Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Proposed Rules 16981 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: 

PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON 

NAVIGABLE WATER 

1. The authority citation for part 100 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233. 

2. Add § 100.35T01–0004 to read as 

follows: 

§ 100.35T01–0004 Macy’s Fourth of July 

Fireworks Display Spectator Viewing Areas; 

Hudson River; New York, NY. 

(a) Regulated area. The regulated area 

includes all navigable waters of the 

Hudson River bounded by a line drawn 

from the northern most break-wall of the 

79th Street Boat Basin, New York, NY, 

approximate position 40°47′11.70′′ N, 

073°59′8.83′′ W, then west to a point on 

the shoreline of Guttenberg, NJ, 

approximate position 40°47′28.27′′ N, 

073°59′46.39′′ W, then south along the 

New Jersey shoreline to a point in the 

vicinity of Port Imperial, Weehawken, 

NJ approximate position 40°46′35.43′′ N, 

074°00′37.53′′ W, then east to a point in 

the vicinity of Pier 99, New York, NY 

approximate position 40°46′16.98′′ N, 

073°59′52.34′′ W, then along the 

Manhattan shoreline north to the point 

of origin and all navigable waters of the 

Hudson River bounded by a line drawn 

from Maxwell Park, Hoboken, NJ, 

approximate location 40°44′55.90′′ N, 

074°01′24.94′′ W, east to Chelsea Piers, 

New York, NY approximate location 

40°44′48.97′′ N, 074°00′41.01′′ W,, south 

along the Manhattan shore line to Pier 

40 approximate location 40°43′46.43′′ N, 

074°00′50.95′′ W, and west to Hoboken/ 

New Jersey Transit Station, Hoboken, NJ 

approximate location 40°43′50.38′′ N, 

074°01′41.68′′ W, and then north to the 

point of origin. All geographic 

coordinates are North American Datum 

of 1983 (NAD 83). Within the overall 

regulated area defined in this paragraph 

(a), the following are individually 

defined areas subject to specific 

requirements: 

(1) Area ALPHA: All navigable waters 

of the Hudson River north of a line 

drawn from a point in the vicinity of 

Riverwalk Place, Weehawken, NJ, 

approximate position 40°46′50.85′′ N, 

074°00′19.52′′ W, east to a point in the 

vicinity of 64th Street, New York, NY, 

approximate position 40°46′34.38′′ N, 

073° 59′30.98′′ W, and south of a line 

drawn from the shoreline of Guttenberg, 

NJ, approximate position 40°47′28.27′′ 

N, 073°59′46.39′′ W, east to the northern 

most break-wall of the 79th Street Boat 

Basin, New York, NY, approximate 

position 40°47′11.70′′ N, 073°59′8.83′′ 

W. (NAD 83). 

(2) Area BRAVO: All navigable waters 

of the Hudson River north of a line 

drawn from the ferry terminal at Port 

Imperial, Weehawken, NJ, approximate 

position 40°46′35.43′′ N, 074°00′37.53′′ 

W, east to a point in the vicinity of Pier 

99, New York, NY, approximate 

position 40°46′16.98′′ N, 073°59′52.34′′ 

W, and south of a line drawn from 

Riverwalk Place, Weehawken, NJ, 

approximate position 40°46′51.01′′ N, 

074°00′19.52′′ W, east to a point in the 

vicinity of 64th Street, New York, NY, 

approximate position 40°46′34.38′′ N, 

073°59′30.98′′ W. (NAD 83). 

(3) Area DELTA: All navigable waters 

of the Hudson River north of a line 

drawn to a point in the vicinity of Pier 

C Park, Hoboken, NJ, in approximate 

position 40°44′24.32′′ N, 074°01′32.98′′ 

W, east to Gansevoort Street, New York, 

NY, approximate position 40°44′20.46′′ 

N, 074°00′37.28′′ W, and south of a line 

drawn from in the vicinity of Chelsea 

Piers, approximate position 

40°44′48.98′′ N, 074°00′41.06′′ W, then 

west to a point in near Maxwell Park, 

Hoboken, NJ, in approximate position 

40°44′55.91′′ N, 074°01′24.94′′ W. (NAD 

83). 

(4) Area ECHO: All navigable waters 

of the Hudson River north of a line 

drawn Hoboken/New Jersey Transit 

Station approximate position 

40°43′50.38′′ N, 074°01′41.68′′ W in 

Hoboken, NJ, east to Pier 40, New York, 

NY in approximate position 

40°43′46.43′′ N, 074°00′50.95′′ W, and 

south of a line drawn from Pier C Park, 

Hoboken, NJ, in approximate position 

40°44′24.32′′ N, 074°01′32.98′′ W, east to 

Gansevoort Street, New York, NY, 

approximate position 40°44′20.46′′ N, 

074°00′37.28′′ W. (NAD 83). 

