Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 24997 

Name of non-regulatory SIP 

revision Applicable geographic area State submittal date EPA approval date Additional explanation 

*******

Negative Declarations—VOC 

Source Categories.

Metropolitan Washington 

ozone nonattainment area.

4/8/93, 9/4/97 10/27/99, 64 FR 57777 ........ 52.478(a), 52.478(b). 

Negative Declarations—VOC 

Source Categories.

Metropolitan Washington 

ozone nonattainment area.

1/26/10, 3/24/11 4/29/13 [Insert Federal 

Register page number 

where the document begins and date].

52.478(c). 

*******

■ 3. Section 52.478 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 52.478 Rules and regulations. 

* * * * * 

(c) On March 24, 2011, the District of 

Columbia submitted a letter to EPA 

declaring that there are no sources 

located in the District which belong to 

the following VOC categories: 

(1) Auto and Light-duty Truck 

Assembly Coatings; 

(2) Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing 

Materials; 

(3) Paper, Film and Foil Coatings; 

(4) Flatwood Paneling. 

[FR Doc. 2013–09937 Filed 4–26–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 82 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0111; FRL–9800–9] 

RIN–2060–AQ84 

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: 

Listing of Substitutes for OzoneDepleting Substances—Fire 

Suppression and Explosion Protection 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency’s 

Significant New Alternatives Policy 

program, this action lists C7 

Fluoroketone as an acceptable 

substitute, subject to narrowed use 

limits, for ozone-depleting substances 

used as streaming agents in the fire 

suppression and explosion protection 

sector. The program implements Section 

612 of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 

1990, which requires the Agency to 

evaluate substitutes and find them 

acceptable where they pose comparable 

or lower overall risk to human health 

and the environment than other 

available substitutes. 

DATES: This rule is effective on May 29, 

2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0111. 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, 

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 is publicly available 

only in hard copy form. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, 

EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. 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 is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Bella Maranion, Stratospheric 

Protection Division, Office of 

Atmospheric Programs (6205J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 

343–9749; fax number: (202) 343–2363; 

email address: maranion.bella@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

regulations implementing the 

Significant New Alternatives Policy 

(SNAP) program are codified at 40 CFR 

part 82, subpart G. The appendices to 

subpart G list substitutes for ozonedepleting substances (ODSs) for specific 

end uses as unacceptable or as 

acceptable with certain restrictions 

imposed on their use. In addition, a list 

of acceptable substitutes without 

restrictions is available at http:// 

www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/lists/ 

index.html. This final rule will add a 

new fire suppression agent to the SNAP 

list of acceptable substitutes in the 

appendices to subpart G and specifically 

to the list of substitutes for halon 1211 

for streaming uses. This action does not 

place any significant burden on the 

regulated community but lists as 

acceptable, subject to narrowed use 

limits, a new halon substitute. The 

restrictions will ensure that this 

substitute will not pose a greater risk to 

human health or the environment than 

other available or potentially available 

substitutes in the fire suppression end 

use. 

This final rule finds C7 Fluoroketone 

acceptable subject to narrowed use 

limits as a substitute for halon 1211 for 

use as a streaming agent in portable fire 

extinguishers in nonresidential 

applications. Halons are chemicals that 

were once widely used in the fire 

protection sector but have been banned 

from production in the U.S. since 1994 

because their emissions into the 

atmosphere are highly destructive to the 

stratospheric ozone layer. This action 

will provide users that need specialized 

fire protection applications with more 

alternatives to the use of halons. 

Businesses that may be regulated, either 

through manufacturing, distribution, 

installation and servicing, or use of the 

fire suppression equipment containing 

the substitutes are listed in the table 

below: 

TABLE 1—POTENTIALLY REGULATED ENTITIES, BY NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (NAICS) CODE

Category NAICS Code Description of regulated entities 

Construction .............................................. 238210 Alarm system (e.g., fire, burglar), electric, installation only. 

Manufacturing ........................................... 325998 Fire extinguisher chemical preparations manufacturing. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
24998 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

1As defined at 40 CFR 82.104, ‘‘interstate 

commerce’’ means the distribution or transportation 

of any product between one state, territory, 

possession or the District of Columbia, and another 

state, territory, possession or the District of 

Columbia, or the sale, use or manufacture of any 

product in more than one state, territory, possession 

or District of Columbia. The entry points for which 

a product is introduced into interstate commerce 

are the release of a product from the facility in 

which the product was manufactured, the entry into 

TABLE 1—POTENTIALLY REGULATED ENTITIES, BY NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (NAICS) 

CODE—Continued 

Category NAICS Code Description of regulated entities 

Manufacturing ........................................... 332919 Nozzles, fire fighting, manufacturing. 

Manufacturing ........................................... 334290 Fire detection and alarm systems manufacturing. 

Manufacturing ........................................... 336611 Shipbuilding and repairing. 

Manufacturing ........................................... 339999 Fire extinguishers, portable, manufacturing. 

Manufacturing ........................................... 336411 Aircraft manufacturing. 

Manufacturing ........................................... 336413 Other aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment manufacturing. 

This table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather a guide regarding 

entities likely to be regulated by this 

action. If you have any questions about 

whether this action applies to a 

particular entity, consult the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

Table of Contents 

I. Section 612 Program 

A. Statutory Requirements 

B. Regulatory History 

II. Listing Decision: Fire Suppression and 

Explosion Protection Streaming 

Application: C7 Fluoroketone— 

Acceptable Subject to Narrowed Use 

Limits 

III. Response to Public Comment 

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 

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 

K. Congressional Review Act 

I. Section 612 Program 

A. Statutory Requirements 

Section 612 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) requires EPA to develop a 

program for evaluating alternatives to 

ozone-depleting substances. EPA refers 

to this program as the Significant New 

Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. 

The major provisions of Section 612 are: 

• Rulemaking—Section 612(c) 

requires EPA to promulgate rules 

making it unlawful to replace any class 

I (chlorofluorocarbon, halon, carbon 

tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and 

hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II 

(hydrochlorofluorocarbon) substance 

with any substitute that the 

Administrator determines may present 

adverse effects to human health or the 

environment where the Administrator 

has identified an alternative that (1) 

reduces the overall risk to human health 

and the environment, and (2) is 

currently or potentially available. 

• Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable 

Substitutes—Section 612(c) also 

requires EPA to publish a list of the 

substitutes unacceptable for specific 

uses and to publish a corresponding list 

of acceptable alternatives for specific 

uses. The list of acceptable substitutes is 

found at http://www.epa.gov/ozone/ 

snap/lists/index.html, and the lists of 

‘‘unacceptable,’’ ‘‘acceptable subject to 

use conditions,’’ and ‘‘acceptable 

subject to narrowed use limits’’ 

substitutes are found in the appendices 

to subpart G of 40 CFR part 82. 

• Petition Process—Section 612(d) 

grant the right to any person to petition 

EPA to add a substitute to, or delete a 

substitute from, the lists published in 

accordance with Section 612(c). The 

Agency has 90 days to grant or deny a 

petition. Where the Agency grants the 

petition, EPA must publish the revised 

lists within an additional six months. 

• 90-day Notification—Section 612(e) 

directs EPA to require any person who 

produces a chemical substitute for a 

class I substance to notify the Agency 

not less than 90 days before new or 

existing chemicals are introduced into 

interstate commerce for significant new 

uses as substitutes for a class I 

substance. The producer must also 

provide the Agency with the producer’s 

unpublished health and safety studies 

on such substitutes. 

• Outreach—Section 612(b)(1) states 

that the Administrator shall seek to 

maximize the use of federal research 

facilities and resources to assist users of 

class I and II substances in identifying 

and developing alternatives to the use of 

such substances in key commercial 

applications. 

• Clearinghouse—Section 612(b)(4) 

requires the Agency to set up a public 

clearinghouse of alternative chemicals, 

product substitutes, and alternative 

manufacturing processes that are 

available for products and 

manufacturing processes which use 

class I and II substances. 

B. Regulatory History 

On March 18, 1994, EPA published 

the original rulemaking (59 FR 13044) 

which established the process for 

administering the SNAP program and 

issued EPA’s first lists identifying 

acceptable and unacceptable substitutes 

in the major industrial use sectors 

(subpart G of 40 CFR part 82). These 

sectors include: Refrigeration and airconditioning; foam blowing; solvents 

cleaning; fire suppression and explosion 

protection; sterilants; aerosols; 

adhesives, coatings and inks; and 

tobacco expansion. These sectors 

comprise the principal industrial sectors 

that historically consumed the largest 

volumes of ODS. 

Section 612 of the CAA requires EPA 

to list as acceptable those substitutes 

that do not present a significantly 

greater risk to human health and the 

environment as compared with other 

substitutes that are currently or 

potentially available. 

Under the SNAP regulations, anyone 

who plans to market or produce a 

substitute to replace a class I substance 

or class II substance in one of the eight 

major industrial use sectors must 

provide notice to the Agency, including 

health and safety information on the 

substitute at least 90 days before 

introducing it into interstate commerce 

for significant new use as an alternative. 

40 CFR 82.176(a). This requirement 

applies to the persons planning to 

introduce the substitute into interstate 

commerce,1 which typically are 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 24999 

a warehouse from which the domestic manufacturer 

releases the product for sale or distribution, and at 

the site of United States Customs clearance. 

2As defined at 40 CFR 82.172, ‘‘end-use’’ means 

processes or classes of specific applications within 

major industrial sectors where a substitute is used 

to replace an ODS. 

3The SNAP regulations also include ‘‘pending,’’ 

referring to submissions for which EPA has not 

reached a determination, under this provision. 

chemical manufacturers but may 

include importers, formulators, or endusers when they are responsible for 

introducing a substitute into 

commerce.2 The 90-day SNAP review 

process begins once EPA receives the 

submission and determines that the 

submission includes complete and 

adequate data (40 CFR 82.180(a)). As 

required by the CAA, the SNAP 

regulations, 40 CFR 82.174(a), prohibit 

the introduction of a substitute into 

interstate commerce earlier than 90 days 

after notice has been provided to the 

Agency. 

The Agency has identified four 

possible decision categories for 

substitutes that are submitted for 

evaluation: acceptable; acceptable 

subject to use conditions; acceptable 

subject to narrowed use limits; and 

unacceptable 3 (40 CFR 82.180(b)). Use 

conditions and narrowed use limits are 

both considered ‘‘use restrictions’’ and 

are explained below. Substitutes that are 

deemed acceptable with no use 

restrictions (no use conditions or 

narrowed use limits) can be used for all 

applications within the relevant enduses within the sector. Substitutes that 

are acceptable subject to use restrictions 

may be used only in accordance with 

those restrictions. 

After reviewing a substitute, the 

Agency may determine that a substitute 

is acceptable only if certain conditions 

in the way that the substitute is used are 

met to minimize risks to human health 

and the environment. EPA describes 

such substitutes as ‘‘acceptable subject 

to use conditions.’’ Entities that use 

these substitutes without meeting the 

associated use conditions are in 

violation of EPA’s SNAP regulations. 40 

CFR 82.174(c). 

For some substitutes, the Agency may 

permit a narrow range of use within an 

end-use or sector. For example, the 

Agency may limit the use of a substitute 

to certain end-uses or specific 

applications within an industry sector. 

EPA describes these substitutes as 

‘‘acceptable subject to narrowed use 

limits.’’ A person using a substitute that 

is acceptable subject to narrowed use 

limits in applications and end-uses that 

are not consistent with the narrowed 

use limit is using the substitute in an 

unacceptable manner and is in violation 

of section 612 of the CAA and EPA’s 

SNAP regulations. 40 CFR 82.174(c). 

The Agency publishes its SNAP 

program decisions in the Federal 

Register. EPA first publishes decisions 

concerning substitutes that are deemed 

acceptable subject to use restrictions 

(use conditions and/or narrowed use 

limits), or substitutes deemed 

unacceptable, as proposed rulemakings 

to allow the public opportunity to 

comment, before publishing final 

decisions. 

In contrast, EPA publishes decisions 

concerning substitutes that are deemed 

acceptable with no restrictions in 

‘‘notices of acceptability,’’ rather than as 

proposed and final rules. As described 

in the preamble to the rule initially 

implementing the SNAP program in the 

Federal Register at 59 FR 13044 on 

March 18, 1994, EPA does not believe 

that rulemaking procedures are 

necessary to list alternatives that are 

acceptable without restrictions because 

such listings neither impose any 

sanction nor prevent anyone from using 

a substitute. 

Many SNAP listings include 

‘‘Comments’’ or ‘‘Further Information’’ 

to provide additional information on 

substitutes. Since this additional 

information is not part of the regulatory 

decision, these statements are not 

binding for use of the substitute under 

the SNAP program. However, regulatory 

requirements so listed are binding under 

other regulatory programs (e.g., worker 

protection regulations promulgated by 

the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA)). The ‘‘Further 

Information’’ classification does not 

necessarily include all other legal 

obligations pertaining to the use of the 

substitute. While the items listed are not 

legally binding under the SNAP 

program, EPA encourages users of 

substitutes to apply all statements in the 

‘‘Further Information’’ column in their 

use of the substitute. In many instances, 

the information simply refers to sound 

operating practices that have already 

been identified in existing industry and/ 

or building codes and standards. Thus, 

many of the comments, if adopted, 

would not require the affected user to 

make significant changes in existing 

operating practices. 

For copies of the comprehensive 

SNAP lists of substitutes or additional 

information on SNAP, refer to EPA’s 

Ozone Layer Protection Web site at 

www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/index.html. 

For more information on the Agency’s 

process for administering the SNAP 

program or criteria for evaluation of 

substitutes, refer to the SNAP final 

rulemaking in the Federal Register at 59 

FR 13044 on March 18, 1994, codified 

at 40 CFR part 82, subpart G. A 

complete chronology of SNAP decisions 

and the appropriate citations are found 

at http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/ 

chron.html. 

II. Listing Decision: Fire Suppression 

and Explosion Protection Streaming 

Application: C7 Fluoroketone— 

Acceptable Subject to Narrowed Use 

Limits 

EPA’s decision: EPA finds C7 

Fluoroketone acceptable subject to 

narrowed use limits as a substitute for 

halon 1211 for use as a streaming agent. 

The narrowed use limits require that C7 

Fluoroketone be used only in 

nonresidential applications. 

C7 Fluoroketone is also known as C7 

FK or FK–6–1–14. This substitute is a 

blend of two isomers, 3- 

pentanone,1,1,1,2,4,5,5,5-octafluoro-2,4- 

bis(trifluoromethyl) (Chemical Abstracts 

Service Registry Number [CAS Reg. No.] 

813–44–5) and 3- 

hexanone,1,1,1,2,4,4,5,5,6,6,6- 

undecafluoro-2-(trifluoromethyl) (CAS 

Reg. No. 813–45–6). You may find the 

submission under docket EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2011–0111 at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Environmental information: C7 

Fluoroketone has zero ODP and a GWP 

of approximately 1. Therefore, C7 

Fluoroketone is not expected to pose 

any significant adverse impact on the 

ozone layer or climate. 

The physicochemical properties of the 

majority of halon substitutes make it 

unlikely that the substitutes would be 

released to surface water as a result of 

use. In the case of C7 Fluoroketone, the 

proposed substitute is insoluble in 

water and readily volatilizes. Thus, EPA 

expects that all of the constituents 

would rapidly vaporize during 

expulsion from the container, would not 

be likely to settle, and therefore would 

be unlikely to lead to surface water 

contamination or generation of solid 

waste. 

C7 Fluoroketone has not been 

exempted as a volatile organic 

compound (VOC) under the CAA (40 

CFR 51.100(s)). VOC emissions from the 

production of portable extinguishers 

charged with C7 Fluoroketone are 

controlled through standard industry 

practices, and as such, emissions from 

manufacture of units are likely to be 

minimal. An assessment was performed 

to compare the annual VOC emissions 

from use of C7 Fluoroketone in portable 

extinguishers in one year to other 

anthropogenic sources of VOC 

emissions. This assessment is available 

in docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0111 

under the name, ‘‘Risk Screen on 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
25000 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

4Based on 2010 projections calculated using 2008 

EPA annual VOC emissions data for residential 

wood burning and agricultural field burning (EPA 

2008 and EPA 2011) and ICF assumptions. 

5Based on 2010 projections calculated using 2008 

EPA annual VOC emissions data (EPA 2009) and 

ICF assumptions. 

6 ‘‘Determination of an AEL for C7 Fluoroketone 

(C7 FK),’’ Appendix A to Risk Screen on Substitute 

for Halon 1211 as a Streaming Agent in Portable 

Fire Extinguishers Substitute: C7 Fluoroketone. 

Available in docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0111. 

Substitute for Halon 1211 as a 

Streaming Agent in Portable Fire 

Extinguishers Substitute: C7 

Fluoroketone.’’ This assessment finds 

that even if the entire portion for 

streaming agent applications of the 

allowable quantity of C7 FK produced 

by the submitter in one year was all 

released to the atmosphere (extremely 

unlikely), the resulting VOC emissions 

would be approximately equal to 

3.0×10¥2 percent of annual VOC 

emissions caused by fires,4 or only 

about 1.1×10¥3 percent of all annual 

anthropogenic VOC emissions.5 The 

environmental impacts of these VOCs 

are not considered a significant risk to 

local air quality. 

Toxicity and exposure data: 

Inhalation of C7 Fluoroketone could 

cause respiratory tract irritation and 

symptoms may include cough, sneezing, 

nasal discharge, headache, hoarseness, 

and nose and throat pain. Contact with 

the eyes and/or skin during product use 

is not expected to result in significant 

irritation. Ingestion of C7 Fluoroketone 

is not expected to cause health effects, 

and there is no anticipated need for first 

aid if C7 Fluoroketone is ingested. The 

potential health effects of C7 

Fluoroketone can be minimized by 

following the exposure guidelines and 

recommendations for ventilation and 

personal protective equipment (PPE) 

outlined in the Material Safety Data 

Sheet (MSDS) and discussed further 

below. 

EPA evaluated occupational and 

general population exposure at 

manufacture and at end use to ensure 

that the use of C7 Fluoroketone will not 

pose unacceptable risks to workers or 

the general public. This risk screen is 

available in docket EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2011–0111 under the name, ‘‘Risk 

Screen on Substitute for Halon 1211 as 

a Streaming Agent in Portable Fire 

Extinguishers Substitute: C7 

Fluoroketone.’’ 

EPA is providing the following 

additional information regarding use of 

C7 Fluoroketone as a streaming agent in 

nonresidential applications. 

Appropriate protective measures should 

be taken and proper training 

administered for the manufacture, 

clean-up and disposal of this product. 

For this new chemical, the manufacturer 

developed an acceptable exposure limit 

(AEL) for the workplace set at a level 

believed to protect from chronic adverse 

health effects those workers who are 

regularly exposed, such as in the 

manufacturing or filling processes. EPA 

reviewed the submitter’s supporting 

data and accepts the manufacturer’s 

AEL for C7 Fluoroketone of 225 ppm 

over an 8-hour time-weighted average.6

EPA recommends the following for 

establishments filling canisters to be 

used in streaming applications: 

—adequate ventilation should be in 

place; 

—all spills should be cleaned up 

immediately in accordance with good 

industrial hygiene practices; and 

—training for safe handling procedures 

should be provided to all employees 

that would be likely to handle the 

containers of the agent or 

extinguishing units filled with the 

agent. 

EPA anticipates that C7 Fluoroketone 

will be used consistent with the 

recommendations specified in the 

manufacturer’s MSDS. 

EPA recommends that users of C7 

Fluoroketone as a streaming agent act in 

accordance with the latest edition of 

NFPA Standard 10 for Portable Fire 

Extinguishers. We expect that users will 

be able to meet the recommended 

workplace exposure limit and address 

potential health risks by following the 

above recommendations, using the 

substitute in accordance with the 

manufacturer’s MSDS, and following 

other safety precautions common to the 

fire protection industry. 

Comparison to other fire 

suppressants: C7 Fluoroketone is not 

ozone-depleting with a GWP of 

approximately 1 in contrast to halon 

1211 (with an ODP of 7.1 and a GWP of 

1890), the ODS which it replaces. 

Compared to other substitutes for halon 

1211, such as HCFC Blend B (with ODP 

of roughly 0.01 and GWP of roughly 80), 

HFC–227ea (with ODP of 0 and GWP of 

3220), and HFC–236fa (with an ODP of 

0 and GWP of 9810), C7 Fluoroketone 

has a similar or less significant impact 

on the ozone layer and climate. Risk to 

the general population is expected to be 

negligible provided because under the 

narrowed use limits the substitute is not 

approved for use in residential 

applications. Occupational exposure 

should not pose a problem if use is in 

accordance with the manufacturer’s 

MSDS and other precautions normally 

used in the fire protection industry. 

III. Response to Public Comment 

The EPA published in the Federal 

Register at 77 FR 58035 on September 

19, 2012, a direct final rule and a 

companion proposed rule issuing 

listings for three fire suppressants under 

EPA’s SNAP program. Because EPA 

received an adverse comment 

concerning the fire suppressant C7 

Fluoroketone, EPA withdrew that part 

of the direct final rule that listed C7 

Fluoroketone at 77 FR 74381 on 

December 19, 2012. This section 

summarizes EPA’s response to the 

comment received on the proposed rule. 

The comment as well as a late comment 

from the manufacturer of C7 

Fluoroketone and additional supporting 

documents used for EPA’s response can 

be found in docket EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2011–0111. 

Comments: A commenter questioned 

the potential toxicity and environmental 

impacts of C7 Fluoroketone based on 

the ability of some other fluorinated 

ketones to react in water to form active 

perfluorinated compounds. The 

commenter indicates concern that the 

reactivity of perfluorinated ketones in 

water, particularly in tissues in which 

there is a lung:blood air interface (e.g., 

nose, sinus, trachea along an inhalation 

portal of entry), may pose significant 

risks to individuals breathing the 

compound due to interference with 

proper oxygenation of the blood and/or 

lung edema. The commenter also stated 

that the two principal components of C7 

Fluoroketone were expected to produce 

derivatives of perfluorobutanoic acid in 

the environment, in particular 

hexafluoroacetone (HFA). The 

commenter provides two references 

documenting the extreme reactivity of 

HFA in water. 

In response to the above comment, the 

compound’s manufacturer submitted a 

late comment disagreeing with these 

statements and indicating that hydrate 

formation is significantly different for 

branched fluoroketones such as C7 

Fluoroketone compared to simple 

unbranched fluoroketones such as HFA. 

The manufacturer stated that C7 

Fluoroketone has low mammalian 

toxicity, low potential for aquatic 

toxicity and low environmental impact. 

Response: After evaluating the 

comment, reviewing the risk screen 

prepared under SNAP, and reviewing 

supplemental information provided by 

the manufacturer, EPA disagrees with 

the concerns raised by the first 

commenter. In the SNAP submission for 

C7 Fluoroketone in the streaming enduse and in more recent information 

submitted by the manufacturer, data 

indicate that C7 Fluoroketone has very 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 25001 

7Portal of entry effects are specifically 

investigated in acute and short-term inhalation 

exposure studies as the relevant tissues will receive 

the greatest exposure to the study compound. 

low solubility or reactivity in water and 

that it is highly volatile. The lack of 

water solubility for C7 FK indicates that 

it will not form gem-diol hydrates and 

will thus not have appreciable effects in 

any organisms that might be exposed to 

it. In addition, the lack of solubility and 

high volatility will prevent any 

significant formation of 

perfluorobutanoic acid derivatives (e.g., 

HFA) in surface waters. While the two 

references provided by the commenter 

document the extreme reactivity of HFA 

in water (a fact that is supported by 

other sources of chemical information), 

these references provide no information 

to support the claim that C7 

Fluoroketone should react similarly. 

Further, two inhalation studies 

performed for C7 Fluoroketone (a 5-day 

repeat toxicity study in which study 

animals were exposed to high 

concentrations of the compound and a 

28-day repeat dose study in which male 

and female rats were exposed to 

concentrations ≤10,000 ppm for 6 hours 

per day) showed no inhalation portal-ofentry effects.7 No other observations 

were reported that might indicate any 

other adverse effects on blood 

oxygenation or similar impairments. 

The concern with potential toxicity of 

C7 Fluoroketone is not supported by 

information available about its 

chemistry and current toxicity testing 

data on the compound. 

IV. Final Action 

We are issuing a final listing for C7 

Fluoroketone, finding it acceptable 

subject to narrowed use limits for use as 

a substitute for halon 1211 as a 

streaming agent in non-residential 

applications, as initially proposed. We 

have determined that the overall 

environmental and human health risk 

posed by C7 Fluoroketone is lower than 

or comparable to the risks posed by 

other available substitutes in the same 

end use. 

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 it 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 any new 

information collection burden. This 

final rule is an Agency determination. It 

contains no new requirements for 

reporting. However, the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

previously approved the information 

collection requirements contained in the 

existing regulations in subpart G of 40 

CFR part 82 under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB 

control numbers 2060–0226 (EPA ICR 

No. 1596.08). The OMB control numbers 

for EPA’s regulations are listed in 40 

CFR part 9. 

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 statutes 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 impact 

of today’s rule on small entities, small 

entities are defined as (1) a small 

business that produces or uses fire 

suppressants such as total flooding and/ 

or streaming agents as defined by the 

Small Business Administration’s 

regulations 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-forprofit 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. 

This final rule will not impose any 

requirements on small entities beyond 

current industry practices. Today’s 

action effectively supports the 

introduction of a new alternative to the 

market for fire protection extinguishing 

systems, thus providing additional 

options for users making the transition 

away from ozone-depleting halons. 

Use of halon 1301 total flooding 

systems and halon 1211 streaming 

agents have historically been in 

specialty fire protection applications 

including essential electronics, civil 

aviation, military mobile weapon 

systems, oil and gas and other process 

industries, and merchant shipping with 

smaller segments of use including 

libraries, museums, and laboratories. 

The majority of halon system and 

equipment owners continue to maintain 

and refurbish existing systems since 

halon supplies continue to be available 

in the U.S. Owners of new facilities 

make up the market for the new 

alternative agent systems and may also 

consider employing other available fire 

protection options including new, 

improved technology for early warning 

and smoke detection. Thus, EPA is 

providing more options to any entity, 

including small entities, by finding 

substitutes acceptable for use. The 

narrowed use limit imposed on the 

substitute in today’s rule is consistent 

with the application suggested by the 

submitter and with current industry 

practices. Therefore, we conclude that 

the rule does not impose any new cost 

on businesses. 

Although this final rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

EPA nonetheless has tried to reduce the 

impact of this rule on small entities. By 

finding a new substitute acceptable, 

today’s rule gives additional flexibility 

to small entities that are concerned with 

fire suppression. EPA also has worked 

closely together with the NFPA, which 

conducts regular outreach with small 

entities and involves small state, local, 

and tribal governments in developing 

and implementing relevant fire 

protection standards and codes. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no Federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act 

of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538 for 

State, local, or tribal governments or the 

private sector. This 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 or 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 will provide an additional 

option for fire protection subject to 

safety guidelines in industry standards. 

These standards are typically already 

required by state or local fire codes, so 

this action will not affect small 

governments. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
25002 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

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 regulation 

applies directly to facilities that use the 

substance and not to governmental 

entities. 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). It does not significantly or 

uniquely affect the communities of 

Indian tribal governments because this 

regulation applies directly to facilities 

that use this substance and not to tribal 

or governmental entities. Thus, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply 

to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to E.O. 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 

because it is not economically 

significant as defined in E.O. 12866, and 

because the Agency does not believe the 

environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children. This 

action’s health and risk assessments are 

discussed in section II. 

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, 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 involves technical 

standards. EPA defers to existing NFPA 

voluntary consensus standards and 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA) regulations that 

relate to the safe use of halon substitutes 

reviewed under SNAP. EPA has worked 

in consultation with OSHA to encourage 

development of technical standards to 

be adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. EPA refers users to the 

latest edition of NFPA 10 Standard for 

Portable Fire Extinguishers. A copy of 

this standard may be obtained by calling 

the NFPA’s telephone number for 

ordering publications at 1–800–344– 

3555. 

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 

increases the level of environmental 

protection for all affected populations 

without having any disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on any 

population, including any minority or 

low-income population. This final rule 

provides a fire suppression substitute 

with no ODP and low GWP. The 

avoided ODS and greenhouse gas 

emissions would assist in restoring the 

stratospheric ozone layer, avoiding 

adverse climate impacts, and result in 

human health and environmental 

benefits. 

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 

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 May 29, 2013. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Stratospheric ozone layer. 

Dated: April 18, 2013. 

Bob Perciasepe, 

Acting Administrator. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 82—PROTECTION OF 

STRATOSPHERIC OZONE 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 82 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671– 

7671q. 

Subpart G—Significant New 

Alternatives Policy Program 

■ 2. Subpart G of part 82 is amended by 

adding appendix T to read as follows: 

Appendix T to Subpart G of Part 82— 

Substitutes listed in the April 29, 2013 

Final Rule, effective May 29, 2013. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 82 / Monday, April 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 25003 

FIRE SUPPRESSION AND EXPLOSION PROTECTION SECTOR—ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO NARROWED USE LIMITS

End-use Substitute Decision Conditions Further Information 

Streaming ................... C7 Fluoro-ketone as a 

substitute for Halon 

1211.

Acceptable subject to 

narrowed use limits.

For use only in nonresidential applications.Use of this agent should be in accordance 

with the latest edition of NFPA Standard 

10 for Portable Fire Extinguishers. 

For operations that fill canisters to be used 

in streaming applications, EPA recommends the following: 

—Adequate ventilation should be in place; 

—All spills should be cleaned up immediately in accordance with good industrial 

hygiene practices; and 

—Training for safe handling procedures 

should be provided to all employees that 

would be likely to handle containers of the 

agent or extinguishing units filled with the 

agent. 

See additional comments 1, 2, 3, 4. 

Additional comments: 

1—Should conform to relevant OSHA requirements, including 29 CFR 1910, Subpart L, Sections 1910.160 and 1910.162. 

2—Per OSHA requirements, protective gear (SCBA) should be available in the event personnel should reenter the area. 

3—The agent should be recovered from the fire protection system in conjunction with testing or servicing, and recycled for later use or destroyed. 

4—EPA has no intention of duplicating or displacing OSHA coverage related to the use of personal protective equipment (e.g., respiratory protection), fire protection, hazard communication, worker training or any other occupational safety and health standard with respect to halon 

substitutes. 

[FR Doc. 2013–10046 Filed 4–26–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 648 

[Docket No. 121009528–2729–02] 

RIN 0648–XC634 

Fisheries of the Northeastern United 

States; Summer Flounder Fishery; 

Quota Transfer 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary rule; quota transfers. 

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the 

State of North Carolina is transferring a 

portion of its 2013 commercial summer 

flounder quota to the Commonwealth of 

Virginia and to the State of Rhode 

Island; and that the Commonwealth of 

Virginia is transferring a portion of its 

2013 commercial summer flounder 

quota to the Commonwealth of 

Massachusetts and to the State of New 

Jersey. NMFS is adjusting the quotas 

and announcing the revised commercial 

quota for each state involved. 

DATES: Effective April 24, 2013, through 

December 31, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carly Bari, Fishery Management 

Specialist, 978–281–9224. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulations governing the summer 

flounder fishery are in 50 CFR part 648, 

and require annual specification of a 

commercial quota that is apportioned 

among the coastal states from North 

Carolina through Maine. The process to 

set the annual commercial quota and the 

percent allocated to each state are 

described in § 648.100. 

The final rule implementing 

Amendment 5 to the Summer Flounder, 

Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery 

Management Plan, which was published 

on December 17, 1993 (58 FR 65936), 

provided a mechanism for summer 

flounder quota to be transferred from 

one state to another. Two or more states, 

under mutual agreement and with the 

concurrence of the Administrator, 

Northeast Region, NMFS (Regional 

Administrator), can transfer or combine 

summer flounder commercial quota 

under § 648.102(c)(2). The Regional 

Administrator is required to consider 

the criteria in § 648.102(c)(2)(i) to 

evaluate requests for quota transfers or 

combinations. 

North Carolina has agreed to transfer 

556,921 lb (252,615 kg) of its 2013 

commercial quota to Virginia. This 

transfer was prompted by summer 

flounder landings of a number of North 

Carolina vessels that were granted safe 

harbor in Virginia due to hazardous 

shoaling, from March 20, 2013, to April 

5, 2013, thereby requiring a quota 

transfer to account for an increase in 

Virginia’s landings that would have 

otherwise accrued against the North 

Carolina quota. North Carolina has also 

agreed to transfer 8,940 lb (4,055 kg) of 

its 2013 commercial quota to Rhode 

Island. This transfer was prompted by 

summer flounder landings of a North 

Carolina vessel that was granted safe 

harbor in Rhode Island on March 17, 

2013, thereby requiring a quota transfer 

to account for an increase in Rhode 

Island’s landings that would have 

otherwise accrued against the North 

Carolina quota. 

Virginia has agreed to transfer 10,990 

lb (4,985 kg) of its 2013 commercial 

quota to Massachusetts. This transfer 

was prompted by summer flounder 

landings of a Virginia vessel that was 

granted safe harbor in Massachusetts on 

March 20, 2013, thereby requiring a 

quota transfer to account for an increase 

in Massachusetts’ landings that would 

have otherwise accrued against Virginia 

quota. Virginia has also agreed to 

transfer 11,729 lb (5,320 kg) of its 2013 

commercial quota to New Jersey. This 

transfer was prompted by summer 

flounder landings of a Virginia vessel 

that was granted safe harbor in New 

Jersey on March 7, 2013, thereby 

requiring a quota transfer to account for 

an increase in New Jersey’s landings 

that would have otherwise accrued 

against the Virginia quota. The Regional 

Administrator has determined that the 

criteria set forth in § 648.102(c)(2)(i) 

have been met. The revised summer 

flounder quotas for calendar year 2013 

are: North Carolina, 422,360 lb (191,579 

kg); Virginia, 5,040,501 lb (2,286,333 

kg); New Jersey, 1,972,066 lb (894,514 

kg); Rhode Island, 1,839,824 lb (834,530 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES