Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, California Air Resources Board-Consumer Products, 62346-62350 [2014-24492]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
62346
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this rule
will not result in such an expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
8. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
9. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
10. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
11. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
12. Energy Effects
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under Executive Order
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
13. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
14. 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 determined that this action is one
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:55 Oct 16, 2014
Jkt 235001
of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves a safety
zone of limited size and duration. This
rule is categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2–1 of the Commandant
Instruction. An environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination
and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination are available in the
docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this rule.
■
2014. The Captain of the Port San
Francisco (COTP) will notify the
maritime community of periods during
which this zone will be enforced via
Broadcast Notice to Mariners in
accordance with 33 CFR 165.7.
(c) 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 COTP in the enforcement
of the safety zone.
(d) Regulations. (1) Under the general
regulations in 33 CFR Part 165, Subpart
C, entry into, transiting or anchoring
within this safety zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the COTP or a
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 a designated
representative. Persons and vessels may
request permission to enter the safety
zone on VHF–23A or through the 24hour Command Center at telephone
(415) 399–3547.
§ 165.T11–664 Safety zone; Pier 39 36th
Anniversary Fireworks Display, San
Francisco Bay, San Francisco, CA.
Dated: September 29, 2014.
Gregory G. Stump,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port San Francisco.
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. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3707; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T11–664 to read as
follows:
(a) Location. This temporary safety
zone is established in the navigable
waters of the San Francisco Bay near
Pier 39 in San Francisco, CA as depicted
in National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) Chart 18650.
From 11 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. on October 4,
11, 18 and 25, 2014, the temporary
safety zone applies to the nearest point
of the fireworks barge within a radius of
100 feet during the loading, transit, and
arrival of the fireworks barge from Pier
50 to the launch site near Pier 39 in
approximate positions 37°48′45″ N,
122°24′40″ W (NAD83). From 8:30 p.m.
until 9 p.m. on October 4, 11, 18 and 25,
2014, the temporary safety zone will
increase in size and encompass the
navigable waters around and under the
fireworks barge in approximate position
37°48′45″ N, 122°24′40″ W (NAD83)
within a radius of 560 feet.
(b) Enforcement period. The zone
described in paragraph (a) of this
section will be enforced from 11 a.m. to
9 p.m. on October 4, 11, 18 and 25,
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[FR Doc. 2014–24780 Filed 10–16–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0529; FRL–9915–53–
Region 9]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, California Air
Resources Board—Consumer
Products
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the
California Air Resources Board portion
of the California State Implementation
Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17OCR1.SGM
17OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
volatile organic compound (VOC)
emissions from consumer products. We
are approving a local rule that regulates
these emission sources under the Clean
Air Act (CAA or the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on
December 16, 2014 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
comments by November 17, 2014. If we
receive such comments, we will publish
a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register to notify the public that this
direct final rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2014–0529, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous
access’’ system, and EPA will not know
your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send email
directly to EPA, your email address will
be automatically captured and included
as part of the public comment. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at www.regulations.gov
and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California 94105–3901. While all
documents in the docket are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps), and some may not
be publicly available in either location
62347
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415)
947–4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revision?
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule we are approving
with the date it was amended by the
State and submitted by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD RULE
Regulation
Amended
Filed with California
Secretary of State
Subchapter 8.5—Consumer Products; Article 2—Consumer Products ...........
March 15, 2013 .........
April 25, 2013 ............
On July 18, 2014, EPA determined
that the submittal for California Code of
Regulations, Title 17, Division 3,
Chapter 1, Subchapter 8.5—Consumer
Products; Article 2—Consumer Products
met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR
Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met
before formal EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We approved an earlier version of
CARB’s Consumer Products Regulation
(amended on August 6, 2010 and
submitted to EPA on January 28, 2011),
into the SIP on February 13, 2012 (77 FR
7535). CARB’s submittal letter advised
EPA that its SIP submission did not
include the second tier 3% VOC limits
for Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint
Thinners. CARB’s intent was to monitor
manufacturers’ progress to meet both
the technology forcing lower VOC limit
and a less flammable product. In 2013
CARB determined the 3% VOC limit for
Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint
Thinners was technically feasible and
included the limit in a May 28, 2014 SIP
submittal.
Submitted to
EPA
May 28, 2014.
On September 29, 2011, and March
15, 2013 CARB adopted additional
revisions to the SIP-approved version
and submitted them to us along with the
3% VOC limit for Multi-purpose
Solvents and Paint Thinners on May 28,
2014. Table 2 lists the three
amendments. While we can act on only
the most recently amended version that
was submitted to EPA, we have
reviewed materials provided with the
SIP submittal and note that it includes
and builds on the previous
amendments.
TABLE 2—CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD SUBMITTED REVISIONS TO ITS CONSUMER PRODUCTS REGULATION
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Board hearing
Amended 1
Filed with California
Secretary of State
Submitted to EPA
September 24, 2009 ..........................
August 6, 2010 ..........
September 20, 2010 ..
November 18, 2010 ...........................
October 18, 2012 ...............................
September 29, 2011
March 15, 2013 .........
November 10, 2011 ..
April 25, 2013 ............
May 28, 2014 (2nd tier—3% VOC limit for Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners only).
May 28, 2014.
May 28, 2014.
1 Date the Final Rulemaking Package was filed
with the California Office of Administrative Law.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:55 Oct 16, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\17OCR1.SGM
17OCR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
62348
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
rule revision?
VOCs help produce ground-level
ozone and smog, which harm human
health and the environment. Section
110(a) of the CAA requires States to
submit regulations that control VOC
emissions. The California Health and
Safety Code (Section 41712(b)) requires
CARB to adopt regulations to achieve
the maximum feasible reduction in
volatile organic compounds emitted by
consumer products if the state board
determines that adequate data exist to
establish both of the following:
(1) The regulations are necessary to
attain state and federal ambient air
quality standards.
(2) The regulations are commercially
and technologically feasible and
necessary.
CARB’s May 28, 2014 submittal
contains the following three
amendments to its Consumer Products
Regulation: (1) The second tier 3% VOC
limits for Multi-purpose Solvents and
Paint Thinners from CARB’s August 6,
2010 amendments (September 24, 2009
Board Hearing), but excluded from
CARB’s January 28, 2011 SIP
submittal; 2 (2) CARB’s September 29,
2011 amendments (November 18, 2010
Board Hearing), which established new
or lower VOC limits for 11 consumer
product categories; and (3) CARB’s
March 15, 2013 amendments (October
18, 2012 Board Hearing), which
incorporates additional areas where
higher VOC automobile windshield
washer fluid could be sold to
accommodate mountainous areas that
routinely experience freezing
temperatures in the winter.
The amendments also: (1) Add or
modify the definitions for artist’s
solvent/thinner, oven cleaners, spot
removers, and the ‘‘Most Restrictive
Limit’’ provision; (2) consolidate
existing requirements into a table listing
the consumer product categories that
prohibit the use of the toxic air
contaminants methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and
trichloroethylene. This will make it
easier to find the requirements for all
consumer product categories where use
of these compounds is prohibited; (3)
consolidate into a table listing the
consumer product categories that
prohibit the use of compounds with a
global warming potential (GWP) of 150
or greater; (4) consolidate into a table
listing the consumer products that
prohibit the use of para2 Robert D. Fletcher (CARB), letter to Jared
Blumenfeld (EPA Region IX), January 28, 2011,
submitting the August 6, 2010 amendments to
California’s Consumer Products Regulation.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:55 Oct 16, 2014
Jkt 235001
dichlorobenzene; (5) add additional test
methods to be used to determine the
aromatic content of Multi-purpose
Solvents and Paint Thinners and the
VOC content of Fabric Softener-Single
Use Drying Product; (6) raise the VOC
limit for nonaerosol Oven or Grill
Cleaners products to 4% to
accommodate the use of noncaustic
technologies; (7) delay the effective date
until December 31, 2012 for Spot
Removers, and until December 31, 2013
for Flying Bug Insecticide (aerosol) and
Wasp or Hornet Insecticide (aerosol);
and (8) prohibit the use of alkylphenol
ethoxylates in certain products to
ensure these compounds are not used
when reformulating the products.
Generally, CARB received support for
its amendments from both the consumer
products industry and environmental
organizations. Although industry
commented about the serious and costly
reformulation challenges posed by the
amendments, industry was committed
to expending the money to conduct the
research and development necessary to
meet the new requirements.
Environmental organizations were also
generally supportive of the proactive
approach CARB was taking to prohibit
the use of certain toxic compounds in
order to help protect the health of
workers and consumers, and prohibiting
the use of compounds with high global
warming potential in the reformulation
of products to meet lower VOC limits.
CARB estimates that raising the VOC
limit for Oven or Grill Cleaners to 4%
will result in an increase of
approximately 0.1 tons per day (tpd)
and that increasing the number of areas
where higher VOC automotive
windshield washer fluid could be sold
will result in an increase of 0.12 tpd
VOC. CARB’s staff reports indicate these
increases would be offset by
approximately 11 tpd of VOC reductions
from other consumer product categories.
EPA’s technical support document
(TSD) has more information about this
rule.
II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that
regulations submitted to EPA for
approval into a SIP must be clear and
legally enforceable. CAA section 110(l)
prohibits EPA from approving any SIP
revision that would interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further
progress (RFP) or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA. California’s
consumer products regulation covers
VOC area sources and not stationary
sources. In 1998 EPA promulgated a
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
national rule to regulate VOC emissions
from consumer products (63 FR 48831,
September 11, 1998). EPA’s national
rule largely parallels an early SIPapproved version of CARB’s consumer
products regulation. The amendments
from CARB that we are approving today
regulate nearly three times the number
of consumer product categories and has
more stringent VOC limits than
categories covered under EPA’s 1998
national rule. CARB points out that
although emissions from individual
consumer products may not seem large,
collectively, they represent a significant
source of emissions when taking into
account 39 million California residents
use these products and that given the
severity of air pollution in California,
‘‘dramatic emission reductions from all
sources contributing to ground-level
ozone are necessary’’.3 CARB estimates
that ozone pollution damage to crops is
estimated to cost agriculture over $500
million dollars annually.4
Guidance and policy documents that
we use to evaluate enforceability and
SIP requirements consistently include
the following:
1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988, revised
January 11, 2000 (the Bluebook).
2. ‘‘State Implementation Plans;
General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR
13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070
(April 28, 1992).
3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. 40 CFR 59 Subpart C, National
Volatile Organic Compound Emission
Standards for Consumer Products.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with
the relevant policy and guidance
regarding enforceability and SIP
relaxations. CARB estimates that raising
the VOC limit for Oven or Grill Cleaners
and increasing the mountainous areas
where higher VOC windshield washer
fluid can be sold will increase VOC
emissions by approximately 0.1 and
0.12 tpd respectively, but that these
increases are offset by VOC reductions
(approximately 11 tpd) from other
consumer product categories. We have
3 Initial Statement of Reasons; Proposed
Amendments to the California Regulation for
Reducing Emissions from Consumer Products;
Release Date: September 29, 2010. IV–25. https://
www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/
cpmthdisor.pdf.
4 Ibid. IV–19.
E:\FR\FM\17OCR1.SGM
17OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
reviewed CARB’s analysis and agree
that the emission increases are offset by
greater VOC reductions achieved in
other consumer product categories and
that it will not interfere with attainment,
RFP, or any other applicable CAA
requirement. Our TSD has more
information on our evaluation.
Our action is being taken under CAA
Title 1 part D and is limited to the
control of criteria pollutants. However,
we support CARB’s actions to limit
toxic or potentially toxic compounds
and those compounds with a high global
warming potential.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, EPA is fully approving the
submitted rule because we believe it
fulfills all relevant requirements. We do
not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without
proposing it in advance. However, in
the Proposed Rules section of this
Federal Register, we are simultaneously
proposing approval of the same
submitted rule. If we receive adverse
comments by November 17, 2014, we
will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public
that the direct final approval will not
take effect and we will address the
comments in a subsequent final action
based on the proposal. If we do not
receive timely adverse comments, the
direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on December 16,
2014. This will incorporate the rule into
the federally enforceable SIP.
Please note that if EPA receives
adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if
that provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
State choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason,
this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:55 Oct 16, 2014
Jkt 235001
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
62349
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by December 16,
2014. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final rule does not affect the finality
of this action for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time
within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule
or action. Parties with objections to this
direct final rule are encouraged to file a
comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this
action published in the Proposed Rules
section of today’s Federal Register,
rather than file an immediate petition
for judicial review of this direct final
rule, so that EPA can withdraw this
direct final rule and address the
comment in the proposed rulemaking.
This action may not be challenged later
in proceedings to enforce its
requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: August 5, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52 [AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(444) to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(444) New and amended regulations
were submitted on May 28, 2014, by the
Governor’s designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference. (A)
California Air Resource Board.
(1) ‘‘Final Regulation Order,
Regulation for Reducing Emissions from
Consumer Products,’’ Subchapter 8.5
(Consumer Products), Article 2
E:\FR\FM\17OCR1.SGM
17OCR1
62350
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
(Consumer Products), amended March
15, 2013.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2014–24492 Filed 10–16–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0495; FRL–9917–82–
Region–9]
Revisions of Air Quality
Implementation Plan; Nevada; Clark
County; Stationary Source Permits
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is finalizing approval of
revisions to the Clark County
Department of Air Quality (Clark or
DEQ) portion of the Nevada State
Implementation Plan (SIP). This action
was proposed in the Federal Register on
July 23, 2014, and concerns seven Clark
County permitting related rules
submitted by Nevada Division of
SUMMARY:
Environmental Protection (NDEP). Final
approval of these rules makes these
rules federally enforceable and corrects
program deficiencies identified in
previous EPA rulemaking.
DATES: These rules will be effective on
November 17, 2014.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established docket
number EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0495 for
this action. Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California 94105–3901.
While all documents in the docket are
listed at https://www.regulations.gov,
some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps,
multi-volume reports), and some may
not be available in either location (e.g.,
confidential business information
(CBI)). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415)
972–3534, yannayon.laura@epa.gov.
This
action concerns seven Clark County
permitting related rules (referred to as
Sections) submitted by Nevada Division
of Environmental Protection (NDEP):
Sections 0—Definitions, 12.0—
Applicability, General Requirements
and Transition Procedures, 12.1—
Permit Requirements for Minor Sources,
12.2—Permit Requirements for Major
Sources in Attainment Areas, 12.3—
Permit Requirements for Major Sources
in Nonattainment Areas, 12.4—
Authority to Construct Application and
Permit Requirements for Part 70
Sources, and subsection 12.7.5 of
Section 12.7—Emission Reduction
Credits.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’
‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. EPA Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Proposed Action
On July 23, 2014 (79 FR 42752), EPA
proposed to approve the following rules
into the Clark portion of the Nevada SIP.
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED NSR RULES
Section No.
Section title
0 ...............................................
12.0 ..........................................
12.1 ..........................................
12.2 ..........................................
Definitions .........................................................................................................
Applicability, General Requirements and Transition Procedures .....................
Permit Requirements for Minor Sources ..........................................................
Permit Requirements for Major Sources in Attainment Areas (Prevention of
Significant Deterioration).
Permit Requirements for Major Sources in Nonattainment Areas ...................
Authority to Construct Application and Permit Requirements for Part 70
Sources.
Emission Reduction Credits ..............................................................................
12.3 ..........................................
12.4 ..........................................
12.7 (Subsection 12.7.5) ..........
We proposed to approve these rules
because we determined that they
address deficiencies identified in a
Adopted
previous action (77 FR 64039, October
18, 2012), and complied with the
relevant CAA requirements. On July 23,
Submitted
3/18/14
3/18/14
3/18/14
3/18/14
4/1/14
4/1/14
4/1/14
4/1/14
3/18/14
3/18/14
4/1/14
4/1/14
5/18/10
4/1/14
2014, we simultaneously proposed to
remove several outdated regulations
from the SIP as listed below.
TABLE 2—RULES REQUESTED TO RESCIND
Section title
1 ...................
11 .................
24 .................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Section No.
Definitions ......................................................................................................................................
Ambient Air Quality Standards ......................................................................................................
Sampling and Testing—Records and Reports .............................................................................
We have reconsidered our proposed
rescission of all of the remaining
defined terms in section 1
(‘‘Definitions’’) and are taking final
action to rescind all of them with the
exception of certain defined terms that
are necessary to retain because they are
relied upon in certain Clark County
rules in the existing SIP. The terms in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:55 Oct 16, 2014
Jkt 235001
Repealed
section 1 for which we are deferring
final rescission action at this time, and
the corresponding Clark County SIP rule
that relies on the term, are as follows:
‘‘affected facility’’ (SIP section 23),
‘‘dust’’ (SIP section 27), ‘‘existing
gasoline station’’ (SIP section 52),
‘‘fumes’’ (SIP section 27), ‘‘mist’’ (SIP
section 1 definition of ‘‘uncombined
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3/18/14
4/05/11
3/16/10
Submitted
4/01/14
4/01/14
4/01/14
water’’), ‘‘new gasoline station’’ (SIP
section 52), ‘‘new source’’ (SIP section
26), ‘‘single source’’ (SIP section 26),
‘‘standard conditions’’ (SIP section 30),
and ‘‘uncombined water’’ (SIP section
26).
Our proposed action and the
associated Technical Support Document
(TSD) contains more information on the
E:\FR\FM\17OCR1.SGM
17OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 201 (Friday, October 17, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62346-62350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24492]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0529; FRL-9915-53-Region 9]
Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, California
Air Resources Board--Consumer Products
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve revisions to the California Air Resources Board
portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern
[[Page 62347]]
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from consumer products. We
are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under
the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act).
DATES: This rule is effective on December 16, 2014 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 17, 2014. If
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2014-0529, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105-3901.
While all documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov,
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be
publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
C. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What rule did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the date it was
amended by the State and submitted by the California Air Resources
Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted California Air Resources Board Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Filed with California
Regulation Amended Secretary of State Submitted to EPA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter 8.5--Consumer March 15, 2013.............. April 25, 2013............. May 28, 2014.
Products; Article 2--Consumer
Products.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 18, 2014, EPA determined that the submittal for California
Code of Regulations, Title 17, Division 3, Chapter 1, Subchapter 8.5--
Consumer Products; Article 2--Consumer Products met the completeness
criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal
EPA review.
B. Are there other versions of this rule?
We approved an earlier version of CARB's Consumer Products
Regulation (amended on August 6, 2010 and submitted to EPA on January
28, 2011), into the SIP on February 13, 2012 (77 FR 7535). CARB's
submittal letter advised EPA that its SIP submission did not include
the second tier 3% VOC limits for Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint
Thinners. CARB's intent was to monitor manufacturers' progress to meet
both the technology forcing lower VOC limit and a less flammable
product. In 2013 CARB determined the 3% VOC limit for Multi-purpose
Solvents and Paint Thinners was technically feasible and included the
limit in a May 28, 2014 SIP submittal.
On September 29, 2011, and March 15, 2013 CARB adopted additional
revisions to the SIP-approved version and submitted them to us along
with the 3% VOC limit for Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners on
May 28, 2014. Table 2 lists the three amendments. While we can act on
only the most recently amended version that was submitted to EPA, we
have reviewed materials provided with the SIP submittal and note that
it includes and builds on the previous amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Date the Final Rulemaking Package was filed with the
California Office of Administrative Law.
Table 2--California Air Resources Board Submitted Revisions to Its Consumer Products Regulation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Filed with California
Board hearing Amended \1\ Secretary of State Submitted to EPA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 24, 2009............. August 6, 2010............... September 20, 2010........... May 28, 2014 (2nd
tier--3% VOC
limit for Multi-
purpose Solvents
and Paint
Thinners only).
November 18, 2010.............. September 29, 2011........... November 10, 2011............ May 28, 2014.
October 18, 2012............... March 15, 2013............... April 25, 2013............... May 28, 2014.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62348]]
C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. The California Health
and Safety Code (Section 41712(b)) requires CARB to adopt regulations
to achieve the maximum feasible reduction in volatile organic compounds
emitted by consumer products if the state board determines that
adequate data exist to establish both of the following:
(1) The regulations are necessary to attain state and federal
ambient air quality standards.
(2) The regulations are commercially and technologically feasible
and necessary.
CARB's May 28, 2014 submittal contains the following three
amendments to its Consumer Products Regulation: (1) The second tier 3%
VOC limits for Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners from CARB's
August 6, 2010 amendments (September 24, 2009 Board Hearing), but
excluded from CARB's January 28, 2011 SIP submittal; \2\ (2) CARB's
September 29, 2011 amendments (November 18, 2010 Board Hearing), which
established new or lower VOC limits for 11 consumer product categories;
and (3) CARB's March 15, 2013 amendments (October 18, 2012 Board
Hearing), which incorporates additional areas where higher VOC
automobile windshield washer fluid could be sold to accommodate
mountainous areas that routinely experience freezing temperatures in
the winter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Robert D. Fletcher (CARB), letter to Jared Blumenfeld (EPA
Region IX), January 28, 2011, submitting the August 6, 2010
amendments to California's Consumer Products Regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The amendments also: (1) Add or modify the definitions for artist's
solvent/thinner, oven cleaners, spot removers, and the ``Most
Restrictive Limit'' provision; (2) consolidate existing requirements
into a table listing the consumer product categories that prohibit the
use of the toxic air contaminants methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene. This will make it easier to
find the requirements for all consumer product categories where use of
these compounds is prohibited; (3) consolidate into a table listing the
consumer product categories that prohibit the use of compounds with a
global warming potential (GWP) of 150 or greater; (4) consolidate into
a table listing the consumer products that prohibit the use of para-
dichlorobenzene; (5) add additional test methods to be used to
determine the aromatic content of Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint
Thinners and the VOC content of Fabric Softener-Single Use Drying
Product; (6) raise the VOC limit for nonaerosol Oven or Grill Cleaners
products to 4% to accommodate the use of noncaustic technologies; (7)
delay the effective date until December 31, 2012 for Spot Removers, and
until December 31, 2013 for Flying Bug Insecticide (aerosol) and Wasp
or Hornet Insecticide (aerosol); and (8) prohibit the use of
alkylphenol ethoxylates in certain products to ensure these compounds
are not used when reformulating the products.
Generally, CARB received support for its amendments from both the
consumer products industry and environmental organizations. Although
industry commented about the serious and costly reformulation
challenges posed by the amendments, industry was committed to expending
the money to conduct the research and development necessary to meet the
new requirements. Environmental organizations were also generally
supportive of the proactive approach CARB was taking to prohibit the
use of certain toxic compounds in order to help protect the health of
workers and consumers, and prohibiting the use of compounds with high
global warming potential in the reformulation of products to meet lower
VOC limits.
CARB estimates that raising the VOC limit for Oven or Grill
Cleaners to 4% will result in an increase of approximately 0.1 tons per
day (tpd) and that increasing the number of areas where higher VOC
automotive windshield washer fluid could be sold will result in an
increase of 0.12 tpd VOC. CARB's staff reports indicate these increases
would be offset by approximately 11 tpd of VOC reductions from other
consumer product categories. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has
more information about this rule.
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that regulations submitted to EPA
for approval into a SIP must be clear and legally enforceable. CAA
section 110(l) prohibits EPA from approving any SIP revision that would
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress (RFP) or any other applicable requirement
of the CAA. California's consumer products regulation covers VOC area
sources and not stationary sources. In 1998 EPA promulgated a national
rule to regulate VOC emissions from consumer products (63 FR 48831,
September 11, 1998). EPA's national rule largely parallels an early
SIP-approved version of CARB's consumer products regulation. The
amendments from CARB that we are approving today regulate nearly three
times the number of consumer product categories and has more stringent
VOC limits than categories covered under EPA's 1998 national rule. CARB
points out that although emissions from individual consumer products
may not seem large, collectively, they represent a significant source
of emissions when taking into account 39 million California residents
use these products and that given the severity of air pollution in
California, ``dramatic emission reductions from all sources
contributing to ground-level ozone are necessary''.\3\ CARB estimates
that ozone pollution damage to crops is estimated to cost agriculture
over $500 million dollars annually.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Initial Statement of Reasons; Proposed Amendments to the
California Regulation for Reducing Emissions from Consumer Products;
Release Date: September 29, 2010. IV-25. https://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/cpmthdisor.pdf.
\4\ Ibid. IV-19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability and SIP requirements consistently include the following:
1. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988, revised January 11, 2000 (the
Bluebook).
2. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 57
FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. 40 CFR 59 Subpart C, National Volatile Organic Compound Emission
Standards for Consumer Products.
B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. CARB estimates
that raising the VOC limit for Oven or Grill Cleaners and increasing
the mountainous areas where higher VOC windshield washer fluid can be
sold will increase VOC emissions by approximately 0.1 and 0.12 tpd
respectively, but that these increases are offset by VOC reductions
(approximately 11 tpd) from other consumer product categories. We have
[[Page 62349]]
reviewed CARB's analysis and agree that the emission increases are
offset by greater VOC reductions achieved in other consumer product
categories and that it will not interfere with attainment, RFP, or any
other applicable CAA requirement. Our TSD has more information on our
evaluation.
Our action is being taken under CAA Title 1 part D and is limited
to the control of criteria pollutants. However, we support CARB's
actions to limit toxic or potentially toxic compounds and those
compounds with a high global warming potential.
C. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rule. If we
receive adverse comments by November 17, 2014, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on December 16, 2014. This will incorporate the
rule into the federally enforceable SIP.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 16, 2014. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed
Rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so
that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in
the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: August 5, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52 [AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F--California
0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(444) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(444) New and amended regulations were submitted on May 28, 2014,
by the Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference. (A) California Air Resource Board.
(1) ``Final Regulation Order, Regulation for Reducing Emissions
from Consumer Products,'' Subchapter 8.5 (Consumer Products), Article 2
[[Page 62350]]
(Consumer Products), amended March 15, 2013.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-24492 Filed 10-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