(b) Definitions. For purposes of this 

section ‘‘Designated representative’’ is 

any Coast Guard commissioned, 

warrant, or petty officer who has been 

designated by the Captain of the Port 

New York (COTP) to act on the COTP’s 

behalf. 

(c) Special local regulations. (1) In 

accordance with the general regulations 

in section 100.35 of this part, entry into, 

transiting, or anchoring within the 

regulated areas is prohibited, unless 

authorized by the COTP or the 

designated representative. 

(2) Vessels are authorized by the 

COTP or the designated representative 

to enter areas of this special location 

regulation in accordance with the 

following restrictions: 

(i): Area ALPHA access is limited to 

vessels less than 20 meters (65.6 ft) in length. 

(ii) Area BRAVO access is limited to 

vessels greater than 20 meters (65.6 ft) in 

length. 

(iii) Area DELTA access is limited to 

vessels greater than 20 meters (65.6 ft) in 

length. 

(iv) Area ECHO access is limited to vessels 

less than 20 meters (65.6 ft) in length. 

(3) All persons and vessels in the 

regulated areas shall comply with the 

instructions of the COTP or the 

designated representative. 

(4) Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast 

Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing 

light or other means, the operator of a 

vessel shall proceed as directed. The 

COTP or the designated representative 

can be reached on VHF channel 16. 

(d) Effective period. This rule will be 

effective from 7 p.m. to 11 p.m. on July 

4, 2012. If the fireworks display is 

postponed, this section will be effective 

from 7 p.m. until 11 p.m. on July 5, 

2012. 

Dated: February 27, 2012. 

G.P. Hitchen, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain 

of the Port New York. 

[FR Doc. 2012–6980 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 51 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2007–0089; FRL–9650–9] 

RIN 2060–AO17 

Air Quality: Revision to Definition of 

Volatile Organic Compounds— 

Exclusion of a Group of Four 

Hydrofluoropolyethers (HFPEs) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to 

revise the agency’s definition of volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs) for purposes 

of preparing State Implementation Plans 

(SIPs) to attain the national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone 

under Title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

This proposed revision would add four 

chemical compounds to the list of 

compounds excluded from the 

definition of VOC on the basis that each 

of these compounds makes a negligible 

contribution to tropospheric ozone 

formation. These compounds consist of 

four hydrofluoropolyethers (HFPEs) 

which are identified as HCF2OCF2H 

(also known as HFE-134), 

HCF2OCF2OCF2H (also known as HFE236cal2), HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (also 

known as HFE-338pcc13), and 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
16982 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (also known 

as H-Galden 1040X or H-Galden ZT 130 

(or 150 or 180)). In addition, the EPA is 

proposing to make certain technical 

corrections to the current list of exempt 

compounds at 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 23, 2012. Public Hearing: 

If anyone contacts us requesting us to 

hold a public hearing by April 9, 2012, 

we will hold a public hearing. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2007–0089, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Comments may be sent by 

electronic mail (email) to a-and-rDocket@epa.gov. Attention Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2007–0089. 

• Fax: Fax your comments to: 202– 

566–1741, Attention Docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2007–0089. 

• Mail: Send your comments to: Air 

and Radiation Docket and Information 

Center, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Mail Code: 2822T, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 

20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2007–0089. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA West (Air 

Docket), 1301 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC 

20004. Attention: Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2007–0089. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2007– 

0089. The EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider as CBI or otherwise protected 

information through 

www.regulations.gov, or email. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means that the EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov, 

your email address will be 

automatically captured and included as 

part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, the EPA recommends that 

you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any 

form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses. For additional 

instructions on submitting comments, 

go to http://www.epa.gov/epahome/ 

dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Office of Air and Radiation Docket 

and Information Center, 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 Office of Air and 

Radiation Docket and Information 

Center is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Sanders, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Air Quality 

Policy Division, State and Local 

Programs Group, Mail Code (C539–01), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; 

telephone (919) 541–3356 or fax (919) 

541–0824; and email address: 

sanders.dave@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

Entities potentially affected by this 

proposed rule include, but are not 

necessarily limited to, states (typically 

state air pollution control agencies) that 

control VOCs, and industries listed in 

the following table involved in the 

manufacture or use of fire suppressants 

and specialized refrigerants in 

secondary loop refrigeration systems for 

heat transfer. 

This proposed rule is applicable to all 

manufacturers, distributors, and users of 

these chemical compounds. 

Industry group SIC a NAICSb

Fire Suppression .............................................................................................................................................. 2899 325998, 423990 

Refrigerants ..................................................................................................................................................... 2869, 3585 238220, 336111 

aStandard Industrial Classification. 

b North American Industry Classification System. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for the EPA? 

Submitting CBI: Do not submit this 

information to the EPA through 

www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to the EPA, mark the outside 

of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

C. How can I find information about a 

possible public hearing? 

To request a public hearing or 

information pertaining to a public 

hearing on this document, contact Ms. 

Pamela S. Long, Air Quality Policy 

Division, Mail code C504–01, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

telephone (919) 541–0641, facsimile 

number (919) 541–5509, electronic 

email address: long.pam@epa.gov. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Proposed Rules 16983 

D. How is this preamble organized? 

The information presented in this 

preamble is organized as follows: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

B. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for the EPA? 

C. How can I find information about a 

possible public hearing? 

D. How is this preamble organized? 

II. Background 

A. VOC Exemptions 

B. Petitioned Compounds to List as 

Negligibly Reactive: HCF2OCF2H (HFE 

134), HCF2OCF2OCF2H (HFE-236cal2), 

HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (HFE-338pcc13), 

and HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (HGalden 1040X and H-Galden ZT 130 (or 

150 or 180)) 

III. The EPA Response to the Petition 

A. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone 

B. Likelihood of Risk to Human Health or 

the Environment 

C. Conclusion 

IV. Proposed Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Orders Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning 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 

and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations 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 

II. Background 

A. VOC Exemptions 

Tropospheric ozone, commonly 

known as smog, is formed when VOCs 

and nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the 

atmosphere in the presence of sunlight. 

Because of the harmful health effects of 

ozone, the EPA and state governments 

limit the amount of VOCs that can be 

released into the atmosphere. VOCs are 

those organic compounds of carbon 

which form ozone through atmospheric 

photochemical reactions. Different 

VOCs have different levels of 

reactivity—that is, they do not react to 

form ozone at the same speed or do not 

form ozone to the same extent. Some 

VOCs react slowly, or form less ozone; 

therefore, changes in their emissions 

have limited effects on local or regional 

ozone pollution episodes. It has been 

the EPA’s policy that organic 

compounds with a negligible level of 

reactivity should be excluded from the 

regulatory definition of VOC so as to 

focus VOC control efforts on 

compounds that do significantly 

increase ozone concentrations. The EPA 

also believes that exempting such 

compounds creates an incentive for 

industry to use negligibly reactive 

compounds in place of more highly 

reactive compounds that are regulated 

as VOCs. The EPA lists these negligibly 

reactive compounds in its regulations 

(at 40 CFR 51.100(s)) and excludes them 

from the definition of VOC. 

The CAA requires the regulation of 

VOCs for various purposes. Section 

302(s) of the CAA specifies that the EPA 

has the authority to define what this 

term means, and hence what 

compounds shall be treated as VOCs for 

regulatory purposes. The policy of 

excluding negligibly reactive 

compounds from the VOC definition 

was first set forth in the ‘‘Recommended 

Policy on Control of Volatile Organic 

Compounds’’ (42 FR 35314, July 8, 

1977) and was supplemented most 

recently with the ‘‘Interim Guidance on 

Control of Volatile Organic Compounds 

in Ozone State Implementation Plans’’ 

(Interim Guidance) (70 FR 54046, 

September 13, 2005). The EPA uses the 

reactivity of ethane as the threshold for 

determining whether a compound has 

negligible reactivity. Compounds that 

are less reactive than, or equally reactive 

to, ethane under certain assumed 

conditions may be deemed negligibly 

reactive and therefore suitable for 

exemption from the regulatory 

definition of VOC. Compounds that are 

more reactive than ethane continue to 

be considered VOCs for regulatory 

purposes and therefore subject to 

control requirements. The selection of 

ethane as the threshold compound was 

based on a series of smog chamber 

experiments that underlay the 1977 

policy. 

The EPA has used three different 

metrics to compare the reactivity of a 

specific compound to that of ethane: (i) 

The reaction rate constant (known as 

kOH) with the hydroxyl radical (OH); (ii) 

the maximum incremental reactivities 

(MIR) of ethane and the compound in 

question expressed on a reactivity per 

mass basis; and (iii) the MIR of ethane 

and the compound in question 

expressed on a reactivity per mole basis. 

Differences between these three metrics 

are discussed below. 

The kOH is the reaction rate constant 

of the compound with the OH radical in 

the air. This reaction is typically the 

first step in a series of chemical 

reactions by which a compound breaks 

down in the air and participates in the 

ozone-forming process. If this step is 

slow, the compound will likely not form 

ozone at a very fast rate. The kOH values 

have long been used by the EPA as a 

measure of photochemical reactivity 

and ozone-forming activity, and they 

have been the basis for most of the 

EPA’s previous exclusions of negligibly 

reactive compounds. The kOH metric is 

inherently a molar comparison, i.e., it 

measures the rate at which molecules 

react. 

The MIR values, both by mole and by 

mass, are a more recently developed 

measure of photochemical reactivity 

derived from a computer-based 

photochemical model. This 

measurement considers the complete 

ozone forming activity of a compound, 

not merely the first reaction step. 

Further explanation of the MIR metric 

can be found in: W. P. L. Carter, 

‘‘Development of Ozone Reactivity 

Scales for Volatile Organic 

Compositions,’’ Journal of the Air & 

Waste Management Association, Vol. 

44, 881–899, July 1994. 

The MIR values for compounds are 

typically expressed as grams of ozone 

formed per gram of VOC (mass basis), 

but may also be expressed as grams of 

ozone formed per mole of VOC (molar 

basis). For comparing the reactivities of 

two compounds, using the molar MIR 

values considers an equal number of 

molecules of the two compounds. 

Alternatively, using the mass MIR 

values compares an equal mass of the 

two compounds, which will involve 

different numbers of molecules, 

depending on the relative molecular 

weights. The molar MIR comparison is 

consistent with the original smog 

chamber experiments that underlie the 

original selection of ethane as the 

threshold compound and compared 

equal molar concentrations of 

individual VOCs. It is also consistent 

with previous reactivity determinations 

based on inherently molar kOH values. 

By contrast, the mass MIR comparison 

is more consistent with how MIR values 

and other reactivity metrics have been 

applied in reactivity-based emission 

limits, such as the national VOC 

emissions standards for aerosol coatings 

(73 FR 15604). Many other VOC 

regulations contain limits based upon a 

weight of VOC per volume of product, 

such as the EPA’s regulations for 

limiting VOC emissions from 

architectural and industrial 

maintenance coatings (65 FR 7736). 

However, the fact that regulations are 

structured to measure VOC content by 

weight for ease of implementation and 

enforcement does not necessarily 

control whether VOC exemption 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
16984 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

1 Information on the SNAP program can be found 

on the following Web page: www.epa.gov/ozone/ 

snap. 

decisions should be made on a weight 

basis as well. 

The choice of the molar basis versus 

the mass basis for the ethane 

comparison can be significant. Given 

the relatively low molecular weight of 

ethane, use of the mass basis tends to 

result in more VOCs being classified as 

‘‘negligibly reactive’’ than in the case of 

the molar basis. In some cases, a 

compound might be considered less 

reactive than ethane and eligible for 

VOC exemption under the mass basis 

but not under the molar basis. 

In this proposed action, the EPA relies 

on the kOH metric because of the 

availability of relevant data. No reported 

calculations of MIR values on a molar or 

mass basis were found for these 

compounds. Thus, the EPA relies on the 

kOH metric. 

The EPA’s 2005 Interim Guidance 

also notes that concerns have sometimes 

been raised about the potential impact 

of a VOC exemption on environmental 

endpoints other than ozone 

concentrations, including fine particle 

formation, air toxics exposures, 

stratospheric ozone depletion, and 

climate change. The EPA has 

recognized, however, that there are 

existing regulatory and non-regulatory 

programs that are specifically designed 

to address these issues, and the agency 

continues to believe that the impacts of 

VOC exemptions on environmental 

endpoints other than ozone formation 

will be adequately addressed by these 

programs. The VOC exemption policy is 

intended to facilitate attainment of the 

ozone NAAQS, and questions have been 

raised as to whether the agency has 

authority to use its VOC policy to 

address concerns that are unrelated to 

ground-level ozone. Thus, in general, 

VOC exemption decisions will continue 

to be based solely on consideration of a 

compound’s contribution to ozone 

formation. However, if the agency 

determines that a particular VOC 

exemption is likely to result in a 

significant increase in the use of a 

compound and that the increased use 

would pose a significant risk to human 

health or the environment that would 

not be addressed adequately by existing 

programs or policies, the EPA reserves 

the right to exercise its judgment in 

deciding whether to grant an exemption. 

In this case, the agency has examined 

available information on the risks to 

human health and the environment and 

applicability of other regulatory 

programs; that information for the four 

compounds considered here is 

discussed further in Section III. 

B. Petitioned Compounds To List as 

Negligibly Reactive: HCF2OCF2H (HFE 

134), HCF2OCF2OCF2H (HFE-236cal2), 

HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (HFE-338pcc13), 

and HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (HGalden 1040X and H-Galden ZT 130 (or 

150 or 180)) 

On February 10, 2005, Solvay Solexis, 

Incorporated submitted to the EPA a 

petition requesting that four compounds 

in the family of products known by the 

trade name H-Galden be added to the 

list of compounds that are considered to 

be negligibly reactive in the definition 

of VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s). These four 

compounds—HCF2OCF2H (HFE-134), 

HCF2OCF2OCF2H (HFE-236cal2), 

HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (HFE-338pcc13), 

and HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (HGalden 1040X and H-Galden ZT 130 (or 

150 or 180))—can be used in some heat 

transfer applications (as refrigerants) 

and as fire suppressants. 

In both the refrigeration and fire 

suppressant end uses, these HFPEs 

would be used as substitutes for ozonedepleting substances (ODS) and thus 

have either undergone or would need to 

undergo review by the EPA’s Significant 

New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) 

Program. The SNAP Program is EPA’s 

program to evaluate and regulate 

substitutes for the ozone-depleting 

chemicals that are being phased out 

under the stratospheric ozone protection 

provisions of the CAA. In Section 612(c) 

of the CAA, the agency is authorized to 

identify and publish lists of acceptable 

and unacceptable substitutes for class I 

or class II ozone-depleting substances.1

The EPA’s SNAP program has evaluated 

the use of H-Galden HFPEs and found 

acceptable their use as fire suppressants 

in non-residential applications, in place 

of Halon 1211 (68 FR 4004, January 27, 

2003). However, the SNAP program has 

not approved H-Galden HFPEs for 

certain other uses (i.e., solvent, aerosol 

propellant, foam blowing, and 

refrigeration). There currently is no 

submission pending review to list these 

substances as substitutes in other uses. 

Thus, at this time, it would be a 

violation of the CAA and the SNAP 

program regulations for any person to 

introduce H-Galden HFPEs into 

interstate commerce for use in other end 

uses regulated by the SNAP program. HGalden HFPEs may be used in nonmechanical heat transfer as a secondary 

refrigerant in secondary-loop 

refrigeration systems without approval 

from SNAP; the EPA does not list, and 

does not currently require notification 

for, compounds that are used only as a 

secondary fluid in secondary-loop 

refrigeration systems (62 FR 10702; 

March 10, 1997). 

With respect to the photochemical 

reactivity of the H-Galden compounds, 

Solvay Solexis, Incorporated provided 

information on the photochemical 

reactivity of its chemical compounds as 

measured by each compound’s kOH rate 

constant. Measurements of the reaction 

rate of HCF2OCF2H (HFE-134) with OH 

have been estimated at 298 K to be 

2.9×10¥15 (cm3/molecule-sec). This rate 

constant is highly temperature 

dependent and decreases at lower 

temperatures. The calculated reaction 

rates for the three additional HFPEs 

submitted by Solvay Solexis are 

2.4×10¥15 (cm3/molecule-sec) for HFE236cal2, 4.7×10¥15 (cm3/molecule-sec) 

for HFE-338pcc13, and 4.9×10¥15 (cm3/ 

molecule-sec) for H-Galden 1040X. The 

kOH values for these four HFPEs are 

significantly lower than the reaction rate 

for ethane which has a kOH value of 

2.4×10¥13 (cm3/molecule-sec) at 298 K. 

The scientific information that the 

petitioner submitted in support of the 

petition has been added to the docket 

for this rulemaking. This docketed 

information includes journal articles 

where the rate constant values can be 

found. Solvay Solexis, Incorporated 

submitted the following articles in 

support of its petition: (1) 

‘‘Tropospheric Degradation Products of 

Novel Hydrofluoropolyethers,’’ Tuazon, 

Environmental Science & Technology, 

University of California, Riverside, May 

1997; (2) ‘‘Hydrofluoropolyethers,’’ 

Marchionni, Silvani, Fontana, 

Malinverno, Visca, Journal of Fluorine 

Chemistry, Ausimont SpA, R & D 

Centre, 1999; and (3) ‘‘Toxicological 

Profile of Hydrofluoropolyethers,’’ 

Malinverno, Colombo, Visca, Regulatory 

Toxicology and Pharmacology, 

December, 2004. 

Information in the Solvay Solexis, 

Incorporated petition and its reference 

material indicates that the four HFPEs 

have low acute toxicity, no irritation or 

skin sensitization, and no detectable 

genotoxic activity in vitro or in vivo. 

The HFPEs show a similarly low 

potential for developmental toxicity. 

This toxicity information has been 

placed in the docket for this rulemaking. 

III. The EPA Response to the Petition 

Consistent with the Interim Guidance, 

the EPA’s proposed response to the 

petition is based on a consideration of 

the contribution that each chemical 

makes to tropospheric ozone formation 

based on a comparison of reactivity 

metrics, and our assessment that 

existing programs or policies already 

adequately address the possibility that 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Proposed Rules 16985 

granting the petition would pose a 

significant risk to human health or the 

environment. Information on these 

topics is given below. 

A. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone 

Table 1 summarizes the information 

provided by the petitioner regarding the 

photochemical reactivity of the 

compounds under consideration. The 

data submitted by the petitioner support 

the contention that the reactivity of 

these compounds, with respect to 

reaction with the OH radical in the 

atmosphere, is lower than that of 

ethane. 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF REACTION RATES WITH OH (KOH) REACTION RATE CONSTANT COMPARED TO ETHANE

Chemical formula CAS No. Name 

kOH

(cm3/(moleculesec)) 1

kOH ratio relative 

to ethane 

C2H6 .......................................................... 74–84–0 ethane ....................................................... 2.4x10¥13 1.00 

HCF2OCF2H .............................................. 1691–17–4 HFE-134 ................................................... 2.3x10¥15 0.01 

HCF2OCF2OCF2H ..................................... 78522–47–1 HFE-236ca12 ........................................... 2.4x10¥15 0.01 

HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H .............................. 188690–78–0 HFE-338pcc13 .......................................... 4.7x10¥15 0.02 

HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H ..................... 188690–77–9 H-Galden 1040X ....................................... 4.9x10¥15 0.02 

Note: 1K Tokuhashi et al., Journal of Physical Chemistry A, 104, 1165 (2000). 

B. Likelihood of Risk to Human Health 

or the Environment 

Additionally, we examined and 

present available information on the 

likelihood of risk to human health or the 

environment from increased use of the 

chemicals considered here. We believe 

that current regulation of these 

compounds under other EPA programs 

adequately protects human health and 

the environment. 

The EPA’s SNAP program has 

reviewed the potential impacts of the HGalden HFPEs on human health and the 

environment, including stratospheric 

ozone depletion and global warming 

potential (GWP). From a human health 

standpoint, use of HFPEs as a streaming 

agent fire suppressant in non-residential 

applications does not pose a significant 

risk as compared to other available 

substitutes with the same end use. 

Because HFPEs do not contain chlorine 

or bromine, these compounds do not 

contribute to the depletion of the ozone 

layer and have ozone depletion 

potential values of zero. These HFPEs 

have significant GWPs, comparable to 

those for hydrofluorocarbons also used 

as fire suppressants. The SNAP program 

listed H-Galden HFPEs as acceptable 

substitutes for Halon 1211 subject to 

narrowed use limits (for use only in 

non-residential applications) because 

they reduce overall risk to human health 

and the environment in the listed end 

use and application (68 FR 4004, 

January 27, 2003). 

Table 2 shows the 20 and 100 year 

GWPs of these four compounds relative 

to carbon dioxide (CO2) as reported by 

the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change. These GWP–100 levels are 

comparable to mid-range levels 

associated with some chemical 

compounds that have previously been 

exempted from the VOC definition, 

which range from 23 to 12,000. We 

invite the public to submit comments 

and additional information relevant to 

this issue and whether such information 

should be considered in connection 

with the decision to grant an exemption 

from the regulatory definition of VOC. 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS RELATIVE TO CO2 OVER 20 AND 100 YEARS FOR THE FOUR

COMPOUNDS BEING CONSIDERED FOR VOC EXEMPTIONS

Chemical formula CAS No. Name 

GWP relative to 

CO2

(20 years) 1

GWP relative to 

CO2

(100 years) 

HCF2OCF2H .............................................. 1691–17–4 HFE-134 ................................................... 12200 6320 

HCF2OCF2OCF2H ..................................... 78522–47–1 HFE-236ca12 ........................................... 8000 2800 

HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H .............................. 188690–78–0 HFE-338pcc13 .......................................... 5100 1500 

HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H ..................... 188690–77–9 H-Galden 1040X ....................................... 6320 1870 

CO2 ........................................................... 124–38–9 Carbon dioxide ......................................... 1 1 

Note: 1Forster, P., V. Ramaswamy, P. Artaxo, T. Berntsen, R. Betts, D.W. Fahey, J. Haywood, J. Lean, DC Lowe, G. Myhre, J. Nganga, R. 

Prinn, G. Raga, M. Schulz and R. Van Dorland, 2007: Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing. In: Climate Change 2007: 

The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, 

Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. 

C. Conclusion 

In summary, for all four compounds, 

the EPA believes that (a) these 

chemicals qualify as negligibly reactive 

with respect to their contribution to 

tropospheric ozone formation, and (b) 

any non-tropospheric ozone-related 

risks associated with potential increased 

use are adequately addressed by other 

existing programs and policies. We 

invite the public to submit comments 

and additional information relevant to 

the issue of these compounds’ overall 

risks and benefits to human health and 

the environment, and on whether such 

information should be considered in 

connection with the decision to grant an 

exemption from the regulatory 

definition of VOC. 

IV. Proposed Action 

The EPA hereby proposes to amend 

its definition of VOC at 40 CFR 

51.100(s) to exclude a group of four 

HFPE’s identified as HCF2OCF2H 

(known as HFE-134), HCF2OCF2OCF2H 

(known as HFE-236cal2), 

HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (known as HFE338pcc13), and 

HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (known as HGalden 1040X and also H-Galden ZT 

130 (or 150 or 180)) as VOCs for ozone 

SIP and ozone control purposes. If an 

entity uses or produces any of these four 

HFPE compounds and is subject to the 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
16986 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

EPA regulations limiting the use of VOC 

in a product, limiting the VOC 

emissions from a facility, or otherwise 

controlling the use of VOC for purposes 

related to attaining the ozone NAAQS, 

then the compound will not be counted 

as a VOC in determining whether these 

regulatory obligations have been met. 

This action may also affect whether any 

of these four HFPE compounds are 

considered as VOCs for state regulatory 

purposes to reduce ozone formation, if 

a state relies on the EPA’s definition of 

VOC. States are not obligated to exclude 

from control as a VOC those compounds 

that the EPA has found to be negligibly 

reactive. However, if this action is made 

final, states may not take credit for 

controlling these compounds in their 

ozone control strategies. 

The EPA is also proposing to make 

certain technical corrections to the 

current list of exempt compounds at 40 

CFR 51.100(s)(1) by replacing several 

commas separating individual 

compounds with semicolons and by 

removing the erroneous ‘‘(1)’’ notation 

in ‘‘(1) 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3- 

methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane 

(HFE-7300)’’ so that it reads 

‘‘1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3- 

methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane 

(HFE-7300)’’. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Executive Order 13563: 

Improving Regulation and Regulatory 

Review 

Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 

(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 

action is a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ because it raises novel legal or 

policy issues arising out of legal 

mandates. Accordingly, the EPA 

submitted this action to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review under Executive Orders 12866 

and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 

2011) and any changes made in 

response to OMB recommendations 

have been documented in the docket for 

this action. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). It does not 

contain any recordkeeping or reporting 

requirement. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the agency certifies 

that the proposed rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of this proposed rule on small entities, 

small entity is defined as: (1) A small 

business that is a small industrial entity 

as defined in the U.S. Small Business 

Administration (SBA) size standards. 

(See 13 CFR 121.); (2) A governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district, or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) A small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of this proposed rule on small 

entities, I certify that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This proposed rule will not impose any 

requirements on small entities. 

We continue to be interested in the 

potential impacts of the proposed rule 

on small entities and welcome 

comments on issues related to such 

impacts. 

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. Therefore, this action 

is not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 and 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 proposed 

action addresses the exemption of a set 

of chemical compounds from the VOC 

definition. Thus, Executive Order 13132 

does not apply to this rule. In the spirit 

of Executive Order 13132, and 

consistent with the EPA policy to 

promote communications between the 

EPA and state and local governments, 

the EPA specifically solicits comment 

on this proposed rule 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). It will not have substantial direct 

effects on tribal governments, on 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 rule. In the spirit of 

Executive Order 13175, and consistent 

with the EPA policy to promote 

communications between the EPA and 

Tribal governments, the EPA 

specifically solicits additional comment 

on this proposed rule from tribal 

officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 

1997) because it is not economically 

significant as defined in EO 12866. 

While this proposed rule is not subject 

to the Executive Order, the EPA has 

reason to believe that ozone has a 

disproportionate effect on active 

children who play outdoors (62 FR 

38856–38859, July 18, 1997). The EPA 

has not identified any specific studies 

on whether or to what extent the 

chemical compound may affect 

children’s health. The EPA has placed 

the available data regarding the health 

effects of this chemical compound in 

Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2007–0089. 

The public is invited to submit 

comments or identify peer-reviewed 

studies and data, of which the EPA may 

not be aware, that assess results of early 

life exposure to the chemical 

compounds herein. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This proposed 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 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Proposed Rules 16987 

22, 2001) because it is not likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

This action proposes to revise the EPA’s 

definition of VOCs for purposes of 

preparing SIPs to attain the NAAQS for 

ozone under title I of the CAA. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer Advancement Act 

of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 104– 

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

directs the 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 

the EPA to provide Congress, through 

OMB, with explanations when the 

agency decides not to use available and 

applicable voluntary consensus 

standards. 

This proposed rulemaking does not 

involve technical standards. Therefore, 

the EPA is not considering 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 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. 

The EPA has determined that this 

proposed 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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: March 15, 2012. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

For reasons set forth in the preamble, 

part 51 of chapter I of title 40 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR 

PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND 

SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION 

PLANS 

1. The authority citation for part 51 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401– 

7671q. 

§ 51.100 [Amended] 

2. In § 51.100 in paragraph (s)(1) 

introductory text, remove the words 

‘‘methyl acetate, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3- 

heptafluoro-3-methoxy-propane (nC3F7OCH3, HFE-7000), 3-ethoxy1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-dodecafluoro-2- 

(trifluoromethyl) hexane (HFE-7500), 

1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane (HFC 

227ea), methyl formate (HCOOCH3), (1) 

1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3- 

methoxy- 4-trifluoromethyl-pentane 

(HFE-7300); propylene carbonate; 

dimethyl carbonate; and 

perfluorocarbon compounds which fall 

into these classes:’’ and add in their 

place the words ‘‘methyl acetate; 

1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxypropane (n-C3F7OCH3, HFE-7000); 3- 

ethoxy- 1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6- 

dodecafluoro-2-(trifluoromethyl) hexane 

(HFE-7500); 1,1,1,2,3,3,3- 

heptafluoropropane (HFC 227ea); 

methyl formate (HCOOCH3); 

1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3- 

methoxy- 4-trifluoromethyl-pentane 

(HFE-7300); propylene carbonate; 

dimethyl carbonate; HCF2OCF2H 

(HFE134); HCF2OCF2OCF2H (HFE236cal2); HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H 

(HFE-338pcc13); 

HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (H-Galden 

1040x or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or 

180)); and perfluorocarbon compounds 

which fall into these classes:’’ 

[FR Doc. 2012–6911 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0544; FRL–9651–8] 

RIN 2060–AQ40 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants: Secondary 

Aluminum Production 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of extension of public 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: On February 14, 2012, EPA 

proposed amendments to the national 

emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants for secondary aluminum 

production (77 FR 8576). The EPA is 

extending the deadline for written 

comments on the proposed amendments 

by 14 days to April 13, 2012. The EPA 

received a request for an extension from 

the Aluminum Association. The 

Aluminum Association has requested 

the extension in order to allow more 

time to review the redlined of the 

original rule and the proposed revisions, 

as well as review the test data for Group 

I furnaces. 

DATES: Comments. The public comment 

period for the proposed rule published 

February 14, 2012, (77 FR 8576) is being 

extended for 14 days to April 13, 2012, 

in order to provide the public additional 

time to submit comments and 

supporting information. 

ADDRESSES: Comments. Written 

comments on the proposed rule may be 

submitted to EPA electronically, by 

mail, by facsimile or through hand 

delivery/courier. Please refer to the 

proposal for the addresses and detailed 

instructions. 

Docket. Publicly available documents 

relevant to this action are available for 

public inspection either electronically at 

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

copy at the EPA Docket Center, Room 

3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue 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. A reasonable fee may be 

charged for copying. 

World Wide Web. The EPA Web site 

for this rulemaking is at: http://www.

epa.gov/ttn/atw/. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Rochelle Boyd, Metals and Inorganic 

Chemicals Group (D243–02), Sector 

Policies and Programs Division, Office 

of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711; Telephone number: (919) 541– 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS