51851 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules 
2000), nor will it impose substantial 
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. 
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 
Environmental protection, Air 
pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. 
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 
Dated: September 9, 2021. 
John Blevins, 
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 
[FR Doc. 2021–20005 Filed 9–16–21; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 
AGENCY 
40 CFR Part 59 
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0971; FRL–7966–02– 
OAR] 
RIN 2060–AU94 
National Volatile Organic Compound 
Emission Standards for Aerosol Coatings Amendments 
AGENCY : Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA). 
ACTION : Proposed rule. 
SUMMARY : The U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to amend the National Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emission Standards for Aerosol Coatings, which establishes reactivity-based emission standards for the aerosol coatings category (aerosol spray paints) under the Clean Air Act (CAA). In this action, the EPA is proposing to update coating category product-weighted reactivity limits for aerosol coatings categories; add new compounds and reactivity factors (RFs); update existing reactivity values; revise the default RF; amend the thresholds for compounds regulated by this document; and add electronic reporting provisions. 
DATES : 
Comments. Comments must be 
received on or before November 16, 2021. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), comments on the information collection provisions are best assured of consideration if the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of your comments on or before October 18, 2021. 
Public Hearing: If anyone contacts us 
requesting a public hearing on or before September 22, 2021, the Agency will hold a virtual public hearing. See 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 
information on requesting and registering for a public hearing. 
ADDRESSES : You may send comments, 
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2006–0971, 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 59, subpart E, by any of the following methods: 
•Federal eRulemaking Portal: 
https://www.regulations.gov/ (our 
preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. 
•Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 
Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 2006–0971 in the subject line of the message. 
•Fax: (202) 566–9744. Attention 
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006– 0971. 
Instructions: All submissions received 
must include the Docket ID No. EPA– HQ–OAR–2006–0971 for this rulemaking. Comments received may be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any 
personal information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 
this document. Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room closed to public visitors on March 31, 2020 to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID–19 Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. The Agency encourages the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov/or email, as there is a temporary suspension of mail delivery to EPA, and no hand deliveries are currently accepted. For further information on EPA Docket Center services and the current status, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/ dockets. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : For 
information about the National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Aerosol Coatings, contact Ms. J. Kaye Whitfield, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division, Minerals and Manufacturing Group (D243–04), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541–2509; fax number (919) 541–4991; and email address: whitfield.kaye@epa.gov. For questions 
related to enforcement, contact Mr. John Cox, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. EPA WJC South Building (2221A), Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number; (202– 564–1395); and email address: cox.john@epa.gov. For questions 
regarding electronic reporting, contact Ms. Theresa Lowe, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division, Measurement Policy Group (D243–05), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541– 4786; and email address: lowe.theresa@epa.gov. 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : 
Entities Potentially Affected by This 
Action. The entities potentially affected 
by this regulation include manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or importers of aerosol coatings for sale or distribution in the United States, or manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or importers who supply the entities listed above with aerosol coatings for sale or distribution in interstate commerce in the United States. The entities potentially affected by this proposed action include those listed in the North American Industry Classification System codes 32551 and 325998. This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for entities likely to be affected by this action. To determine whether you would be affected by this action, you should examine the applicable industry description in section I.E of the promulgation preamble, published at 73 FR 15604 (March 24, 2008). If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the appropriate EPA contact listed in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT  
section of this notice. 
Obtaining a copy of this document 
and other related information. In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of this action is available on the internet. Following signature by the EPA Administrator, the EPA will post a copy of this proposed action at https://www.epa.gov/ stationary-sources-air-pollution/aerosol- coatings-national-volatile-organic- compound-emission. Following 
publication in the Federal Register, the 
EPA will post the Federal Register version of the proposal and key technical documents at this same website. 
The proposed changes to the 
regulatory text in the CFR that would be necessary to incorporate the changes proposed in this action are set out the document titled Proposed Regulation Edits for 40 CFR part 59, subpart E in the docket for this action (Docket ID No. 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Sep 16, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM 17SEP151852 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules 
EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0971). This 
document includes the specific proposed amendatory language for revising the CFR and, for the convenience of interested parties, a redline version of the regulations. Following signature by the EPA Administrator, the EPA will also post a copy of this memorandum and the attachment to https://www.epa.gov/ stationary-sources-air-pollution/aerosol- coatings-national-volatile-organic- compound-emission. 
Participation in virtual public 
hearing. Please note that the EPA is 
deviating from its typical approach for public hearings because the President declared a national emergency. Due to the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations, as well as state and local orders for social distancing to limit the spread of COVID–19, the EPA cannot hold in-person public meetings at this time. 
To request a virtual public hearing, 
contact the public hearing team at (888) 372–8699 or by email at SPPDpublichearing@epa.gov. If 
requested, the virtual hearing will be held on October 4, 2021. The hearing will convene at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time (ET) and will conclude at 3:00 p.m. ET. The EPA may close a session 15 minutes after the last pre-registered speaker has testified if there are no additional speakers. The EPA will announce further details at https://www.epa.gov/ stationary-sources-air-pollution/aerosol- coatings-national-volatile-organic- compound-emission. 
Upon publication of this document in 
the Federal Register, the EPA will begin 
pre-registering speakers for the hearing, if a hearing is requested. To register to speak at the virtual hearing, please use the online registration form available at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources- air-pollution/aerosol-coatings-national- volatile-organic-compound-emission or 
contact the public hearing team at (888) 372–8699 or by email at SPPDpublichearing@epa.gov. The last 
day to pre-register to speak at the hearing will be September 29, 2021. Prior to the hearing, the EPA will post a general agenda that will list pre- registered speakers in approximate order at: https://www.epa.gov/ stationary-sources-air-pollution/aerosol- coatings-national-volatile-organic- compound-emission. 
The EPA will make every effort to 
follow the schedule as closely as possible on the day of the hearing; however, please plan for the hearings to run either ahead of schedule or behind schedule. Each commenter will have 5 minutes 
to provide oral testimony. The EPA 
encourages commenters to provide the EPA with a copy of their oral testimony electronically (via email) by emailing it to whitfield.kaye@epa.gov. The EPA also 
recommends submitting the text of your oral testimony as written comments to the rulemaking docket. 
The EPA may ask clarifying questions 
during the oral presentations but will not respond to the presentations at that time. Written statements and supporting information submitted during the comment period will be considered with the same weight as oral testimony and supporting information presented at the public hearing. 
Please note that any updates made to 
any aspect of the hearing will be posted online at https://www.epa.gov/ stationary-sources-air-pollution/aerosol- coatings-national-volatile-organic- compound-emission. While the EPA 
expects the hearing to go forward as set forth above, please monitor our website or contact the public hearing team at (888) 372–8699 or by email at SPPDpublichearing@epa.gov to 
determine if there are any updates. The EPA does not intend to publish a document in the Federal Register announcing updates. If you require the services of a translator or a special accommodation such as audio description, please pre-register for the hearing with the public hearing team and describe your needs by September 24, 2021. The EPA may not be able to arrange accommodations without advanced notice. 
Docket. The EPA has established a 
docket for this rulemaking under Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0971. All documents in the dockets are listed in https://www.regulations.gov/. Although 
listed, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business 
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on 
the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either in the docket for this action, Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006– 0971, or electronically at https://www.regulations.gov/. 
Instructions. Direct your comments to 
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006– 0971. The EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at https:// 
www.regulations.gov/. Do not submit 
electronically any information that you consider to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. This type of information should be 
submitted by mail as discussed below. 
The EPA may publish any comment 
received to its public docket. 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://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. 
The https://www.regulations.gov/ 
website allows you to submit your comment anonymously, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through https://www.regulations.gov/, your email 
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any digital storage media you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should not include special characters or any form of encryption and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about the EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https:// 
www.epa.gov/dockets. 
The EPA is temporarily suspending 
its Docket Center and Reading Room for 
public visitors, with limited exceptions, to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID–19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. The EPA encourages the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov/ as there may be a 
delay in processing mail and faxes. Hand deliveries or couriers will be received by scheduled appointment only. For further information and updates on EPA Docket Center services, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets. 
The EPA continues to carefully and 
continuously monitor information from 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Sep 16, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM 17SEP151853 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules 
1Email Conversation, American Coatings 
Association, March 29, 2021. the CDC, local area health departments, 
and our Federal partners so that the Agency can respond rapidly as conditions change regarding COVID–19. 
Submitting CBI. Do not submit 
information containing CBI to the EPA through https://www.regulations.gov/ or 
email. Clearly mark the part or all the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on any digital storage media that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the digital storage media as CBI and then identify electronically within the digital storage media the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comments that includes information claimed as CBI, 
you must submit a copy of the comments that does not contain the information claimed as CBI directly to the public docket through the procedures outlined in Instructions above. If you submit any digital storage media that does not contain CBI, mark the outside of the digital storage media clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and the EPA’s electronic public docket without prior notice. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the following address: OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404–02), OAQPS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA– HQ–OAR–2006–0971. Note that written comments containing CBI and submitted by mail may be delayed and no hand deliveries will be accepted. 
Organization of this document. The 
information in this preamble is organized as follows: 
I. Background 
II. What amendments have been made to the 
National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Aerosol Coatings Rule? 
III. Summary of Proposed Amendments to 
the National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Aerosol Coatings 
A. Table 1 to Subpart E of Part 59.— 
Product-Weighted Reactivity Limits by Coatings Category 
B. Table 2 to Subpart E of Part 59.—2A 
Reactivity Factors, 2B Aliphatic Hydrocarbon Solvent Mixtures, and 2C Aromatic Hydrocarbon Solvent Mixtures 
C. The Default Reactivity Factor D. VOC Regulated Under This Rule E. Electronic Reporting of Notifications and 
Reports 
F. Test Methods 
IV. Summary of Impacts 
A. Environmental Impacts B. Energy Impacts C. Cost and Economic Impacts V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 
Planning and Review and Executive 
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 Risks and Safety Risks 
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 
I. National Technology Transfer and 
Advancement Act 
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 
To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations 
I. Background 
The EPA promulgated ‘‘The National 
Volatile Organic Compound Emission 
Standards for Aerosol Coatings,’’ in 2008 (73 FR 15604; March 24, 2008) and codified the action at 40 CFR part 59, subpart E (sections 59.500– 59.516). The rule established nationwide VOC reactivity-based standards for the aerosol coatings source category. The statutory authority for this action is provided by section 183(e) of the CAA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). Section 183(e) of the CAA requires the EPA to control VOC emissions from certain categories of consumer and commercial products for purposes of reducing VOC emissions contributing to ozone formation and nonattainment of the ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). 
The EPA and states typically have 
promulgated rules for regulating VOCs from consumer products based upon reductions of VOC content in the products by mass. One state, California, promulgated a regulation for VOC emissions from aerosol coatings based on a relative reactivity approach. The EPA promulgated a national rule based upon the relative reactivity approach after concluding that the approach could achieve more reduction in ozone formation than may be achieved by a mass-based approach for this source category. The reactivity-based approach requires the EPA to revise the regulatory definition of VOC to include compounds that would otherwise be exempt, to account for all reactive compounds in aerosol coatings that contribute to ozone formation. Therefore, certain compounds that would not be VOC under the otherwise applicable definition for other purposes, do count towards the applicable 
reactivity-based limits of the aerosol coatings standards. 
Regulated entities, encompassing all 
steps in aerosol coatings operations, include manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or importers of aerosol coatings or their suppliers. There are approximately 46 regulated 
entities; however, two aerosol coatings companies account for about 70 percent of the U.S. market.
1 
II. What amendments have been made to the National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Aerosol Coatings Rule? 
The national emission standards for 
aerosol coatings (74 FR 29595; June 23, 2009) has been amended several times. In accordance with section 59.511(j), the EPA responded to an industry petition and added 128 compounds, corresponding reactivity factors, and Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) numbers for each compound or class of compounds listed in Table 2A. In addition, the Agency changed the definition of VOC in part 51 to clarify that compounds that are excluded from the definition of VOC under both 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1) and (s)(5) are to be counted as VOC for the purposes of determining compliance with the aerosol coatings reactivity rule in 40 CFR part 59, subpart E. In the same action, the EPA amended section 59.511(g) to ensure that both the certifying entity and the regulated entity have full knowledge of responsibilities assumed by the certifying entity. In a later action, the EPA responded to a second petition from industry and added three new compounds, reactivity factors, and CAS numbers to Table 2A of the rule. See 77 FR 14279 (March 9, 2012). 
III. Summary of Proposed Amendments 
to the National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Aerosol Coatings 
The EPA is proposing to amend 
Tables 1 and 2 to subpart E of part 59, the default reactivity factor, VOC regulated by the rule, and requirements for submitting reports. The Agency is proposing these changes, in part, to respond to petitions from American Coatings Association (ACA) requesting revisions to the standards that promote consistency and uniformity, where appropriate, between California Air Resources Board (CARB) and national aerosol coatings regulations. For more information on the petitions submitted 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Sep 16, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM 17SEP151854 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules 
2Proposed Amendments to the Antiperspirant 
and Deodorants Regulation, the Consumer Products 
Regulation, the Aerosol Coating Products Regulation, the Tables of MIR Values, Test Method 310, and Proposed Repeal of the Hairspray Credit Program; Date of Release: August 7, 2013, Scheduled for Consideration: September 26, 2013. 3Title 17, California’s Regulation, Division 3, 
Chapter 1, Subchapter 8.5, Article 3, Aerosol Coatings Products, Sections 94520–94528 (Amended September 17, 2014). 
4Title 17, CCR, Article 1, Tables of Maximum 
Incremental Reactivity Values, Sections 94700– 94701 (Amended September 17, 2014). 
5Ibid. 6Carter, William (2009). Investigation of 
Atmospheric Ozone Impacts of Trans 1-Chloro- 3,3,3-Trifluoropropene, Final Report. Riverside, California: Center for Environmental Research and Technology, University of California. 
7Venecek, Melissa (2020). Estimating Maximum 
Incremental Reactivity for Diethyl Carbonate. Final Report. Sacramento, California: Technical Development Section, Consumer Products and Air Quality Assessment Branch, Air Quality Planning and Science Division, California Air Resources Board. 
8Title 17, CCR, Sections 94700–94701. by ACA to the Agency, see the docket 
for this action, Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2006–0971. 
A. Table 1 to Subpart E of Part 59.— 
Product-Weighted Reactivity Limits by Coatings Category 
The national rule establishes product- 
weighted reactivity limits, listed in Table 1, for each coating category. Compliance with these limits is determined by the mass weighted sum of the reactivity values of the VOC ingredients in the product. In this action, the Agency is proposing to update both the reactivity values of individual VOCs (in Table 2) and the limits for each coating category (in Table 1). These changes are intended to update the relative reactivity scale that underlies both the reactivity factors and limits; to further decrease the contribution of aerosol coatings to ozone formation; and to make the national rule consistent with the California regulation to improve ease of compliance and implementation. 
When considering updates to coating 
categories and emission limits in Table 1, the EPA consulted with CARB and reviewed CARB’s rationale
2for changes 
made to California’s aerosol coatings regulations since promulgation of the EPA national regulation. The Agency then met with ACA to discuss their concerns. Based on the outcome of these consultations, the Agency is proposing to adopt category names and limits identical to those in the CARB aerosol coatings regulation. The proposed amendments will increase clarity and promote consistency between California and national aerosol coatings regulations, one of the stated objectives of the ACA petition. 
Accordingly, the Agency is proposing 
to combine two sets of coatings subcategories into two main categories and to add corresponding limits for those categories, as follows: 
The subcategories ‘‘enamel,’’ 
‘‘lacquer,’’ and ‘‘clear or metallic’’ coatings will be subsumed under the category heading, ‘‘Hobby/Model/Craft Coatings,’’ and the category limit will be set equal to 1.6 g O
3/g VOC. The 
subcategories ‘‘clear’’ and ‘‘pigmented’’ coatings will be subsumed under the category heading, ‘‘Shellac Sealers,’’ with the category limit set equal to 1.00 g O
3/g VOC. The EPA also is proposing to add six 
new specialty coating categories and 
corresponding limits for those categories, as follows: 
‘‘Electrical/Electronic/Conformal 
Coatings,’’ with a category limit set equal to 2.00 O
3/g VOC; ‘‘Flexible 
Coatings,’’ with a limit equal to 1.60 O 3/ 
g VOC; ‘‘Mold Release Coatings,’’ with a limit equal to 1.10 O
3/g VOC; ‘‘Rust 
Converter,’’ with a limit equal to 1.10 O
3/g VOC; ‘‘Two Component Coating,’’ 
with a limit equal to 1.20 O 3/g VOC; and 
‘‘Uniform Finish Coating,’’ with a limit 
equal to 1.30 O 3/g VOC. 
For a complete list of proposed 
changes to Table 1, see Proposed Regulation Edits for 40 CFR part 59, subpart E, located in the docket for this action, EPA Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2006–0971. 
B. Table 2 to Subpart E of Part 59.—2A 
Reactivity Factors, 2B Aliphatic Hydrocarbon Solvent Mixtures, and 2C Aromatic Hydrocarbon Solvent Mixtures 
The EPA is proposing to amend 
Tables 2A, 2B, and 2C by adding new compounds and RFs and updating existing reactivity values. The proposed changes will provide uniformity between CARB
3and national aerosol 
coatings regulations (73 FR 15604). California uses maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) values
4as the basis for 
its aerosol coatings regulations. In the national rule, the Agency uses the term ‘‘reactivity factor’’ and sets the value equal to the MIR or upper limit MIR used by CARB. 
In accordance with 40 CFR part 59, 
subpart E, section 59.511(j), ACA submitted petitions requesting the EPA add 17 new compounds and RFs to Table 2A and update the RF of one existing compound mixture on Table 2B. The petitioners provided the chemical names, CAS numbers, a statement certifying the intent to use the compounds in aerosol coatings products, and information allowing the EPA to evaluate the reactivity of the compounds and assign RF values. Of the 17 new compound additions to Table 2A, CARB has assigned MIR values for 15 of the compounds in California’s aerosol coatings regulation,
5which the 
Agency is proposing to adopt in this action. The proposed RFs of the two remaining compounds are equal to 0.04 g O
3/g VOC for trans-1-chloro-3,3,3- trifluoropropene (HFO-1233zdE), CAS 
102687–65–0, based on MIR values from Carter
6; and 0.71 g O 3/g VOC for diethyl 
carbonate, CAS 105–58–8, based on MIR 
values derived by Venecek.7 
One of the compounds being added, 
dipropylene glycol monomethyl ether, CAS 34590–94–8, is a mixture of isomers. The compound, 2-[2- methoxypropoxy]-1-propanol, CAS 13588–28–8, which is an isomer of dipropylene glycol monomethyl ether, is already on Table 2A. Both compounds are assigned the same RF. 
In addition to adding the identified 
compounds, the Agency is proposing to update all of the existing reactivity factors listed in Table 2A, 2B, and 2C to align with the MIR values in the current California regulation.
8This change is 
necessary to maintain the internal consistency of the relative reactivity scale and consistency with the changes proposed for the limits in Table 1. 
For a complete list of proposed 
changes to Table 2, see Proposed Regulation Edits for 40 CFR part 59, subpart E in the docket for this action, EPA Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 2006–0971. 
C. The Default Reactivity Factor 
The ACA petition requested the EPA 
revise the default RF for compounds in 
aerosol coatings formulations that do not have an established RF listed in Table 2A to subpart E of part 59— Reactivity Factors. Consistent with the EPA’s methodology for setting the default RF, if a VOC does not have an RF, then the EPA assigns the compound the maximum RF for any compound listed in the rule. See 72 FR 38952 (July 16, 2007). Therefore, the EPA is proposing to revise the default RF to 18.50 g O
3/g VOC, the highest RF in this 
proposed rule. Furthermore, the EPA is proposing to require that regulated entities include the name and CAS number of all VOCs that are assigned the default RF, as specified in reporting requirements. 
The EPA also is proposing that, if a 
VOC is used in a product and is not listed in Table 2A, but its isomer is listed in Table 2A, then the RF of the isomer will be used. If more than one 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Sep 16, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM 17SEP151855 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules 
9Improving Our Regulations: Final Plan for 
Periodic Retrospective Reviews, August 2011. 
Available at:, https://www.regulations.gov/ 
search?filter=EPA-HQ-OA-2011-0156-0154. 
10E-Reporting Policy Statement for the EPA 
Regulations, September 2013. Available at: https:// 
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/ 
documents/epa-ereporting-policy-statement-2013- 09-30.pdf. 
11Digital Government: Building a 21st Century 
Platform to Better Serve the American People, May 2012. Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/ document/EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0682-0755 or https:// 
obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/ 
omb/egov/digital-government/digital- government.html. isomer of that VOC, or mixtures of the 
isomers of that VOC, is listed in Table 2A, then the highest RF associated with the listed isomers or isomer mixtures will be used. 
D. VOC Regulated Under This Rule 
In conjunction with promulgating the 
initial aerosol coatings regulations, the 
EPA amended the regulatory definition of VOC by adding 40 CFR 51.100(s)(7), which removes the exemption of specific organic compounds identified in paragraphs (s)(1) and (s)(5) from the definition of VOC for purposes of compliance with the aerosol coatings emission limits. To eliminate consideration of VOC that make de minimis contributions to a product’s 
reactivity, the EPA also excluded from the applicable limits, those compounds (a) that contribute less than 0.1 percent of the product weight (regardless of their RF), and (b) that have reactivities less than ethane and comprise less than 7.3 percent of product weight. The EPA explained the basis for the derivation of the 7.3 percent threshold in the original 
rulemaking and its relationship to the RF for ethane and the default RF (73 FR 15604). 
In this action, the EPA is proposing to 
retain part (a), where compounds that comprise less than 0.1 percent of the product weight are excluded from the product’s mass-weighted reactivity. The EPA is proposing to eliminate part (b), the exclusion of low reactivity compounds that comprise more than 0.1 percent but less than 7.3 percent of the product weight. Eliminating this exclusion should have little impact on the ability of product formulations to comply with product-weighted reactivity limits, as the affected compounds have low RFs and contribute a small percentage of product weight. These two proposed actions, in combination, will make the EPA’s national regulation consistent with the CARB aerosol coatings regulation. 
When considering the elimination of 
VOC that make de minimis contributions to a product’s reactivity, the Agency is soliciting comment on the proposal to retain part (a) above, where compounds that comprise less than 0.1 percent of the product weight are excluded from the product’s mass- weighted reactivity, and eliminate part (b), the exclusion of low reactivity compounds that comprise more than 0.1 percent but less than 7.3 percent of the product weight. 
E. Electronic Reporting of Notifications 
and Reports 
The EPA is proposing to revise the 
existing aerosol coatings rule to require that regulated entities submit electronic copies of required notifications and reports in template format through the EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX) using the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI), instead of the current hard copy submission requirement. A description of the electronic data submission process is provided in the memorandum Electronic Reporting Requirements for New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Rules, available in the docket for this action. For the nine notification and reports, (Temporary Variances, Initial Notification, Change to Information in Initial Notification, Response to Written Notification, Exemption Claim Initial Notification, Exemption Claim Annual Report, Notice of Certifying Entity to Maintain Records, Notice Rescinding Certification and Triennial Report), the proposed rule requires that regulated entities use the appropriate spreadsheet template to submit information to CEDRI. A draft version of the proposed spreadsheet template for these notifications and reports is included in the docket. The EPA specifically requests comment on the content, layout, and overall design of the spreadsheet template, which can be found in the docket, EPA Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0971 and posted online at https://www.epa.gov/ stationary-sources-air-pollution/aerosol- coatings-national-volatile-organic- compound-emission. 
Additionally, the EPA has identified 
two broad circumstances in which it may provide extensions of the electronic reporting deadlines. These circumstances are (1) outages of the EPA’s CDX or CEDRI which preclude a regulated entity from accessing the system and submitting required reports, and (2) force majeure events, which are defined as events that will be or have been caused by circumstances beyond the control of the regulated entity from complying with the requirement to submit a report electronically by the applicable deadline. Examples of force majeure events are acts of nature, acts 
of war or terrorism, or equipment failure or safety hazards beyond the control of the regulated entity. The EPA is providing these potential extensions to protect regulated entities from noncompliance in cases where they cannot successfully submit a report by the reporting deadline for reasons outside of their control. In both circumstances, the decision to accept the claim of needing additional time to report is within the discretion of the Administrator, and reporting should 
occur as soon as possible. 
The electronic submittal of the reports 
addressed in this proposed rulemaking will increase the usefulness of the data contained in those reports, is in keeping with current trends in data availability and transparency, will further assist in the protection of public health and the environment, will improve compliance by facilitating the ability of regulated entities to demonstrate compliance with requirements and by facilitating the ability of delegated state, local, tribal, and territorial air agencies and the EPA to assess and determine compliance, and will ultimately reduce burden on regulated entities, delegated air agencies, and the EPA. Electronic reporting also eliminates paper-based, manual processes, thereby saving time and resources, simplifying data entry, eliminating redundancies, minimizing data reporting errors, and providing data quickly and accurately to the affected facilities, air agencies, the EPA, and the public. Moreover, electronic reporting is consistent with the EPA’s plan
9to 
implement Executive Order 13563 and is in keeping with the EPA’s agency- wide policy
10developed in response to 
the White House’s Digital Government Strategy.
11For more information on the 
benefits of electronic reporting, see the memorandum titled, Electronic Reporting Requirements for New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Rules, referenced earlier in this section. 
F. Test Methods 
Although the EPA is proposing no 
new technical standards in this action, the Agency is soliciting comment on whether to amend this rule to require the use of the updated versions of the two existing test methods currently identified in the rule: CARB Method 310, ‘‘Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Consumer Products and Reactive Organic Compounds in Aerosol Coating Products,’’ updated May 25, 2018; and ASTM D523–89 (1999), ‘‘Standard Test 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Sep 16, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM 17SEP151856 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules 
Method for Specular Gloss,’’ currently 
named ASTM Method D523–14 (2018), updated May 1, 2018. 
IV. Summary of Impacts 
This section presents a summary of 
the impacts expected as a result of this 
proposed rule. 
A. Environmental Impacts 
There are no anticipated 
environmental impacts from compliance 
with this proposed rule. The proposed revisions are minor and not expected to result in net changes to an aerosol coating product’s potential to form ozone because the overall average changes to the values used to measure reactivity, i.e., category emission limits 
and reactivity factors, are small compared to the values in the original rule. The proposed action is, however, expected to improve upon the original rule by ensuring updates are made (e.g., adds new compounds, updates reactivity factors, and adds electronic reporting) that promote consistency and uniformity between state and national regulations. As such, this proposed action would maintain the level of environmental protection to populations in affected ozone nonattainment areas without having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on any populations, including any minority or low-income populations. 
B. Energy Impacts 
There are no adverse energy impacts 
anticipated from compliance with this 
proposed rule. 
C. Cost and Economic Impacts 
There are no adverse economic 
impacts anticipated from compliance 
with this proposed rule. This action primarily updates reactivity tables and factors and adds electronic reporting provisions. 
V. Statutory and Executive Order 
Reviews 
Additional information about these 
statutes and Executive Orders can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/laws- regulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 
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 OMB for review. 
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 
This action does not impose any new 
information collection burden under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the 
information collection activities contained in the existing regulations and has assigned OMB control number 2060–0617. There is no increase in burden associated with this action because the rule primarily adds compounds and reactivity factors, updates category limits and reactivity factors, and adds electronic reporting provisions. The burden associated with the proposed change from paper to electronic reporting would not change as a result of this action, at least in the short term, because regulated entities will need time to become familiar with the new reporting scheme and template. In the long term, the Agency anticipates that electronic reporting, which is more efficient than paper reporting, would reduce the burden as regulated entities become more familiar with the electronic reporting process. The EPA expects the decrease in burden estimates resulting from electronic reporting would be reflected in future updates to the ICR for this rule. 
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. In making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small entities subject to the rule. This rule will not impose any requirements on small entities. The EPA has determined that small businesses will not incur any adverse impacts because the Agency is taking this action to amend the aerosol coatings rule primarily by updating coating categories in Table 1 and adding compounds to Table 2 of the rule and adding an electronic reporting provision. These amendments do not create any new requirements or burdens, and no costs are associated with these amendments. The Agency has, therefore, concluded that this proposed rule will not pose any additional regulatory burden for all affected small entities. 
The EPA continues to be interested in 
the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such impacts. D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
(UMRA) 
This action does not contain an 
unfunded mandate of $100 million or 
more 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. The proposed regulatory action does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, in that this action imposes no regulatory burdens on tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. 
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 
Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks 
The EPA interprets Executive Order 
13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory action’’ in section 2–202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern increase in an adverse or environmental health risk or safety risk that disproportionately affects children. 
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 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 
The rule involves technical standards; 
however, no new technical standards are being proposed in this action. 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Sep 16, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM 17SEP151857 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 178 / Friday, September 17, 2021 / Proposed Rules 
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 peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)) establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. 
As stated in section VI of the 
preamble of this action, there are no anticipated adverse environmental impacts and no adverse economic impacts anticipated from compliance with this rule. As stated in section I of this action, section 183(e) of the CAA requires the control of VOC emissions from certain categories of consumer and commercial products for purposes of reducing VOC emissions contributing to ozone formation and nonattainment of the ozone NAAQS. The health and environmental risks associated with ozone were considered in the establishment of the ozone NAAQS. The level is designed to be protective of the public with an adequate margin of safety. Accordingly, these actions would help increase the level of environmental protection to populations in affected ozone nonattainment areas without having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on any populations, including any minority or low-income populations. 
Michael S. Regan, 
Administrator. 
[FR Doc. 2021–19896 Filed 9–16–21; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 
COMMISSION 
47 CFR Part 1 
[MD Docket Nos. 21–190 and 20–105; 
Report No. 3182; FR ID 46762] 
Petitions for Reconsideration of Action 
in Rulemaking Proceeding 
AGENCY : Federal Communications 
Commission. 
ACTION : Petition for reconsideration. 
SUMMARY : Petitions for Reconsideration 
(Petitions) have been filed in the Commission’s rulemaking proceeding by Ms. Elisabeth Neasmith, on behalf of Telesat Canada, David Goldman, on behalf of Space Exploration Holdings, LLC, Nickolas G. Spina, on behalf of Kepler Communications Inc., and by Eric Graham, on behalf of WorldVu Satellites Limited (d/b/a OneWeb) (NGSO Satellite Coalition). 
DATES : Oppositions to the Petitions 
must be filed on or before October 4, 2021. Replies to oppositions must be filed on or before October 12, 2021. 
ADDRESSES : Federal Communications 
Commission, 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : 
Regina Brown, Attorney-Advisor, Financial Operations, Office of the Managing Director, (202) 418–0792 or via email at regina.brown@fcc.gov. 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : This is a 
summary of the Commission’s document, Report No. 3182, released September 1, 2021. The full text of the Petitions can be accessed online via the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System at: https://apps.fcc.gov/ ecfs/. The Commission will not send a 
Congressional Review Act (CRA) submission to Congress or the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because no rules are being adopted by the Commission. 
Subject: In the Matter of Assessment 
and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2021, MD Docket No. 21– 190; Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2020, MD Docket No. 20–105, Report and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 86 FR 26677, May 17, 2021. This document is being published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). See also 47 CFR 1.4(b)(1) and 1.429(f), (g). 
Number of Petitions Filed: 2. 
Federal Communications Commission. 
Marlene Dortch, 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary. 
[FR Doc. 2021–20143 Filed 9–16–21; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
Fish and Wildlife Service 
50 CFR Part 17 
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2021–0106; 
FF09E21000 FXES11110900000212] 
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 
and Plants; 90-Day Finding for Two Petitions To List the Gray Wolf in the Western United States 
AGENCY : Fish and Wildlife Service, 
Interior. 
ACTION : Notification of petition findings 
and initiation of status reviews. SUMMARY : We, the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 90-day finding on a petition to add the gray wolf (Canis lupus) in the Northern 
Rocky Mountains and a petition to add the gray wolf in western North America to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that the petitions present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned actions may be warranted. Therefore, with the publication of this document, we announce that we plan to initiate a status review to determine whether the petitioned actions are warranted. To ensure that the status review is comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial data and other information regarding the species and factors that may affect its status. Based on the status review, we will issue a 12-month petition finding, which will address whether or not the petitioned actions are warranted, in accordance with the Act. 
DATES : The findings announced in this 
document were made on September 17, 2021. As we commence our status review, we seek any new information concerning the status of, or threats to, the gray wolf, or its habitats in the Northern Rocky Mountains and/or Western United States. Any information we receive during the course of our status review will be considered. 
ADDRESSES : 
Supporting documents: A summary of 
the basis for the petition findings contained in this document is available on http://www.regulations.gov in Docket 
No. FWS–HQ–ES–2021–0106. In addition, this supporting information is available by contacting the person specified in 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION  
CONTACT . 
Status reviews: If you have new 
scientific or commercial data or other information concerning the status of, or threats to, the gray wolf or its habitats in the Northern Rocky Mountains and/ or Western United States, please provide those data or information by one of the following methods: 
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, 
enter the docket number presented above in the document headings. For best results, do not copy this number from this document but instead type it into the Search box using hyphens. Then, click on the ‘‘Search’’ button. After finding the correct document, you may submit information by clicking on ‘‘Comment.’’ If your information will fit 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:47 Sep 16, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\17SEP1.SGM 17SEP1