user spent under the hood during recharging
operations.
The size of the space where any leaking gas would
disperse.
The air exchange rate in a service area that should be
well-ventilated when the engine is running.
Use of the refrigerant in a closed garage with no
ventilation.
The amount of refrigerant used during recharge operations.
During the comment period for the proposed SNUR, the PMN submitter
conducted a simulated vehicle service leak testing, using HFC-134a as a
surrogate, indicating that exposures from use of a 12-oz can during
consumer DIY use are below the Agency's level of concern for HFO-1234yf
(Ref. 7).
Response: After reviewing the submitted consumer DIY use exposure
study, EPA responded with a list of clarifying questions (Ref. 5), to
which the PMN submitter subsequently responded (Ref. 8). Although the
PMN submitter's responses were helpful, EPA still has concerns about
potential exposures to consumers during DIY use and the inherent
toxicity of HFO-1234yf. Therefore, the Agency has decided to retain
requirements in the final rule for notification to the Agency prior to
distribution in commerce of products intended for use by DIY consumers,
while waiting for data from the acute inhalation toxicity study in
rabbits described in Unit V.A. With regards to exposure, the peak
concentration values from the submitted study are as high as 3% by
volume, equivalent to 30,000 ppm. These peaks appeared to occur in the
first one or two minutes of each emission. Accordingly, EPA would need
exposure data presented and averaged out over shorter Time Weighted
Averages (TWAs) than the 30 minutes currently in the study, because it
would appear that a number of these early exposure peaks could result
in TWA values that would result in MOEs less than the acceptable Agency
level of 30 (see Unit V.A.). This is important because the data on HFO-
1234yf are insufficient to differentiate whether the toxicity is due to
blood level alone from an acute exposure, is due to accumulated
exposure over time (area under the curve), or is due to some
[[Page 65991]]
combination of both. Since blood equilibrium levels are reached within
minutes, a high level of exposure in a short duration could result in
blood levels exceeding a threshold if the mode of action is due to
blood levels. Additional TWAs of 3, 5, and 10 minutes are recommended.
The Agency's chief concern during its analysis of the submitted
exposure study, and generally when estimating potential consumer
exposure to HFO-1234yf, is that even if there is a low likelihood of
the types of exposure scenarios assessed in this study occurring, there
are estimates of 11 million DIY consumer recharging events per year in
the United States (Ref. 1) (this is not necessarily 11 million people
as some individuals recharge more than once). The Clodic survey
commissioned by the California Air Resources Board (Ref. 3) indicated
that 10% of DIY consumers released 100 g or more of refrigerant during
servicing, including 2% releasing more than 500 g, and another 15% of
DIY consumers released 50 to 100 g during servicing, due to faulty
recharging equipment and poor technique. Both these percentages and the
overall number of DIY consumer recharging events indicate that a
substantial number of events could have significant leaks. The Agency
recognizes that commenters have suggested, as an alternative to the
container size limitation contained in the proposed SNUR, that the
reductions in emissions and exposures can be accomplished by
restricting sales and use of all refrigerants to qualified technicians,
or by using DIY consumer containers and charging equipment that
minimize the potential for releases (e.g., having a resealable/leak
control device on all containers and using charging connection
equipment that has a quick coupler with a moving rod to open the low
pressure refrigerant valve on the vehicle). For example, CARB's
``Certification Procedures for Small Containers of Automotive
Refrigerant,'' effective March 10, 2010 (Ref. 2), mandates a self-
sealing valve with leakage rate in storage of <=3.0 g/yr, container
labeling requirements, and education materials requirements. However,
commenters provided insufficient information on these approaches for
EPA to assess whether, for HFO-1234yf, they would reduce exposures
during DIY consumer use and thus eliminate the potential toxicity risk.
Consequently, the Agency has removed the specific container size
limitation proposed as a significant new use, and replaced it with a
description that directly addresses the issue of potential exposure to
DIY consumers by clarifying that significant new use, found at 40 CFR
721.80(o) (``use in a consumer product''), as ``distribution in
commerce of products intended for use by a consumer for the purpose of
servicing, maintenance, and disposal involving the PMN substance.''
Information on such techniques or equipment to minimize potential
exposures to DIY consumers should accompany any SNUN submitted in
response to this final SNUR that requests use of HFO-1234yf in DIY
consumer products. Other information submitted with such a SNUN should
include data that quantifies exposures for durations shorter than the
30-minute TWA presented in the exposure study submitted by the PMN
submitter, in particular, TWAs for 3 minutes, 5 minutes, and 10
minutes, in addition to 30 minutes.
C. CAA Section 609 Certification
Comment: One commenter stated that the training and equipment
requirements currently in CAA section 609 relative to other
refrigerants would not be necessary for environmentally safe usage of
HFO-1234yf during initial charging in an automobile assembly plant. The
commenter stated that a CAA section 609 certification is not currently
required for automobile assembly plants workers or equipment;
manufacturers perform their own training programs; and Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements for handling
flammable substances already fully address the flammability-related
HFO-1234yf worker safety issues in automobile assembly facilities.
Response: EPA recognizes that the requirements for certification
contained in CAA section 609 are reserved only for the MVAC servicing
sector, i.e., ``service for consideration,'' which includes technicians
or mechanics being paid either with cash, credit, goods, or services
when they perform a service in a vehicle involving a refrigerant in an
air conditioning system (40 CFR 82.32 (g)).
The following scenarios are not covered under CAA section 609:
Initial charge of an MVAC by OEMs.
The action of disposing or disassembling an MVAC in a
disposal facility in accordance with 40 CFR 82.152 and 40 CFR 82.156
(f). The action of extracting or recovering refrigerant from an MVAC at
a disposal facility does not require CAA section 608 or 609
certification (40 CFR 82.34 (d)); however, such processing does require
the use of an approved refrigerant handling equipment meeting the
requirements of 40 CFR 82.36 (i.e., CAA section 609 equipment).
Servicing on gratitude (service done for free). For
example, a DIY individual if not being paid with cash, credits, goods,
or service would not be covered under CAA section 609 requirements.
Furthermore, intentionally venting any refrigerant is prohibited
under section 608 of the CAA and under 40 CFR 82.154 (a)(1).
EPA expects, in accordance with 40 CFR 82.34, that all servicing
and maintenance of the MVAC involving the PMN substance will be done
only by CAA section 609-certified technicians using CAA section 609-
certified refrigerant handling equipment, and that extraction or
recovery of the PMN substance from MVAC bound for disposal and located
at a motor vehicle disposal facility will be done with CAA section 609-
approved refrigerant recovery equipment. In 2011, EPA expects to
propose regulations under CAA section 609 that specifically address
requirements for servicing using HFO-1234yf (e.g., certification of
refrigerant handling equipment). EPA also expects that during initial
charging by OEM, general industry requirements under OSHA 29 CFR 1910
for personal protective equipment, training and other measures for
working with chemicals that may pose risks to their health and safety,
are already applicable and any further restrictions under this final
SNUR would be redundant and unnecessary.
Therefore, EPA agrees with the commenter and has modified the
relevant language in the regulatory text of the proposed rule to remove
specific references to the CAA section 609 certification.
D. Use of HFO-1234yf as a Delivery Agent
Comment: One commenter expressed concern that HFC-134a refrigerant
has been used to deliver chemicals into MVAC systems for the advertised
purpose of increasing system-cooling performance and/or injecting oil,
trace dyes, sealants to stop refrigerant system leakage, etc. The
commenter requests that EPA not allow use of HFO-1234yf as transfer/
delivery agent for such purposes. Another commenter requested that HFO-
1234yf not be allowed for this use due to health concerns.
Response: Prior to marketing HFO-1234yf as a delivery agent, a
person would need to submit notices to EPA under both the CAA SNAP
program and under TSCA. If a person plans to market HFO-1234yf as a
``delivery agent'' in cans, rather than as a refrigerant for MVAC, then
they must submit a SNAP
[[Page 65992]]
information notice to EPA for use of HFO-1234yf as an aerosol
propellant. Under the SNAP program, the person would be allowed to
market HFO-1234yf as an aerosol propellant 90 days after submission of
a complete notice. Similarly, under the SNUR, that person would also
need to submit a SNUN 90 days before engaging in a use other than as a
refrigerant in MVAC, such as a delivery agent. In many cases, EPA
responds to a SNUN by amending the SNUR to allow companies other than
the SNUN submitter (such as the submitter's processor customers) to
engage in the newly approved use(s).
VI. Applicability of Rule to Uses Occurring Before Effective Date of
the Final Rule
As discussed in the Federal Register of April 24, 1990 (55 FR
17376), EPA has decided that the intent of TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) is
best served by designating a use as a significant new use as of the
date of publication of the proposed SNUR rather than as of the
effective date of the final rule. If uses begun after publication were
considered ongoing, rather than new, it would be difficult for EPA to
establish SNUR notice requirements because a person could defeat the
SNUR by initiating the proposed significant new use before the rule
became effective, and then argue that the use was ongoing as of the
effective date of the final rule.
Any person who began commercial manufacture, import, or processing
of 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1; aka
HFO-1234yf) for any of the significant new uses designated in the
proposed SNUR after the date of publication of the proposed SNUR must
stop that activity before the effective date of this final rule.
Persons who ceased those activities will have to meet all SNUR notice
requirements and wait until the end of the notification review period,
including all extensions, before engaging in any activities designated
as significant new uses. If, however, persons who began manufacture,
import, or processing of the chemical substance between the date of
publication of the proposed SNUR and the effective date of this final
SNUR meet the conditions of advance compliance as codified at Sec.
721.45(h), those persons would be considered to have met the final SNUR
requirements for those activities.
VII. Test Data and Other Information
EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 does not require the development
of any particular test data before submission of a SNUN. There are two
exceptions:
1. Development of test data is required where the chemical
substance subject to the SNUR is also subject to a test rule under TSCA
section 4 (see TSCA section 5(b)(1)).
2. Development of test data may be necessary where the chemical
substance has been listed under TSCA section 5(b)(4) (see TSCA section
5(b)(2)).
In the absence of a section 4 test rule or a section 5(b)(4)
listing covering the chemical substance, persons are required only to
submit test data in their possession or control and to describe any
other data known to or reasonably ascertainable by them (see 40 CFR
720.50). However, upon review of PMNs and SNUNs, the Agency has the
authority to require appropriate testing. In this case, EPA recommends
a rabbit acute inhalation toxicity study to address human health
concerns. EPA strongly encourages persons, before performing any
testing, to consult with the Agency pertaining to protocol selection.
The OECD test guidelines are available from the OECD Bookshop at https://www.oecdbookshop.org or SourceOECD at https://www.sourceoecd.org.
The recommended tests may not be the only means of addressing the
potential risks of the chemical substance. However, SNUNs submitted
without any test data may increase the likelihood that EPA will respond
by taking action under TSCA section 5(e), particularly if satisfactory
test results have not been obtained from a prior PMN or SNUN submitter.
EPA recommends that potential SNUN submitters contact EPA early enough
so that they will be able to conduct the appropriate tests.
SNUN submitters should be aware that EPA will be better able to
evaluate SNUNs which provide detailed information on the following:
Human exposure and environmental release that may result
from the significant new use of the chemical substance.
Potential benefits of the chemical substance.
Information on risks posed by the chemical substance
compared to risks posed by potential substitutes.
VIII. SNUN Submissions
As stated in Unit II.C. of this document, according to Sec.
[emsp14]721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN must comply with the same
notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as persons submitting
a PMN, including submission of test data on health and environmental
effects as described in 40 CFR 720.50. SNUNs must be submitted to EPA
on EPA Form No. 7710-25 in accordance with the procedures set forth in
Sec. [emsp14]721.25 and Sec. [emsp14]720.40. This form is available
from the Environmental Assistance Division (7408M), 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. Forms and information are also
available on-line at https://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems.
IX. Economic Analysis
EPA evaluated the potential costs of establishing SNUN requirements
for potential manufacturers, importers, and processors of the chemical
substance during the development of the direct final rule. The Agency's
complete Economic Analysis is available in the docket under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918.
X. References
The following is a listing of those documents used to prepare the
preamble to this final rule. Additional information for this final rule
can be located under docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918, which is
available for inspection as specified under ADDRESSES.
1. CARB 2008. Technical Support Document Staff Analysis on
Emissions and Economic Impact of Proposed Regulation for Small
Containers of Automotive Refrigerant. Appendix G to CARB, 2010 (Ref.
2).
2. CARB 2010. Certification Procedures for Small Containers of
Automotive Refrigerant. California Air Resources Board, effective March
10, 2010. Document incorporated by reference in California Code of
Regulations (CCR), title 17, sections 95360 through 9537. Available on-
line at https://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/hfc09/hfc09.htm.
3. Clodic et al. 2008. Clodic, D, Tremoulet, A, Riachi, Y, et al.
Evaluation of the Potential Impact of Emissions of HFC-134a from Non
Professional Servicing of Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning Systems.
Prepared under CARB Agreement No. 06-341. December 2008.
4. EPA 2009. Risk Assessment: PMN 07-0601; Reflecting Deliberations
and Decisions From the 03/04/09 RAD Dispo. Docket ID number: EPA-HQ-
OPPT-2008-0918-0034.
5. EPA 2010. EPA Questions to Honeywell on Submitted Exposure
Study. Docket ID number: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918.
6. Gradient 2009. Risk Assessment for Alternative Refrigerant HFO-
1234yf. Gradient Corporation, Seattle, Washington. April 3, 2009.
Prepared for SAE International, Cooperative Research Program 1234.
[[Page 65993]]
7. Honeywell 2010a. Comment on EPA Proposed Rule. Simulated Vehicle
Service Leak Testing and Exposure Study. Docket ID number: EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2008-0918-0088.
8. Honeywell 2010b. Honeywell Response to EPA Questions on
Submitted Exposure Study. Docket ID number: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918.
XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866
This final rule establishes a SNUR for a chemical substance that
was the subject of a PMN. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order
12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4,
1993).
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., an Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information that requires OMB
approval under the PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and included on the related
collection instrument or form, if applicable. EPA is amending the table
in 40 CFR part 9 to list the OMB approval number for the information
collection requirements contained in this final rule. This listing of
the OMB control numbers and their subsequent codification in the CFR
satisfies the display requirements of PRA and OMB's implementing
regulations at 5 CFR part 1320. This Information Collection Request
(ICR) was previously subject to public notice and comment prior to OMB
approval, and given the technical nature of the table, EPA finds that
further notice and comment to amend it is unnecessary. As a result, EPA
finds that there is ``good cause'' under section 553(b)(3)(B) of the
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), to amend this
table without further notice and comment.
The information collection requirements related to this action have
already been approved by OMB pursuant to PRA under OMB control number
2070-0012 (EPA ICR No. 574). This action does not impose any burden
requiring additional OMB approval. If an entity were to submit a SNUN
to the Agency, the annual burden is estimated to average between 30 and
170 hours per response. This burden estimate includes the time needed
to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and
maintain the data needed, and complete, review, and submit the required
SNUN.
Send any comments about the accuracy of the burden estimate, and
any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including
through the use of automated collection techniques, to the Director,
Collection Strategies Division, Office of Environmental Information
(2822T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. Please remember to include the OMB control
number in any correspondence, but do not submit any completed forms to
this address.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency hereby certifies that promulgation
of this SNUR will not have a significant adverse economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The rationale supporting this
conclusion is discussed in this unit. The requirement to submit a SNUN
applies to any person (including small or large entities) who intends
to engage in any activity described in the final rule as a
``significant new use.'' Because these uses are ``new,'' based on all
information currently available to EPA, it appears that no small or
large entities presently engage in such activities. A SNUR requires
that any person who intends to engage in such activity in the future
must first notify EPA by submitting a SNUN. Although some small
entities may decide to pursue a significant new use in the future, EPA
cannot presently determine how many, if any, there may be. However,
EPA's experience to date is that, in response to the promulgation of
over 1,400 SNURs, the Agency receives on average only 5 notices per
year. Of those SNUNs submitted from 2006-2008, only one appears to be
from a small entity. In addition, the estimated reporting cost for
submission of a SNUN (see Unit IX.) is minimal regardless of the size
of the firm. Therefore, EPA believes that the potential economic
impacts of complying with these SNURs are not expected to be
significant or adversely impact a substantial number of small entities.
In a SNUR that published in the Federal Register of June 2, 1997 (62 FR
29684) (FRL-5597-1), the Agency presented its general determination
that final SNURs are not expected to have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities, which was provided to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Based on EPA's experience with proposing and finalizing SNURs,
State, local, and Tribal governments have not been impacted by these
rulemakings, and EPA does not have any reasons to believe that any
State, local, or Tribal government will be impacted by this final rule.
As such, EPA has determined that this rule does not impose any
enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or otherwise have any
affect on small governments subject to the requirements of sections
202, 203, 204, or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4).
E. Executive Order 13132
This action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
F. Executive Order 13175
This final rule does not have Tribal implications because it is not
expected to have substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes. This does
not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian Tribal
governments, nor does it involve or impose any requirements that affect
Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), do not apply to this final rule.
G. Executive Order 13045
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because this is not an economically
significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and
this action does not address environmental health or safety risks
disproportionately affecting children.
H. Executive Order 13211
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because this action
is not expected to affect energy supply,
[[Page 65994]]
distribution, or use and because this action is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
In addition, since this action does not involve any technical
standards, section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note), does not apply to this action.
J. Executive Order 12898
This action does not entail special considerations of environmental
justice related issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898, entitled
Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
XII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit 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
United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register.
This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 9
Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 721
Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 14, 2010.
Wendy C. Hamnett,
Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR parts 9 and 721 are amended as follows:
PART 9--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136-136y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003,
2005, 2006, 2601-2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1318, 1321, 1326, 1330,
1342, 1344, 1345 (d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR,
1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g,
300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300j-1, 300j-2,
300j-3, 300j-4, 300j-9, 1857 et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-7671q, 7542,
9601-9657, 11023, 11048.
0
2. The table in Sec. [emsp14]9.1 is amended by adding the following
section in numerical order under the undesignated center heading
``Significant New Uses of Chemical Substances'' to read as follows:
Sec. [emsp14]9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Citation OMB Control No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Significant New Uses of Chemical Substances
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
721.10182............................................ 2070-0012
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
PART 721--[AMENDED]
0
3. The authority citation for part 721 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 2625(c).
0
4. Add Sec. [emsp14]721.10182 to subpart E to read as follows:
Sec. 721.10182 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-.
(a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to
reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified as 1-propene, 2,3,3,3-
tetrafluoro- (PMN P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1; also known as HFO-1234yf)
is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses
described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. Requirements
as specified in Sec. 721.80(j) (use other than as a refrigerant in
motor vehicle air conditioning systems in new passenger cars and
vehicles (i.e., as defined in 40 CFR 82.32 (c) and (d)); Sec. 721.80
(m) (commercial use other than in new passenger cars and vehicles in
which the charging of motor vehicle air conditioning systems with the
PMN substance was done by the motor vehicle original equipment
manufacturer (OEM)); and Sec. 721.80(o) (distribution in commerce of
products intended for use by a consumer for the purpose of servicing,
maintenance, and disposal involving the PMN substance).
(ii) [Reserved]
(b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph.
(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in Sec.
721.125 (a), (b), (c), and (i) are applicable to manufacturers,
importers, and processors of this chemical substance.
(2) Limitations or revocation of certain notification requirements.
The provisions of Sec. 721.185 apply to this section.
[FR Doc. 2010-27166 Filed 10-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P