Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 53029 

Mailing Standards of the United States 

Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual 

(DMM) 

* * * * * 

700 Special Standards 

[Revise the heading of 703 as follows:] 

703 Nonprofit Standard Mail and/or 

Other Unique Eligibility 

* * * * * 

[Revise the heading of 8.0 as follows:] 

8.0 Balloting Materials 

[Renumber 8.1 and 8.2 as 8.2 and 8.3. 

Add new 8.1 as follows:] 

8.1 Basic Standards 

8.1.1 Definition 

Balloting materials include postcard 

applications, all ballot types, voting 

instructions, mailing instructions, and 

return envelopes. 

8.1.2 Exceptions to Standards 

An exception to the marking and 

verification standards in 8.1.3 through 

8.1.5 is granted for one of the following 

reasons: 

a. Ballots are mailed under 8.2, 

Special Exemption. 

b. Ballots are returned under 505.1.0, 

Business Reply Mail. 

c. A postage due account has been 

established to guarantee the payment of 

return postage. 

d. Prepayment of return postage is 

made by stamps, meter, or Permit Reply 

Mail. 

8.1.3 Postage 

Except for ballots meeting one of the 

exceptions under 8.1.2, balloting 

materials for any election, whether 

disseminated hardcopy or 

electronically, must indicate in a 

prominent location that the proper 

amount of postage must be paid. This 

information must be included in the 

balloting materials with the marking 

‘‘First-Class Mail postage must be 

applied.’’ Alternatively, the marking 

‘‘Apply First-Class Mail postage here’’ 

may be printed in the upper right corner 

of the address side of the return 

envelope. Approved versions will also 

be acceptable in either location. Election 

officials should consult with postal 

officials to assist with mailpiece design, 

barcode placement, and to determine 

the proper amount of postage required 

for mailing ballots to voters and the 

return of ballots to election officials. 

8.1.4 Notification of Postage 

Requirement on Return Ballots 

Except for ballots meeting one of the 

exceptions under 8.1.2, all ballot types 

for any election, whether disseminated 

hardcopy or electronically, must 

indicate in a prominent location on the 

balloting materials the specific amount 

of First-Class Mail postage required for 

return by mail to election officials. 

8.1.5 Verification 

Except for ballots meeting one of the 

exceptions under 8.1.2, each mailing 

must be accompanied by a complete 

sample mailpiece. 

[Revise the heading of renumbered 8.2 

as follows:] 

8.2 Special Exemption 

8.2.1 Definition 

[Revise the introductory text of 

renumbered 8.2.1 as follows:] 

Balloting materials may be sent 

through the mail without prepayment of 

postage to enable persons in the 

following categories to apply for 

registration and vote by absentee ballot 

when absent from the place of voting 

residence and otherwise eligible to vote 

as an absentee: 

* * * * * 

[Delete renumbered heading 8.3, 

Marking, and renumber 8.3.1 as 8.2.5, 

Exhibit 8.3.1 as Exhibit 8.2.5, 8.3.2 as 

8.2.6, Exhibit 8.3.2 as Exhibit 8.2.6, and 

8.3.3 as 8.2.7.] 

* * * * * 

We will publish an appropriate 

amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to reflect 

these changes. 

Stanley F. Mires, 

Attorney, Legal Policy and Legislative Advice. 

[FR Doc. 2013–20799 Filed 8–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 51 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0393; FRL–9844–3] 

RIN 2060–AR67 

Air Quality: Revision to Definition of 

Volatile Organic Compounds— 

Exclusion of trans 1-chloro-3,3,3- 

trifluoroprop-1-ene [SolsticeTM

1233zd(E)] 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking final action 

to revise the regulatory definition of 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) for 

purposes of preparing state 

implementation plans (SIPs) to attain 

the national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) for ozone under 

title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA). This 

final action adds trans 1-chloro-3,3,3- 

trifluoroprop-1-ene (also known as 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E)) to the list of 

compounds excluded from the 

regulatory definition of VOCs on the 

basis that this compound makes a 

negligible contribution to tropospheric 

ozone formation. As a result, if you are 

subject to certain federal regulations 

limiting emissions of VOCs, your 

emissions of SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) may 

not be regulated for some purposes. This 

action may also affect whether 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) is considered as a 

VOC for state regulatory purposes, 

depending on whether the state relies 

on the EPA’s regulatory definition of 

VOCs. An exemption for SolsticeTM

1233zd(E) was promulgated first as a 

direct final rulemaking but was 

withdrawn because EPA received an 

adverse comment. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

September 27, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0393. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., confidential business information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2012– 

0393, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 

1301 Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC. The Public Reading 

Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. The telephone number 

for the Public Reading Room is (202) 

566–1744, and the telephone number for 

the Air and Radiation Docket and 

Information Center is (202) 566–1742. 

For additional information about the 

EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at: http://

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Sanders, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Air Quality 

Policy Division, Mail Code C539–01, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; 

telephone: (919) 541–3356; fax number: 

919–541–0824; email address: 

sanders.dave@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
53030 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

1Trans 1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-ene will 

also be marketed by Honeywell under the trade 

names SolsticeTM N12 Refrigerant, SolsticeTM

Liquid Blowing Agent (SolsticeTM LBA), and 

SolsticeTM Performance Fluid. 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

Entities potentially affected by this 

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 VOCs; industries involved 

in the manufacture or use of 

refrigerants, aerosol and non-aerosol 

solvents and blowing agents for 

insulating foams; and manufacturers of 

refrigeration equipment, hot water 

heaters and waste heat recovery 

equipment. If you have questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult the person 

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. This 

action has no substantial direct effects 

on industry because it does not impose 

any new mandates on these entities, but, 

to the contrary, removes SolsticeTM

1233zd(E) from the regulatory definition 

of VOCs. The use of this compound 

remains subject to other restrictions 

under the CAA. Specifically, the use of 

this compound as an aerosol propellant, 

blowing agent or refrigerant, or any 

other use in which it would substitute 

for chlorofluorocarbons, 

hydrochlorofluorocarbons or their 

substitutes, is subject to restrictions 

under the Significant New Alternatives 

Policy (SNAP) program (CAA § 612; 40 

CFR part 82 subpart G). The SNAP 

program has issued final approvals for 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) as a suitable foam 

and refrigerant substitute and as a 

propellant (74 FR 50129, September 30, 

2009; 75 FR 34017, June 16, 2010), and 

as a solvent for metals, electronics, and 

precision cleaning and in adhesives, 

coatings, and inks. 

B. How is this preamble organized? 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

B. How is this preamble organized? 

II. Background 

A. The EPA’s VOC Exemption Policy 

B. Petition to List SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) as 

an Exempt Compound 

C. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone 

D. Health and Environmental Risks 

III. Proposed Action and Response to 

Comments 

IV. Final Action 

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 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

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 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 

K. Congressional Review Act 

L. Judicial Review 

II. Background 

A. The EPA’s VOC Exemption Policy 

Tropospheric ozone, commonly 

known as smog, is formed when VOCs 

and nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the 

atmosphere in the presence of sunlight. 

Because of the harmful health effects of 

ozone, the EPA and state governments 

limit the amount of VOCs that can be 

released into the atmosphere. VOCs are 

those organic compounds of carbon that 

form ozone through atmospheric 

photochemical reactions. Different 

VOCs have different levels of reactivity. 

That is, they do not react to form ozone 

at the same speed or do not form ozone 

to the same extent. Some VOCs react 

slowly or form less ozone; therefore, 

changes in their emissions have less 

and, in some cases, very limited effects 

on local or regional ozone pollution 

episodes. It has been the EPA’s policy 

that organic compounds with a 

negligible level of reactivity should be 

excluded from the regulatory definition 

of VOCs so as to focus VOC control 

efforts on compounds that do 

significantly increase ozone 

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 VOCs. The EPA lists 

compounds that it has determined to be 

negligibly reactive in its regulations as 

being excluded from the regulatory 

definition of VOCs (40 CFR 51.100(s)). 

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 VOCs for 

regulatory purposes. The policy of 

excluding negligibly reactive 

compounds from the regulatory 

definition of VOCs was first set forth in 

the ‘‘Recommended Policy on Control of 

Volatile Organic Compounds’’ (42 FR 

35314, July 8, 1977) and was 

supplemented most recently with the 

‘‘Interim Guidance on Control of 

Volatile Organic Compounds in Ozone 

State Implementation Plans’’ (Interim 

Guidance) (70 FR 54046, September 13, 

2005). 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 VOCs. Compounds that are 

more reactive than ethane continue to 

be considered VOCs 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 reaction rate constant (known as 

kOH) with the hydroxyl radical (OH); (ii) 

the maximum incremental reactivity 

(MIR) on a reactivity per unit mass 

basis; and (iii) the MIR expressed on a 

reactivity per mole basis. A full 

description of each metric and how it is 

derived can be found in the direct final 

rulemaking (78 FR 11101, February 15, 

2013) and is not repeated here. 

B. Petition to List SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) 

as an Exempt Compound 

Honeywell Inc. submitted a petition 

to the EPA on July 19, 2011, requesting 

that SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) (CAS number 

102687–65–0) be exempted from VOC 

control based on its low reactivity 

relative to ethane.1 The petitioner 

indicated that SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) may 

be used in a variety of applications, 

including as a solvent in aerosol and 

non-aerosol applications, as a blowing 

agent in insulating foams for 

refrigerators/freezers and hot water 

heaters and as a refrigerant in 

commercial chillers and waste heat 

recovery (Rankin cycle) systems. A 

fuller description of the petition 

regarding SolsticeTM 1233zd(E), 

including a discussion of other 

compounds for which it would 

substitute, is found in the direct final 

rulemaking (78 FR 11101, February 15, 

2013) and is not repeated here. 

C. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone 

Detailed information on the ozone 

reactivity of SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) was 

presented in the direct final rulemaking 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 53031 

2Since publication of the direct final rule and 

parallel proposed rule, the SNAP program found 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) acceptable for use as a solvent 

for metals, electronics, and precision cleaning and 

in adhesives, coatings, and inks (78 FR 29034, May 

17, 2013). The SNAP program is currently still 

reviewing SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) for use as a 

refrigerant for non-mechanical heat transfer. 

3The EPA considered this comment to be an 

adverse comment and accordingly withdrew the 

direct final rule before it became effective. 78 FR 

23149, April 18, 2013. 

(78 FR 11101, February 15, 2013) and is 

summarized here. 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) has a higher kOH

value than ethane, meaning that it 

initially reacts more quickly in the 

atmosphere than ethane. However, a 

molecule of SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) is less 

reactive than a molecule of ethane in 

terms of complete ozone forming 

activity as shown by the molar-based 

MIR (g O3/mole VOC) values. Also, a 

gram of SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) has a 

lower MIR value than a gram of ethane. 

Thus, under the Interim Guidance, 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) is eligible to be 

exempted from the regulatory definition 

of VOCs, based on both mass-based and 

molar-based MIR. 

D. Health and Environmental Risks 

The preamble to the direct final 

rulemaking (78 FR 11101, February 15, 

2013) provided background information 

on the Premanufacture Notice (PMN) 

review and SNAP program review of 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E). That preamble 

also presented other information 

relevant to any potential health or 

environmental risks. This information is 

summarized here. 

As a chemical not yet introduced into 

commerce, SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) 

completed a PMN review on January 30, 

2012. After considering all relevant data 

currently available, the EPA was unable 

to find any unreasonable risks to human 

health or the environment from the 

expected use of the substance. Based on 

this finding, the EPA did not find it 

necessary to take any actions to prevent 

unreasonable risk under the Toxic 

Substance Control Act (TSCA). 

The SNAP program review of 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) described the 

potential health effects of SolsticeTM

1233zd(E) as being common to many 

refrigerants, foam agents and solvents, 

including many of those already listed 

as acceptable under SNAP. Potential 

health effects of this substitute include 

serious eye irritation, skin irritation and 

frostbite. EPA anticipates that users will 

be able to meet the manufacturer’s 

recommended workplace exposure limit 

and address potential health risks by 

following requirements and 

recommendations in the material safety 

data sheet and in any other safety 

precautions common to the refrigeration 

and air conditioning industry, the foam 

blowing industry and the solvent-based 

cleaning industry and common when 

using adhesives and coatings.2

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) is not 

flammable. SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) is not 

expected to undergo wet or dry 

deposition to an appreciable extent. 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) has a 100-yr 

global warming potential (GWP) 

reported as 4.7 to 7 and an atmospheric 

lifetime of approximately 26 to 31 days 

or less. The net GWP effect of increased 

use of SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) in place of 

certain other compounds will be 

advantageous. 

III. Proposed Action and Response to 

Comments 

Based on both the mass and molar 

MIR values for SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) 

being equal to or less than that of 

ethane, the EPA issued a direct final 

rule (78 FR 11101, February 15, 2013) 

and a parallel notice-and-comment 

proposal (78 FR 11119, February 15, 

2013) to find that SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) 

is ‘‘negligibly reactive’’ and to exempt 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) from the 

regulatory definition of VOCs at 40 CFR 

51.100(s). 

Comments: The EPA received three 

comments on the parallel notice-andcomment proposal during its comment 

period. Only one commenter, an 

individual, expressed reservations about 

the proposed exemption.3 This 

commenter believes that the low ozone 

reactivity of SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) is not 

sufficient to exempt it from the 

regulatory definition of VOCs in light of 

what the commenter says are its hazards 

to humans and the environment. The 

commenter characterizes SolsticeTM

1233zd(E) as being a toxin and a 

halogen and notes that it has an 

occupational exposure limit (OEL) of 

300 parts per million (ppm). The 

commenter says that removing 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) from the 

regulatory definition of VOCs would 

trivialize the safety hazards posed by its 

use and that keeping SolsticeTM

1233zd(E) within the regulatory 

definition of VOCs would incline 

people who work near and on it to treat 

it with caution. 

Two comments, one from the 

petitioner Honeywell and the other from 

an individual, supported the proposed 

exemption. Honeywell’s comments 

directly address the assertions made by 

the commenter who expressed the 

reservations noted above. Honeywell 

notes that SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) does not 

meet the common definition of a 

‘‘toxin’’ and that it is not itself a 

halogen. Honeywell also explains that 

the OEL of 300 ppm is Honeywell’s own 

recommendation and that this level is 

higher than three other particular 

chemicals that have already been 

excluded from the regulatory definition 

of VOCs. Honeywell states that 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) is not a listed 

chemical substance in the regulations of 

the Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA), nor would it be 

classified as acutely toxic based on 

OSHA health hazard criteria. Honeywell 

also notes that SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) is 

not a hazardous air pollutant under the 

Clean Air Act. 

EPA Response: The EPA agrees with 

the factual information provided in the 

comments from Honeywell. The EPA 

notes that the only fact cited in the 

single adverse comment is that the 

(Honeywell-recommended) OEL for 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) is 300 ppm. The 

commenter does not argue or present 

any evidence that exposures to workers 

or the public will approach this level. 

The EPA does not agree that keeping 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) within the 

regulatory definition of VOCs would 

increase worker or public awareness of 

its potential toxicity at high exposure 

levels or help them to limit their 

exposures, in the context of other 

mechanisms operating to inform and 

protect workers and the public from 

high exposures, because such 

individuals are unlikely to be aware of 

the details of the EPA’s regulatory 

definition of VOCs and because 

individuals do not necessarily associate 

mere qualification as a VOC with 

hazard. There are more direct and 

customary ways for people likely to be 

exposed to the chemical to become 

aware of needed precautions (e.g., 

material safety data sheets). Issues of 

workplace exposure were considered in 

the EPA’s reviews of this compound 

under the PMN and SNAP program and 

the EPA felt that existing measures were 

appropriate to prevent unreasonable 

risk. 

As stated previously, the EPA finds 

that SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) qualifies as 

negligibly reactive with respect to its 

contribution to tropospheric ozone 

formation. In addition, we believe that 

risks not related to tropospheric ozone 

associated with currently allowed uses 

of the chemical are acceptable and that 

any new or increased risk from potential 

new uses are adequately addressed by 

other existing programs and policies, 

specifically the SNAP program. We also 

believe that the comparable or lower 

GWP of SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) compared 

to other acceptable substitutes is an 

additional reason to approve the 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) petition given that 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
53032 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

applying the Interim Guidance itself 

supports such approval. 

IV. Final Action 

The EPA is taking final action to 

approve the petition for exemption of 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) from the 

regulatory definition of VOCs. 

If an entity uses or produces 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) and is subject to 

the EPA regulations limiting the use of 

VOC in a product other than an aerosol 

coating, limiting the VOC emissions 

from a facility, or otherwise controlling 

the use of VOC for purposes related to 

attaining the ozone NAAQS, then the 

compound will not be counted as a VOC 

in determining whether these regulatory 

obligations have been met. Emissions of 

this compound will not be considered 

in determining whether a proposed new 

or modified source triggers the 

applicability of Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) 

requirements, in areas where the PSD 

program is implemented by the EPA or 

a delegated state, local or tribal agency. 

This action may also affect whether 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) is considered as a 

VOC for state regulatory purposes to 

reduce ozone formation, if a state relies 

on the EPA’s regulatory definition of 

VOCs. States are not obligated to 

exclude from control as a VOC those 

compounds that the EPA has found to 

be negligibly reactive. However, states 

may not take credit for controlling these 

compounds in their ozone control 

strategies. 

This action is consistent with the 

Interim Guidance in that two of the 

three reactivity metric values for 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) compare favorably 

to the corresponding values for ethane. 

This action is also supported by our 

inability in the Premanufacture 

Notification Review Program to find any 

unreasonable risks to human health or 

the environment from the expected use 

of the substance, our finding in the 

SNAP program review of this chemical 

that use of this chemical in currently 

allowed applications poses lower or 

comparable overall risk to human health 

and the environment than other 

acceptable options for the same uses, 

and on our confidence that the SNAP 

program would prevent the use of this 

chemical in any additional applications 

subject to review by the SNAP program 

where such use would pose a significant 

risk to human health or the 

environment. 

V. 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’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and is therefore not 

subject to review under Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). It does not 

contain any recordkeeping or reporting 

requirement. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small 

organizations and small governmental 

jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of this action on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration (SBA) regulation (see 13 

CFR 121.201); (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s final rule on small 

entities, I certify that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

In determining whether a rule has a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, the 

impact of concern is any significant 

adverse economic impact on small 

entities, since the primary purpose of 

the regulatory flexibility analyses is to 

identify and address regulatory 

alternatives ‘‘which minimize any 

significant economic impact of the rule 

on small entities.’’ 5 USC 603 and 604. 

Thus, 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, or otherwise has a positive 

economic effect on all of the small 

entities subject to the rule. This final 

rule removes SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) from 

the regulatory definition of VOCs and 

thereby relieves users of the compound 

from requirements to control emissions 

of the compound. We have, therefore, 

concluded that today’s final rule will 

relieve regulatory burden for all affected 

small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538 for state, local or tribal 

governments or the private sector. The 

action imposes no enforceable duty on 

any state, local or tribal governments or 

the private sector. Therefore, this action 

is not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. 

This action is also not subject to the 

requirements of section 203 of UMRA 

because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. This 

final rule removes SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) 

from the regulatory definition of VOCs 

and thereby relieves users of the 

compound from requirements to control 

emissions of the compound. 

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, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This final rule 

removes SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) from the 

regulatory definition of VOCs and 

thereby relieves users from 

requirements to control emissions of the 

compound. Thus, Executive Order 

13132 does not apply to this rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). It would not have substantial 

direct effects on tribal governments, on 

the relationship between the federal 

government and Indian Tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the federal 

government and Indian Tribes, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 53033 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this rule. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to EO 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because 

it is not economically significant as 

defined in EO 12866. While this final 

rule is not subject to the Executive 

Order, the EPA has reason to believe 

that ozone has a disproportionate effect 

on active children who play outdoors 

(62 FR 38856; 38859, July 18, 1997). The 

EPA has not identified any specific 

studies on whether or to what extent 

SolsticeTM 1233zd(E) may affect 

children’s health. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 

2001)), because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, section 12(d), (15 U.S.C. 272 

note) directs the EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory 

activities unless to do so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards (e.g., materials specifications, 

test methods, sampling procedures and 

business practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. The NTTAA directs 

the EPA to provide Congress, through 

OMB, explanations when the agency 

decides not to use available and 

applicable voluntary consensus 

standards. This rulemaking does not 

involve technical standards. Therefore, 

the EPA has not considered the use of 

any voluntary consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 

7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

The EPA has determined that this 

final rule will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

because it will not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. The EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of the rule in the Federal 

Register. A major rule cannot take effect 

until 60 days after it is published in the 

Federal Register. This action is not a 

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). This rule will be effective on 

September 27, 2013. 

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 

final, and shall not postpone the 

effectiveness of such action. Thus, any 

petitions for review of this action 

related to the exemption of SolsticeTM

1233zd(E) from the regulatory definition 

of VOCs 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. 

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: August 16, 2013. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator. 

For reasons set forth 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 

■ 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. 

§ 51.100—[Amended] 

■ 2. Section 51.100 is amended at the 

end of paragraph (s)(1) introductory text 

by removing the words ‘‘and 

perfluorocarbon compounds which fall 

into these classes:’’ and adding in their 

place the words ‘‘trans 1-chloro-3,3,3- 

trifluoroprop-1-ene; and 

perfluorocarbon compounds which fall 

into these classes:’’. 

[FR Doc. 2013–21014 Filed 8–27–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0148; FRL–9843–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Nevada; 

Regional Haze Federal Implementation 

Plan; Extension of BART Compliance 

Date for Reid Gardner Generating 

Station 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

extend the compliance date for NOX

emission limits, under the Best 

Available Retrofit Technology (BART) 

requirements of the Regional Haze Rule, 

for Units 1, 2, and 3 at the Reid Gardner 

Generating Station (RGGS) by 18 

months from January 1, 2015, to June 

30, 2016. EPA’s BART determination 

was promulgated in a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) on August 

23, 2012. On March 26, 2013, EPA 

granted reconsideration of the 

compliance date and proposed to extend 

the compliance date for the NOX

emission limits applicable to Units 1, 2, 

and 3 at RGGS. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES