Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 6481 

Time Topic 

DAY 2: AFTERNOON SESSION IMPROVING THE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE AND PROVIDING EXCELLENT CUSTOMER SERVICE 

1:30 to 2:00 pm ........................................ Pillar 3: Overview of Currently Available Improvements. 

2:00 to 2:15 pm ........................................ Introduction of Proposals 5 and 6. 

2:15 to 3:00 pm ........................................ All Audience Discussion of Proposals 5 and 6. 

3:00 to 3:15 pm ........................................ Break. 

3:15 to 5:15 pm ........................................ Brainstorming for Pillar 3 in General and Proposals 5 and 6 

Small group break-out session to be followed by sharing of ideas with all audience. 

5:15 to 5:30 pm ........................................ Concluding Remarks and Next Steps. 

Date: February 3, 2015. 

Michelle K. Lee, 

Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of 

the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office. 

[FR Doc. 2015–02398 Filed 2–4–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 51 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0795; FRL–9922– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AR65 

Air Quality: Revision to the Regulatory 

Definition of Volatile Organic 

Compounds—Requirements for t-Butyl 

Acetate 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to amend the 

EPA’s regulatory definition of volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs) under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). The regulatory 

definition of VOCs currently excludes tbutyl acetate (also known as tertiary 

butyl acetate or TBAC; CAS NO: 540– 

88–5) for purposes of VOC emissions 

limitations or VOC content 

requirements on the basis that it makes 

a negligible contribution to tropospheric 

ozone formation. However, the current 

definition includes TBAC as a VOC for 

purposes of all recordkeeping, 

emissions reporting, photochemical 

dispersion modeling and inventory 

requirements which apply to VOCs. The 

regulatory definition requires that TBAC 

be uniquely identified in emission 

reports. TBAC is used as a solvent in 

paints, inks and adhesives, in which it 

substitutes for compounds that are 

regulated as VOCs. This proposed action 

would remove recordkeeping, emissions 

reporting, photochemical dispersion 

modeling and inventory requirements 

related to the use of TBAC as a VOC. 

The EPA has concluded that these 

requirements are not resulting in useful 

information. Furthermore, there is no 

evidence that TBAC is being used at 

levels that would cause concern for 

ozone formation. As these requirements 

are unnecessary and can be burdensome 

for states and industry, we are 

proposing to revoke these requirements 

and exclude TBAC from the regulatory 

definition of VOCs for all purposes. 

Note that the EPA is not reconsidering 

its determination that TBAC is 

‘‘negligibly reactive’’ with respect to 

ground-level ozone formation. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 6, 2015. 

Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the 

EPA requesting a public hearing 

concerning the proposed regulation on 

or before March 9, 2015 we will hold a 

public hearing on March 23, 2015. If a 

public hearing is requested, it will be 

held at 10 a.m. on the EPA campus in 

Research Triangle Park, NC, or at an 

alternate site nearby. Please refer to 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 

additional information on the comment 

period and the public hearing. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2013–0795, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments 

• Email: a-and-r-Docket@

epamail.epa.gov. Include docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0795 in the 

subject line of the message. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. 

• Mail: Environmental Protection 

Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), 

Mail Code: 28221T, Attention Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0795, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. 

• Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket 

Center, Room 3334, EPA WJC West 

Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20004, Attention 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2013– 

0795. Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Docket’s normal hours of 

operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2013– 

0795. The EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov, 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means the EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov, 

your email address will be 

automatically captured and included as 

part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, the EPA recommends that 

you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any 

form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses. For additional 

information about the EPA’s public 

docket, visit the EPA Docket Center 

homepage at http://www.epa.gov/

epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., 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 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
6482 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2013– 

0795, EPA, WJC West Building, 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: Ms. 

Souad Benromdhane, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, Health 

and Environmental Impacts Division, 

Mail Code C539–07, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27711; telephone: (919) 541– 

4359; fax number: (919) 541–5315; 

email address: benromdhane.souad@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

B. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for the EPA? 

C. How can I find information about a 

possible public hearing? 

II. Background 

A. The EPA’s VOC Exemption Policy 

B. History of the VOC Exemption for TBAC 

Including the Unique Recordkeeping, 

Emissions Reporting, Photochemical 

Dispersion Modeling and Inventory 

Requirements 

C. Petition to Remove Recordkeeping and 

Reporting Requirements from the TBAC 

Exemption 

III. The EPA’s Assessment of the Petition 

IV. Proposed 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 (PRA) 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health and 

Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

to Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority and Low-Income Populations 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

Entities potentially affected by this 

proposed rule include, but are not 

necessarily limited to, state and local air 

pollution control agencies that prepare 

VOC emission inventories and ozone 

attainment demonstrations for state 

implementation plans (SIPs). These 

agencies would be relieved of the 

requirements to separately inventory 

emissions of TBAC. This proposed 

action may also affect manufacturers, 

distributors and users of TBAC and 

TBAC-containing products, which may 

include paints, inks and adhesives. This 

action would allow state air agencies to 

no longer require these entities to report 

emissions of TBAC. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for the EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI: Do not submit this 

information to the EPA through 

www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to the EPA, mark the outside 

of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Follow directions—The Agency 

may ask you to respond to specific 

questions or organize comments by 

referencing a Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) part or section 

number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree, 

suggest alternatives, and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

C. How can I find information about a 

possible public hearing? 

To request a public hearing or 

information pertaining to a public 

hearing, contact Ms. Eloise Shepherd, 

Health and Environmental Impacts 

Division, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards (C504–02), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; 

telephone number (919) 541–5507; fax 

number (919) 541–0804; email address: 

shepherd.eloise@epa.gov. 

II. Background 

A. The EPA’s VOC Exemption Policy 

Tropospheric ozone, commonly 

known as smog, is formed when VOCs 

and nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the 

atmosphere in the presence of sunlight. 

Because of the harmful health effects of 

ozone, the EPA and state governments 

limit the amount of VOCs that can be 

released into the atmosphere. VOCs are 

organic compounds of carbon, many of 

which form ozone through atmospheric 

photochemical reactions. Different 

VOCs have different levels of reactivity. 

That is, they do not react to form ozone 

at the same speed or do not form ozone 

to the same extent. Some VOCs react 

slowly or form less ozone; therefore, 

changes in their emissions have limited 

effects on local or regional ozone 

pollution episodes. It has been the 

EPA’s policy that organic compounds 

with a negligible level of reactivity 

should be excluded from the regulatory 

definition of VOCs so as to focus control 

efforts on compounds that do 

significantly increase ozone 

concentrations. The EPA also believes 

that exempting such compounds creates 

an incentive for industry to use 

negligibly reactive compounds in place 

of more highly reactive compounds that 

are regulated as VOCs. The EPA lists 

compounds that it has determined to be 

negligibly reactive in its regulations as 

being excluded from the regulatory 

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

The CAA requires the regulation of 

VOCs for various purposes. Section 

302(s) of the CAA specifies that the EPA 

has the authority to define the meaning 

of ‘‘VOCs,’’ and hence what compounds 

shall be treated as VOCs for regulatory 

purposes. The policy of excluding 

negligibly reactive compounds from the 

regulatory definition of VOCs was first 

laid out in the ‘‘Recommended Policy 

on Control of Volatile Organic 

Compounds’’ (42 FR 35314, July 8, 

1977) and was supplemented 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 6483 

1Carter, William P.L., Dongmin Luo, and Irina L. 

Malkina (1997). Investigation of the Atmospheric 

Ozone Formation Potential of T-Butyl Acetate, 

Report to ARCO Chemical Corporation, Riverside: 

College of Engineering Center for Environmental 

Research and Technology, University of California, 

97–AP–RT3E–001–FR, http://www.cert.ucr.edu/

∼carter/pubs/tbuacetr.pdf. 

2Between the EPA’s proposed and final rule 

exempting TBAC as a VOC, the state of California 

raised concerns to the EPA about the potential 

carcinogenicity of tertiary-butanol, or TBA, the 

principal metabolite of TBAC. At the time, the EPA 

decided that there was insufficient evidence of 

health risks to affect the exemption decision, but 

persuaded LyondellBasell to voluntarily perform 

additional toxicity testing, use the testing results in 

a health risk assessment, and have the testing and 

assessment results reviewed in a peer consultation. 

subsequently with the ‘‘Interim 

Guidance on Control of Volatile Organic 

Compounds in Ozone State 

Implementation Plans’’ (70 FR 54046, 

September 13, 2005). The EPA uses the 

reactivity of ethane as the threshold for 

determining whether a compound has 

negligible reactivity. Compounds that 

are less reactive than, or equally reactive 

to, ethane under certain assumed 

conditions may be deemed negligibly 

reactive and, therefore, suitable for 

exemption by EPA from the regulatory 

definition of VOCs. Compounds that are 

more reactive than ethane continue to 

be considered VOCs for regulatory 

purposes and, therefore, are subject to 

control requirements. The selection of 

ethane as the threshold compound was 

based on a series of smog chamber 

experiments that underlay the 1977 

policy. 

The EPA uses two different metrics to 

compare the reactivity of a specific 

compound to that of ethane: (1) The 

reaction rate constant (known as kOH) 

with the hydroxyl radical (OH) and (2) 

the maximum incremental reactivity 

(MIR) on ozone production per unit 

mass basis. Differences between these 

metrics and the rationale for their 

selection is discussed further in the 

2005 Interim Guidance (70 FR 54046, 

September 13, 2005). 

B. History of the VOC Exemption for 

TBAC Including the Unique 

Recordkeeping, Emissions Reporting, 

Photochemical Dispersion Modeling and 

Inventory Requirements 

On January 17, 1997, ARCO Chemical 

Company (now known as and from here 

forward referred to as LyondellBasell) 

submitted a petition to the EPA which 

requested that the EPA add TBAC to the 

list of compounds which are designated 

negligibly reactive in the regulatory 

definition of VOCs at 40 CFR 51.100(s). 

The materials submitted in support of 

this petition are contained in Docket 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–0084. 

LyondellBasell’s case for TBAC being 

less reactive than ethane was based 

primarily on the use of relative 

incremental reactivity factors set forth 

in a 1997 report by Carter, et al.1

Although the kOH values for TBAC are 

higher than for ethane, Carter’s results 

indicated that the MIR value for TBAC, 

expressed in units of grams of ozone per 

gram of TBAC, was between 0.43 and 

0.48 times the MIR for ethane, 

depending on the chemical mechanism 

used to calculate the MIR. In other 

words, TBAC formed less than half as 

much ozone as an equal weight of 

ethane under the conditions assumed in 

the calculation of the MIR scale. 

On September 30, 1999, the EPA 

proposed to revise the regulatory 

definition of VOCs to exclude TBAC, 

relying on the comparison of MIR 

factors expressed on a mass basis to 

conclude that TBAC is negligibly 

reactive (64 FR 52731, September 30, 

1999). However, in the final rule, the 

EPA concluded at that time that even 

‘‘negligibly reactive’’ compounds may 

contribute significantly to ozone 

formation if present in sufficient 

quantities and that emissions of these 

compounds need to be represented 

accurately in photochemical modeling 

analyses. In addition to these general 

concerns about the potential cumulative 

impacts of negligibly reactive 

compounds, the need to maintain 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for TBAC was further 

justified by the potential for widespread 

use of TBAC, the fact that its relative 

reactivity falls close to the borderline of 

what has been considered negligibly 

reactive, and continuing efforts to assess 

long-term health risks.2 Based on these 

conclusions, the EPA promulgated a 

final rule under which TBAC was 

excluded from the definition of VOCs 

for purposes of VOC emissions 

limitations or VOC content 

requirements, but continued to be 

defined as a VOC for purposes of all 

recordkeeping, emissions reporting, and 

inventory requirements which apply to 

VOCs (69 FR 69298, November 29, 

2004). 

In the final rule, the EPA argued that 

the recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements were not new 

requirements for TBAC as industry and 

states were already subject to such 

requirements to report TBAC as a VOC 

prior to the exemption. However, in 

practice, the rule created a new, distinct 

recordkeeping and reporting burden by 

requiring that TBAC be ‘‘uniquely 

identified’’ in emission reports, rather 

than aggregated with other compounds 

as VOC. The final rule explained that 

the EPA was in the process of reviewing 

its overall VOC exemption policy and 

that the potential for retaining 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for compounds exempted 

from the definition of VOCs in the 

future would be considered in that 

process. That process led to the 

development of the 2005 Interim 

Guidance (70 FR 54046, September 13, 

2005), which encouraged the 

development of speciated inventories 

for highly reactive compounds and 

identified the voluntary submission of 

emissions estimates for exempt 

compounds as an option for further 

consideration, but did not recommend 

mandatory reporting requirements 

associated with future exemptions. 

Thus, TBAC is the only compound that 

is excluded from the VOCs definition 

for purposes of emission controls but is 

still considered a VOC for purposes of 

recordkeeping and reporting. 

C. Petition to Remove Recordkeeping 

and Reporting Requirements from the 

TBAC Exemption 

The EPA received a petition from 

LyondellBasell in December 2009, 

which was re-affirmed in November 

2011, requesting the removal of 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements from the final rule to 

exempt TBAC from the regulatory VOCs 

definition. LyondellBasell contends that 

the emissions reporting requirements 

are redundant and present an 

unnecessary bureaucratic burden. 

III. The EPA’s Assessment of the 

Petition 

In most cases, when a negligibly 

reactive VOC is exempted from the 

definition of VOCs, emissions of that 

compound are no longer recorded, 

collected, or reported to states or the 

EPA as part of VOC emissions. When 

the EPA exempted TBAC from the VOCs 

definition for purposes of control 

requirements, the EPA created a new 

category of compounds and a new 

reporting requirement. The new 

definition required that emissions of 

TBAC be reported separately by states 

and, in turn, by industry. However, the 

EPA did not issue any guidance on how 

TBAC emissions should be tracked and 

reported, and implementation of this 

requirement by states has thus been 

inconsistent. A few states have modified 

their rules and emissions inventory 

processes to track TBAC emissions 

separately and provide that information 

to the EPA. Others appear to have 

included TBAC with other 

undifferentiated VOCs in their 

emissions inventories. Thus, the data 

that have been collected to date as a 

result of these requirements are 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
6484 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

3Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment 

(2009). Report of the Peer Consultation of the 

Potential Risk of Health Effects from Exposure to 

Tertiary-Butyl Acetate, January 7–8, 2009, Northern 

Kentucky University METS Center, Erlanger, 

Kentucky, Volumes I and II, http://www.tera.org/

Peer/TBAC/index.html. 

4Luo, Dongmin, et al. (2006) Environmental 

Impact Assessment of Tertiary-Butyl Acetate, Staff 

Report, Sacramento: California Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Resources Board, January 

2006, http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/reactivity/

tbacf.pdf http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/reactivity/ 

tbaca1.pdf http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/

reactivity/tbaca2.pdf. 

5See http://www.epa.gov/iris/publicmeeting/iris_

bimonthly-dec2013/mtg_docs.htm#etbe. 

incomplete and inconsistent. In 

addition, the EPA has not established 

protocols for receiving and analyzing 

TBAC emissions data collected under 

the requirements of the rule. 

Although the reactivity of TBAC and 

other negligibly reactive compounds is 

low, if emitted in large quantities, they 

could still contribute significantly to 

ozone formation in some locations. 

However, without speciated emissions 

estimates or extensive speciated 

hydrocarbon measurements, it is 

difficult to assess the impacts of any one 

exempted compound or even the 

cumulative impact of all of the 

exempted compounds. 

In the 2004 TBAC rule, the EPA stated 

the primary objective of the 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for TBAC was to address 

these cumulative impacts of ‘‘negligibly 

reactive’’ compounds and suggested that 

future exempt compounds may also be 

subject to such requirements. However, 

such requirements have not been 

included in any other proposed or final 

VOC exemptions since the TBAC 

decision. Having even high quality data 

on TBAC emissions alone is unlikely to 

be very useful in assessing the 

cumulative impacts of exempted 

compounds on ozone formation. Thus, 

the requirements are not achieving their 

primary objective to inform more 

accurate photochemical modeling in 

support of SIP submissions. 

With regard to the concerns related to 

efforts to characterize long-term health 

risks associated with TBAC and its 

metabolite tertiary-butyl alcohol (TBA), 

since the rule was finalized, 

LyondellBasell performed additional 

toxicity testing and a health risk 

assessment and submitted the peerconsultation results to the EPA in 2009.3

In addition, in 2006, the State of 

California published its own assessment 

of the potential health effects associated 

with TBA and TBAC.4 The EPA is 

currently in the process of assessing the 

evidence for health risks from TBA 

through its Integrated Risk Information 

System (IRIS) program.5 A draft of this 

assessment is expected to be circulated 

for public comment in 2015. The 

existing toxicity information being 

examined in the IRIS assessment does 

not rely on any of the data collected 

through the recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements, and thus those 

requirements do not appear relevant to 

any likely future determinations about 

the health risks associated with TBAC 

or TBA. 

IV. Proposed Action 

The EPA is proposing to revise certain 

aspects of the EPA’s regulatory 

definition of VOCs under the CAA. The 

regulatory definition of VOCs currently 

excludes TBAC on the basis that it 

makes a negligible contribution to 

tropospheric ozone formation and 

contains a specific requirement for 

recordkeeping and reporting of TBAC 

emissions. 

The recordkeeping, emissions 

reporting, photochemical dispersion 

modeling and inventory requirements 

for TBAC are not resulting in useful 

information. Furthermore, there is no 

evidence that TBAC is being used at 

levels that would cause concern for 

ozone formation. Additionally, the EPA 

believes these requirements, which are 

unique among all VOC-exempt 

compounds, are of limited utility 

because they do not provide sufficient 

information to judge the cumulative 

impacts of exempted compounds, and 

because they have not been consistently 

collected and reported. Because these 

requirements are not addressing any of 

the concerns as they were intended, the 

EPA proposes to revoke the 

requirements for TBAC and relieve 

industry and states of the associated 

information collection burden until 

such time that the EPA re-evaluates the 

necessity for reporting and 

recordkeeping of negligibly reactive 

compounds generally. 

This proposed action would remove 

recordkeeping, emissions reporting, 

photochemical dispersion modeling and 

inventory requirements related to the 

use of TBAC. This action would not 

affect the existing exclusion of TBAC 

from the regulatory definition of VOCs 

for purposes of emission limits and 

control requirements. 

We note that removal of the 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements does not indicate that the 

EPA has reached final conclusions 

about all aspects of the health effects 

posed by the use of TBAC or its 

metabolite TBA. The EPA is currently 

awaiting completion of the IRIS 

assessment on the potential risks 

involved with TBA and its toxicity. If it 

becomes clear that action is warranted 

due to the health risks of direct 

exposure to TBA or TBAC, the EPA will 

consider the range of authorities at its 

disposal to mitigate these risks 

appropriately. 

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 and was therefore not 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the PRA. It does not 

contain any new recordkeeping or 

reporting requirements. This action 

would remove recordkeeping, emissions 

reporting, photochemical dispersion 

modeling and inventory requirements 

related to use of TBAC. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This action will not 

impose any requirements on small 

entities. This action would remove 

recordkeeping, emissions reporting, 

photochemical dispersion modeling and 

inventory requirements related to use of 

TBAC. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandates as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. The action imposes no 

enforceable duty on any state, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the states, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. This proposed action 

would remove existing emission 

inventory reporting and other 

requirements that uniquely apply to 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 6485 

TBAC among all VOC-exempt 

compounds. Thus, Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to this rule. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 because it is not 

economically significant as defined in 

E.O. 12866, and because the EPA does 

not believe the environmental health or 

safety risks addressed by this action 

present a disproportionate risk to 

children. This action would remove 

recordkeeping, emissions reporting, 

photochemical dispersion modeling and 

inventory requirements related to use of 

TBAC. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ because it is not likely to 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

This action would remove existing 

emission inventory reporting and other 

requirements that uniquely apply to 

TBAC among all VOC-exempt 

compounds. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This action does not involve technical 

standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority and Low-Income 

Populations 

The EPA believes the human health or 

environmental risks addressed by this 

action 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. The EPA did not conduct 

an environmental analysis for this rule 

because the EPA does not believe that 

removing the unique reporting 

requirements will lead to substantial 

and predictable changes in the use of 

TBAC in and near particular 

communities. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: January 29, 2015. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Environmental Protection 

Agency proposes to amend part 51 of 

chapter I of title 40 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR 

PREPARATION ADOPTION AND 

SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION 

PLANS SUBPART F PROCEDURAL 

REQUIREMENTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 51, 

subpart F, continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7412, 

7413, 7414, 7470–7479, 7501–7508, 7601, 

and 7602. 

§ 51.100 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 51.100 is amended by: 

■ a. Adding the term ‘‘t-butyl acetate;’’ 

before the phrase ‘‘perfluorocarbon 

compounds which fall into these 

classes:’’ to paragraph (s)(1) 

introductory text; and 

■ b. Removing and reserving paragraph 

(s)(5). 

[FR Doc. 2015–02325 Filed 2–4–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2014–0220; FRL–9922–41– 

Region 4] 

Air Quality Implementation Plan; 

Florida; Attainment Plan for the 

Hillsborough Area for the 2008 Lead 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the state implementation 

plan (SIP), submitted by the State of 

Florida through the Florida Department 

of Environmental Protection (FL DEP), 

to EPA on June 29, 2012, as amended on 

June 27, 2013, for the purpose of 

providing for attainment of the 2008 

Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) in the Hillsborough 

2008 Lead nonattainment area (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Hillsborough Area’’ 

or ‘‘Area’’). The Hillsborough Area is 

comprised of a portion of Hillsborough 

County in Florida surrounding 

EnviroFocus Technologies, LLC 

(hereafter referred to as ‘‘EnviroFocus’’). 

The attainment plan includes the base 

year emissions inventory, an analysis of 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT) and reasonably available control 

measures (RACM), reasonable further 

progress (RFP) plan, modeling 

demonstration of lead attainment, and 

contingency measures for the 

Hillsborough Area. This action is being 

taken in accordance with the Clean Air 

Act (CAA or Act). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 9, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R04–OAR–2014–0220 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4-ARMS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2014–0220 

Air Regulatory Management Section 

(formerly the Regulatory Development 

Section), Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch (formerly the 

Air Planning Branch), Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. 

Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2014– 

0220. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS