Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 77909 

Maintenance Plan for the Northern 

Kentucky Area’’ at the end of the table 

to read as follows: 

§ 52.920 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED KENTUCKY NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of non-regulatory SIP 

provision 

Applicable geographic or 

nonattainment area 

State submittal 

date/effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanations 

*******

1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance Plan for the Northern 

Kentucky Area.

Boone, Campbell and Kenton 

Counties (Kentucky portion 

of the Cincinnati-Hamilton 

OH-KY-IN Area).

1/27/11 12/15/2011. [Insert citation of 

publication].

For the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. 

PART 81—[AMENDED] 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 4. In § 81.318, the table entitled 

‘‘Kentucky—PM2.5 (Annual NAAQS)’’ is 

amended under ‘‘Cincinnati-Hamilton, 

OH-KY-IN’’ by revising the entries for 

‘‘Boone County,’’ ‘‘Campbell County,’’ 

and ‘‘Kenton County’’ to read as follows: 

§ 81.318 Kentucky. 

* * * * * 

KENTUCKY—PM2.5

[Annual NAAQS] 

Designated area 

Designation a

Date 1 Type 

Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN: 

Boone County ....................................................................... This action is effective December 15, 2011 Attainment. 

Campbell County .................................................................. This action is effective December 15, 2011 Attainment. 

Kenton County ...................................................................... This action is effective December 15, 2011 Attainment. 

*******

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 

1This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–32058 Filed 12–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 82 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0672; FRL–9507–6] 

RIN 2060–AQ39 

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: 

Extension of the Laboratory and 

Analytical Use Exemption for Essential 

Class I Ozone-Depleting Substances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is extending the 

laboratory and analytical use exemption 

for the production and import of Class 

I ozone-depleting substances through 

December 31, 2014. This action is taken 

under the Clean Air Act consistent with 

the recent actions by the Parties to the 

Montreal Protocol on Substances that 

Deplete the Ozone Layer. The 

exemption allows the production and 

import of controlled substances in the 

United States for laboratory and 

analytical uses that have not been 

already identified by EPA as 

nonessential. 

DATES: This action is effective on 

December 15, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0672. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard 

copy at the Air and Radiation Docket, 

EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC. The Public Reading Room is open 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the Air 

and Radiation Docket is (202) 566– 

1742). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeremy Arling by regular mail: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Stratospheric Protection Division 

(6205J), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20460; by courier 

service or overnight express: 1301 L 

Street NW., Washington, DC 20005; by 

telephone: (202) 343–9055; or by email: 

arling.jeremy@epa.gov. You may also 

visit the EPA’s Ozone Protection Web 

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

strathome.html for further information 

about EPA’s Stratospheric Ozone 

Protection regulations, the science of 

ozone layer depletion, and other related 

topics. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

553(d) of the Administrative Procedure 

Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, generally 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
77910 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

1 ‘‘Consumption’’ is defined as the amount of a 

substance produced in the United States, plus the 

amount imported into the United States, minus the 

amount exported from the United States to other 

Parties to the Montreal Protocol (see Section 601(6) 

of the Clean Air Act). 

2Class I controlled substances are listed at 40 CFR 

part 82, subpart A, Appendix A. 

provides that rules may not take effect 

earlier than 30 days after they are 

published in the Federal Register. EPA 

is issuing this final rule under section 

307(d)(1) of the Clean Air Act, which 

states: ‘‘The provisions of section 553 

through 557 * * * of Title 5 shall not, 

except as expressly provided in this 

section, apply to actions to which this 

subsection applies.’’ Thus, section 

553(d) of the APA does not apply to this 

rule. EPA is nevertheless acting 

consistently with the policies 

underlying APA section 553(d) in 

making this rule effective on December 

15, 2011. APA section 553(d) allows an 

effective date less than 30 days after 

publication ‘‘as otherwise provided by 

the agency for good cause found and 

published with the rule.’’ As explained 

below, EPA finds that there is good 

cause for this rule to become effective 

on December 15, 2011, even though this 

results in an effective date fewer than 30 

days from the date of publication in the 

Federal Register. The purpose of the 30- 

day waiting period prescribed in APA 

section 553(d) is to give affected parties 

a reasonable time to adjust their 

behavior and prepare before the final 

rule takes effect. This final rule extends 

an exemption from the phaseout of class 

I ozone depleting substances for limited 

laboratory and analytical uses that is set 

to expire on December 31, 2011. A 

shorter effective date in such 

circumstances is consistent with the 

purposes of APA section 553(d), which 

provides an exception for any action 

that grants or recognizes an exemption 

or relieves a restriction. Accordingly, we 

find good cause exists to make this rule 

effective December 15, 2011. 

Table of Contents 

I. Extension of the Laboratory and Analytical 

Use Exemption 

II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act 

I. Extension of the Laboratory and 

Analytical Use Exemption 

The Montreal Protocol on Substances 

that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal 

Protocol, or Protocol) is the 

international agreement to reduce and 

eventually eliminate the global 

production and consumption 1 of ozonedepleting substances (ODS). This goal is 

accomplished through adherence by 

each country that is a Party to the 

Montreal Protocol to phaseout 

schedules for specific controlled 

substances. The Protocol established 

January 1, 1996, as the date by which 

the production and import of most Class 

I controlled substances—including 

chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), carbon 

tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform 2— 

were phased out in developed countries, 

including the United States. The Clean 

Air Act grants EPA the authority to 

implement the Protocol’s phaseout 

schedules in the United States. Section 

604 of the Clean Air Act requires EPA 

to promulgate regulations phasing out 

production and consumption of Class I 

ODS according to a prescribed schedule. 

EPA’s phaseout regulations for ODS are 

codified at 40 CFR part 82, subpart A. 

The Montreal Protocol provides 

exemptions that allow for the continued 

import and/or production of ODSs for 

specific uses. Under the Montreal 

Protocol, for most Class I ODSs, the 

Parties may collectively grant 

exemptions to the ban on production 

and import of ODS for uses that they 

determine to be ‘‘essential.’’ For 

example, with respect to CFCs, Article 

2A(4) provides that the phaseout will 

apply ‘‘save to the extent that the Parties 

decide to permit the level of production 

or consumption that is necessary to 

satisfy uses agreed by them to be 

essential.’’ Similar language appears in 

the control provisions for halons (Art. 

2B), carbon tetrachloride (Art. 2D), 

methyl chloroform (Art. 2E), 

hydrobromofluorocarbons (Art. 2G), and 

chlorobromomethane (Art. 2I). As 

defined by Decision IV/25 of the Parties, 

‘‘use of a controlled substance should 

qualify as ‘essential’ only if: ‘‘(i) It is 

necessary for the health, safety or is 

critical for the functioning of society 

(encompassing cultural and intellectual 

aspects); and (ii) there are no available 

technically and economically feasible 

alternatives or substitutes that are 

acceptable from the standpoint of 

environment and health.’’ 

Decision X/19 under the Montreal 

Protocol (taken in 1998) allowed a 

general exemption for essential 

laboratory and analytical uses through 

December 31, 2005. EPA codified this 

exemption at 40 CFR part 82, subpart A. 

While the Clean Air Act does not 

specifically provide for this exemption, 

EPA determined that an exemption for 

essential laboratory and analytical uses 

was allowable under the Act as a de 

minimis exemption. EPA addressed the 

de minimis exemption in a regulation 

issued March 13, 2001 (66 FR 14760). 

Decision X/19 also requested the 

Montreal Protocol’s Technology and 

Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP), a 

group of technical experts from various 

Parties, to report annually to the Parties 

to the Montreal Protocol on laboratory 

and analytical procedures that could be 

performed without the use of controlled 

substances. It further stated that at 

future Meetings of the Parties (MOPs), 

the Parties would decide whether such 

procedures should no longer be eligible 

for exemptions. Based on the TEAP’s 

recommendation, the Parties to the 

Montreal Protocol decided in 1999 

(Decision XI/15) that the general 

exemption no longer applied to the 

following uses: Testing of oil and grease 

and total petroleum hydrocarbons in 

water; Testing of tar in road-paving 

materials; and forensic finger-printing. 

EPA incorporated these exclusions at 

Appendix G to subpart A of 40 CFR part 

82 on February 11, 2002 (67 FR 6352). 

At the 18th MOP, the Parties 

acknowledged the need for methyl 

bromide for laboratory and analytical 

procedures, and added methyl bromide 

to the ODSs under the essential 

laboratory and analytical use 

exemption. Decision XVIII/15 outlined 

specific uses and exclusions for methyl 

bromide under the exemption. EPA 

incorporated specific uses of methyl 

bromide in the essential laboratory and 

analytical use exemption at Appendix G 

to subpart A of 40 CFR part 82 on 

December 27, 2007 (72 FR 73264). 

In November 2009, at the 21st MOP, 

the Parties in Decision XXI/6 extended 

the global laboratory and analytical use 

exemption through December 31, 2014. 

Decision XXI/6 also notes laboratory 

and analytical uses of ODSs for which 

the TEAP and its Chemicals Technical 

Options Committee (CTOC), determined 

that alternative procedures exist. 

However, the Parties did not exclude 

any of those procedures from the 

exemption for laboratory and analytical 

uses. The Parties asked the TEAP and 

the CTOC to continue to consider 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 77911 

possible alternatives and report back to 

the Parties. 

EPA’s regulations regarding this 

exemption at 40 CFR 82.8(b) currently 

state, ‘‘A global exemption for Class I 

controlled substances for essential 

laboratory and analytical uses shall be 

in effect through December 31, 2011, 

subject to the restrictions in appendix G 

of this subpart, and subject to the 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements at § 82.13(u) through (x). 

There is no amount specified for this 

exemption.’’ Because certain laboratory 

procedures continue to require the use 

of Class I substances in the United 

States, because non-ODS replacements 

for the Class I substances have not been 

identified for all uses, and because the 

Parties, via Decision XXI/6, extended 

this exemption through December 31, 

2014, EPA proposed to revise 40 CFR 

82.8(b) to reflect the extension of the 

exemption to December 31, 2014. The 

EPA received two comments in total on 

the proposed rule, including the 

proposal to adopt the Parties’ extension, 

one from a corporation (the company 

commenter) and one from a laboratory. 

The company commenter supported the 

proposed extension of the global 

laboratory use exemption through 

December 31, 2014, while the other 

commenter supported the extension 

insofar as it applied to the use of carbon 

tetrachloride. For a more detailed 

discussion of the reasons for the 

exemption, refer to the regulation issued 

March 13, 2001 (66 FR 14760). That rule 

discusses how the controls in place for 

laboratory and analytical uses provide 

adequate assurance that very little, if 

any, environmental damage will result 

from the handling and disposal of the 

small amounts of Class I ODS used in 

such applications, due to the Appendix 

G requirements for small quantity and 

high purity. In the decade since EPA 

issued the exemption, EPA and has not 

received information that would suggest 

otherwise. 

In the proposed rule, EPA also sought 

comment on adding to the list of 

procedures that are excluded from the 

exemption under 40 CFR part 82, 

appendix G. EPA did not propose to add 

these procedures at this time. The 

following uses are noted in Decision 

XXI/6 as being laboratory and analytical 

procedures for which the TEAP and its 

CTOC have concluded that alternatives 

exist: 

(a) Analyses in which the ODS is used as 

a solvent for spectroscopic measurements: 

(i) Of hydrocarbons (oil and grease) in 

water or soil; 

(ii) Of simethicone (polydimethylsiloxane); 

(iii) When recording infrared and nuclear 

magnetic resonance (NMR) spectra, including 

hydroxyl index. 

(b) Analyses in which the ODS is used as 

a solvent for electrochemical methods of 

analysis of: 

(i) Cyanocobalamin; 

(ii) Bromine index. 

(c) Analyses involving selective solubility 

in the ODS of: 

(i) Cascarosides; 

(ii) Thyroid extracts; 

(iii) Polymers. 

(d) Analyses in which the ODS is used to 

preconcentrate the analyte, for: 

(i) Liquid chromatography (HPLC) of drugs 

and pesticides; 

(ii) Gas chromatography of organic 

chemicals such as steroids; 

(iii) Adsorption chromatography of organic 

chemicals. 

(e) Titration of iodine with thiosulfate 

(iodometric analyses) for determination of: 

(i) Iodine; 

(ii) Copper; 

(iii) Arsenic; 

(iv) Sulphur. 

(f) Iodine and bromine index 

measurements (titrations). 

(g) Miscellaneous analyses, namely: 

(i) Stiffness of leather; 

(ii) Jellification point; 

(iii) Specific weight of cement; 

(iv) Gas mask cartridge breakthrough. 

(h) Use of ODS as a solvent in organic 

chemical reactions: 

(i) O- and N-difluoromethylation. 

(i) General use as laboratory solvent, 

namely: 

(i) Washing of NMR tubes; 

(ii) Removal of greases from glassware. 

EPA sought comment on whether 

alternative procedures exist in the 

United States for each of these 

laboratory applications. EPA received 

comments from the same two 

commenters noted above regarding the 

use of carbon tetrachloride (CTC), which 

is an ODS, in analyses under section 

(a)(iii) of Decision XXI/6, which 

analyses are described above. Due to its 

unique properties (e.g. lack of carbonhydrogen bonds, small but non-zero 

solubility), the commenters stated that 

CTC is used as a solvent in certain 

analytical measurements. 

The company commenter stated that 

the procedures listed in section (a)(iii) 

of Decision XXI/6 are standard 

spectroscopic procedures for which CTC 

is not required. Therefore, the 

commenter does not oppose the 

exclusion of those procedures from the 

exemption. The commenter did describe 

its own current use of the chemical for 

a proprietary method of hydroxyl 

analysis that does not fall under the 

analysis listed in section (a)(iii) and for 

which CTC would still be required. 

The laboratory commenter also 

discussed CTC’s unique properties and 

commented that the continued use of 

CTC as a solvent is essential for some 

of the uses listed in section (a)(iii) of 

Decision XXI/6. It interpreted the 

Decision language quoted above as 

proposed regulatory language and 

requested that the following line be 

added to the potential exclusion that 

appears in paragraph (a)(iii) of the 

Decision: ‘‘Research applications for 

which there are no effective alternate 

solvents for carbon tetrachloride are not 

prohibited.’’ 

EPA did not propose to remove any of 

these procedures from the list of 

exempted uses of ODS and is not taking 

action in this final rule. However, EPA 

continues to be interested in laboratory 

uses of ODS for which there are no 

effective alternatives since this issue 

continues to be discussed by the Parties 

to the Protocol. 

II. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore 

not subject to review under Executive 

Order 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden. This 

action extends the existing laboratory 

and analytical use exemption allowing 

the production and import of Class I 

ozone-depleting substances until 

December 31, 2014. The Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

previously approved the information 

collection requirements contained in the 

existing regulations at 40 CFR 82.8(a) 

under the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 

and has assigned OMB control number 

2060–0170. The OMB control numbers 

for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR part 82 

are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The RFA generally requires an agency 

to prepare a regulatory flexibility 

analysis of any rule subject to notice 

and comment rulemaking requirements 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

or any other statute unless the agency 

certifies that the rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
77912 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

For purposes of assessing the impact 

of today’s rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR 

121.201; (2) pharmaceutical 

preparations manufacturing businesses 

(NAICS code 325412) that have fewer 

than 750 employees; (3) a small 

governmental jurisdiction that is a 

government of a city, county, town, 

school district or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; and (4) 

a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s rule on small entities, 

I certify that this action will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. In 

determining whether a rule has a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, the 

impact of concern is any significant 

adverse economic impact on small 

entities, since the primary purpose of 

the regulatory flexibility analyses is to 

identify and address regulatory 

alternatives ‘‘which minimize any 

significant economic impact of the rule 

on small entities.’’ 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 

Thus, an agency may certify that a rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities if the rule relieves regulatory 

burden, or otherwise has a positive 

economic effect on all of the small 

entities subject to the rule. 

This action provides an otherwise 

unavailable benefit to those companies 

that obtain ozone-depleting substances 

under the essential laboratory and 

analytical use exemption. We have 

therefore concluded that today’s rule 

will relieve regulatory burden for all 

small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no Federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538 for State, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. The 

action imposes no enforceable duty on 

any State, local or tribal governments or 

the private sector. This action merely 

extends the essential laboratory and 

analytical use exemption from the 1996 

and 2005 phaseouts of Class I ODS until 

December 31, 2014. Therefore, this 

action is not subject to the requirements 

of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. 

This action is also not subject to the 

requirements of section 203 of UMRA 

because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This action 

merely extends the essential laboratory 

and analytical use exemption from the 

1996 and 2005 phaseouts of Class I ODS 

until December 31, 2014. Thus, 

Executive Order 13132 does not apply 

to this action. In the spirit of Executive 

Order 13132, and consistent with EPA 

policy to promote communications 

between EPA and State and local 

governments, EPA specifically solicited 

comment on this action from State and 

local officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). This rule does not significantly or 

uniquely affect the communities of 

Indian tribal governments, nor does it 

impose any enforceable duties on 

communities of Indian tribal 

governments. This action merely 

extends the essential laboratory and 

analytical use exemption from the 1996 

and 2005 phaseouts of Class I ODS until 

December 31, 2014. Thus, Executive 

Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. EPA specifically solicited 

comment on this action from tribal 

officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 

19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only 

to those regulatory actions that concern 

health or safety risks, such that the 

analysis required under section 5–501 of 

the EO has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

EO 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 rule is not a ‘‘significant energy 

action’’ as defined in Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May 

22, 2001)) because it is not likely to 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

This rule does not pertain to any 

segment of the energy production 

economy nor does it regulate any 

manner of energy use. Therefore, we 

have concluded that this rule does not 

have any adverse energy effects. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

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

note) directs EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory 

activities unless to do so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards (e.g., materials specifications, 

test methods, sampling procedures, and 

business practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. The NTTAA directs 

EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. This 

rule does not involve technical 

standards. Therefore, EPA did not 

consider the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 

7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this rule will 

not have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority or low-income 

populations because it will not affect 

the level of protection provided to 

human health or the environment. The 

controls in place for laboratory and 

analytical uses provide adequate 

assurance that very little, if any, 

environmental impact will result from 

the handling and disposal of the small 

amounts of Class I ODS used in such 

applications. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 241 / Thursday, December 15, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 77913 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this rule and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A ‘‘major rule,’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2), cannot take 

effect until 60 days after it is published 

in the Federal Register. This action is 

not a ‘‘major rule.’’ This rule will be 

effective January 1, 2012. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Chemicals, 

Chlorofluorocarbons, Imports, Methyl 

chloroform, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: December 9, 2011. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 82—PROTECTION OF 

STRATOSPHERIC OZONE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 82 

continues to read as follows: 

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

7671q. 

■ 2. Section 82.8 is amended by revising 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 82.8 Grant of essential use allowances 

and critical use allowances. 

* * * * * 

(b) A global exemption for class I 

controlled substances for essential 

laboratory and analytical uses shall be 

in effect through December 31, 2014, 

subject to the restrictions in appendix G 

of this subpart, and subject to the 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements at § 82.13(u) through (x). 

There is no amount specified for this 

exemption. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–32179 Filed 12–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES