Air Quality: Revision to the Regulatory Definition of Volatile Organic Compounds-Exclusion of 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy) Ethane (HFE-347pcf2), 50330-50336 [2016-17789]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
50330
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
obtaining regulatory objectives and
taking into account—among other things
and to the extent practicable—the costs
of cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, select those
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives, rather than the
behavior or manner of compliance a
regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available
alternatives to direct regulation,
including economic incentives—such as
user fees or marketable permits—to
encourage the desired behavior or
provide information that enables the
public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires
an agency ‘‘to use the best available
techniques to quantify anticipated
present and future benefits and costs as
accurately as possible.’’ The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ‘‘identifying
changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological
innovation or anticipated behavioral
changes.’’
We are issuing these final priorities,
requirements, and definitions only on a
reasoned determination that their
benefits justify their costs. In choosing
among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Based on the analysis that follows, the
Department believes that this regulatory
action is consistent with the principles
in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this
regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive
orders, the Department has assessed the
potential costs and benefits, both
quantitative and qualitative, of this
regulatory action. The potential costs
are those resulting from statutory
requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for
administering the Department’s
programs and activities.
Intergovernmental Review: This
competition is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34
CFR part 79. However, under 34 CFR
79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental
review in order to make an award by the
end of FY 2016.
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Jul 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or compact disc) on
request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register
and the Code of Federal Regulations is
available via the Federal Digital System
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you
can view this document, as well as all
other documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Portable Document Format
(PDF). To use PDF you must have
Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at: www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Dated: July 26, 2016.
Sue Swenson,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2016–18031 Filed 7–29–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 51
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2015–0041; FRL–9949–77–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AR94
Air Quality: Revision to the Regulatory
Definition of Volatile Organic
Compounds—Exclusion of 1,1,2,2Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)
Ethane (HFE-347pcf2)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to revise the regulatory definition
of volatile organic compounds (VOC)
under the Clean Air Act (CAA). This
direct final action adds 1,1,2,2Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)
ethane (also known as HFE-347pcf2;
CAS number 406–78–0) to the list of
compounds excluded from the
regulatory definition of VOC on the
basis that this compound makes a
negligible contribution to tropospheric
ozone (O3) formation.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This rule is effective on
September 30, 2016 without further
notice, unless the EPA receives adverse
comment by August 31, 2016. If the EPA
receives adverse comment, we will
publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2015–0041, at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Souad Benromdhane, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Health
and Environmental Impacts Division,
Mail Code C539–07, Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711; telephone: (919) 541–
4359; fax number: (919) 541–5315;
email address: benromdhane.souad@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Table of Contents
I. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
II. Does this action apply to me?
III. Background
A. The EPA’s VOC Exemption Policy
B. Petition To List HFE-347pcf2 as an
Exempt Compound
IV. The EPA’s Assessment of the Petition
A. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone
Formation
B. Contribution to Stratospheric Ozone
Depletion
C. Toxicity
D. Contribution to Climate Change
E. Conclusions
V. Direct Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM
01AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
L. Judicial Review
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
I. Why is the EPA using a direct final
rule?
The EPA is publishing this direct final
rule without a prior proposed rule
because we view this as a
noncontroversial action and anticipate
no adverse comment. This action revises
the EPA’s regulatory definition of VOC
for purposes of preparing state
implementation plans (SIPs) to attain
the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for O3 under title I
of the CAA by adding HFE-347pcf2 to
the list of compounds excluded from the
regulatory definition of VOC on the
basis that this compound makes a
negligible contribution to tropospheric
O3 formation. However, in the
‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of this
Federal Register, we are publishing a
separate document that will serve as the
proposed rule to make this revision to
the regulatory definition of VOC if
adverse comments are received on this
direct final rule. We will not institute a
second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time. For further
information about commenting on this
rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this
document.
If the EPA receives adverse comment,
we will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the
public that this direct final rule will not
take effect. We would address all public
comments in any subsequent final rule
based on the proposed rule.
II. Does this action apply to me?
Entities potentially affected by this
direct final rule include, but are not
necessarily limited to: State and local
air pollution control agencies that adopt
and implement regulations to control air
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Jul 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
emissions of VOC; and industries
manufacturing and/or using HFE347pcf2 as a precision cleaning agent to
remove contaminants including oil,
flux, and fingerprints from items like
medical devices, artificial implants,
crucial military and aerospace items,
electric components, printed circuit
boards, optics, jewelry, ball bearings,
aircraft guidance systems, film, relays,
and a variety of metal components,
among others.
III. Background
A. The EPA’s VOC Exemption Policy
Tropospheric O3, commonly known
as smog, is formed when VOC and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the
atmosphere in the presence of sunlight.
Because of the harmful health effects of
O3, the EPA and state governments limit
the amount of VOC that can be released
into the atmosphere. Volatile organic
compounds form O3 through
atmospheric photochemical reactions,
and different VOC have different levels
of reactivity. That is, different VOC do
not react to form O3 at the same speed
or do not form O3 to the same extent.
Some VOC react slowly or form less O3;
therefore, changes in their emissions
have limited effects on local or regional
O3 pollution episodes. It is the EPA’s
policy that organic compounds with a
negligible level of reactivity should be
excluded from the regulatory definition
of VOC in order to focus VOC control
efforts on compounds that significantly
increase O3 concentrations. The EPA
also believes that exempting such
compounds creates an incentive for
industry to use negligibly reactive
compounds in place of more highly
reactive compounds that are regulated
as VOC. The EPA lists compounds that
it has determined to be negligibly
reactive in its regulations as being
excluded from the regulatory definition
of VOC (40 CFR 51.100(s)).
The CAA requires the regulation of
VOC for various purposes. Section
302(s) of the CAA specifies that the EPA
has the authority to define the meaning
of ‘‘VOC’’ and, hence, what compounds
shall be treated as VOC for regulatory
purposes. The policy of excluding
negligibly reactive compounds from the
regulatory definition of VOC was first
laid out in the ‘‘Recommended Policy
on Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds’’ (42 FR 35314, July 8,
1977) (from here forward referred to as
the 1977 Recommended Policy) and was
supplemented subsequently with the
‘‘Interim Guidance on Control of
Volatile Organic Compounds in Ozone
State Implementation Plans’’ (70 FR
54046, September 13, 2005) (from here
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
50331
forward referred to as the 2005 Interim
Guidance). The EPA uses the reactivity
of ethane as the threshold for
determining whether a compound has
negligible reactivity. Compounds that
are less reactive than, or equally reactive
to, ethane under certain assumed
conditions may be deemed negligibly
reactive and, therefore, suitable for
exemption from the regulatory
definition of VOC. Compounds that are
more reactive than ethane continue to
be considered VOC for regulatory
purposes and, therefore, are subject to
control requirements. The selection of
ethane as the threshold compound was
based on a series of smog chamber
experiments that underlay the 1977
policy.
The EPA has used three different
metrics to compare the reactivity of a
specific compound to that of ethane: (i)
The rate constant for reaction with the
hydroxyl radical (OH) (known as kOH);
(ii) the maximum incremental reactivity
(MIR) on a reactivity per unit mass
basis; and (iii) the MIR expressed on a
reactivity per mole basis. Differences
between these three metrics are
discussed below.
The kOH is the rate constant of the
reaction of the compound with the OH
radical in the air. This reaction is often,
but not always the first and rate-limiting
step in a series of chemical reactions by
which a compound breaks down in the
air and contributes to O3 formation. If
this step is slow, the compound will
likely not form O3 at a very fast rate. The
kOH values have long been used by the
EPA as metrics of photochemical
reactivity and O3-forming activity, and
they have been the basis for most of the
EPA’s early exemptions of negligibly
reactive compounds from the regulatory
definition of VOC. The kOH metric is
inherently a molar-based comparison,
i.e., it measures the rate at which
molecules react.
The MIR, both by mole and by mass,
is a more updated metric of
photochemical reactivity derived from a
computer-based photochemical model,
and has been used as a consideration of
reactivity since 1995. This metric
considers the complete O3-forming
activity of a compound over multiple
hours and through multiple reaction
pathways, not merely the first reaction
step with OH. Further explanation of
the MIR metric can be found in Carter
(1994), ‘‘Development of ozone
reactivity scales for volatile organic
compounds.’’
The EPA has considered the choice
between a molar or mass basis for the
comparison to ethane in past
rulemakings and guidance. In the 2005
Interim Guidance, the EPA stated:
E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM
01AUR1
50332
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
[A] comparison to ethane on a mass basis
strikes the right balance between a threshold
that is low enough to capture compounds
that significantly affect ozone concentrations
and a threshold that is high enough to
exempt some compounds that may usefully
substitute for more highly reactive
compounds.
When reviewing compounds that have
been suggested for VOC-exempt status, EPA
will continue to compare them to ethane
using kOH expressed on a molar basis and
MIR values expressed on a mass basis.
The 2005 Interim Guidance also noted
that concerns have sometimes been
raised about the potential impact of a
VOC exemption on environmental
endpoints other than O3 concentrations,
including fine particle formation, air
toxics exposures, stratospheric O3
depletion, and climate change. The EPA
has recognized, however, that there are
existing regulatory and non-regulatory
programs that are specifically designed
to address these issues, and the EPA
continues to believe in general that the
impacts of VOC exemptions on
environmental endpoints other than O3
formation will be adequately addressed
by these programs. The VOC exemption
policy is intended to facilitate
attainment of the O3 NAAQS. In general,
VOC exemption decisions will continue
to be based solely on consideration of a
compound’s contribution to O3
formation. However, if the EPA
determines that a particular VOC
exemption is likely to result in a
significant increase in the use of a
compound and that the increased use
would pose a significant risk to human
health or the environment that would
not be addressed adequately by existing
programs or policies, then the EPA may
exercise its judgment accordingly in
deciding whether to grant an exemption.
B. Petition To List HFE-347pcf2 as an
Exempt Compound
Asahi Glass Company, AGC
Chemicals America, Inc. submitted a
petition to the EPA on February 5, 2007,
requesting that 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-
(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy) ethane (HFE347pcf2; CAS number 406–78–0) be
exempted from the regulatory definition
of VOC. The petition was based on the
argument that HFE-347pcf2 has low
reactivity relative to ethane. The
petitioner indicated that HFE-347pcf2
may be used in a variety of applications
as a precision cleaning agent to remove
contaminants including oil, flux, and
fingerprints from items like medical
devices, artificial implants, crucial
military and aerospace items, electric
components, printed circuit boards,
optics, jewelry, ball bearings, aircraft
guidance systems, film, relays, and a
variety of metal components, among
others.
To support its petition, AGC
Chemicals America, Inc. referenced
several documents, including two peerreviewed journal articles on HFE347pcf2’s reaction rates (Tokuhashi et
al., 2000; Pitts et al, 1983). In 2014, AGC
provided a supplemental technical
report on the maximum incremental
reactivity of HFE-347pcf2 (Carter, 2014).
According to this report, the maximum
incremental reactivity of HFE-347pcf2
ranges between 0.0007 g O3/g HFE347pcf2 (best estimate) and 0.0013 g
O3/g HFE-347pcf2 (high reactivity
estimate) on the mass-based MIR scale.
This reactivity rate is much lower than
that of ethane (0.28 g O3/g ethane), the
compound that the EPA has used for
comparison to define ‘‘negligible’’ O3
reactivity for the purpose of exempting
compounds from the regulatory
definition of VOC. The rate constant for
the gas-phase reaction of OH radicals
with HFE-347pcf2 (kOH) has been
measured to be 9.16 × 10¥15 cm3/
molecule-sec at ∼298 K (Pitts et al.,
1983, Tokuhashi et al., 2000). Based on
the measured reactivity rate of HFE347pcf2 (Pitts et al., 1983), HFE-347pcf2
has a smaller kOH than ethane (kOH of
ethane = 2.4 × 10¥13 cm3/molecule-sec
at ∼298 K) and, therefore, is less reactive
than ethane.
To address the potential for
stratospheric O3 impacts, the petitioner
contended that, given the atmospheric
lifetime of HFE-347pcf2 and that it does
not contain chlorine or bromine, it is
not expected to contribute to the
depletion of the stratospheric O3 layer.
IV. The EPA’s Assessment of the
Petition
The EPA is taking direct final action
to respond to the petition by exempting
HFE-347pcf2 from the regulatory
definition of VOC. This action is based
on consideration of the compound’s low
contribution to tropospheric O3 and the
low likelihood of risk to human health
or the environment. In this case, the
EPA considered issues of contribution
to stratospheric O3 depletion, toxicity,
and climate change. Additional
information on these topics is provided
in the following sections.
A. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone
Formation
The reaction rate of HFE-347pcf2 with
the OH radical (kOH) has been measured
to be 9.16 × 10¥15 cm3/molecule-sec
(Tokuhashi et al., 2000); other reactions
with O3 and the nitrate radical were
negligibly small. The corresponding
reaction rate of ethane with OH is 2.4 ×
10¥13 cm3/molecule-sec (Atkinson et
al., 2006).
The overall atmospheric reactivity of
HFE-347pcf2 was not studied in an
experimental smog chamber, but the
chemical mechanism derived from other
chamber studies (Carter, 2011) was used
to model the complete formation of O3
for an entire single day under realistic
atmospheric conditions (Carter, 2014).
In 2014, Carter calculated a MIR value
of 0.0007 to 0.0013 g O3/g VOC for HFE347pcf2 for ‘‘averaged conditions,’’
versus 0.28 g O3/g VOC for ethane.
Table 1 presents the three reactivity
metrics for HFE-347pcf2 as they
compare to ethane.
TABLE 1—REACTIVITIES OF ETHANE AND HFE-347pcf2
kOH
(cm3/molecule-sec)
Compound
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Ethane ..................................................................................................................
HFE-347pcf2 ........................................................................................................
Maximum
incremental
reactivity (MIR)
(g O3/mole VOC)
2.4 × 10¥13
9.16 × 10¥15
8.4
0.14–0.26
Maximum
incremental
reactivity (MIR)
(g O3/g VOC)
0.28
0.0007–0.0013
Notes:
1. kOH value at 298 K for ethane is from Atkinson et al., 2006 (page 3626).
2. kOH value at 298 K for HFE-347pcf2 is from Tokuhashi, 2000.
3. Mass-based MIR value (g O3/g VOC) of ethane is from Carter, 2011.
4. Mass-based MIR value (g O3/g VOC) of HFE-347pcf2 is from a supplemental report by Carter, 2014.
5. Molar-based MIR (g O3/mole VOC) values were calculated from the mass-based MIR (g O3/g VOC) values using the number of moles per
gram of the relevant organic compound.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Jul 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM
01AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
The data in Table 1, shows that HFE347pcf2 has a significantly lower kOH
value than ethane, meaning that it
initially reacts less quickly in the
atmosphere than ethane. Also, a
molecule of HFE-347pcf2 is less reactive
than a molecule of ethane in terms of
complete O3-forming activity as shown
by the molar-based MIR (g O3/mole
VOC) values. Additionally, one gram of
HFE-347pcf2 has a lower capacity than
one gram of ethane to form O3. Thus,
following the 2005 Interim Guidance,
HFE-347pcf2 is eligible to be exempted
from the regulatory definition of VOC
on the basis of kOH and both the moleand mass-based MIR.
B. Contribution to Stratospheric Ozone
Depletion
HFE-347pcf2 is unlikely to contribute
to the depletion of the stratospheric O3
layer. The O3 depletion potential (ODP)
of HFE-347pcf2 is expected to be
negligible based on several lines of
evidence: The absence of chlorine or
bromine from the compound, the
expected initial reactions described in
Carter (2008), and the general theory
supporting the estimated mechanisms of
its reactivity with the hydroxyl OH
discussed in Carter (2011).
The Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) program is the EPA’s
program to evaluate and regulate
substitutes for end uses historically
using ozone-depleting chemicals. Under
Section 612(c) of the CAA, the EPA is
required to identify and publish lists of
acceptable and unacceptable substitutes
for class I or class II ozone-depleting
substances. According to the SNAP
program finding, the HFE-347pcf2 ODP
is zero and therefore HFE-347pcf2 is
listed as an acceptable substitute for
several of these ozone-depleting
chemicals in electronics and precision
cleaning and as an aerosol solvent in
2012.1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
C. Toxicity
Based on a screening assessment of
the health and environmental risks of
HFE-347pcf2 (available in the docket for
the SNAP rule at EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–
0118 under the name, ‘‘Risk Screen on
Substitutes CFC–113, Methyl
Chloroform, and HCFC-141b in Aerosol
Solvent, Electronics Cleaning, and
Precision Cleaning Substitute: HFE347pcf2’’), the SNAP program
anticipated that users will be able to use
the compound in precision cleaning
without significantly greater health risks
1 77 FR 47768, August 10, 2012. Also see list of
acceptable cleaning solvents under SNAP decision:
https://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/solvents/
solvents.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:26 Jul 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
than presented by use of other available
substitutes.
Potential health effects of HFE347pcf2 include coughing, dizziness,
dullness, drowsiness, and headache.
Higher concentrations can produce
heart irregularities, central nervous
system depression, narcosis,
unconsciousness, respiratory failure, or
death. This compound may also irritate
the skin or eyes. The acute and shortterm studies presented during the SNAP
review indicated that HFE-347pcf2 is
toxic by inhalation, and mortality was
observed at high concentrations of 2000
ppm and above. HFE-347pcf2 is not
commonly used outside of industrial
settings, and other compounds in the
same industrial uses have similar health
and environmental risks. The SNAP
program, in their listing of HFE-347pcf2
as an acceptable substitute in aerosol
solvent, recommended that adequate
ventilation and good industrial hygiene
practice be utilized due to the potential
neurotoxic effects of this substitute at
high acute (short-term) concentrations.
The manufacturer recommended an
acceptable exposure limit (AEL) for the
workplace of 50 ppm (8-hr total weight
average, TWA). The EPA recommended
a maximum allowable human exposure
limit of 150 ppm for HFE-347pcf2. The
EPA anticipates that users following
good practices will be able to use HFE347pcf2 in electronics and precision
cleaning without appreciable health
risks.
HFE-347pcf2 is not regulated as a
hazardous air pollutant (HAP) under
Title I of the CAA. Also, it is not listed
as a toxic chemical under Section 313
of the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA).
The Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) gives the EPA authority to
assess and prevent potential
unreasonable risks to human health and
the environment before a new chemical
substance is introduced into commerce.
Section 5 of TSCA requires
manufacturers and importers to notify
the EPA before manufacturing or
importing a new chemical substance by
submitting a pre-manufacture notice
(PMN) prior to the manufacture
(including import) of the chemical.
Under the TSCA New Chemicals
Program, the EPA then assesses whether
an unreasonable risk may, or will, be
presented by the expected manufacture,
processing, distribution in commerce,
use, and disposal of the new substance.
The PMN for HFE-347pcf2 stated the
substance will be used in industrial
settings for cleaning electronic
components, precision cleaning,
dewatering of electronic components
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
50333
and other parts following aqueous
cleaning, and as a carrier/lubricant
coating for hard disk drives and other
precision parts. EPA did not determine
that the above-listed proposed industrial
processing or use of the substance
presents an unreasonable risk. The EPA
has determined, however, that domestic
manufacture, use in non-industrial
products, or use other than as described
in the PMN may cause serious chronic
health effects. To mitigate risks
identified during the PMN review of
HFE-347pcf2 (PMN P–04–0635), EPA
issued a Significant New Use Rule
(SNUR) 2 requiring that manufacturers
notify the EPA prior to manufacture or
processing of the compound for any
new use other than those proposed in
the PMN. The required notification will
provide the EPA with the opportunity to
evaluate the intended use and, if
necessary, to prohibit or limit that
activity before it occurs.
D. Contribution to Climate Change
The Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment
Report (IPCC AR5) estimated the
lifetime of HFE-347pcf2 to be 6.0 years
and the radiative efficiency to be 0.48
W/m2/ppb. The report estimated the
resulting 100-year global warming
potential (GWP) to be 889, meaning that,
over a 100-year period, one ton of HFE347pcf2 traps 889 times as much
warming energy as one ton of CO2
(IPCC, 2013).3 HFE-347pcf2’s GWP of
889 is lower than some of the
substitutes in the end uses for which it
has been listed as acceptable under the
SNAP program, such as HFC-4310mee
(GWP = 1650), but higher than the GWP
of some other substitutes, such as HFC365mfc (GWP = 804), HFE-7100 (GWP =
421) and aqueous cleaners with no
direct GWP. Under the SNAP program,
the EPA continually reviews the
availability of acceptable substitutes and
expects to eventually eliminate higherGWP chemicals from the list of
acceptable compounds as safer, lowerGWP substitutes become available.
E. Conclusions
The EPA finds that HFE-347pcf2 is
negligibly reactive with respect to its
contribution to tropospheric O3
formation and thus may be exempted
from the EPA’s definition of VOC in 40
CFR 51.100(s). HFE-347pcf2 has been
2 77 FR 61117 (Oct. 5, 2012): FR document, with
preamble background. See 40 CFR 721.10549.
3 The GWP value for HFE-347pcf2 of 580
considered in the 2012 SNAP decision came from
the previous IPCC report, AR4 (IPCC, 2007). AR4
GWP values are still used in a number of regulatory
and reporting contexts to maintain consistency and
allow for analysis of trends.
E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM
01AUR1
50334
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
listed as acceptable for use in electronic
and precision cleaning and as an aerosol
solvent under the SNAP program
(USEPA, 2004). The EPA determined
that HFE-347pcf2 has a similar or lower
stratospheric O3 depletion potential
than available substitutes in those end
uses and that the toxicity risk from
using HFE-347pcf2 is not significantly
greater than the risk from using other
available alternatives. HFE-347pcf2,
among other hydrofluoroethers, was
found by both the Montreal Protocol’s
solvents, coatings, and adhesives
technical options committee in 2002
and its technical and economic
assessment panel in 2005, to be a
suitable replacement for other, more
harmful cleaning solvents (UNEP, 2002,
2005). HFE-347pcf2 is expected to be
used primarily for the purposes
regulated by the SNAP program. It is
mostly replacing chemicals with higher
GWP and the SNAP program will
continue to evaluate its acceptability as
an alternative for those specific uses, the
EPA has concluded that nontropospheric ozone-related risks
associated with potential increased use
of HFE-347pcf2 are adequately managed
by this program. The EPA does not
expect significant use of HFE-347pcf2 in
applications not covered by the SNAP
program. However, the SNUR in place
under TSCA requires that any
significant new use of the chemical be
reported to EPA using a Significant New
Use Notice (SNUN).
Any significant new use of HFE347pcf2 would need to be evaluated by
the EPA, and the EPA will continually
review the availability of acceptable
substitute chemicals from the list of
acceptable compounds under the SNAP
program as lower-GWP substitutes
become available, which could lead to
restrictions on the use of HFE-347pcf2,
should safer, lower-GWP substitutes
become available. At this time, SNAP
does not anticipate further evaluation of
HFE-347pcf2 to potentially remove the
compound from the list of acceptable
substitutes in the precision cleaning
end-use largely because the use of the
chemical is limited to a small niche
market.
V. Direct Final Action
The EPA is responding to the petition
by revising its regulatory definition of
VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s) to add HFE347pcf2 to the list of compounds that
are exempt from the regulatory
definition of VOC because it is less
reactive than ethane based on a
comparison of kOH, and mass-based
MIR, and molar-based MIR metrics and
is therefore considered negligibly
reactive. As a result of this action, if an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Jul 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
entity uses or produces any of this
compound and is subject to the EPA
regulations limiting the use of VOC in
a product, limiting the VOC emissions
from a facility, or otherwise controlling
the use of VOC for purposes related to
attaining the O3 NAAQS, then this
compound will not be counted as a VOC
in determining whether these regulatory
obligations have been met. This action
may also affect whether this compound
is considered a VOC for state regulatory
purposes to reduce O3 formation if a
state relies on the EPA’s regulatory
definition of VOC. States are not
obligated to exclude from control as a
VOC those compounds that the EPA has
found to be negligibly reactive.
However, no state may take credit for
controlling this compound in its O3
control strategy. Consequently,
reduction in emissions for this
compound will not be considered or
counted in determining whether states
have met the rate of progress
requirements for VOC in SIPs or in
demonstrating attainment of the O3
NAAQS.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was therefore not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
PRA. It does not contain any
recordkeeping or reporting
requirements.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. This action will not
impose any requirements on small
entities. This action removes HFE347pcf2 from the regulatory definition
of VOC and thereby relieves
manufacturers, distributers, and users of
the compound from requirements to
control emissions of the compound.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The action imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local or
tribal governments, or the private sector.
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the 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.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175. This direct final rule
removes HFE-347pcf2 from the
regulatory definition of VOC and
thereby relieves manufacturers,
distributers and users from
requirements to control emissions of the
compound. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it is not
economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because the
EPA does not believe the environmental
health or safety risks addressed by this
action present a disproportionate risk to
children. Since HFE-347pcf2 is utilized
in specific industrial applications where
children are not present and dissipates
quickly, there is no exposure or
disproportionate risk to children. This
action removes HFE-347pcf2 from the
regulatory definition of VOC and
thereby relieves manufacturers,
distributers and users from
requirements to control emissions of the
compound.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does
not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority populations, lowincome populations and/or indigenous
E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM
01AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
peoples, as specified in Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629 February 16, 1994).
This action removes HFE-347pcf2 from
the regulatory definition of VOC and
thereby relieves manufacturers,
distributers, and users of the compound
from requirements to control emissions
of the compound.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and
the EPA will submit a rule report to
each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United
States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
L. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit Court within 60 days
from the date the final action is
published in the Federal Register.
Filing a petition for review by the
Administrator of this final action 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 must be
filed, and shall not postpone the
effectiveness of such action. Thus, any
petitions for review of this action
related to the exemption of HFE-347pcf2
from the regulatory definition of VOC
must be filed in the Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit within
60 days from the date final action is
published in the Federal Register.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
References
Atkinson, R., Baulch, D. L., Cox, R. A.,
Crowley, J. N., Hampson, Jr., R. F.,
Hynes, R. G., Jenkin, M. E., Kerr, J. A.,
Rossi, M. J., and Troe, J. (2006) Evaluated
kinetic and photochemical data for
atmospheric chemistry: Volume II—gas
phase reactions of organic species.
Atmos. Chem. Phys. 6: 3625–4055.
Carter, W. P. L. (1994) Development of ozone
reactivity scales for volatile organic
compounds. J. Air Waste Manage, 44:
881–899.
Carter, W. P. L. (2008) Reactivity Estimates
for Selected Consumer Product
Compounds, Final Report to California
Air Resources Board Contract No. 06–
408, February 19, 2008. https://
www.arb.ca.gov/research/reactivity/
consumer_products.pdf.
Carter, W. P. L. (2011) SAPRC Atmospheric
Chemical Mechanisms and VOC
Reactivity Scales, Web page at https://
www.engr.ucr.edu/∼carter/SAPRC/ Last
updated in Sept. 14, 2013. Tables of
Maximum Incremental Reactivity (MIR)
Values available at https://
www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/mir2009/
mir2009.htm. May 11, 2011.
Carter, W. P. L. (2014) Estimating the groundlevel atmospheric ozone formation
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Jul 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
potentials of 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2trifluoroethoxy) ethane (HFE-347pcf2),
November 13, 2014.
IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: The
Physical Science Basis. Contribution of
Working Group I to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M.
Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B.
Averyt, M. Tignor and H. L. Miller
(eds.)]. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom and New
York, NY, USA, 996 pp.
IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The
Physical Science Basis. Contribution of
Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change [Stocker, T. F., D. Qin,
G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J.
Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and
P. M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, United
Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535
pp.
Pitts, J. N. Jr., Winer, A. M., Aschmann, S.
M., Carter, W. P. L., and Atkinson, K.
(1983), Experimental Protocol for
Determining Hydroxyl Radical Reaction
Rate Constants Environmental Science
Research Laboratory, ORD, USEPA.
EPA600/3–82–038.
Tokuhashi, K., Takahashi, A., Kaise, M.,
Kondo, K., Sekiya, A., Yamashita, S., and
Ito, H., (2000), Rate Constants for the
Reactions of OH Radicals with
CH3OCF2CHF2, CHF2OCH2CF2CHF2,
CHF2OCH2CF2CF3, and
CF3CH2OCF2CHF2 over the Temperature
Range 250–430 K. J. Phys. Chem. Kinet
A, 2000, V 104, N 6, 17 February, 2000.
UNEP (2002), Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer:
2002 Report of the Solvents, Coatings,
and Adhesives Technical Options
Committee, Assessment Report, 2002.
UNEP Technology and Economic Assessment
Panel, UNEP/TEAP, (2005), Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the
Ozone Layer, Progress Report, May 2005.
USEPA, (USEPA/SNAP), (2004), The U.S.
Solvents Cleaning Industry and the
Transition to Non Ozone Depleting
Substances, September 2004.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements,
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: July 20, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
For reasons stated in the preamble,
part 51 of chapter I of title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
50335
PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR
PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND
SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION
PLANS
Subpart F—Procedural Requirements
1. The authority citation for part 51,
subpart F, continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7412,
7413, 7414, 7470–7479, 7501–7508, 7601,
and 7602.
2. Section 51.100 is amended by
revising the introductory text of
paragraph (s)(1) to read as follows:
■
§ 51.100
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(s)(1) This includes any such organic
compound other than the following,
which have been determined to have
negligible photochemical reactivity:
Methane; ethane; methylene chloride
(dichloromethane); 1,1,1-trichloroethane
(methyl chloroform); 1,1,2-trichloro1,2,2-trifluoroethane (CFC-113);
trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11);
dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12);
chlorodifluoromethane (HCFC-22);
trifluoromethane (HFC-23); 1,2-dichloro
1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (CFC-114);
chloropentafluoroethane (CFC-115);
1,1,1-trifluoro 2,2-dichloroethane
(HCFC-123); 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane
(HFC-134a); 1,1-dichloro 1-fluoroethane
(HCFC-141b); 1-chloro 1,1difluoroethane (HCFC-142b); 2-chloro1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HCFC-124);
pentafluoroethane (HFC-125); 1,1,2,2tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134); 1,1,1trifluoroethane (HFC-143a); 1,1difluoroethane (HFC-152a);
parachlorobenzotrifluoride (PCBTF);
cyclic, branched, or linear completely
methylated siloxanes; acetone;
perchloroethylene (tetrachloroethylene);
3,3-dichloro-1,1,1,2,2pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225ca); 1,3dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane
(HCFC-225cb); 1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,5decafluoropentane (HFC 43-10mee);
difluoromethane (HFC-32); ethylfluoride
(HFC-161); 1,1,1,3,3,3hexafluoropropane (HFC-236fa);
1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC245ca); 1,1,2,3,3-pentafluoropropane
(HFC-245ea); 1,1,1,2,3pentafluoropropane (HFC-245eb);
1,1,1,3,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC245fa); 1,1,1,2,3,3-hexafluoropropane
(HFC-236ea); 1,1,1,3,3pentafluorobutane (HFC-365mfc);
chlorofluoromethane (HCFC-31); 1
chloro-1-fluoroethane (HCFC-151a); 1,2dichloro-1,1,2-trifluoroethane (HCFC123a); 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4-nonafluoro-4methoxy-butane (C4F9OCH3 or HFE7100); 2-(difluoromethoxymethyl)1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane
E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM
01AUR1
50336
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 147 / Monday, August 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
((CF3)2CFCF2OCH3); 1-ethoxy1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4-nonafluorobutane
(C4F9OC2H5 or HFE-7200); 2(ethoxydifluoromethyl)-1,1,1,2,3,3,3heptafluoropropane
((CF3)2CFCF2OC2H5); methyl acetate;
1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxypropane (n-C3F7OCH3, HFE-7000); 3ethoxy-1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6dodecafluoro-2-(trifluoromethyl) hexane
(HFE-7500); 1,1,1,2,3,3,3heptafluoropropane (HFC 227ea);
methyl formate (HCOOCH3);
1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane
(HFE-7300); propylene carbonate;
dimethyl carbonate; trans-1,3,3,3tetrafluoropropene; HCF2OCF2H (HFE134); HCF2OCF2OCF2H (HFE-236cal2);
HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (HFE-338pcc13);
HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (H-Galden
1040x or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or
180)); trans 1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop1-ene; 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene; 2amino-2-methyl-1-propanol; t-butyl
acetate; 1,1,2,2- Tetrafluoro -1-(2,2,2trifluoroethoxy) ethane; and
perfluorocarbon compounds which fall
into these classes:
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–17789 Filed 7–29–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0304; FRL–9949–72–
Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds Emissions From
Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing
Materials
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to approve a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Maryland.
This revision pertains to Maryland’s
adoption of the requirements in EPA’s
control technique guidelines (CTG) for
fiberglass boat manufacturing materials.
This action is being taken under the
Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on
September 30, 2016 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
written comment by August 31, 2016. If
EPA receives such comments, it will
publish a timely withdrawal of the
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Jul 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
direct final rule in the Federal Register
and inform the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03–
OAR–2016–0304 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed
from Regulations.gov. For either manner
of submission, the EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
confidential business information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gavin Huang, (215) 814–2042, or by
email at huang.gavin@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides
that SIPs for nonattainment areas must
include reasonably available control
measures (RACM), including reasonably
available control technology (RACT), for
sources of emissions. Additionally,
Maryland is in the Ozone Transport
Region (OTR) established under section
184(a) of the CAA. Pursuant to section
184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, all areas in the
OTR must submit SIP revisions that
include implementation of RACT with
respect to all sources of VOCs in the
states covered by a CTG. See CAA
section 184(b)(1). EPA defines RACT as
‘‘the lowest emission limitation that a
particular source is capable of meeting
by the application of control technology
that is reasonably available considering
technological and economic feasibility.’’
44 FR 53761 (September 17, 1979).
CTGs are intended to provide state
and local air pollution control
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
authorities information that should
assist them in determining RACT for
VOCs from various sources of fiberglass
boat manufacturing. EPA has not
published a previous CTG for fiberglass
boat manufacturing materials, but did
publish an assessment of VOC
emissions from fiberglass boat
manufacturing in 1990. The 1990
assessment defined the nature and
scope of VOC emissions from fiberglass
boat manufacturing, characterized the
industry, estimated per plant and
national VOC emissions, and identified
and evaluated potential control options.
In 2001, EPA promulgated the National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Boat Manufacturing, 40
CFR part 63, subpart VVVV (2001
NESHAP). The 2001 NESHAP
established organic hazardous air
pollutant (HAP) emissions limits based
on low-HAP resins and gel coats and
low-emitting resin application
technology. Several of the air pollution
control districts in California have
specific regulations that control VOC
emissions from fiberglass boat
manufacturing operations as part of
their regulations for limiting VOC
emissions from polyester resin
operations. Several other states also
have regulations that address VOC
emissions from fiberglass boat
manufacturing as part of polyester resin
operations. After reviewing the 1990
VOC assessment, the 2001 NESHAP,
and existing California district and other
state VOC emission reduction
approaches, and after considering
information obtained since the issuance
of the 2001 NESHAP, EPA developed a
CTG entitled Control Techniques
Guidelines for Fiberglass Boat
Manufacturing Materials (Publication
No. EPA 453/R–08–004; September
2008).
The CTG for fiberglass boat
manufacturing materials provides
control recommendations for reducing
VOC emissions from the use of gel coats,
resins, and materials used to clean
application equipment in fiberglass boat
manufacturing operations. This CTG
applies to facilities that manufacture
hulls or decks of boats from fiberglass or
build molds to make fiberglass boat
hulls or decks. EPA’s 2008 CTG
recommends that the following
operations should be covered: Open
molding resin and gel coat operations
(these include pigmented gel coat, clear
gel coat, production resin, tooling gel
coat, and tooling resin); resin and gel
coat mixing operations; and resin and
gel coat application equipment cleaning
operations.
EPA’s 2008 CTG recommends the
following VOC reduction measures:
E:\FR\FM\01AUR1.SGM
01AUR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 147 (Monday, August 1, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50330-50336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17789]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 51
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0041; FRL-9949-77-OAR]
RIN 2060-AR94
Air Quality: Revision to the Regulatory Definition of Volatile
Organic Compounds--Exclusion of 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-
trifluoroethoxy) Ethane (HFE-347pcf2)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to revise the regulatory definition of volatile organic
compounds (VOC) under the Clean Air Act (CAA). This direct final action
adds 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy) ethane (also known
as HFE-347pcf2; CAS number 406-78-0) to the list of compounds excluded
from the regulatory definition of VOC on the basis that this compound
makes a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone (O3)
formation.
DATES: This rule is effective on September 30, 2016 without further
notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by August 31, 2016. If
the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2015-0041, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Souad Benromdhane, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts
Division, Mail Code C539-07, Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone: (919) 541-4359; fax number: (919)
541-5315; email address: benromdhane.souad@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
II. Does this action apply to me?
III. Background
A. The EPA's VOC Exemption Policy
B. Petition To List HFE-347pcf2 as an Exempt Compound
IV. The EPA's Assessment of the Petition
A. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone Formation
B. Contribution to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
C. Toxicity
D. Contribution to Climate Change
E. Conclusions
V. Direct Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive
[[Page 50331]]
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
L. Judicial Review
I. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
The EPA is publishing this direct final rule without a prior
proposed rule because we view this as a noncontroversial action and
anticipate no adverse comment. This action revises the EPA's regulatory
definition of VOC for purposes of preparing state implementation plans
(SIPs) to attain the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for
O3 under title I of the CAA by adding HFE-347pcf2 to the
list of compounds excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC on the
basis that this compound makes a negligible contribution to
tropospheric O3 formation. However, in the ``Proposed
Rules'' section of this Federal Register, we are publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposed rule to make this revision to
the regulatory definition of VOC if adverse comments are received on
this direct final rule. We will not institute a second comment period
on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this
time. For further information about commenting on this rule, see the
ADDRESSES section of this document.
If the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this
direct final rule will not take effect. We would address all public
comments in any subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule.
II. Does this action apply to me?
Entities potentially affected by this direct final rule include,
but are not necessarily limited to: State and local air pollution
control agencies that adopt and implement regulations to control air
emissions of VOC; and industries manufacturing and/or using HFE-347pcf2
as a precision cleaning agent to remove contaminants including oil,
flux, and fingerprints from items like medical devices, artificial
implants, crucial military and aerospace items, electric components,
printed circuit boards, optics, jewelry, ball bearings, aircraft
guidance systems, film, relays, and a variety of metal components,
among others.
III. Background
A. The EPA's VOC Exemption Policy
Tropospheric O3, commonly known as smog, is formed when
VOC and nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the atmosphere in the
presence of sunlight. Because of the harmful health effects of
O3, the EPA and state governments limit the amount of VOC
that can be released into the atmosphere. Volatile organic compounds
form O3 through atmospheric photochemical reactions, and
different VOC have different levels of reactivity. That is, different
VOC do not react to form O3 at the same speed or do not form
O3 to the same extent. Some VOC react slowly or form less
O3; therefore, changes in their emissions have limited
effects on local or regional O3 pollution episodes. It is
the EPA's policy that organic compounds with a negligible level of
reactivity should be excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC in
order to focus VOC control efforts on compounds that significantly
increase O3 concentrations. The EPA also believes that
exempting such compounds creates an incentive for industry to use
negligibly reactive compounds in place of more highly reactive
compounds that are regulated as VOC. The EPA lists compounds that it
has determined to be negligibly reactive in its regulations as being
excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC (40 CFR 51.100(s)).
The CAA requires the regulation of VOC for various purposes.
Section 302(s) of the CAA specifies that the EPA has the authority to
define the meaning of ``VOC'' and, hence, what compounds shall be
treated as VOC for regulatory purposes. The policy of excluding
negligibly reactive compounds from the regulatory definition of VOC was
first laid out in the ``Recommended Policy on Control of Volatile
Organic Compounds'' (42 FR 35314, July 8, 1977) (from here forward
referred to as the 1977 Recommended Policy) and was supplemented
subsequently with the ``Interim Guidance on Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds in Ozone State Implementation Plans'' (70 FR 54046, September
13, 2005) (from here forward referred to as the 2005 Interim Guidance).
The EPA uses the reactivity of ethane as the threshold for determining
whether a compound has negligible reactivity. Compounds that are less
reactive than, or equally reactive to, ethane under certain assumed
conditions may be deemed negligibly reactive and, therefore, suitable
for exemption from the regulatory definition of VOC. Compounds that are
more reactive than ethane continue to be considered VOC for regulatory
purposes and, therefore, are subject to control requirements. The
selection of ethane as the threshold compound was based on a series of
smog chamber experiments that underlay the 1977 policy.
The EPA has used three different metrics to compare the reactivity
of a specific compound to that of ethane: (i) The rate constant for
reaction with the hydroxyl radical (OH) (known as kOH); (ii)
the maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) on a reactivity per unit mass
basis; and (iii) the MIR expressed on a reactivity per mole basis.
Differences between these three metrics are discussed below.
The kOH is the rate constant of the reaction of the
compound with the OH radical in the air. This reaction is often, but
not always the first and rate-limiting step in a series of chemical
reactions by which a compound breaks down in the air and contributes to
O3 formation. If this step is slow, the compound will likely
not form O3 at a very fast rate. The kOH values
have long been used by the EPA as metrics of photochemical reactivity
and O3-forming activity, and they have been the basis for
most of the EPA's early exemptions of negligibly reactive compounds
from the regulatory definition of VOC. The kOH metric is
inherently a molar-based comparison, i.e., it measures the rate at
which molecules react.
The MIR, both by mole and by mass, is a more updated metric of
photochemical reactivity derived from a computer-based photochemical
model, and has been used as a consideration of reactivity since 1995.
This metric considers the complete O3-forming activity of a
compound over multiple hours and through multiple reaction pathways,
not merely the first reaction step with OH. Further explanation of the
MIR metric can be found in Carter (1994), ``Development of ozone
reactivity scales for volatile organic compounds.''
The EPA has considered the choice between a molar or mass basis for
the comparison to ethane in past rulemakings and guidance. In the 2005
Interim Guidance, the EPA stated:
[[Page 50332]]
[A] comparison to ethane on a mass basis strikes the right balance
between a threshold that is low enough to capture compounds that
significantly affect ozone concentrations and a threshold that is
high enough to exempt some compounds that may usefully substitute
for more highly reactive compounds.
When reviewing compounds that have been suggested for VOC-exempt
status, EPA will continue to compare them to ethane using
kOH expressed on a molar basis and MIR values expressed
on a mass basis.
The 2005 Interim Guidance also noted that concerns have sometimes
been raised about the potential impact of a VOC exemption on
environmental endpoints other than O3 concentrations,
including fine particle formation, air toxics exposures, stratospheric
O3 depletion, and climate change. The EPA has recognized,
however, that there are existing regulatory and non-regulatory programs
that are specifically designed to address these issues, and the EPA
continues to believe in general that the impacts of VOC exemptions on
environmental endpoints other than O3 formation will be
adequately addressed by these programs. The VOC exemption policy is
intended to facilitate attainment of the O3 NAAQS. In
general, VOC exemption decisions will continue to be based solely on
consideration of a compound's contribution to O3 formation.
However, if the EPA determines that a particular VOC exemption is
likely to result in a significant increase in the use of a compound and
that the increased use would pose a significant risk to human health or
the environment that would not be addressed adequately by existing
programs or policies, then the EPA may exercise its judgment
accordingly in deciding whether to grant an exemption.
B. Petition To List HFE-347pcf2 as an Exempt Compound
Asahi Glass Company, AGC Chemicals America, Inc. submitted a
petition to the EPA on February 5, 2007, requesting that 1,1,2,2-
Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy) ethane (HFE-347pcf2; CAS number
406-78-0) be exempted from the regulatory definition of VOC. The
petition was based on the argument that HFE-347pcf2 has low reactivity
relative to ethane. The petitioner indicated that HFE-347pcf2 may be
used in a variety of applications as a precision cleaning agent to
remove contaminants including oil, flux, and fingerprints from items
like medical devices, artificial implants, crucial military and
aerospace items, electric components, printed circuit boards, optics,
jewelry, ball bearings, aircraft guidance systems, film, relays, and a
variety of metal components, among others.
To support its petition, AGC Chemicals America, Inc. referenced
several documents, including two peer-reviewed journal articles on HFE-
347pcf2's reaction rates (Tokuhashi et al., 2000; Pitts et al, 1983).
In 2014, AGC provided a supplemental technical report on the maximum
incremental reactivity of HFE-347pcf2 (Carter, 2014). According to this
report, the maximum incremental reactivity of HFE-347pcf2 ranges
between 0.0007 g O3/g HFE-347pcf2 (best estimate) and 0.0013
g O3/g HFE-347pcf2 (high reactivity estimate) on the mass-
based MIR scale. This reactivity rate is much lower than that of ethane
(0.28 g O3/g ethane), the compound that the EPA has used for
comparison to define ``negligible'' O3 reactivity for the
purpose of exempting compounds from the regulatory definition of VOC.
The rate constant for the gas-phase reaction of OH radicals with HFE-
347pcf2 (kOH) has been measured to be 9.16 x
10-15 cm\3\/molecule-sec at ~298 K (Pitts et al., 1983,
Tokuhashi et al., 2000). Based on the measured reactivity rate of HFE-
347pcf2 (Pitts et al., 1983), HFE-347pcf2 has a smaller kOH
than ethane (kOH of ethane = 2.4 x 10-13 cm\3\/
molecule-sec at ~298 K) and, therefore, is less reactive than ethane.
To address the potential for stratospheric O3 impacts,
the petitioner contended that, given the atmospheric lifetime of HFE-
347pcf2 and that it does not contain chlorine or bromine, it is not
expected to contribute to the depletion of the stratospheric
O3 layer.
IV. The EPA's Assessment of the Petition
The EPA is taking direct final action to respond to the petition by
exempting HFE-347pcf2 from the regulatory definition of VOC. This
action is based on consideration of the compound's low contribution to
tropospheric O3 and the low likelihood of risk to human
health or the environment. In this case, the EPA considered issues of
contribution to stratospheric O3 depletion, toxicity, and
climate change. Additional information on these topics is provided in
the following sections.
A. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone Formation
The reaction rate of HFE-347pcf2 with the OH radical
(kOH) has been measured to be 9.16 x 10-15 cm\3\/
molecule-sec (Tokuhashi et al., 2000); other reactions with
O3 and the nitrate radical were negligibly small. The
corresponding reaction rate of ethane with OH is 2.4 x 10-13
cm\3\/molecule-sec (Atkinson et al., 2006).
The overall atmospheric reactivity of HFE-347pcf2 was not studied
in an experimental smog chamber, but the chemical mechanism derived
from other chamber studies (Carter, 2011) was used to model the
complete formation of O3 for an entire single day under
realistic atmospheric conditions (Carter, 2014). In 2014, Carter
calculated a MIR value of 0.0007 to 0.0013 g O3/g VOC for
HFE-347pcf2 for ``averaged conditions,'' versus 0.28 g O3/g
VOC for ethane.
Table 1 presents the three reactivity metrics for HFE-347pcf2 as
they compare to ethane.
Table 1--Reactivities of Ethane and HFE-347pcf2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
incremental Maximum
Compound kOH (cm\3\/ reactivity (MIR) incremental
molecule-sec) (g O3/mole VOC) reactivity (MIR)
(g O3/g VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ethane.............................................. 2.4 x 10-\13\ 8.4 0.28
HFE-347pcf2......................................... 9.16 x 10-\15\ 0.14-0.26 0.0007-0.0013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
1. kOH value at 298 K for ethane is from Atkinson et al., 2006 (page 3626).
2. kOH value at 298 K for HFE-347pcf2 is from Tokuhashi, 2000.
3. Mass-based MIR value (g O3/g VOC) of ethane is from Carter, 2011.
4. Mass-based MIR value (g O3/g VOC) of HFE-347pcf2 is from a supplemental report by Carter, 2014.
5. Molar-based MIR (g O3/mole VOC) values were calculated from the mass-based MIR (g O3/g VOC) values using the
number of moles per gram of the relevant organic compound.
[[Page 50333]]
The data in Table 1, shows that HFE-347pcf2 has a significantly
lower kOH value than ethane, meaning that it initially
reacts less quickly in the atmosphere than ethane. Also, a molecule of
HFE-347pcf2 is less reactive than a molecule of ethane in terms of
complete O3-forming activity as shown by the molar-based MIR
(g O3/mole VOC) values. Additionally, one gram of HFE-
347pcf2 has a lower capacity than one gram of ethane to form
O3. Thus, following the 2005 Interim Guidance, HFE-347pcf2
is eligible to be exempted from the regulatory definition of VOC on the
basis of kOH and both the mole- and mass-based MIR.
B. Contribution to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
HFE-347pcf2 is unlikely to contribute to the depletion of the
stratospheric O3 layer. The O3 depletion
potential (ODP) of HFE-347pcf2 is expected to be negligible based on
several lines of evidence: The absence of chlorine or bromine from the
compound, the expected initial reactions described in Carter (2008),
and the general theory supporting the estimated mechanisms of its
reactivity with the hydroxyl OH discussed in Carter (2011).
The Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program is the EPA's
program to evaluate and regulate substitutes for end uses historically
using ozone-depleting chemicals. Under Section 612(c) of the CAA, the
EPA is required to identify and publish lists of acceptable and
unacceptable substitutes for class I or class II ozone-depleting
substances. According to the SNAP program finding, the HFE-347pcf2 ODP
is zero and therefore HFE-347pcf2 is listed as an acceptable substitute
for several of these ozone-depleting chemicals in electronics and
precision cleaning and as an aerosol solvent in 2012.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 77 FR 47768, August 10, 2012. Also see list of acceptable
cleaning solvents under SNAP decision: https://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/solvents/solvents.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Toxicity
Based on a screening assessment of the health and environmental
risks of HFE-347pcf2 (available in the docket for the SNAP rule at EPA-
HQ-OAR-2003-0118 under the name, ``Risk Screen on Substitutes CFC-113,
Methyl Chloroform, and HCFC-141b in Aerosol Solvent, Electronics
Cleaning, and Precision Cleaning Substitute: HFE-347pcf2''), the SNAP
program anticipated that users will be able to use the compound in
precision cleaning without significantly greater health risks than
presented by use of other available substitutes.
Potential health effects of HFE-347pcf2 include coughing,
dizziness, dullness, drowsiness, and headache. Higher concentrations
can produce heart irregularities, central nervous system depression,
narcosis, unconsciousness, respiratory failure, or death. This compound
may also irritate the skin or eyes. The acute and short-term studies
presented during the SNAP review indicated that HFE-347pcf2 is toxic by
inhalation, and mortality was observed at high concentrations of 2000
ppm and above. HFE-347pcf2 is not commonly used outside of industrial
settings, and other compounds in the same industrial uses have similar
health and environmental risks. The SNAP program, in their listing of
HFE-347pcf2 as an acceptable substitute in aerosol solvent, recommended
that adequate ventilation and good industrial hygiene practice be
utilized due to the potential neurotoxic effects of this substitute at
high acute (short-term) concentrations. The manufacturer recommended an
acceptable exposure limit (AEL) for the workplace of 50 ppm (8-hr total
weight average, TWA). The EPA recommended a maximum allowable human
exposure limit of 150 ppm for HFE-347pcf2. The EPA anticipates that
users following good practices will be able to use HFE-347pcf2 in
electronics and precision cleaning without appreciable health risks.
HFE-347pcf2 is not regulated as a hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
under Title I of the CAA. Also, it is not listed as a toxic chemical
under Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Act (EPCRA).
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) gives the EPA authority to
assess and prevent potential unreasonable risks to human health and the
environment before a new chemical substance is introduced into
commerce. Section 5 of TSCA requires manufacturers and importers to
notify the EPA before manufacturing or importing a new chemical
substance by submitting a pre-manufacture notice (PMN) prior to the
manufacture (including import) of the chemical. Under the TSCA New
Chemicals Program, the EPA then assesses whether an unreasonable risk
may, or will, be presented by the expected manufacture, processing,
distribution in commerce, use, and disposal of the new substance. The
PMN for HFE-347pcf2 stated the substance will be used in industrial
settings for cleaning electronic components, precision cleaning,
dewatering of electronic components and other parts following aqueous
cleaning, and as a carrier/lubricant coating for hard disk drives and
other precision parts. EPA did not determine that the above-listed
proposed industrial processing or use of the substance presents an
unreasonable risk. The EPA has determined, however, that domestic
manufacture, use in non-industrial products, or use other than as
described in the PMN may cause serious chronic health effects. To
mitigate risks identified during the PMN review of HFE-347pcf2 (PMN P-
04-0635), EPA issued a Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) \2\ requiring
that manufacturers notify the EPA prior to manufacture or processing of
the compound for any new use other than those proposed in the PMN. The
required notification will provide the EPA with the opportunity to
evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that
activity before it occurs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 77 FR 61117 (Oct. 5, 2012): FR document, with preamble
background. See 40 CFR 721.10549.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Contribution to Climate Change
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth
Assessment Report (IPCC AR5) estimated the lifetime of HFE-347pcf2 to
be 6.0 years and the radiative efficiency to be 0.48 W/m\2\/ppb. The
report estimated the resulting 100-year global warming potential (GWP)
to be 889, meaning that, over a 100-year period, one ton of HFE-347pcf2
traps 889 times as much warming energy as one ton of CO2
(IPCC, 2013).\3\ HFE-347pcf2's GWP of 889 is lower than some of the
substitutes in the end uses for which it has been listed as acceptable
under the SNAP program, such as HFC-4310mee (GWP = 1650), but higher
than the GWP of some other substitutes, such as HFC-365mfc (GWP = 804),
HFE-7100 (GWP = 421) and aqueous cleaners with no direct GWP. Under the
SNAP program, the EPA continually reviews the availability of
acceptable substitutes and expects to eventually eliminate higher-GWP
chemicals from the list of acceptable compounds as safer, lower-GWP
substitutes become available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The GWP value for HFE-347pcf2 of 580 considered in the 2012
SNAP decision came from the previous IPCC report, AR4 (IPCC, 2007).
AR4 GWP values are still used in a number of regulatory and
reporting contexts to maintain consistency and allow for analysis of
trends.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Conclusions
The EPA finds that HFE-347pcf2 is negligibly reactive with respect
to its contribution to tropospheric O3 formation and thus
may be exempted from the EPA's definition of VOC in 40 CFR 51.100(s).
HFE-347pcf2 has been
[[Page 50334]]
listed as acceptable for use in electronic and precision cleaning and
as an aerosol solvent under the SNAP program (USEPA, 2004). The EPA
determined that HFE-347pcf2 has a similar or lower stratospheric
O3 depletion potential than available substitutes in those
end uses and that the toxicity risk from using HFE-347pcf2 is not
significantly greater than the risk from using other available
alternatives. HFE-347pcf2, among other hydrofluoroethers, was found by
both the Montreal Protocol's solvents, coatings, and adhesives
technical options committee in 2002 and its technical and economic
assessment panel in 2005, to be a suitable replacement for other, more
harmful cleaning solvents (UNEP, 2002, 2005). HFE-347pcf2 is expected
to be used primarily for the purposes regulated by the SNAP program. It
is mostly replacing chemicals with higher GWP and the SNAP program will
continue to evaluate its acceptability as an alternative for those
specific uses, the EPA has concluded that non-tropospheric ozone-
related risks associated with potential increased use of HFE-347pcf2
are adequately managed by this program. The EPA does not expect
significant use of HFE-347pcf2 in applications not covered by the SNAP
program. However, the SNUR in place under TSCA requires that any
significant new use of the chemical be reported to EPA using a
Significant New Use Notice (SNUN).
Any significant new use of HFE-347pcf2 would need to be evaluated
by the EPA, and the EPA will continually review the availability of
acceptable substitute chemicals from the list of acceptable compounds
under the SNAP program as lower-GWP substitutes become available, which
could lead to restrictions on the use of HFE-347pcf2, should safer,
lower-GWP substitutes become available. At this time, SNAP does not
anticipate further evaluation of HFE-347pcf2 to potentially remove the
compound from the list of acceptable substitutes in the precision
cleaning end-use largely because the use of the chemical is limited to
a small niche market.
V. Direct Final Action
The EPA is responding to the petition by revising its regulatory
definition of VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s) to add HFE-347pcf2 to the list of
compounds that are exempt from the regulatory definition of VOC because
it is less reactive than ethane based on a comparison of
kOH, and mass-based MIR, and molar-based MIR metrics and is
therefore considered negligibly reactive. As a result of this action,
if an entity uses or produces any of this compound and is subject to
the EPA regulations limiting the use of VOC in a product, limiting the
VOC emissions from a facility, or otherwise controlling the use of VOC
for purposes related to attaining the O3 NAAQS, then this
compound will not be counted as a VOC in determining whether these
regulatory obligations have been met. This action may also affect
whether this compound is considered a VOC for state regulatory purposes
to reduce O3 formation if a state relies on the EPA's
regulatory definition of VOC. States are not obligated to exclude from
control as a VOC those compounds that the EPA has found to be
negligibly reactive. However, no state may take credit for controlling
this compound in its O3 control strategy. Consequently,
reduction in emissions for this compound will not be considered or
counted in determining whether states have met the rate of progress
requirements for VOC in SIPs or in demonstrating attainment of the
O3 NAAQS.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA. It does not contain any recordkeeping or reporting
requirements.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action
removes HFE-347pcf2 from the regulatory definition of VOC and thereby
relieves manufacturers, distributers, and users of the compound from
requirements to control emissions of the compound.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local or tribal governments, or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the 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.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This direct final rule removes HFE-347pcf2 from
the regulatory definition of VOC and thereby relieves manufacturers,
distributers and users from requirements to control emissions of the
compound. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children. Since HFE-347pcf2 is utilized in specific industrial
applications where children are not present and dissipates quickly,
there is no exposure or disproportionate risk to children. This action
removes HFE-347pcf2 from the regulatory definition of VOC and thereby
relieves manufacturers, distributers and users from requirements to
control emissions of the compound.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous
[[Page 50335]]
peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 February 16,
1994). This action removes HFE-347pcf2 from the regulatory definition
of VOC and thereby relieves manufacturers, distributers, and users of
the compound from requirements to control emissions of the compound.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
L. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit Court within 60 days from the date the
final action is published in the Federal Register. Filing a petition
for review by the Administrator of this final action 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
must be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such action.
Thus, any petitions for review of this action related to the exemption
of HFE-347pcf2 from the regulatory definition of VOC must be filed in
the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60
days from the date final action is published in the Federal Register.
References
Atkinson, R., Baulch, D. L., Cox, R. A., Crowley, J. N., Hampson,
Jr., R. F., Hynes, R. G., Jenkin, M. E., Kerr, J. A., Rossi, M. J.,
and Troe, J. (2006) Evaluated kinetic and photochemical data for
atmospheric chemistry: Volume II--gas phase reactions of organic
species. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 6: 3625-4055.
Carter, W. P. L. (1994) Development of ozone reactivity scales for
volatile organic compounds. J. Air Waste Manage, 44: 881-899.
Carter, W. P. L. (2008) Reactivity Estimates for Selected Consumer
Product Compounds, Final Report to California Air Resources Board
Contract No. 06-408, February 19, 2008. https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/reactivity/consumer_products.pdf.
Carter, W. P. L. (2011) SAPRC Atmospheric Chemical Mechanisms and
VOC Reactivity Scales, Web page at https://www.engr.ucr.edu/~carter/
SAPRC/ Last updated in Sept. 14, 2013. Tables of Maximum Incremental
Reactivity (MIR) Values available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/mir2009/mir2009.htm. May 11, 2011.
Carter, W. P. L. (2014) Estimating the ground-level atmospheric
ozone formation potentials of 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-
trifluoroethoxy) ethane (HFE-347pcf2), November 13, 2014.
IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin,
M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H. L.
Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United
Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 996 pp.
IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T. F., D.
Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels,
Y. Xia, V. Bex and P. M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp.
Pitts, J. N. Jr., Winer, A. M., Aschmann, S. M., Carter, W. P. L.,
and Atkinson, K. (1983), Experimental Protocol for Determining
Hydroxyl Radical Reaction Rate Constants Environmental Science
Research Laboratory, ORD, USEPA. EPA600/3-82-038.
Tokuhashi, K., Takahashi, A., Kaise, M., Kondo, K., Sekiya, A.,
Yamashita, S., and Ito, H., (2000), Rate Constants for the Reactions
of OH Radicals with CH3OCF2CHF2,
CHF2OCH2CF2CHF2,
CHF2OCH2CF2CF3, and
CF3CH2OCF2CHF2 over the
Temperature Range 250-430 K. J. Phys. Chem. Kinet A, 2000, V 104, N
6, 17 February, 2000.
UNEP (2002), Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
Layer: 2002 Report of the Solvents, Coatings, and Adhesives
Technical Options Committee, Assessment Report, 2002.
UNEP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, UNEP/TEAP, (2005),
Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer,
Progress Report, May 2005.
USEPA, (USEPA/SNAP), (2004), The U.S. Solvents Cleaning Industry and
the Transition to Non Ozone Depleting Substances, September 2004.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: July 20, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
For reasons stated in the preamble, part 51 of chapter I of title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Subpart F--Procedural Requirements
0
1. The authority citation for part 51, subpart F, continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7412, 7413, 7414, 7470-7479,
7501-7508, 7601, and 7602.
0
2. Section 51.100 is amended by revising the introductory text of
paragraph (s)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 51.100 Definitions.
* * * * *
(s)(1) This includes any such organic compound other than the
following, which have been determined to have negligible photochemical
reactivity: Methane; ethane; methylene chloride (dichloromethane);
1,1,1-trichloroethane (methyl chloroform); 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-
trifluoroethane (CFC-113); trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11);
dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12); chlorodifluoromethane (HCFC-22);
trifluoromethane (HFC-23); 1,2-dichloro 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (CFC-
114); chloropentafluoroethane (CFC-115); 1,1,1-trifluoro 2,2-
dichloroethane (HCFC-123); 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a); 1,1-
dichloro 1-fluoroethane (HCFC-141b); 1-chloro 1,1-difluoroethane (HCFC-
142b); 2-chloro-1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HCFC-124); pentafluoroethane
(HFC-125); 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134); 1,1,1-trifluoroethane
(HFC-143a); 1,1-difluoroethane (HFC-152a); parachlorobenzotrifluoride
(PCBTF); cyclic, branched, or linear completely methylated siloxanes;
acetone; perchloroethylene (tetrachloroethylene); 3,3-dichloro-
1,1,1,2,2-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225ca); 1,3-dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-
pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225cb); 1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,5-decafluoropentane
(HFC 43-10mee); difluoromethane (HFC-32); ethylfluoride (HFC-161);
1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoropropane (HFC-236fa); 1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane
(HFC-245ca); 1,1,2,3,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC-245ea); 1,1,1,2,3-
pentafluoropropane (HFC-245eb); 1,1,1,3,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC-
245fa); 1,1,1,2,3,3-hexafluoropropane (HFC-236ea); 1,1,1,3,3-
pentafluorobutane (HFC-365mfc); chlorofluoromethane (HCFC-31); 1
chloro-1-fluoroethane (HCFC-151a); 1,2-dichloro-1,1,2-trifluoroethane
(HCFC-123a); 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4-nonafluoro-4-methoxy-butane
(C4F9OCH3 or HFE-7100); 2-
(difluoromethoxymethyl)-1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane
[[Page 50336]]
((CF3)2CFCF2OCH3); 1-
ethoxy-1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4-nonafluorobutane
(C4F9OC2H5 or HFE-7200); 2-
(ethoxydifluoromethyl)-1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane
((CF3)2CFCF2OC2H5
); methyl acetate; 1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxy-propane (n-
C3F7OCH3, HFE-7000); 3-ethoxy-1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-dodecafluoro-2-
(trifluoromethyl) hexane (HFE-7500); 1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane
(HFC 227ea); methyl formate (HCOOCH3); 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-
3-methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane (HFE-7300); propylene carbonate;
dimethyl carbonate; trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene;
HCF2OCF2H (HFE-134);
HCF2OCF2OCF2H (HFE-236cal2);
HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (HFE-
338pcc13);
HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2
H (H-Galden 1040x or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or 180)); trans 1-chloro-
3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-ene; 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene; 2-amino-2-
methyl-1-propanol; t-butyl acetate; 1,1,2,2- Tetrafluoro -1-(2,2,2-
trifluoroethoxy) ethane; and perfluorocarbon compounds which fall into
these classes:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-17789 Filed 7-29-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
