Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 72027 

185See 37 CFR 201.1(d), 205.24. 

The second round of public comment 

seeks comments from members of the 

public who oppose an exemption. As 

with the first round, commenters during 

the second round should present the 

full legal and evidentiary basis for their 

opposition. Finally, the third round of 

public comment will be limited to 

supporters of particular proposals and 

those who neither support nor oppose a 

proposal, who seek to reply to points 

made in the earlier rounds of comments. 

Reply comments should not raise new 

issues, but should instead be limited to 

addressing arguments and evidence 

presented by others during prior rounds. 

B. Public Hearings 

After the three rounds of comments 

are completed, the Copyright Office will 

hold virtual public hearings in spring 

2024. The hearings will allow for 

participation by videoconference and 

will be streamed online. A separate 

notice providing details about the 

hearings and how to participate will be 

published in the Federal Register at a 

later date. The Office will identify 

specific items of inquiry to be addressed 

during the hearings. 

C. Post-Hearing Questions 

As with previous rulemakings, 

following the hearings, the Office may 

request additional information with 

respect to particular classes from 

rulemaking participants, to supply 

missing information for the record or 

otherwise resolve issues that it believes 

are material to particular exemptions. 

Such requests for information will take 

the form of a letter from the Office, will 

be addressed to individual parties 

involved in the proposal as to which 

more information is sought, and will 

provide a deadline for submission. 

Responding to such a request will be 

voluntary. After the receipt of all 

responses, the Office will post the 

questions and responses on the Office’s 

website as part of the public record. 

D. Ex Parte Communication 

In the last two proceedings, in 

response to stakeholder requests, the 

Office provided written guidelines 

under which interested nongovernmental participants could request 

informal communications with the 

Office during the post-hearing phase of 

the proceeding. In this proceeding, the 

Office will permit ex parte 

communications, but participating 

parties will be required to follow its 

regulations on ex parte 

communications, codified at 37 CFR 

201.1(d) and 205.24.185 In accordance 

with the regulations, and similar to the 

last two proceedings, no ex parte 

communications with the Office 

regarding this proceeding will be 

permitted prior to the post-hearing 

phase. 

Dated: October 12, 2023, 

Suzanne V. Wilson, 

General Counsel and Associate Register of 

Copyrights. 

[FR Doc. 2023–22949 Filed 10–18–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 82 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0707; FRL–9603–01– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AV65 

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: 

Updates Related to the Use of OzoneDepleting Substances as Process 

Agents 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

establish recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for uses of ozonedepleting substances as process agents 

and to update definitions to reflect 

current practice. Codified recordkeeping 

and reporting requirements would 

provide clear and consistent notice each 

year of information EPA collects, 

aggregates, and reports as a party to the 

Montreal Protocol on Substances that 

Deplete the Ozone Layer; effectively 

monitor these narrow uses in a more 

routine and consistent manner under 

the Clean Air Act; and enhance 

understanding of emissions of 

substances harmful to the ozone layer. 

DATES: Comments on this notice of 

proposed rulemaking must be received 

on or before December 4, 2023. Under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 

comments on the proposed information 

collection provisions are best assured of 

consideration if the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

receives a copy of your comments on or 

before November 20, 2023. Any party 

requesting a public hearing must notify 

the contact listed below under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 5 p.m. 

Eastern Time on October 24, 2023. If a 

public hearing is held, it will take place 

on or before November 3, 2023 and 

further information will be provided at 

https://www.epa.gov/ods-phaseout. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2022–0707, by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov (our 

preferred method). Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, 

Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 

28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: EPA 

Docket Center, WJC West Building, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket 

Center’s hours of operations are 8:30 

a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday–Friday (except 

Federal Holidays). 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the Docket ID No. for this 

rulemaking. Comments received may be 

posted without change to https://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. For 

further information on EPA Docket 

Center services and the current status, 

please visit us online at https://

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

You may find the following 

suggestions helpful for preparing your 

comments: direct your comments to 

specific sections of this proposed 

rulemaking and note where your 

comments may apply to future separate 

actions where possible; explain your 

views as clearly as possible; describe 

any assumptions that you used; provide 

any technical information or data you 

used that support your views; provide 

specific examples to illustrate your 

concerns; offer alternatives; and, make 

sure to submit your comments by the 

comment period deadline. Please 

provide any published studies or raw 

data supporting your position. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (e.g., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). 

EPA recognizes that given the nature 

of this proposed rulemaking, potentially 

affected entities may wish to submit 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other confidential information. CBI 

should not be submitted through 

https://www.regulations.gov. For 

submission of confidential comments or 

data, please work with the person listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. For additional 

submission methods, the full EPA 

public comment policy, information 

about CBI or multimedia submissions, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
72028 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

1For the purposes of this preamble, EPA uses 

‘‘ozone-depleting substance’’ and ‘‘controlled 

substance’’ interchangeably. Both terms are 

intended to have the same meaning as ‘‘controlled 

substance’’ as defined in 40 CFR 82.3. 

and general guidance on making 

effective comments, please visit https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Feather, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Stratospheric Protection 

Division, telephone number: 202–564– 

1230; or email address: feather.john@

epa.gov. You may also visit EPA’s 

website at https://www.epa.gov/ozonelayer-protection for further information. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ ‘‘the Agency,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is 

used, we mean EPA. Acronyms that are 

used in this rulemaking that may be 

helpful include: 

ASME—American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers 

CAA—Clean Air Act 

CBI—confidential business information 

CFC—chlorofluorocarbon 

EPA—U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

FOIA—Freedom of Information Act 

GHGRP—Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program 

HCFC—hydrochlorofluorocarbon 

ICR—Information Collection Request 

NAICS—North American Industry 

Classification System 

NARA—National Archives and Records 

Administration 

ODP—ozone depletion potential 

ODS—ozone-depleting substances 

PRA—Paperwork Reduction Act 

RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act 

SISNOSE—Significant Economic Impact on a 

Substantial Number of Small Entities 

TRI—Toxics Release Inventory 

UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

A. Does this proposed action apply to me? 

B. What action is the Agency proposing? 

C. What is EPA’s regulatory authority for 

this proposed action? 

II. Background 

A. EPA’s Phaseout of ODS 

B. ODS Used as Process Agents 

C. EPA’s Treatment of ODS Process Agents 

III. Proposed Recordkeeping and Reporting 

Requirements 

A. One-Time Report 

B. Annual Report and Significant Process 

Changes 

C. Recordkeeping 

IV. How does EPA propose to treat ODS 

process agent data collected under this 

action? 

A. Background on Determinations of 

Whether Information Is Entitled to 

Treatment as Confidential Information 

B. Data Elements Proposed To Be Reported 

to EPA Under This Action 

V. Proposed Definitions 

VI. Costs and Benefits 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Review 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory 

Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations and Executive Order 14096: 

Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment 

to Environmental Justice for All 

I. General Information 

A. Does this proposed action apply to 

me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this proposal if you use ozone-depleting 

substances 1 (ODS) as process agents. 

Potentially affected categories, North 

American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS) codes, and examples of 

potentially affected entities include 

Industrial Gas Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 325120), Other Basic Inorganic 

Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS code 

325180), and All Other Basic Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS code 

325199). 

This list is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this section could 

also be affected. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. What action is the Agency proposing? 

This action is narrow in scope and 

proposes to codify recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements for a limited 

number of chemical manufacturing 

facilities and to make minor revisions to 

definitions under 40 CFR part 82. EPA 

annually collects process agent 

consumption and emissions 

information. The Agency is proposing to 

codify reporting requirements to collect 

this information, including a 

methodology to calculate emissions. 

EPA also proposes to add a definition of 

‘‘process agent’’ and to revise 

definitions of ‘‘plant’’ and ‘‘facility’’ to 

better reflect current practice. 

Included in the docket is a 

description of the procedures EPA is 

seeking comment on to implement the 

proposed emission reporting 

requirements (see the memorandum 

titled Proposed Procedures for ODS 

Process Agent Emission Reporting 

(EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0707)). The 

remaining regulatory changes proposed 

in this action are included in this 

document. 

C. What is EPA’s authority for this 

proposed action? 

Several sections of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) provide authority for this 

proposed action. In particular, section 

603 provides authority to establish 

monitoring and reporting requirements 

for controlled substances. EPA also 

relies on its authority under section 114 

of the CAA, which authorizes the EPA 

Administrator to establish 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements in carrying out any 

provision of the CAA (with certain 

exceptions that do not apply here). 

Section 604 and 605 provide the 

authority to phase out the production 

and consumption of class I and II 

substances, to restrict the use of class I 

and II controlled substances, and to 

promulgate regulations associated with 

the production of class I and II 

substances. EPA’s regulations 

implementing the production and 

consumption controls for class I and II 

substances, including provisions 

implementing exceptions to those 

controls, can be found at 40 CFR part 

82, subpart A. Additional authority for 

electronic reporting, as required under 

provisions in 40 CFR 82.13(c) and 40 

CFR 82.24(a)(1) comes from the 

Government Paperwork Elimination Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3504), which provides ‘‘(1) 

for the option of the electronic 

maintenance, submission, or disclosure 

of information, when practicable as a 

substitute for paper; and (2) for the use 

and acceptance of electronic signatures, 

when practicable.’’ 

II. Background 

A. EPA’s Phaseout of ODS 

In 1987, the United States joined 23 

other countries and the European Union 

to sign the Montreal Protocol on 

Substances that Deplete the Ozone 

Layer (Montreal Protocol) and the 

United States ratified the Montreal 

Protocol on April 21, 1988. This 

international treaty protects and restores 

the ozone layer by phasing out the 

production and consumption of certain 

ODS including chlorofluorocarbons 

(CFCs), halons, methyl bromide, and 

hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). The 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 72029 

2EPA considers terms related to ‘‘transformation’’ 

and ‘‘feedstock uses’’ to be interchangeable for the 

purposes of this proposal. 3Approved destruction technologies are listed at 

40 CFR 82.3 ‘‘Destruction.’’ 

4United Nations Environment Programme, 

Medical and Chemicals Technical Options 

Committee, 2022 Assessment Report. https://

ozone.unep.org/system/files/documents/MCTOCAssessment-Report-2022.pdf. 

5https://ozone.unep.org/treaties/montrealprotocol/meetings/tenth-meeting-parties/decisions/ 

decision-x14-process-agents. 

Protocol, which has been joined by all 

countries of the United Nations, and its 

parent treaty, the Vienna Convention for 

the Protection of the Ozone Layer, are 

the first international treaties to ever 

achieve this distinction. The Clean Air 

Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA or the 

Act) added Title VI on Stratospheric 

Ozone Protection. Under the CAA and 

EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR part 82, 

controls are in place that restrict the 

production and consumption of ODS to 

implement the phaseout of these 

substances. Title VI establishes two 

classes of controlled ODS: class I and 

class II control substances. Class I 

controlled substances, i.e., CFCs, 

halons, carbon tetrachloride, methyl 

chloroform, methyl bromide, and 

hydrobromofluorocarbons, have a 

higher ozone depletion potential (ODP) 

and were phased out ahead of class II 

controlled substances. Class II 

controlled substances consist only of 

HCFCs that have lower ODPs than class 

I substances, and in many cases acted as 

transitional substitutes for many class I 

substances. While existing regulations 

allow for limited production and 

consumption of two HCFCs (HCFC–123 

and HCFC–124) until 2030, all others 

have been phased out in the United 

States. For both class I and class II ODS, 

there are limited exceptions, such as the 

exclusion from the definition of 

‘‘production’’ in 40 CFR 84.3 for 

controlled substances that are either 

manufactured and subsequently 

transformed, i.e., for feedstock uses,2 or 

destroyed by approved destruction 

technologies.3

B. ODS Used as Process Agents 

Process agents are generally 

understood to be used to create an 

environment for another process to 

occur, without themselves being 

transformed or destroyed during said 

process. The process agent is not 

consumed in the reaction, though trace 

quantities of the process agent may 

remain in the final product. For the 

purposes of this rulemaking, EPA uses 

the terms ‘‘controlled substance used as 

a process agent’’, ‘‘ODS process agent’’, 

and ‘‘process agent’’ interchangeably. 

The Agency also uses the term 

‘‘consumed’’ in this context to mean 

‘‘used up’’ or transformed. 

Process agents may be reused or 

recycled or may subsequently be used in 

transformation reactions or destroyed. 

While process agents are generally 

reused or recycled, additional process 

agents may need to be introduced to 

replenish losses due to transformation, 

destruction, emission, or being present 

in trace quantities in the chemical 

substance being manufactured. 

Emissions can be reduced through 

limiting process agent losses (e.g., 

mitigate fugitive emissions or capture 

process agents for further use or 

destruction) and by directly abating 

process agent emissions. Technology 

resulting in zero-emission uses of 

process agents have increasingly been 

adopted over time as well.4

C. EPA’s Treatment of ODS Process 

Agents 

On August 4, 1998, EPA proposed 

certification requirements for class I 

controlled substances to be used as 

process agents (63 FR 41652). The 

Agency also proposed to interpret the 

definition of controlled substances in 40 

CFR 82.3, to mean that ‘‘production of 

controlled substances for use as a 

process agent is not included in the 

definition of controlled substances in 

the regulation.’’ While EPA decided not 

to finalize the proposed certification 

requirements or interpretation that ODS 

used as process agents are not 

controlled substances, on July 18, 2003, 

EPA published a rule (68 FR 42883) 

which discussed that the Agency had 

determined a use of a class I controlled 

substance as a process agent to be 

exempt from restrictions on controlled 

substances. EPA recognizes that there 

are some legacy uses of ODS as process 

agents, in particular where substitutes 

or alternative processes may not be 

viable yet, and the Agency has 

continued to annually request, collect, 

and review information on these process 

agent uses. This is in line with decisions 

under the Montreal Protocol to allow 

the continued use of ODS as process 

agents under specified situations. The 

parties to the Montreal Protocol agreed 

in decision X/14 to except quantities of 

ODS produced or imported for use as 

process agents from the general 

requirements to phase out production 

and consumption of controlled ODS.5

EPA prepares information derived from 

submissions to the Agency on process 

agent uses in the United States and 

submits this information to the Montreal 

Protocol’s Ozone Secretariat on behalf of 

the United States, consistent with 

decisions taken by the parties to the 

Montreal Protocol. 

III. Proposed Recordkeeping and 

Reporting Requirements 

EPA proposes in this section to 

require one-time, annual, and 

situational reporting from entities that 

use ODS as process agents, add 

associated recordkeeping requirements, 

and determine how to treat the collected 

data. These requirements would ensure 

an initial understanding of the process 

agent uses, support efforts to monitor 

changes that occur over time, enable the 

Agency to anticipate future changes, 

and allow EPA to confirm relevant 

records as appropriate. Codified 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements would provide clear and 

consistent notice each year of the 

information EPA would collect in order 

to report information consistent with 

decisions taken by the parties to the 

Montreal Protocol. These requirements 

would also provide additional clarity to 

industry concerning how to treat and 

report ODS process agent uses. The 

Agency is proposing these reporting 

requirements for both class I and class 

II controlled substances that may be 

used as process agents. Consistent with 

existing requirements in 40 CFR 

82.13(c) for class I controlled substances 

and 40 CFR 82.24(a)(1) for class II 

controlled substances for reports 

available for submission, these reports 

would be submitted electronically 

through the Central Data Exchange or, as 

proposed in this action, another format 

specified by EPA. 

It is EPA’s understanding that uses in 

the United States of ODS as process 

agents are primarily for purposes of 

maintaining legacy production 

processes at existing facilities which 

cannot feasibly transition to processes 

that do not use ODS as process agents. 

The United States is one of a few 

countries that continue to report use of 

controlled substances as process agents. 

The additional recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements proposed in this 

action also would support EPA’s efforts 

to assess use of controlled substances as 

process agents, prepare and report 

associated information supporting 

continued need for excepted uses where 

appropriate, and ensure there is clarity 

and consistency in reporting on 

emissions of ODS used as process 

agents. 

Requiring this reporting will allow 

EPA to effectively monitor these narrow 

process agent uses in a more routine and 

consistent manner under CAA section 

603, and ensure the Agency is 

accurately documenting production and 

consumption of class I and II controlled 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
72030 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

6Uses of controlled substances as process agents 

in the United States include elimination of nitrogen 

trichloride in chlor-alkali production, recovery of 

chlorine by tail gas absorption from chlor-alkali 

production, production of synthetic fiber sheet, 

bromination of a styrenic polymer, and production 

of high modulus polyethylene fiber, among others 

globally. 

substances consistent with the limits 

established under CAA sections 604 and 

605. 

A. One-Time Report 

EPA proposes that any facility that 

uses a controlled substance as a process 

agent must submit a one-time report 

within 120 days of publication of the 

final rule, or within 120 days of the date 

that a facility first uses a controlled 

substance as a process agent, whichever 

is later. These one-time reports would 

be required regardless of whether an 

entity has provided this information to 

EPA previously. We propose that this 

one-time report include information 

concerning the process agent being 

used; a mass balance describing where, 

how, and how much of the controlled 

substance is used and emitted; if 

relevant, where, how, and how much of 

the controlled substance is transformed, 

destroyed, or otherwise captured; data 

on how much controlled substance was 

used in the last year and what it was 

used to produce (e.g., another chemical 

or product); air emissions from stack 

point sources, fugitive sources, and total 

air emissions; actions taken or under 

evaluation to phase out use of ODS as 

a process agent (e.g., by transitioning to 

a non-ozone depleting alternative); 

actions taken or under evaluation to 

minimize process agent use or 

emissions; and the location of the 

facility using the process agent. Such 

information would establish a baseline 

set of information from which EPA can 

monitor potential changes over time. 

For total, fugitive, and stack point air 

emissions, EPA is proposing to require 

that entities using controlled substances 

as process agents report emissions using 

a methodology similar to the emissions 

reporting requirements found at 40 CFR 

part 98, subpart L (40 CFR 98.120 

through 98.128). EPA is proposing that 

acceptable testing methods for 

measuring process vent emissions of 

controlled substances would include 

EPA Method 18 in appendix A–1 to 40 

CFR part 60, EPA Method 320 in 

appendix A to 40 CFR part 63, EPA 

430–R–10–003, ASTM D6348–03 

(Reapproved 2020), or other analytical 

methods validated using EPA Method 

301 at 40 CFR part 63, appendix A. The 

regulations at 40 CFR part 98, subpart L, 

include ‘‘some other scientifically 

sound validation protocol’’ as an 

acceptable alternative method to 

measure emissions, but EPA is not 

proposing to include that in the 

regulations created through this 

rulemaking due to potential lack of 

consistency in reporting emissions in 

the limited set of remaining process 

agent applications. However, EPA 

Method 301 provides a process to 

validate and approve other analytical 

methods as appropriate. The Agency 

expects that the approaches to 

determining fluorinated GHG emissions 

from process vents (continuous or 

batch) and equipment leaks for 

fluorinated gas production would also 

be applicable to the process agent 

applications and their associated 

industry sectors.6 EPA is proposing that 

the units of measure for determining 

emissions and the method to calculate 

emissions would be in kilograms of 

controlled substance emitted. EPA has 

included a memo describing these 

proposed emission reporting procedures 

in the docket for this rulemaking. 

EPA requests comment on whether 

there are distinctions between 

controlled substance emissions, process 

agent applications, or industry sectors 

that would require specific adjustments 

from the proposed generally applicable 

requirements, and if so, what those 

adjustments may be. The Agency also 

requests comment on whether there are 

potential gaps in the proposed 

approaches to determining emissions 

from process agent applications and 

whether alternative approaches, such as 

a mass balance method as described in 

appendix A to 40 CFR part 98, subpart 

L, may be suitable in those particular 

cases. EPA also requests comment on 

the advantages and disadvantages of 

specifying one testing method instead of 

several options (e.g., EPA Method 18 as 

the analytical method and EPA Method 

21 monitoring procedures for leak 

detection). EPA seeks comment on 

whether finalizing the use of one 

method, instead of multiple methods, 

would improve the consistency of 

emissions data reported across the 

facilities using ODS as process agents. 

EPA considered whether to require 

that entities report emissions 

information consistent with the 

approach used by the Toxics Release 

Inventory (TRI) at 40 CFR part 372, but 

is proposing to use an approach similar 

to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting 

Program (GHGRP)’s 40 CFR part 98, 

subpart L, instead. Under 40 CFR 

372.85(b)(14)(i), these requirements 

include an estimate of total releases of: 

(1) Fugitive or non-point air emissions, 

(2) stack or point air emissions, (3) 

discharges to receiving streams or water 

bodies including an indication of the 

percent of releases due to stormwater, 

(4) underground injection on site, and 

(5) releases to land on site. Based on a 

review of available data, we expect all 

facilities that would be subject to this 

rule already report this information 

annually or that this information would 

be reasonably available. TRI emissions 

data are aggregated by chemical across 

an entire facility; therefore, these data 

do not by themselves allow EPA to 

determine particular product or 

production-line contributions. For 

example, currently available TRI data 

would not differentiate between process 

agent emissions from use in a process 

agent application and emissions from 

production or transformation of that 

same ODS or other unrelated processes 

at the same facility. The list of 

chemicals reported under TRI also does 

not include all ODS. Notably, at least 

one of the ODS process agents used in 

the United States, bromochloromethane, 

is not reported under TRI. A 

requirement that entities specifically 

report process agent emissions 

consistent with the approach used by 

TRI would be intended to ensure that 

EPA can fully account for the emissions 

of all process agents attributable to all 

process agent applications from each 

subject facility and distinguish those 

emissions from ODS emissions 

associated with other uses. 

However, the Agency has concerns 

with applying the general TRI reporting 

requirements to this limited set of ODS 

process agent pollutants, industry 

sectors, and types of operations for the 

purposes of this action. The TRI 

requirements are designed to apply to a 

wide variety of pollutants and sectors 

and require facilities to report emissions 

using their best available information, 

although the source of such information 

or any calculations are not prescribed. 

TRI requires facilities to report and 

record information concerning 

emissions and the basis of estimate 

used. For example, to estimate 

emissions an entity may use engineering 

judgment or emissions factors, 

depending on that facility’s available 

information. The facility reports the 

quantity of emissions and the basis of 

the estimate used (e.g., published 

emissions factor, mass balance 

calculation) and maintains 

documentation of supporting 

calculations. However, the facility does 

not report which emissions factor was 

used. The potential for varying emission 

estimation methodologies between 

reporting entities complicates the 

Agency’s ability to assess and ensure 

data quality for these particular process 

agent applications. While some may 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 72031 

argue using the TRI approach is less 

burdensome given nearly all ODS 

process agent users are reporting under 

TRI already, EPA is concerned these 

requirements would not provide the 

consistency and validation necessary for 

the Agency’s needs in preparing and 

reporting information to the Ozone 

Secretariat consistent with the decisions 

the parties have taken. It also makes it 

difficult to compare emission rates 

across facilities. 

In contrast, 40 CFR part 98, subpart L, 

prescribes specific methodologies for 

estimating vent-specific emissions and 

includes associated recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements that would 

support EPA’s efforts to validate the 

reported information. For example, each 

process vent with significant emissions 

must use the process-vent-specific 

emission factor method, which requires 

emission tests with process activity 

parameters measured for either each 

operating scenario or the operating 

scenario with the largest overall 

emissions. All emissions test data and 

procedures used in developing emission 

factors must be documented. Process 

vents with less emissions may use the 

process-vent-specific emission 

calculation factor method, which 

prescribes certain procedures to 

calculate emissions for each operating 

scenario but does not require testing. All 

data, assumptions, and procedures used 

in the calculations or engineering 

assessment must be documented. In 

both cases the reported information 

follows specified methodologies and 

EPA may assess detailed recorded 

information if there are questions or 

concerns about the reported data. For 

these reasons, EPA sees the proposed 

approach in this rule as better suited for 

monitoring process agent emissions. 

EPA requests comment on this 

assessment. In particular, EPA requests 

comment on why it would be 

appropriate to apply the TRI reporting 

requirements to the narrow set of 

process agent pollutants, industry 

sectors, and types of operations and on 

how EPA may ensure a complete and 

consistent set of reports and record. The 

Agency also requests comment on 

whether there are advantages or 

disadvantages of such requirements as 

compared to a methodology similar to 

those found at 40 CFR part 98, subpart 

L, and what those may be. EPA also 

requests comment on potential 

challenges in implementing these 

emissions estimates for emissions of 

ODS from process agent applications. 

B. Annual Report and Significant 

Process Changes 

As part of a continuing effort to 

monitor potential changes over time, 

EPA proposes to require that each entity 

with a facility that uses a controlled 

substance as a process agent must 

submit for each applicable facility an 

annual report by February 14 of each 

year concerning process agent uses for 

the previous calendar year (i.e., January 

1 through December 31). This date 

coincides with the existing fourth 

quarter and annual deadlines for 

existing ODS reporting requirements, 

including all quarterly importer and 

producer reports and the annual reports 

under 40 CFR 82.13(m) for second party 

transformation and destruction of class 

I controlled substances. If there are 

facilities that employ more than one 

process agent use, the facility would 

need to report data individually for each 

process that uses an ODS process agent. 

We propose that these annual reports 

include information concerning process 

agent sourcing, amounts reused, 

recycled, transformed. and destroyed, 

and inventory over the previous 

calendar year; air emissions from stack 

point sources, fugitive sources, and total 

air emissions; and a description of 

emission reduction actions currently in 

use, planned, or currently under 

evaluation since the last one-time or 

annual report. This information will 

help enable the Agency to develop an 

annual report regarding uses of process 

agents in the United States and to 

effectively monitor production and 

consumption of ODS used for process 

agents consistent with domestic 

requirements. 

EPA also proposes to require that each 

facility with a significant process 

change, including an increase in the 

quantity of the final output 

manufactured using an ODS process 

agent, submit a report specifying 

changes at least 180 days prior to 

implementing the change. We propose 

that this prior notification requirement 

apply to any process changes 

anticipated to result in increases by the 

next annual report of greater than 20 

percent of the amount of controlled 

substance initially introduced for or 

emitted during use as a process agent by 

a facility, as compared to the 

corresponding data in the previous 

calendar year. EPA understands that 

facility operations change over time, 

and the Agency can monitor such 

changes through the annual reporting 

mechanism. However, there is potential 

for significant changes in facility 

operations over a short period which 

can have significant impacts on the 

environment, conformance with 

domestic regulatory requirements, and 

our commitment to international 

agreements. Annual reports represent a 

delayed view into past actions and may 

not provide sufficient lead time for an 

appropriate response. This notification 

requirement would provide EPA the 

opportunity to assess potential 

implications in advance of a change at 

the facility. 

C. Recordkeeping 

As described below in this section, 

entities are obligated under existing 

requirements to record information in 

accordance with 40 CFR 82.13 and 

82.24, including information concerning 

ODS used as process agents. In this 

action EPA proposes to add 

recordkeeping requirements specifically 

for uses of ODS as process agents. Under 

40 CFR 82.13(d), entities must retain the 

records and copies of reports required 

for at least three years. The Agency 

currently requires in 40 CFR 82.13 and 

82.24 that entities, including producers 

and importers, record information that 

applies to controlled substances in 

general, including those used as process 

agents, but the current regulations do 

not require that controlled substances 

intended for process agent use be 

differentiated from the wider uses. 

Similar to how EPA requires 

differentiating recordkeeping 

requirements in 40 CFR 82.13 and 82.24 

by whether the controlled substances 

were intended for use in processes 

resulting in their transformation or 

destruction, EPA proposes to also 

require that entities using process agents 

record information that documents what 

would be reported to the Agency, which 

includes information concerning 

sourcing, production, and reuse, 

recycling, transformation, and 

destruction for ODS intended to be used 

for process agent applications. 

Specifically, the Agency is proposing 

to add requirements that companies that 

use process agents maintain: dated 

records of the quantity of each process 

agent produced at each facility; records 

identifying the producer or importer of 

process agents received; copies of 

invoices or receipts documenting the 

sale or other transfer of ownership of 

process agents; dated records 

identifying the quantity of each product 

manufactured within each facility by 

using process agents; dated records of 

the quantity of process agent spills or 

releases greater than or equal to 100 

pounds; dated records of information 

used to calculate emissions; dated 

records of the quantity of process agents 

which are subsequently transformed or 

destroyed; and a copy of the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
72032 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

7CAA section 114(c); 42 U.S.C. 7414(c). 

transformation or destruction 

verification in the case that a process 

agent is subsequently sold or distributed 

to another entity for transformation or 

destruction. This additional information 

would provide further distinctions of 

information already required to be 

recorded. 

IV. How does EPA propose to treat ODS 

process agent data collected under this 

action? 

EPA has reviewed the data elements 

that are proposed to be reported under 

this rule. This proposal identifies 

certain information categories that must 

be submitted to the Agency that will be 

subject to disclosure to the public 

without further notice because the 

information has been determined to be 

either ‘‘emission data’’ under 40 CFR 

2.301(a), or EPA has found that the 

information does not meet the standard 

for confidential treatment under 

Exemption 4 of the Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA). The Agency is 

also proposing to identify certain other 

categories of information that may be 

entitled to confidential treatment. For 

information not addressed in this 

rulemaking, the Agency will apply the 

40 CFR part 2 process for establishing 

case-by-case confidentiality 

determinations. The emission data and 

confidentiality determinations in this 

proposed action are intended to 

encourage consistency, compliance with 

EPA’s general ODS phaseout, and to 

meet the United States’ reporting 

commitments under the Montreal 

Protocol. Establishing these 

determinations through this rulemaking 

will provide predictability for both 

information requesters and submitters. 

A. Background on Determinations of 

Whether Information Is Entitled to 

Treatment as Confidential Information 

1. Confidential Treatment of Reported 

Information 

Regulated entities that must submit 

information to EPA frequently claim 

that some or all of that information is 

entitled to confidential treatment and 

therefore exempt from disclosure under 

Exemption 4 of the FOIA. Exemption 4 

exempts from disclosure ‘‘trade secrets 

and commercial or financial information 

obtained from a person [that is] 

privileged or confidential.’’ In order for 

information to meet the requirements of 

Exemption 4, EPA must find that the 

information is either: (1) A trade secret, 

or (2) commercial or financial 

information that is: (a) obtained from a 

person, and (b) privileged or 

confidential. 

Generally, when EPA has information 

that the Agency intends to disclose 

publicly that is covered by a claim of 

confidentiality under FOIA Exemption 

4, EPA has a process to make case-bycase or class determinations under 40 

CFR part 2 to evaluate whether such 

information qualifies for confidential 

treatment under the exemption. In this 

action, EPA is proposing to make 

categorical emission data and 

confidentiality determinations in 

advance through this notice and 

comment rulemaking for some 

information that would be submitted to 

EPA under the proposed requirements. 

If EPA finalizes these determinations, 

that information would be subject to 

disclosure to the public without further 

notice. 

The U.S. Supreme Court decision in 

Food Marketing Institute v. Argus 

Leader Media, 139 S. Ct. 2356 (2019) 

(Argus Leader) addresses the meaning of 

‘‘confidential’’ within the context of 

FOIA Exemption 4. The Court held that 

‘‘[a]t least where commercial or 

financial information is both 

customarily and actually treated as 

private by its owner and provided to the 

government under an assurance of 

privacy, the information is ‘confidential’ 

within the meaning of Exemption 4.’’ 

The Court identified two conditions 

‘‘that might be required for information 

communicated to another to be 

considered confidential.’’ Under the 

first condition, ‘‘information 

communicated to another remains 

confidential whenever it is customarily 

kept private, or at least closely held, by 

the person imparting it.’’ The second 

condition provides that ‘‘information 

might be considered confidential only if 

the party receiving it provides some 

assurance that it will remain secret.’’ 

The Court found the first condition 

necessary for information to be 

considered confidential within the 

meaning of Exemption 4, but did not 

address whether the second condition 

must also be met. 

Following the issuance of the Court’s 

opinion in Argus Leader, the U.S. 

Department of Justice issued guidance 

concerning the confidentiality prong of 

Exemption 4, articulating ‘‘the newly 

defined contours of Exemption 4’’ postArgus Leader. Where the Government 

provides an express or implied 

indication to the submitter prior to or at 

the time the information is submitted to 

the Government that the Government 

would publicly disclose the 

information, then the submitter 

generally cannot reasonably expect 

confidentiality of the information upon 

submission, and the information is not 

entitled to confidential treatment under 

Exemption 4. In this rule, EPA is 

proposing to clearly assert that certain 

information is not confidential and 

would be disclosed publicly, if it is 

determined to not be entitled to 

confidential treatment in the final 

version of this rule. This assertion aligns 

with the Supreme Court’s decision and 

the subsequent guidance that the 

government’s assurances that a 

submission will be treated as not 

confidential should dictate the 

expectations of submitters. If EPA were 

to finalize these determinations, 

submitters are on notice before they 

submit any information that EPA has 

determined by the identified data 

elements discussed below, as well as in 

the addendum provided in the docket 

for this action, will not be entitled to 

confidential treatment upon submission 

and may be released by the Agency 

without further notice. As a result, 

submitters will not have a reasonable 

expectation that the information will be 

treated as confidential; rather, they 

should have the expectation that the 

information will be disclosed. 

As described further below, EPA is 

proposing to make categorical 

confidentiality determinations as some 

of the proposed data elements that 

would be submitted to EPA contain 

information that is not entitled to 

confidential treatment because either: it 

is not the type of information that 

submitters customarily keep private or 

closely held; it is already publicly 

available; or it is discernible 

information that is self-evident or 

readily observable through reverse 

engineering by a third party. 

2. Emissions Data Under Section 114 of 

the CAA 

The CAA states that ‘‘[a]ny records, 

reports or information obtained under 

[section 114] shall be available to the 

public.’’ 7 Thus, the CAA begins with a 

presumption that the information 

submitted to EPA will be available to be 

disclosed to the public. It then provides 

a narrow exception to that presumption 

for information that ‘‘would divulge 

methods or processes entitled to 

protection as trade secrets.’’ The CAA 

then narrows this exception further by 

excluding ‘‘emission data’’ from the 

category of information eligible for 

confidential treatment. While the CAA 

does not define ‘‘emission data,’’ EPA 

has done so by regulation at 40 CFR 

2.301(a)(2)(i). EPA releases, on occasion, 

some of the information submitted 

under CAA section 114 to parties 

outside of the Agency of its own 

volition, through responses to requests 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 72033 

8 5 U.S.C. 552. 

submitted under the FOIA,8 or through 

civil litigation. As noted in the prior 

section, generally, when we have 

information that we intend to disclose 

publicly that is covered by a claim of 

confidentiality under FOIA Exemption 

4, EPA has a process to make case-bycase or class determinations under 40 

CFR part 2. This process includes 

evaluation whether such information is 

or is not emission data, and whether it 

otherwise qualifies for confidential 

treatment under FOIA Exemption 4. 

The regulations at 40 CFR 2.301 

define emission data to include the 

following: 

(A) Information necessary to 

determine the identity, amount, 

frequency, concentration, or other 

characteristics (to the extent related to 

air quality) of any emission which has 

been emitted by the source (or of any 

pollutant resulting from any emission 

by the source), or any combination of 

the foregoing; 

(B) Information necessary to 

determine the identity, amount, 

frequency, concentration, or other 

characteristics (to the extent related to 

air quality) of the emissions which, 

under an applicable standard or 

limitation, the source was authorized to 

emit (including, to the extent necessary 

for such purposes, a description of the 

manner or rate of operation of the 

source); and 

(C) A general description of the 

location and/or nature of the source to 

the extent necessary to identify the 

source and to distinguish it from other 

sources (including, to the extent 

necessary for such purposes, a 

description of the device, installation, or 

operation constituting the source). 

In this proposal, we are applying the 

regulatory definition of ‘‘emission data’’ 

in 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i) to propose that 

certain categories of source certification 

and compliance information are not 

entitled to confidential treatment 

because they qualify as emissions data. 

If EPA finalizes these determinations, 

that information would be subject to 

disclosure to the public without further 

notice. As relevant to this proposal, a 

‘‘source’’ for purposes of the definition 

in 40 CFR 2.301 is generally the 

equipment covered by a proposed 

regulatory requirement, such as process 

equipment in a plant or facility and any 

related emission units. EPA’s broad 

general definitions of emissions data 

also exclude certain information related 

to products still in the research and 

development phase or products not yet 

on the market except for limited 

purposes. Thus, for example, 40 CFR 

2.301(a)(2)(ii) excludes information 

related to ‘‘any product, method, device, 

or installation (or any component 

thereof) designed and intended to be 

marketed or used commercially but not 

yet so marketed or used.’’ This specific 

exclusion from the definition of 

emissions data is limited in time. EPA 

does not believe data related to this 

exclusion are implicated in this 

proposed rulemaking because these data 

generally relate to equipment that EPA 

understands are primarily for purposes 

of maintaining legacy production 

processes at existing facilities. 

B. Data Elements Proposed To Be 

Reported to EPA Under This Action 

Consistent with EPA’s commitment to 

transparency in program 

implementation, EPA has reviewed the 

data reporting elements proposed in this 

action to see if information under the 

umbrella of those data elements could 

be considered entitled to confidential 

treatment. EPA is proposing to treat 

certain data elements as not entitled to 

confidential treatment. Later in this 

section, EPA outlines individual data 

elements and proposes whether they 

will be handled as confidential, not 

confidential or undetermined, as well as 

whether they are emission data and are 

therefore releasable. There may be 

additional reasons not to release 

individual data elements determined to 

not be entitled to confidential treatment, 

for example if it is personally 

identifiable information (PII). EPA 

proposes to make confidentiality 

determinations and treat data 

concerning process agent uses similarly 

to the process under the HFC 

Phasedown Program as codified in 40 

CFR 84.31(k). Some data may be 

released in different contexts, including 

to the general public to encourage 

transparency, to ensure compliance 

with EPA’s general ODS phaseout, and 

to meet the United States’ reporting 

commitments under the Montreal 

Protocol. Emission data, including data 

used as inputs to emissions equations, 

would generally be releasable under 

CAA section 114(c), which provides that 

emission data shall be available to the 

public. ‘‘Inputs to emission equations’’ 

refers to data necessary to determine the 

identity, amount, frequency, or 

concentration of the emission emitted 

by the reporting facilities. Inputs to 

emission equations include equipment 

parameters, measured data, supporting 

calculations, and other rationale used to 

calculate reported emission quantities. 

Some aggregated data would also be 

released to the Ozone Secretariat in line 

with past practices and existing 

commitments, which could include a 

list of the specific ODS used as process 

agents and the applications those 

specific ODS are used in, the levels of 

emissions from those uses in metric tons 

and ODP-weighted metric tons, and the 

specific containment technologies used 

to minimize emissions of controlled 

substances. EPA also intends to release 

the aggregate consumption of ODS used 

in process agents in metric tons and 

ODP-weighted metric tons. Finally, EPA 

would include production, import, 

export, and destruction of ODS used as 

process agents by chemical in data 

reported to the Montreal Protocol’s 

Ozone Secretariat as part of the United 

States’ annual report submitted under 

Article 7 of the treaty. At this time, this 

aggregated data would comprise data 

from three or more entities. Release of 

this information documents U.S. 

conformance with commitments under 

an international agreement, so even if 

the number of entities with process 

agent uses decreases in future, EPA is 

still proposing to determine that process 

agent data reported by the United States 

in accordance with commitments under 

the Montreal Protocol would not be 

confidential. 

Some of the data elements EPA is 

proposing to collect may be similar to or 

the same as those required to be 

reported under the existing 

requirements associated with the 

GHGRP, particularly for entities subject 

to 40 CFR part 98, subpart L. The 

regulatory reporting requirements are 

separate and the Agency is not 

proposing any changes to 40 CFR part 

98 in this rulemaking. To the extent 

relevant, data elements submitted in 

accordance with requirements 

established through this rulemaking and 

determined to not be confidential under 

40 CFR part 82, subpart A, would not 

be provided confidential treatment 

regardless of whether they have 

previously been determined to be 

confidential under the GHGRP. 

Specifically, EPA proposes that the 

identity of byproducts manufactured in 

the process agent application; contact 

information for facilities that use 

controlled substances as process agents; 

emission data, including reported 

emission factors and the proposed ODS 

process agent monitoring plan; and 

technologies currently being used and 

actions taken to minimize use or 

emissions of controlled substances used 

as process agents would also not be 

considered confidential. The Agency 

proposes to determine the following 

information concerning ODS process 

agents as confidential: process agent 

sourcing; internal facility processes 

such as the quantity of process agent 

use, recycling and reuse, products, and 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
72034 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

byproducts; and emission reduction 

technologies and actions planned or 

currently under evaluation. As noted 

previously, the Agency expects to 

release aggregated data to the Ozone 

Secretariat, including ODS process 

agent information concerning process 

agent applications currently used in the 

United States, consumption, emissions, 

and emission reduction technologies 

and actions undertaken. Further, EPA 

would begin reporting emissions data in 

metric tons instead of ODP-weighted 

metric tons. 

In addition, EPA proposes to revise 

provisions in 40 CFR 82.14(a), 82.13(c) 

for class I controlled substances, and 

82.24(a)(1) for class II controlled 

substances to specify that there may be 

future ways to submit reports 

electronically. Under current 

requirements, reports available for 

submission must be submitted 

electronically through the Central Data 

Exchange. In this action the Agency 

proposes to extend these requirements 

to allow the use of another electronic 

format specified by EPA. This revision 

is intended to provide flexibility in the 

event that the Agency designates a 

successor system to the Central Data 

Exchange for reporting requirements 

under the ODS phaseout in 40 CFR part 

82, subpart A, and would align with 

similar provisions for the HFC 

Phasedown Program in 40 CFR 

84.31(a)(2). 

V. Proposed Definitions 

EPA also proposes to add a definition 

of ‘‘process agent’’ and revise two 

definitions to better reflect current EPA 

and international practices. EPA 

proposes to define ‘‘process agent’’ in 40 

CFR part 82 similarly to the existing 

definition in 40 CFR part 84, with the 

key difference being that 40 CFR part 82 

addresses ODS controlled substances 

and 40 CFR part 84 addresses HFC 

regulated substances. EPA is proposing 

in this action to define the term 

‘‘process agent’’ for the purposes of 40 

CFR part 82 as ‘‘the use of a controlled 

substance to form the environment for a 

chemical reaction or inhibiting an 

unintended chemical reaction (e.g., use 

as a solvent, catalyst, or stabilizer) 

where the controlled substance is not 

consumed in the reaction, but is 

removed or recycled back into the 

process and where no more than trace 

quantities remain in the final product. A 

feedstock, in contrast, is entirely 

consumed during the reaction.’’ We 

expect this definition will provide 

greater clarity of what is considered 

process agent use. In 40 CFR 82.3, the 

Agency defines ‘‘facility’’ to mean ‘‘any 

process equipment (e.g., reactor, 

distillation column) used to convert raw 

materials or feedstock chemicals into 

controlled substances or consume 

controlled substances in the production 

of other chemicals’’ and ‘‘plant’’ to 

mean ‘‘one or more facilities at the same 

location owned by or under common 

control of the same person.’’ These 

definitions are inverted from how they 

would typically be understood and 

applied. EPA proposes to switch the two 

definitions, such that a plant is a subset 

of a facility, similar to how 40 CFR part 

84 considers a production line to be one 

component of a facility. The definition 

of ‘‘plant’’ in 40 CFR part 82 would be 

similar to the definition of ‘‘production 

line’’ in 40 CFR part 84, and definitions 

of ‘‘facility’’ would accordingly 

correspond. We do not expect this to 

result in any material impacts, but this 

revision may increase clarity and 

consistency. 

VI. Costs and Benefits 

The proposed recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements concerning uses 

of ODS as process agents are intended 

in general to codify existing practices 

and do not represent substantive 

additional effort on the part of affected 

entities. EPA is aware of six potentially 

affected entities, and expects that these 

entities are already able to meet most of 

the proposed requirements under 

existing practices. The reported 

information would support U.S. efforts 

to more easily report information 

consistent with Montreal Protocol 

decisions and to better understand 

potential implications of uses of ODS as 

process agents under the CAA. 

EPA expects that entities that would 

be affected by this action are already 

subject to recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements under 40 CFR part 82 and 

that the requirements proposed in this 

action would not result in significant 

increased burden. In 40 CFR 82.13 and 

82.24 the Agency currently requires 

producers of controlled substance to 

record and report related information, 

including requirements in 40 CFR 

82.13(f)(2)(vii) and 82.24(b)(2)(vi) to 

maintain records of any controlled 

substance used as a feedstock, destroyed 

in the manufacture of another 

substance, used in the manufacture of 

any other substance, or introduced into 

the production process of the same 

controlled substance. EPA also requires 

additional documentation and reporting 

concerning uses of ODS in processes 

that result in their transformation or 

destruction. The Agency understands 

that subject entities have already 

reported similar information to EPA 

concerning uses of ODS as a process 

agent in the past on a voluntary basis, 

report similar information concerning 

production of ODS and feedstock uses, 

and already have available process 

knowledge and experience necessary to 

meet the recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements proposed in this action. 

EPA also believes that codified 

requirements will reduce potential 

uncertainty about EPA’s recordkeeping 

and reporting expectations. 

EPA expects that this action will 

result in costs for each subject entity to 

prepare an initial one-time report, 

submit annual reports and notifications 

of significant changes as warranted, and 

recordkeeping. However, with regards to 

the annual reports, the Agency already 

solicits information from the affected 

entities via annual requests. Therefore, 

any associated change in burden would 

be limited relative to current practice. 

The Agency conservatively estimates 

these requirements to result in costs of 

approximately $13,000 per facility for 

the first year, with the higher costs due 

to initial preparation of the one-time 

report, and $1,000 per facility in 

following years for continued 

compliance with the other 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements. As noted in section II.B. 

of this preamble, we do not anticipate 

the establishment of new processes or 

facilities using ODS as process agents, 

but request comment on that 

assumption. 

The Agency estimates that the 

proposal to require an emissions 

reporting methodology similar to 40 

CFR part 98, subpart L, would result in 

additional costs of approximately 

$190,000 per facility in the first year 

due to initial planning and additional 

sampling, analysis, monitoring and 

calculations. EPA estimates compliance 

costs of approximately $17,000 in 

subsequent years for continued 

sampling, analysis, monitoring, and 

calculations. The total estimated costs 

for all requirements are approximately 

$1.8 million in the first year and 

$160,000 annually in subsequent years. 

The costs are discussed in a draft 

technical support document and the 

supporting statement for the 

information collection request (ICR). 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Review 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory 

Review 

This action is not a significant 

regulatory action as defined in 

Executive Order 12866, as amended by 

Executive Order 14094, and was 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 72035 

therefore not subject to a requirement 

for Executive Order 12866 review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

The information collection activities 

in this proposed rule have been 

submitted for approval to OMB under 

the PRA. The ICR document that EPA 

prepared has been assigned EPA ICR 

number 1432.39. You can find a copy of 

the ICR in the docket for this proposed 

rule, and it is briefly summarized here. 

EPA is proposing requirements for 

both one-time, annual, and situational 

reporting and for recordkeeping to 

support international agreements 

concerning the use of controlled 

substances as process agents, and to 

provide relevant information to EPA 

concerning implications of these uses 

and emissions. Recordkeeping, one-time 

reports, and annual reporting 

requirements are consistent with the 

existing importer and producer 

reporting requirements in 40 CFR 82.13 

for class I controlled substances and 40 

CFR 82.24 for class II controlled 

substances. These requirements are also 

consistent with existing practice of 

these facilities providing similar 

information concerning these uses of 

controlled substances as process agents 

to EPA on a voluntary basis. The ICR 

addresses the incremental changes to 

the existing reporting and recordkeeping 

programs that are approved under OMB 

control number 2060–0170. 

Respondents/affected entities: 

Respondents and affected entities that 

use controlled substances as process 

agents. 

Respondent’s obligation to respond: 

Mandatory—sections 603(b) and 114 of 

the CAA. 

Estimated number of respondents: 6. 

Frequency of response: One-time, 

annual, and as needed. 

Total estimated burden: 5,883 hours 

(per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 

1320.3(b). 

Total estimated cost: $719,593 (per 

year), including $28,245 annualized 

capital or operation and maintenance 

costs. 

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 for EPA’s regulations in 40 

CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

Submit your comments on the 

Agency’s need for this information, the 

accuracy of the provided burden 

estimates, and any suggested methods 

for minimizing respondent burden to 

EPA using the docket identified at the 

beginning of this proposed rule. EPA 

will respond to any ICR-related 

comments in the final rule. You may 

also send your ICR-related comments to 

OMB’s Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs using the interface at 

https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under Review—Open for 

Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. OMB must receive 

comments no later than November 20, 

2023. 

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 because none of the identified 

affected entities are small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain an 

unfunded mandate of $100 million or 

more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 

1531–1538, and does not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. 

While this action creates an enforceable 

duty on the private sector, the cost does 

not exceed $100 million or more. 

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. EPA is not aware of Tribal 

businesses engaged in activities that 

would be directly affected by this 

action. Based on the Agency’s 

assessments, as discussed in section VI 

of this preamble, EPA also does not 

believe that potential effects, even if 

direct, would be substantial. 

Accordingly, this action will not have 

substantial direct effects on Tribal 

governments, the relationship between 

the Federal Government and Indian 

tribes, or on the distribution of power 

and responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this action. The Agency 

periodically updates Tribal officials on 

air regulations through the monthly 

meetings of the National Tribal Air 

Association. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

as applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern environmental 

health or safety risks that EPA has 

reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it does not establish an 

environmental standard intended to 

mitigate health or safety risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations and Executive 

Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation’s 

Commitment to Environmental Justice 

for All 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) 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 (people of color and/or 

Indigenous peoples) and low-income 

populations. 

EPA believes that this type of action 

does not concern human health or 

environmental conditions and therefore 

cannot be evaluated with respect to 

potentially disproportionate and 

adverse effects on people of color, lowincome populations and/or Indigenous 

peoples because it does not impact 

emissions from subject facilities. This 

regulatory action proposes 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements that do not impact human 

health or the environment, but provide 

additional insight into the uses and 

emissions of ODS used as process 

agents. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
72036 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82 

Environmental protection, Chemicals, 

Emissions, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Michael S. Regan, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is proposed to 

be 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. 

■ 2. Amend § 82.3 by revising the 

definitions for ‘‘Facility’’ and ‘‘Plant’’ 

and adding the definition ‘‘Process 

agent’’ in alphabetical order to read as 

follows: 

§ 82.3 Definitions for class I and class II 

controlled substances. 

* * * * * 

Facility means one or more plants at 

the same location owned by or under 

common control of the same person. 

* * * * * 

Plant means any process equipment 

(e.g., reactor, distillation column) used 

to convert raw materials or feedstock 

chemicals into controlled substances or 

consume controlled substances in the 

production of other chemicals. 

* * * * * 

Process agent means the use of a 

controlled substance to form the 

environment for a chemical reaction or 

inhibiting an unintended chemical 

reaction (e.g., use as a solvent, catalyst, 

or stabilizer) where the controlled 

substance is not consumed in the 

reaction, but is removed or recycled 

back into the process and where no 

more than trace quantities remain in the 

final product. A feedstock, in contrast, 

is consumed during the reaction. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 82.13 by: 

■ a. In paragraph (c), adding ‘‘or another 

format specified by EPA’’ after the 

words ‘‘Central Data Exchange’’; and 

■ b. Adding paragraph (ee). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 82.13 Recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for class I controlled 

substances. 

* * * * * 

(ee) Process agents. Any entity that 

uses a class I controlled substance as a 

process agent must comply with the 

following recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for each facility that uses 

a class I controlled substance as a 

process agent: 

(1) Reporting—one-time report: By 

[date 120 days after publication of a 

final rule in the Federal Register], or 

within 120 days of the date that an 

entity first uses a class I controlled 

substance as a process agent, whichever 

is later, any entity that uses a class I 

controlled substance as a process agent 

must submit to the Administrator a 

report containing the following 

information for each use of a class I 

controlled substance as a process agent: 

(i) The name and address of each 

facility and plant, and each responsible 

person’s name, email address, and 

phone number; 

(ii) The name, purpose, and final 

product manufactured of each process 

agent application that uses a class I 

controlled substance; 

(iii) The start-up date of each facility 

and plant that uses a class I controlled 

substance as a process agent; 

(iv) For each facility, the names and 

amounts of each product and byproduct 

manufactured in the process agent 

application during the previous control 

period, including amounts destroyed or 

used as a feedstock; 

(v) For each facility, the total air, 

fugitive air, and stack point air 

emissions of class I controlled 

substances used as a process agent 

during the previous control period; 

(vi) For each facility, a description of 

technologies currently being used and 

actions taken or currently under 

evaluation to minimize use or emissions 

of class I controlled substances used as 

process agents (including estimated 

emissions reductions associated with 

each); and 

(vii) For each facility, a description 

that includes details of the percentages 

of class I controlled substances used as 

a process agent and retained within the 

process agent application, recovered 

after the process agent application, and 

emitted or entrained in the final 

product. 

(2) Annual reports: Any entity that 

uses a class I controlled substance as a 

process agent must provide by February 

14 of each year an annual report for the 

previous control period containing the 

following information for each use of 

the class I controlled substance as a 

process agent: 

(i) For each facility, contact 

information including email address 

and phone number for a primary and 

alternate contact person; 

(ii) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class I controlled 

substance initially introduced into the 

process agent application for use as a 

process agent, specified independently 

for paragraphs (ee)(2)(ii)(A) through (G) 

of this section by whether the class I 

controlled substance was: 

(A) Obtained as virgin; 

(B) Obtained as used; 

(C) Produced by the entity; 

(D) Purchased from a U.S. producer; 

(E) Imported; 

(F) Reclaimed by the entity from a 

different use; and 

(G) Reclaimed by another entity; 

(iii) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class I controlled 

substance used as a process agent and 

reused or recycled by the entity for 

continued use in the same process agent 

application at the same facility; 

(iv) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class I controlled 

substance used as a process agent that 

was ultimately: 

(A) Transformed; 

(B) Reused or recycled for use in a 

different process agent application; or 

(C) Destroyed by approved 

destruction technologies; 

(v) For each facility, the total air, 

fugitive air, and stack point air 

emissions of each class I controlled 

substance used as a process agent; 

(vi) For each facility, the names and 

amounts of each product and byproduct 

manufactured in the process agent 

application during the previous control 

period, including amounts destroyed or 

used as a feedstock; 

(vii) For each facility, a description of 

emission reduction actions for class I 

controlled substances used as a process 

agent taken since the last one-time or 

annual report, planned, or currently 

under evaluation; and 

(viii) For each facility, any significant 

process agent application changes 

anticipated to result in increases for the 

next annual report of greater than 20 

percent of the amount of class I 

controlled substance initially 

introduced for or emitted during use as 

a process agent by an entity, as 

compared to the previous control 

period, must be specified in a report 

submitted to EPA at least 180 days prior 

to implementing the change. 

(3) Recordkeeping: Every person who 

uses a class I controlled substance as a 

process agent during a control period 

must maintain the following records, as 

applicable: 

(i) Dated records of the quantity of 

each class I controlled substance 

produced at each facility for use as a 

process agent; 

(ii) Records identifying the producer 

or importer of the class I controlled 

substance received at each facility for 

use as a process agent by the person; 

(iii) For each facility, copies of the 

invoices or receipts documenting the 

sale or other transfer of ownership of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 72037 

each class I controlled substance for use 

as a process agent to the person; 

(iv) Dated records identifying the 

quantity of each product manufactured 

within each facility by using a class I 

controlled substance as a process agent; 

(v) For each facility, records of the 

date and the estimated quantity of any 

spill or release of each class I controlled 

substance used as a process agent that 

equals or exceeds 100 pounds; 

(vi) For each facility, a description of 

the methodology used to measure and 

calculate emissions, and dated records 

of equipment parameters, measured 

data, supporting calculations, and other 

rationale used to validate reported 

emission quantities; 

(vii) For each facility, dated records of 

the quantity of each class I controlled 

substance used as a process agent which 

is subsequently transformed or 

destroyed; 

(viii) In the case where class I 

controlled substances used as a process 

agent were ultimately transformed by an 

entity other the entity which last used 

the class I controlled substances as a 

process agent, a copy of the Internal 

Revenue Service Certificate showing 

that the purchaser or recipient of the 

controlled substance, in the United 

States or in another country that is a 

Party, certifies the intent to transform 

the controlled substance, or sell the 

controlled substance for transformation; 

and 

(ix) In the case where class I 

controlled substances used as a process 

agent were ultimately destroyed by an 

entity other the entity which last used 

the class I controlled substances as a 

process agent, a copy of the destruction 

verification (as in paragraph (k) of this 

section), showing that the purchaser or 

recipient of a controlled substance, in 

the United States or in another country 

that is a Party, certifies the intent to 

destroy the controlled substance, or sell 

the controlled substance for destruction. 

(4) Reports are no longer required for 

process agent use in the year after an 

entity notifies the Administrator that 

they have permanently ceased use of all 

process agents, but the entity must 

continue to comply with all applicable 

recordkeeping requirements. 

§ 82.14 [Amended] 

■ 4. Amend § 82.14, in paragraph (a), by 

adding ‘‘or another format specified by 

EPA’’ after the words ‘‘Central Data 

Exchange.’’ 

■ 5. Amend § 82.24 by: 

■ a. In paragraph (a)(1), adding ‘‘or 

another format specified by EPA’’ after 

the words ‘‘Central Data Exchange’’; and 

■ b. Adding paragraph (g). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 82.24 Recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for class II controlled 

substances. 

* * * * * 

(g) Process agents. Any entity that 

uses a class II controlled substance as a 

process agent must comply with the 

following recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for each facility that uses 

a class II controlled substance as a 

process agent: 

(1) Reporting—one-time report: By 

[date 120 days after publication of a 

final rule in the Federal Register], or 

within 120 days of the date that an 

entity first uses a class II controlled 

substance as a process agent, whichever 

is later, any entity that uses a class II 

controlled substance as a process agent 

must submit to the Administrator a 

report containing the following 

information for each use of a class II 

controlled substance as a process agent: 

(i) The name and address of each 

facility and plant, and each responsible 

person’s name, email address, and 

phone number; 

(ii) The name, purpose, and final 

product manufactured of each process 

agent application that uses a class II 

controlled substance; 

(iii) The start-up date of each facility 

and plant that uses a class II controlled 

substance as a process agent; 

(iv) For each facility, the names and 

amounts of each product and byproduct 

manufactured in the process agent 

application during the previous control 

period, including amounts destroyed or 

used as a feedstock; 

(v) For each facility, the total air, 

fugitive air, and stack point air 

emissions of class II controlled 

substances used as a process agent 

during the previous control period; 

(vi) For each facility, a description of 

technologies currently being used and 

actions taken or currently under 

evaluation to minimize use or emissions 

of class II controlled substances used as 

process agents (including estimated 

emissions reductions associated with 

each); and 

(vii) For each facility, a description 

that includes details of the percentages 

of class II controlled substances used as 

a process agent and retained within the 

process agent application, recovered 

after the process agent application, and 

emitted or entrained in the final 

product. 

(2) Annual reports: Any entity that 

uses a class II controlled substance as a 

process agent must provide by February 

14 of each year an annual report for the 

previous control period containing the 

following information for each use of 

the class II controlled substance as a 

process agent: 

(i) For each facility, contact 

information including email address 

and phone number for a primary and 

alternate contact person; 

(ii) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class II controlled 

substance initially introduced into the 

process agent application for use as a 

process agent, specified independently 

for paragraphs (g)(2)(ii)(A) through (G) 

of this section by whether the class II 

controlled substance was: 

(A) Obtained as virgin; 

(B) Obtained as used; 

(C) Produced by the entity; 

(D) Purchased from a U.S. producer; 

(E) Imported; 

(F) Reclaimed by the entity from a 

different use; and 

(G) Reclaimed by another entity; 

(iii) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class II controlled 

substance used as a process agent and 

reused or recycled by the entity for 

continued use in the same process agent 

application at the same facility; 

(iv) For each facility, the name and 

amount of each class II controlled 

substance used as a process agent that 

was ultimately: 

(A) Transformed; 

(B) Reused or recycled for use in a 

different process agent application; or 

(C) Destroyed by approved 

destruction technologies; 

(v) For each facility, the total air, 

fugitive air, and stack point air 

emissions of each class II controlled 

substance used as a process agent; 

(vi) For each facility, the names and 

amounts of each product and byproduct 

manufactured in the process agent 

application during the previous control 

period, including amounts destroyed or 

used as a feedstock; 

(vii) For each facility, a description of 

emission reduction actions for class II 

controlled substances used as a process 

agent taken since the last one-time or 

annual report, planned, or currently 

under evaluation; and 

(viii) For each facility, any significant 

process agent application changes 

anticipated to result in increases for the 

next annual report of greater than 20 

percent of the amount of class II 

controlled substance initially 

introduced for or emitted during use as 

a process agent by an entity, as 

compared to the previous control 

period, must be specified in a report 

submitted to EPA at least 180 days prior 

to implementing the change. 

(3) Recordkeeping: Every person who 

uses a class II controlled substance as a 

process agent during a control period 

must maintain the following records, as 

applicable: 

(i) Dated records of the quantity of 

each class II controlled substance 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
72038 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

produced at each facility for use as a 

process agent; 

(ii) Records identifying the producer

or importer of the class II controlled 

substance received at each facility for 

use as a process agent by the person; 

(iii) For each facility, copies of the

invoices or receipts documenting the 

sale or other transfer of ownership of 

each class II controlled substance for 

use as a process agent to the person; 

(iv) Dated records identifying the

quantity of each product manufactured 

within each facility by using a class II 

controlled substance as a process agent; 

(v) For each facility, records of the

date and the estimated quantity of any 

spill or release of each class II 

controlled substance used as a process 

agent that equals or exceeds 100 

pounds; 

(vi) For each facility, a description of

the methodology used to measure and 

calculate emissions, and dated records 

of equipment parameters, measured 

data, supporting calculations, and other 

rationale used to validate reported 

emission quantities; 

(vii) For each facility, dated records of

the quantity of each class II controlled 

substance used as a process agent which 

is subsequently transformed or 

destroyed; 

(viii) In the case where class II

controlled substances used as a process 

agent were ultimately transformed by an 

entity other the entity which last used 

the class II controlled substances as a 

process agent, a copy of the person’s 

transformation verification as provided 

under paragraph (e)(3) of this section; 

and 

(ix) In the case where class II

controlled substances used as a process 

agent were ultimately destroyed by an 

entity other the entity which last used 

the class II controlled substances as a 

process agent, a copy of the person’s 

destruction verification, as provided 

under paragraph (e)(5) of this section. 

(4) Reports are no longer required for

process agent use in the year after an 

entity notifies the Administrator that 

they have permanently ceased use of all 

process agents, but the entity must 

continue to comply with all applicable 

recordkeeping requirements. 

■ 6. Add § 82.25 to read as follows: 

§ 82.25 Treatment of data submitted under

this subpart.

(a) Sections 2.201 through 2.215 and

2.301 of this chapter do not apply to 

data submitted under this subpart that 

EPA has determined through 

rulemaking to be either of the following: 

(1) Emission data, as defined in

§ 2.301(a)(2) of this chapter, determined

in accordance with section 114(c) and

307(d) of the Clean Air Act; or

(2) Data not otherwise entitled to

confidential treatment. 

(b) Except as otherwise provided in

paragraph (d) of this section, §§ 2.201 

through 2.208 and 2.301(c) and (d) of 

this chapter do not apply to data 

submitted under this part that EPA has 

determined through rulemaking to be 

entitled to confidential treatment. EPA 

shall treat that information as 

confidential in accordance with the 

provisions of § 2.211 of this chapter, 

subject to paragraph (d) of this section 

and § 2.209 of this chapter. 

(c) Upon receiving a request under 5

U.S.C. 552 for data submitted under this 

part that EPA has determined through 

rulemaking to be entitled to confidential 

treatment, the relevant Agency official 

shall furnish the requestor a notice that 

the information has been determined to 

be entitled to confidential treatment and 

that the request is therefore denied. The 

notice shall include or cite to the 

appropriate EPA determination. 

(d) A determination made through

rulemaking that information submitted 

under this part is entitled to 

confidential treatment shall continue in 

effect unless, subsequent to the 

confidentiality determination through 

rulemaking, EPA takes one of the 

following actions: 

(1) EPA determines through a

subsequent rulemaking that the 

information is emission data or data not 

otherwise entitled to confidential 

treatment; or 

(2) The Office of General Counsel

issues a final determination, based on 

the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4), 

stating that the information is no longer 

entitled to confidential treatment 

because of change in the applicable law 

or newly discovered or changed facts. 

Prior to making such final 

determination, EPA shall afford the 

business an opportunity to submit 

comments on pertinent issues in the 

manner described by §§ 2.204(e) and 

2.205(b) of this chapter. If, after 

consideration of any timely comments 

submitted by the business, the Office of 

General Counsel makes a revised final 

determination that the information is 

not entitled to confidential treatment, 

the relevant agency official will notify 

the business in accordance with the 

procedures described in § 2.205(f)(2) of 

this chapter. 

[FR Doc. 2023–22182 Filed 10–18–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 600 

[Docket No. 231013–0247] 

RIN 0648–BL70 

Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; 

Prohibition of Commercial Fishing in 

the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts 

Marine National Monument 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This action proposes 

regulations for the Northeast Canyons 

and Seamounts Marine National 

Monument (the Monument). This action 

is necessary to conform U.S. fishing 

regulations consistent with Presidential 

Proclamations 9496 and 10287, which 

prohibited commercial fishing in the 

Northeast Canyons and Seamounts 

Marine National Monument and 

directed the Secretaries of Commerce 

and Interior to promulgate regulations 

necessary for the proper care and 

management of the Northeast Canyons 

and Seamounts Marine National 

Monument. The measures herein are 

intended to define the boundary 

coordinates of the Monument area and 

reflect the prohibition on commercial 

fishing in the Magnuson-Stevens Act 

regulations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 20, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2023–0093, by the following 

method: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and enter 

NOAA–NMFS–2023–0093 in the Search 

box. Click the ‘‘Comment’’ icon, 

complete the required fields, and enter 

or attach your comments. 

Instructions: Comments sent by any 

other method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the end of 

the comment period, may not be 

considered by NMFS. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted for public 

viewing on https://www.regulations.gov 

without change. All personal identifying 

information (e.g., name, address, etc.), 

confidential business information, or 

otherwise sensitive information 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1