58686 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Dated: September 9, 2014. 

William C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

Therefore, 40 CFR part 52 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart VV—Virginia 

■ 2. In § 52.2420: 

■ a. In the table in paragraph (e), revise 

the entry for ‘‘Section 110(a)(2) 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 

Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS.’’ 

■ b. In the table in paragraph (e), revise 

the entry for ‘‘Section 110(a)(2) 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 

Ozone NAAQS.’’ 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 52.2420 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic 

area 

State submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation 

*******

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 Nitrogen 

Dioxide NAAQS.

Statewide .................. 5/30/13 .... 3/18/14, 79 FR 15012 This action addresses the following CAA 

elements, or portions thereof: 

110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), 

(E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), 

and (M) with the exception of PSD elements. 

9/30/14 [Insert Federal Register citation].This action addresses the following CAA 

elements, or portions thereof: 

110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) with respect to the PSD elements. 

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Ozone 

NAAQS.

Statewide .................. 7/23/12 .... 3/27/14, 79 FR 17043 This action addresses the following CAA 

elements, or portions thereof: 

110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), 

(E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), 

and (M) with the exception of PSD elements. 

9/30/14 [Insert Federal Register citation].This action addresses the following CAA 

elements, or portions thereof: 

110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) with respect to the PSD elements. 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–23106 Filed 9–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 372 

[EPA–HQ–TRI–2012–0110; FRL–9915–59– 

OEI] 

RIN 2025–AA34 

Addition of Nonylphenol Category; 

Community Right-To-Know Toxic 

Chemical Release Reporting 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is adding a nonylphenol 

category to the list of toxic chemicals 

subject to reporting under section 313 of 

the Emergency Planning and 

Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) 

of 1986 and section 6607 of the 

Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) of 1990. 

EPA is adding this chemical category to 

the EPCRA section 313 list pursuant to 

its authority to add chemicals and 

chemical categories because EPA has 

determined that this category meets the 

EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(C) toxicity 

criterion. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

September 30, 2014, and shall apply for 

the reporting year beginning January 1, 

2015 (reports due July 1, 2016). 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–TRI–2012–0110. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., 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 OEI Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC. This Docket 

Facility 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 OEI Docket is (202) 566–1752. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Daniel R. Bushman, Environmental 

Analysis Division, Office of Information 

Analysis and Access (2842T), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460; telephone number: 202–566– 

0743; fax number: 202–566–0677; email: 

bushman.daniel@epa.gov, for specific 

information on this notice. For general 

information on EPCRA section 313, 

contact the Emergency Planning and 

Community Right-to-Know Hotline, toll 

free at (800) 424–9346 (select menu 

option 3) or (703) 412–9810 in Virginia 

and Alaska or toll free, TDD (800) 553– 

7672, http://www.epa.gov/superfund/

contacts/infocenter/. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 58687 

I. General Information 

A. Does this notice apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you manufacture, process, 

or otherwise use nonylphenol. 

Potentially affected categories and 

entities may include, but are not limited 

to: 

Category Examples of potentially affected entities 

Industry .................................................... Facilities included in the following NAICS manufacturing codes (corresponding to SIC codes 20 

through 39): 311*, 312*, 313*, 314*, 315*, 316, 321, 322, 323*, 324, 325*, 326*, 327, 331, 332, 

333, 334*, 335*, 336, 337*, 339*, 111998*, 211112*, 212324*, 212325*, 212393*, 212399*, 

488390*, 511110, 511120, 511130, 511140*, 511191, 511199, 512220, 512230*, 519130*, 

541712*, or 811490*. 

*Exceptions and/or limitations exist for these NAICS codes. 

Facilities included in the following NAICS codes (corresponding to SIC codes other than SIC codes 

20 through 39): 212111, 212112, 212113 (correspond to SIC 12, Coal Mining (except 1241)); or 

212221, 212222, 212231, 212234, 212299 (correspond to SIC 10, Metal Mining (except 1011, 

1081, and 1094)); or 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122, 221330 (Limited to facilities that combust coal and/or oil for the purpose of generating power for distribution in commerce) 

(corresponds to SIC 4911, 4931, and 4939, Electric Utilities); or 424690, 425110, 425120 (Limited 

to facilities previously classified in SIC 5169, Chemicals and Allied Products, Not Elsewhere Classified); or 424710 (corresponds to SIC 5171, Petroleum Bulk Terminals and Plants); or 562112 (Limited to facilities primarily engaged in solvent recovery services on a contract or fee basis (previously classified under SIC 7389, Business Services, NEC)); or 562211, 562212, 562213, 562219, 

562920 (Limited to facilities regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, subtitle 

C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.) (corresponds to SIC 4953, Refuse Systems). 

Federal Government ................................ Federal facilities. 

This table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Some of the 

entities listed in the table have 

exemptions and/or limitations regarding 

coverage, and other types of entities not 

listed in the table could also be affected. 

To determine whether your facility 

would be affected by this action, you 

should carefully examine the 

applicability criteria in part 372 subpart 

B of Title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations. 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. 

II. Introduction 

A. What is the statutory authority for 

this final rule? 

This rule is issued under EPCRA 

section 313(d) and section 328, 42 

U.S.C. 11023 et seq.. EPCRA is also 

referred to as Title III of the Superfund 

Amendments and Reauthorization Act 

of 1986. 

B. What is the background for this 

action? 

Section 313 of EPCRA, 42 U.S.C. 

11023, requires certain facilities that 

manufacture, process, or otherwise use 

listed toxic chemicals in amounts above 

reporting threshold levels to report their 

environmental releases and other waste 

management quantities of such 

chemicals annually. These facilities 

must also report pollution prevention 

and recycling data for such chemicals, 

pursuant to section 6607 of the PPA, 42 

U.S.C. 13106. Congress established an 

initial list of toxic chemicals that 

comprised more than 300 chemicals and 

20 chemical categories. 

EPCRA section 313(d) authorizes EPA 

to add or delete chemicals from the list 

and sets criteria for these actions. 

EPCRA section 313(d)(2) states that EPA 

may add a chemical to the list if any of 

the listing criteria in Section 313(d)(2) 

are met. Therefore, to add a chemical, 

EPA must demonstrate that at least one 

criterion is met, but need not determine 

whether any other criterion is met. 

Conversely, to remove a chemical from 

the list, EPCRA section 313(d)(3) 

dictates that EPA must demonstrate that 

none of the listing criteria in Section 

313(d)(2)(A)–(C) are met. The EPCRA 

section 313(d)(2)(A)–(C) criteria are: 

• The chemical is known to cause or 

can reasonably be anticipated to cause 

significant adverse acute human health 

effects at concentration levels that are 

reasonably likely to exist beyond facility 

site boundaries as a result of 

continuous, or frequently recurring, 

releases. 

• The chemical is known to cause or 

can reasonably be anticipated to cause 

in humans: 

Æ cancer or teratogenic effects, or 

Æ serious or irreversible— 

D reproductive dysfunctions, 

D neurological disorders, 

D heritable genetic mutations, or 

D other chronic health effects. 

• The chemical is known to cause or 

can be reasonably anticipated to cause, 

because of: 

Æ its toxicity, 

Æ its toxicity and persistence in the 

environment, or 

Æ its toxicity and tendency to 

bioaccumulate in the environment, a 

significant adverse effect on the 

environment of sufficient seriousness, 

in the judgment of the Administrator, to 

warrant reporting under this section. 

EPA often refers to the section 

313(d)(2)(A) criterion as the ‘‘acute 

human health effects criterion;’’ the 

section 313(d)(2)(B) criterion as the 

‘‘chronic human health effects 

criterion;’’ and the section 313(d)(2)(C) 

criterion as the ‘‘environmental effects 

criterion.’’ 

EPA published in the Federal 

Register of November 30, 1994 (59 FR 

61432), a statement clarifying its 

interpretation of the section 313(d)(2) 

and (d)(3) criteria for modifying the 

section 313 list of toxic chemicals. 

III. Summary of Proposed Rule 

A. What chemical did EPA propose to 

add to the EPCRA section 313 list of 

toxic chemicals? 

EPA proposed to add a nonylphenol 

category to the EPCRA section 313 list 

of toxic chemicals. As discussed in the 

proposed rule (78 FR 37176, June 20, 

2013) because there is no one Chemical 

Abstract Service Registry Number 

(CASRN) that adequately captures what 

is referred to as nonylphenol and 

because of the apparent confusion that 

has resulted from the use of multiple 

CASRNs, EPA proposed to add 

nonylphenol as a category defined by a 

structure. EPA proposed to define the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
58688 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

nonylphenol category using the 

structure and text presented below. 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–C 

B. What was EPA’s rationale for 

proposing to list nonylphenol? 

As EPA stated in the proposed rule 

(78 FR 37176, June 20, 2013), 

nonylphenol is highly toxic to 

numerous species of aquatic organisms. 

EPA’s technical evaluation of 

nonylphenol showed that it can 

reasonably be anticipated to cause, 

because of its toxicity, significant 

adverse effects in aquatic organisms. 

The observed effects from nonylphenol 

exposure occur at very low 

concentrations demonstrating that 

nonylphenol is highly toxic to aquatic 

organisms. Data summarized in the 

proposed rule included acute toxicity 

values for freshwater organisms ranging 

from 21 micrograms per liter (mg/L) for 

a detritivorous amphipod to 774 mg/L 

for an algal grazing snail. Acute toxicity 

values for freshwater fish ranged from 

110 mg/L for the fountain darter to 128 

to 360 mg/L for the fathead minnow. 

Acute toxicity values for saltwater 

organisms ranged from 17 mg/L for the 

winter flounder to 310 mg/L for the 

sheepshead minnow. The proposed rule 

also cited chronic toxicity values for 

several aquatic species ranging from 5 

mg/L for growth effects in mysid shrimp 

to 377 mg/L for survival effects in water 

fleas. Chronic toxicity values for 

rainbow trout ranged from 8 mg/L for 

effects on growth to 53 mg/L for 

abnormal development. Reproductive, 

developmental, and estrogenic effects 

on aquatic organisms have also been 

reported for nonylphenol with some 

effects observed at concentrations of 4 

mg/L or less. In the proposed rule EPA 

stated it believes that the evidence is 

sufficient for listing the nonylphenol 

category on the EPCRA section 313 toxic 

chemical list pursuant to EPCRA section 

313(d)(2)(C) based on the available 

ecological toxicity data. 

IV. What comments did EPA receive on 

the proposed rule and what are EPA’s 

responses to those comments? 

EPA received three comments on the 

proposed rule to add a nonylphenol 

category to the EPCRA section 313 list 

of toxic chemicals. The comments 

received were from the following 

groups, the Alkylphenols & Ethoxylates 

Research Council (APERC) (Reference 

(Ref.) 1), Intel Corporation (Ref. 2), and 

the National Council for Air and Stream 

Improvement (NCASI) (Ref. 3). 

Summaries of the most significant 

comments and EPA’s response are 

discussed below. The complete set of 

comments and EPA’s detailed responses 

can be found in the response to 

comments document in the docket for 

this rulemaking (Ref. 4). 

All three commenters requested that 

EPA define the nonylphenol category by 

chemical name and CASRN rather than 

by a chemical structure. The 

commenters were concerned that 

reporting by chemical structure would 

be difficult for some reporters who 

lacked detailed knowledge of the 

chemicals they use. The commenters 

felt that using chemical names and 

CASRNs would simplify reporting and 

be less burdensome. 

There are several TRI chemical 

categories listed based on chemical 

structures or chemical formulas and 

reporting has not been a significant 

issue for those listings. EPA continues 

to believe that listing nonylphenol as a 

category defined by structure would be 

an appropriate way to list the category. 

However, since there are a limited 

number of CASRNs used to identify 

nonylphenol mixtures, EPA has decided 

to modify the category listing to address 

the commenter’s concerns. EPA is 

listing nonylphenol as a delimited 

category defined by the existing names 

and CASRNs. The nonylphenol category 

will be listed as: 

NONYLPHENOL

[This category includes only those chemicals 

listed below] 

CAS No. Chemical name 

104–40–5 ....... 4-Nonylphenol. 

11066–49–2 ... Isononylphenol. 

25154–52–3 ... Nonylphenol. 

26543–97–5 ... 4-Isononylphenol. 

84852–15–3 ... 4-Nonylphenol, branched. 

90481–04–2 ... Nonylphenol, branched. 

The category includes all of the 

CASRNs and chemical names that the 

commenters cited as having been used 

to define nonylphenol. In addition, EPA 

has identified one additional CASRN 

(26543–52–3) that is covered by the 

category. This limited set of chemical 

names and CAS numbers covers all the 

chemicals we are aware of that would 

have been in the category as described 

by chemical structure. At this time, EPA 

does not expect that reports will be filed 

for any of the identified CASRNs other 

than 84852–15–3 and 25154–52–3, 

which were used to estimate the cost of 

the proposed nonylphenol category (Ref. 

5). Nevertheless, the other CASRNs are 

included in order to cover the complete 

nonylphenol category that has been 

identified at this time. As noted by one 

commenter, this type of category listing 

is similar to the current listings for 

diisocyanates, dioxin and dioxin-like 

compounds, and polycyclic aromatic 

compounds. While listing nonylphenol 

as a chemical structure based category 

would be appropriate, listing the 

category by name and CASRN should 

eliminate the potential reporting issues 

the commenters identified with a 

structure based category. 

APERC stated that EPA proposed to 

list nonylphenol based on its toxicity 

and tendency to bioaccumulate in the 

environment under EPCRA section 

(d)(2)(C)(iii). APERC noted that 

nonylphenol is not persistent or 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULESER30SE14.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 58689 

bioaccumulative and suggested that be 

recognized in EPA’s hazard review for 

determining whether nonylphenol 

represents a sufficiently serious hazard 

to warrant significant nation-wide 

reporting under EPCRA section 313. 

APERC stated that EPA should rely on 

definitions for ‘‘persistence’’ and 

‘‘bioaccumulative’’, which are 

consistent with those established for 

EPCRA section 313 (64 FR 58666, 

October 29, 1999). APERC also stated 

that nonylphenol was mischaracterized 

in the proposed rule as persistent based 

on statements previously made in the 

EPA Action Plan (Ref. 6). APERC 

requested that EPA correct the record 

for the proposed rule and Action Plan 

to reflect that nonylphenol is not 

persistent or bioaccumulative. 

APERC is mistaken in their 

understanding of the basis EPA cited to 

support the listing of the nonylphenol 

category. EPA did not propose to list the 

nonylphenol category under EPCRA 

section (d)(2)(C)(iii). While 

bioaccumulation data was discussed in 

the technical section of the proposed 

rule, the rationale that EPA cited for 

listing the nonylphenol category was: 

‘‘EPA’s technical evaluation of 

nonylphenol shows that it can reasonably be 

anticipated to cause, because of its toxicity, 

significant adverse effects in aquatic 

organisms. Toxicity values for nonylphenol 

are available for numerous species of aquatic 

organisms. The observed effects from 

nonylphenol exposure occur at very low 

concentrations demonstrating that 

nonylphenol is highly toxic to aquatic 

organisms. Data summarized in this 

document include acute toxicity values for 

freshwater organisms ranging from 21 mg/L 

for a detritivorous amphipod to 774 mg/L for 

an algal grazing snail. Acute toxicity values 

for freshwater fish ranged from 110 mg/L for 

the fountain darter to 128 to 360 mg/L for the 

fathead minnow. Acute toxicity values for 

saltwater organisms ranged from 17 mg/L for 

the winter flounder to 310 mg/L for the 

sheepshead minnow. Chronic toxicity values 

are also available for several aquatic species 

ranging from 5 mg/L for growth effects in 

mysid shrimp to 377 mg/L for survival effects 

in water fleas. Chronic toxicity values for 

rainbow trout ranged from 8 mg/L for effects 

on growth to 53 mg/L for abnormal 

development. Reproductive, developmental, 

and estrogenic effects on aquatic organisms 

have also been reported for nonylphenol with 

some effects observed at concentrations of 4 

mg/L or less. Therefore, EPA believes that the 

evidence is sufficient for listing the 

nonylphenol category on the EPCRA section 

313 toxic chemical list pursuant to EPCRA 

section 313(d)(2)(C) based on the available 

ecological toxicity data.’’ (78 FR 37176, June 

20, 2013) 

The above rationale discussed only the 

toxicity data for nonylphenol, not the 

bioaccumulation data. EPA’s stated 

rationale for listing is based on the 

toxicity data for nonylphenol not a 

combination of toxicity and 

bioaccumulation. Nonylphenol is highly 

toxic to aquatic organisms and is 

sufficiently toxic as to meet the EPCRA 

section 313(d)(2)(C) criteria without 

consideration of bioaccumulation 

potential. 

With regards to persistence and 

bioaccumulation, these are not 

properties that a chemical is required to 

have in order to meet the EPCRA section 

313(d)(2)(C) listing criteria. As noted in 

Unit II, the EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(C) 

listing criteria is comprised of three 

separate parts: 

• The chemical is known to cause or 

can be reasonably anticipated to cause, 

because of: 

Æ its toxicity, 

Æ its toxicity and persistence in the 

environment, or 

Æ its toxicity and tendency to 

bioaccumulate in the environment, a 

significant adverse effect on the 

environment of sufficient seriousness, 

in the judgment of the Administrator, to 

warrant reporting under this section. 

Under EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(C), a 

chemical may be added based on its 

toxicity, its toxicity and persistence in 

the environment, or its toxicity and 

tendency to bioaccumulate in the 

environment. A chemical only needs to 

meet one of these three criteria to be 

added. 

Regarding the general use of the terms 

persistence and bioaccumulative, these 

terms are not absolutes. Chemicals that 

have persistence or bioaccumulation 

values below criteria established by EPA 

or some other organization for 

categorizing chemicals as Persistent, 

Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) 

chemicals does not mean that the 

chemicals are not persistent or 

bioaccumulative. For example, a 

chemical with a bioconcentration factor 

(BCF) of 500 bioaccumulates, just not to 

the extent that a chemical with a BCF 

of 1,000 does. Similarly, a chemical that 

persists in the environment with a halflife of 40 days is persistent just not as 

persistent as a chemical with a half-life 

of 60 days. As noted in the proposed 

rule, some of the nonylphenol BCF 

values for fish range from 203 to 344 

with a BCF value of 2,168 for the blue 

mussel. As discussed in the Water 

Quality Criteria (WQC) document (Ref. 

7), many studies have shown that 

nonylphenol is present in the 

environment, which indicates some 

level of persistence. EPA cited language 

from EPA’s Action Plan for nonylphenol 

and nonylphenol ethoxylates that 

described nonylphenol as persistent and 

moderately bioaccumulative (Ref. 6). 

Given the available data, those 

characterizations were correct. EPA did 

not address the issue of whether the 

persistence and bioaccumulation data 

were sufficient to classify nonylphenol 

as a PBT chemical under EPA’s 

established EPCRA section 313 PBT 

criteria since EPA was not attempting to 

classify nonylphenol as a PBT chemical. 

APERC also stated that in the 

proposed rule EPA proposed listing 

nonylphenol based on the following 

reasoning: 

‘‘Nonylphenol is toxic to aquatic organisms 

and has been found in ambient waters. 

Because of nonylphenol’s toxicity, chemical 

properties, and widespread use as a chemical 

intermediate, concerns have been raised over 

the potential risks to aquatic organisms from 

exposure to nonylphenol. All of the hazard 

information presented here has been adapted 

from EPA’s 2005 Criteria document for 

nonylphenol, which was previously peer 

reviewed (Ref. 3). Water Quality’’ (78 FR 

37176, June 20, 2013). 

APERC stated that there is no discussion 

of the numeric WQC developed for 

nonylphenol and that EPA does not 

consider whether concentrations in U.S. 

waters represent a risk based on those 

WQC. APERC stated that this approach 

provides that best method to assess 

whether a compound can be reasonably 

anticipated to cause significant adverse 

effects in aquatic organisms. 

The text quoted by APERC is from the 

introduction to the unit in the proposed 

rule entitled ‘‘IV. What Is EPA’s 

evaluation of the environmental toxicity 

of nonylphenol?’’ and is not the basis 

for the addition of nonylphenol. The 

quoted text simply states why EPA has 

developed concerns for potential 

releases of nonlyphenol. The basis for 

the addition of nonylphenol was 

discussed under ‘‘Unit V. Rationale for 

Listing,’’ which summarized the 

extensive aquatic toxicity data for 

nonylphenol (see previous comment 

response). 

With regards to the use of EPA’s 2005 

WQC document for nonylphenol (Ref. 

7), EPA relied on the hazard information 

contained in the WQC document and 

not the numeric WQC values developed 

for nonylphenol. The numeric WQC 

values are not toxicity values; they are 

concentrations that, if not exceeded, 

should not unacceptably affect aquatic 

organisms and their uses. For 

nonylphenol, the numeric WQC values 

are: 

‘‘9.1. Freshwater 

The procedures described in the 

‘‘Guidelines for Deriving Numerical National 

Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of 

Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses’’ (Stephan 

et al. 1985) indicate that, except possibly 

where a locally important species is very 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
58690 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

sensitive, freshwater aquatic organisms and 

their uses should not be affected 

unacceptably if the one-hour average 

concentration of nonylphenol does not 

exceed 28 mg/L more than once every three 

years on the average and if the four-day 

average concentration of nonylphenol does 

not exceed 6.6 mg/L more than once every 

three years on the average. 

9.2. Saltwater 

The procedures described in the 

‘‘Guidelines for Deriving Numerical National 

Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of 

Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses’’ (Stephan 

et al. 1985) indicate that, except possibly 

where a locally important species is very 

sensitive, [saltwater] aquatic organisms and 

their uses should not be affected 

unacceptably if the one-hour average 

concentration of nonylphenol does not 

exceed 7.0 mg/L more than once every three 

years on the average and if the four-day 

average concentration of nonylphenol does 

not exceed 1.7 mg/L more than once every 

three years on the average.’’ (Page 34, Ref. 7) 

Since, as discussed in other responses, 

EPA is not required to consider 

exposure or risk in the listing of 

chemicals that are highly ecotoxic, there 

was no need to discuss the numeric 

WQC values in the proposed rule. 

However, EPA notes that the numeric 

WQC values are very low for 

nonylphenol, ranging from just 1.7 to 28 

mg/L, which indicates a very high level 

of concern for this chemical. 

With regards to the criteria language 

‘‘a significant adverse effect on the 

environment of sufficient seriousness, 

in the judgment of the Administrator, to 

warrant reporting under this section’’ 

chemicals that are highly ecotoxic meet 

this determination. Chemicals that are 

highly ecotoxic are considered to meet 

all the listing requirements of EPCRA 

section 313(d)(2)(C) since they can 

cause significant adverse effects at very 

low concentrations. 

APERC contends that a probabilistic 

risk assessment of the extensive 

monitoring of nonylphenol in U.S. 

waters indicates a low likelihood that 

this compound will exceed EPA’s WQC. 

APERC stated that there are extensive 

monitoring data on the occurrence and 

concentrations of nonylphenol in U.S. 

surface water, much of it conducted by 

EPA and the United States Geological 

Survey. APERC contends that based on 

available data the likelihood that 

concentrations of nonylphenol and 

other metabolites of nonylphenol 

ethoxylates in United States surface 

waters will exceed EPA’s chronic WQC 

(6.6 mg/L) for nonylphenol is low. 

EPA does not consider potential 

exposures or risks under the EPCRA 

section 313(d)(2)(C) criteria when 

adding a chemical that is highly toxic to 

aquatic organisms. With regard to the 

use of exposure or risk assessments in 

the listing of chemicals under the 

EPCRA section 313(d)(2) criteria, EPA 

has stated its policy: 

‘‘The Agency believes that exposure 

considerations are not appropriate in making 

determinations (1) under section 313(d)(2)(B) 

for chemicals that exhibit moderately high to 

high human toxicity (These terms, which do 

not directly correlate to the numerical 

screening values reflected in the Draft Hazard 

Assessment Guidelines, are defined in unit 

II.) based on a hazard assessment, and (2) 

under section 313(d)(2)(C) for chemicals that 

are highly ecotoxic or induce wellestablished adverse environmental effects. 

For chemicals which induce well-established 

serious adverse effects, e.g., 

chlorofluorocarbons, which cause 

stratospheric ozone depletion, EPA believes 

that an exposure assessment is unnecessary. 

EPA believes that these chemicals typically 

do not affect solely one or two species but 

rather cause changes across a whole 

ecosystem. EPA believes that these effects are 

sufficiently serious because of the scope of 

their impact and the well documented 

evidence supporting the adverse effects. EPA, 

however, disagrees with those commenters 

who suggest that EPA must include a risk 

assessment component to EPCRA section 313 

determinations. Specifically, EPA does not 

agree with the commenters about the extent 

to which exposure must be considered in 

making determinations under sections 

313(d)(2)(B) and (C). This is primarily 

because EPA does not agree with the 

commenters’ understanding of EPCRA 

section 313. Risk assessment may be 

pertinent and appropriate for use under 

statutes that control the manufacture, use, 

and/or disposal of a chemical, such as the 

Clean Air Act or the Toxic Substances 

Control Act. However, EPCRA section 313 is 

an information collection provision that is 

fundamentally different from other 

environmental statutes that control or restrict 

chemical activities. EPCRA section 313 

charges EPA with collecting and 

disseminating information on releases, 

among other waste management data, so that 

communities can estimate local exposure and 

local risks; risks which can be significantly 

different than those which would be assessed 

using generic exposure considerations. The 

intent of EPCRA section 313 is to move the 

determination of what risks are acceptable 

from EPA to the communities in which the 

releases occur. This basic local 

empowerment is a cornerstone of the rightto-know program.’’ (59 FR 61432, November 

30, 1994) 

EPA went on to state that: 

‘‘Therefore, to meet its obligation under 

section 313(d)(2)(C), in cases where a 

chemical is low or moderately ecotoxic, EPA 

may look at certain exposure factors 

(including pollution controls, the volume 

and pattern of production, use, and release, 

environmental fate, as well as other chemical 

specific factors, and the use of estimated 

releases and modeling techniques) to 

determine if listing is reasonable, i.e., could 

the chemical ever be present at high enough 

concentrations to cause a significant adverse 

effect upon the environment to warrant 

listing under section 313(d)(2)(C). Of the 

chemicals being added in today’s action 

pursuant to section 313(d)(2)(C), all but one 

are highly ecotoxic. These highly ecotoxic 

chemicals are being added to the EPCRA 

section 313 list pursuant to section 

313(d)(2)(C) based on their hazard. The other 

chemical, which is moderately ecotoxic, is 

being added to the EPCRA section 313 list 

pursuant to section 313(d)(2)(C) based on 

both its hazard and an exposure assessment 

for this chemical.’’ (59 FR 61432, November 

30, 1994) 

EPA also noted that its established 

exposure policy is consistent with the 

legislative history of ECRCA section 

313: 

‘‘EPA believes that its position regarding 

the use of hazard; exposure, and risk in 

listing decisions is consistent with the 

purpose and legislative history of EPCRA 

section 313, as illustrated in the following 

passage from the Conference report: 

The Administrator, in determining to list a 

chemical under any of the above criteria, 

may, but is not required to conduct new 

studies or risk assessments or perform site 

specific analyses to establish actual ambient 

concentrations or to document adverse 

effects at any particular location. (H. Rep. 99– 

962, 99th Cong., 2nd Sess., p. 295 (Oct. 3, 

1986)). 

This passage indicates Congress did not 

intend to require EPA to conduct new 

studies, such as exposure studies, or perform 

risk assessments, and therefore did not 

consider these activities to be mandatory 

components of all section 313 decisions. EPA 

believes that this statement combined with 

the plain language of the statutory criteria 

clearly indicate that Congress intended that 

the decision of whether and how to consider 

exposure under EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B) 

and (C) should be left to the Agency’s 

discretion. EPA has carefully considered 

when and how to use exposure to fully 

implement the right-to-know provisions of 

EPCRA. The Agency believes that in this 

final rule, EPA has appropriately used the 

discretion provided to it to assure the 

addition of chemicals that meet the right-toknow objectives of EPCRA section 313 while 

not unduly burdening the regulated 

community.’’ (59 FR 61441, November 30, 

1994) 

More recently, EPA again explained its 

policy on the use of exposure in a 

Federal Register notice on the lifting of 

the reporting stay for hydrogen sulfide: 

‘‘Hydrogen sulfide has also been 

determined to cause ecotoxicity at relatively 

low concentrations, and thus is considered to 

have high ecotoxicity. EPA believes that 

chemicals that induce death or serious 

adverse effects in aquatic organisms at 

relatively low concentrations (i.e., they have 

high ecotoxicity) have the potential to cause 

significant changes in the population of fish 

and other aquatic organisms, and can 

therefore reasonably be anticipated to cause 

a significant adverse effect on the 

environment of sufficient seriousness to 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 58691 

warrant reporting. EPA does not believe that 

it is required to consider exposure for 

chemicals that have high ecotoxicity based 

on a hazard assessment when determining if 

a chemical can be listed for effects pursuant 

to EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(C) (see 59 FR 

61432, 61433, 61440–61442).’’ (75 FR 8889, 

February. 26, 2010) 

Additional discussion of EPA’s use of 

exposure in chemical listing actions can 

be found in the final notice that lifted 

the reporting stay for hydrogen sulfide 

(76 FR 64022, October 17, 2011). 

Nonylphenol is one of the most ecotoxic 

chemicals that EPA has proposed to add 

to the EPCRA section 313 chemical list. 

EPA did not consider exposure or risk 

in its assessment of nonylphenol since 

it is toxic to numerous aquatic 

organisms at very low concentrations 

and thus is considered to be highly toxic 

to aquatic organisms. 

V. Summary of Final Rule 

EPA is finalizing the addition of a 

nonylphenol category to the EPCRA 

section 313 list of toxic chemicals. EPA 

has determined that nonylphenol meets 

the listing criteria under EPCRA section 

313(d)(2)(C) based on the available 

ecological toxicity data. However, based 

on the comments received on the 

propose rule, the nonylphenol category 

will be defined by a list of chemical 

names and CASRNs rather than by a 

chemical structure. The category 

definition will be: 

NONYLPHENOL

[This category includes only those chemicals 

listed below] 

104–40–5 ....... 4-Nonylphenol. 

11066–49–2 ... Isononylphenol. 

25154–52–3 ... Nonylphenol. 

26543–97–5 ... 4-Isononylphenol. 

84852–15–3 ... 4-Nonylphenol, branched. 

90481–04–2 ... Nonylphenol, branched. 

VI. References 

EPA has established an official public 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–TRI–2012–0110. The 

public docket includes information 

considered by EPA in developing this 

action, including the documents listed 

below, which are electronically or 

physically located in the docket. In 

addition, interested parties should 

consult documents that are referenced 

in the documents that EPA has placed 

in the docket, regardless of whether 

these referenced documents are 

electronically or physically located in 

the docket. For assistance in locating 

documents that are referenced in 

documents that EPA has placed in the 

docket, but that are not electronically or 

physically located in the docket, please 

consult the person listed in the above 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

1. Alkylphenols & Ethoxylates Research 

Council. Comments on US EPA Proposed 

Rule for Addition of Nonylphenol 

Category To Community Right-to-Know 

Toxic Chemical Release Reporting under 

Section 313 of the Emergency Planning 

and Community Right-to-Know Act. 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–TRI–2012–0110. 

August 19, 2013. 

2. Intel Corporation. Comments on the 

Proposed Addition of Nonylphenol 

Category; Community Right-to-Know 

Toxic Chemical Release Reporting (78 FR 

37176-37186; June 20, 2013). July 9, 

2013. 

3. National Council for Air and Stream 

Improvement. RE: Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–TRI–2012–0110, Addition of 

Nonylphenol Category; Community 

Right-to-Know Toxic Chemical Release 

Reporting (78 Federal Register 37176, 

June 20, 2013). August 19, 2013. 

4. USEPA, OEI, Response to Comments 

Received on the June 20, 2013 Proposed 

Rule (78 FR 37176): Addition of 

Nonylphenol Category; Community 

Right-to-Know Toxic Chemical Release 

Reporting. U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of 

Environmental Information, Office of 

Information Analysis and Access. May 

14, 2014. 

5. USEPA, OEI. Economic Analysis of the 

Final Rule to add Nonylphenol to the 

EPCRA Section 313 List of Toxic 

Chemicals. May 7, 2014. 

6. USEPA. 2010. Nonylphenol (NP) and 

Nonylphenol Ethoxylates (NPEs) Action 

Plan (RIN 2070–ZA09). United States 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Washington, DC. August 18, 2010. 

7. USEPA. 2005. Aquatic Life Ambient Water 

Quality Criteria—Nonylphenol Final. 

United States Environmental Protection 

Agency, Washington, DC. Office of 

Water. EPA–822–R–05–005. December 

2005. 

VII. What are the statutory and 

Executive Order reviews associated 

with this action? 

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 final rule does not contain any 

new information collection 

requirements that require additional 

approval by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et. 

seq. Currently, the facilities subject to 

the reporting requirements under 

EPCRA 313 and PPA 6607 may use 

either the EPA Toxic Chemicals Release 

Inventory Form R (EPA Form 1B9350– 

1), or the EPA Toxic Chemicals Release 

Inventory Form A (EPA Form 1B9350– 

2). The Form R must be completed if a 

facility manufactures, processes, or 

otherwise uses any listed chemical 

above threshold quantities and meets 

certain other criteria. For the Form A, 

EPA established an alternative threshold 

for facilities with low annual reportable 

amounts of a listed toxic chemical. A 

facility that meets the appropriate 

reporting thresholds, but estimates that 

the total annual reportable amount of 

the chemical does not exceed 500 

pounds per year, can take advantage of 

an alternative manufacture, process, or 

otherwise use threshold of 1 million 

pounds per year of the chemical, 

provided that certain conditions are 

met, and submit the Form A instead of 

the Form R. In addition, respondents 

may designate the specific chemical 

identity of a substance as a trade secret 

pursuant to EPCRA section 322 42 

U.S.C. 11042: 40 CFR part 350. 

OMB has approved the reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements related to 

Forms A and R, supplier notification, 

and petitions under OMB Control 

number 2025–0009 (EPA Information 

Collection Request (ICR) No. 1363) and 

those related to trade secret designations 

under OMB Control 2050–0078 (EPA 

ICR No. 1428). As provided in 5 CFR 

1320.5(b) and 1320.6(a), an Agency may 

not conduct or sponsor, and a person is 

not required to respond to, a collection 

of information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

The OMB control numbers relevant to 

EPA’s regulations are listed in 40 CFR 

part 9, 48 CFR chapter 15, and 

displayed on the information collection 

instruments (e.g., forms, instructions). 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as 

Amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. 

The 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 

today’s rule on small entities, small 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
58692 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

entity is defined as: (1) A business that 

is classified as a ‘‘small business’’ by the 

Small Business Administration at 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 rule on small entities, 

I certify that this action will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. Of 

the 54 entities estimated to be impacted 

by this rule, 39 are small businesses. Of 

the affected small businesses, all 39 

have cost-to-revenue impacts of less 

than 1% in both the first and 

subsequent years of the rulemaking. No 

small businesses are projected to have a 

cost impact in the first year of 1% or 

greater. Facilities eligible to use Form A 

(those meeting the appropriate activity 

threshold which have 500 pounds per 

year or less of reportable amounts of the 

chemical) will have a lower burden. No 

small governments or small 

organizations are expected to be affected 

by this action. Thus, this rule is not 

expected to have a significant adverse 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. A more 

detailed analysis of the impacts on 

small entities is located in EPA’s 

economic analysis support document 

(Ref. 5). 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This rule does not contain a Federal 

mandate that may result in expenditures 

of $100 million or more for State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or the private sector in any one year. 

EPA’s economic analysis indicates that 

the total cost of this rule is estimated to 

be $183,953 in the first year of reporting 

(Ref. 5). Thus, this rule is not subject to 

the requirements of sections 202 or 205 

of UMRA. 

This rule 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. 

Small governments are not subject to the 

EPCRA section 313 reporting 

requirements. 

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 action 

relates to toxic chemical reporting under 

EPCRA section 313, which primarily 

affects private sector facilities. Thus, 

Executive Order 13132 does not apply 

to this action. 

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). This action relates to toxic 

chemical reporting under EPCRA 

section 313, which primarily affects 

private sector facilities. Thus, Executive 

Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it does 

not establish an environmental standard 

intended to mitigate health or safety 

risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations 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, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 

directs 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. NTTAA directs 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, EPA did 

not consider 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. 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 does not affect 

the level of protection provided to 

human health or the environment. This 

rule adds an additional chemical to the 

EPCRA section 313 reporting 

requirements. By adding a chemical to 

the list of toxic chemicals subject to 

reporting under section 313 of EPCRA, 

EPA would be providing communities 

across the United States (including 

minority populations and low income 

populations) with access to data which 

they may use to seek lower exposures 

and consequently reductions in 

chemical risks for themselves and their 

children. This information can also be 

used by government agencies and others 

to identify potential problems, set 

priorities, and take appropriate steps to 

reduce any potential risks to human 

health and the environment. Therefore, 

the informational benefits of the rule 

will have a positive impact on the 

human health and environmental 

impacts of minority populations, lowincome populations, and children. 

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. 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 189 / Tuesday, September 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 58693 

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 September 30, 2014. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372 

Environmental protection, 

Community right-to-know, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, and 

Toxic chemicals. 

Dated: September 23, 2014. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator. 

Therefore, 40 CFR part 372 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 372—TOXIC CHEMICAL 

RELEASE REPORTING: COMMUNITY 

RIGHT-TO-KNOW 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 372 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11023 and 11048. 

■ 2. In § 372.65, paragraph (c) is 

amended by adding in the table the 

entry for ‘‘Nonylphenol’’ in alphabetical 

order to read as follows: 

§ 372.65 Chemicals and chemical 

categories to which this part applies. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

Category name Effective date 

*******

Nonylphenol (This category includes only those chemicals listed below) .......................................................................................... 1/1/15 

104–40–5 4-Nonylphenol. 

11066–49–2 Isononylphenol. 

25154–52–3 Nonylphenol. 

26543–97–5 4-Isononylphenol. 

84852–15–3 4-Nonylphenol, branched. 

90481–04–2 Nonylphenol, branched. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–23255 Filed 9–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Parts 175 and 181 

46 CFR Parts 160 and 169 

[Docket No. USCG–2013–0263] 

RIN 1625–AC02 

Personal Flotation Devices Labeling 

and Standards 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard published a 

final rule in the Federal Register on 

September 22, 2014, which removes 

references to type codes in its 

regulations on the carriage and labeling 

of Coast Guard-approved personal 

flotation devices. Two extra characters 

were included in the phone number for 

the Coast Guard person to contact for 

more information about that rule. This 

document corrects that phone number. 

DATES: This correction is effective 

September 30, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information about this document call or 

email Ms. Brandi Baldwin, Lifesaving 

and Fire Safety Division, Coast Guard; 

telephone 202–372–1394, email 

brandi.a.baldwin@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast 

Guard published a final rule in the 

Federal Register on September 22, 2014 

(79 FR 56491), which when it becomes 

effective on October 22, 2014, will 

remove references to type codes in 

regulations on the carriage and labeling 

of Coast Guard-approved personal 

flotation devices. In the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of the 

document, two characters, ‘‘–2’’ were 

erroneously inserted between the area 

code and last seven digits of the phone 

number. This document corrects the 

phone number to read ‘‘202–372–1394.’’ 

Correction 

In rule FR Doc. 2014–22373, 

published on September 22, 2014, (79 

FR 56491), make the following 

correction: 

On page 56491, in the second column, 

fourth line from the bottom, remove 

‘‘–2’’. 

Dated: September 24, 2014. 

Katia Cervoni, 

Chief, Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law, U.S. Coast Guard. 

[FR Doc. 2014–23187 Filed 9–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 202, 207, 209, 216, and 

234 

RIN 0750–AI16 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: Limitation on 

Use of Cost-Reimbursement Line Items 

(DFARS Case 2013–D016) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD has adopted as final, 

with changes, an interim rule amending 

the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to 

implement section 811 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2013, which prohibits DoD from 

entering into cost-type contracts for 

production of major defense acquisition 

programs (MDAPs). In implementing 

section 811 of the NDAA for FY 2013, 

DoD further defined the prohibition on 

entering into cost-type contracts to 

explicitly state the prohibition also 

applies to entering into costreimbursement line items for the 

production of MDAPs. 

DATES: Effective September 30, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Janetta Brewer, telephone 571–372– 

6104. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES