[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16981-16987]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6911]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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 HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (also 
known as HFE-134), HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (also 
known as HFE-236cal2), 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (also 
known as HFE-338pcc13), and

[[Page 16982]]

HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>
H (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:
    <bullet> www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    <bullet> Email: Comments may be sent by electronic mail (email) to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#01602c606f652c732c456e626a6475416471602f666e77"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="87e6aae6e9e3aaf5aac3e8e4ece2f3c7e2f7e6a9e0e8f1">[email protected]</span></a>. Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0089.
    <bullet> Fax: Fax your comments to: 202-566-1741, Attention Docket 
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0089.
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> 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: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7102101f151403025f15100714311401105f161e07"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5a293b343e3f2829743e3b2c3f1a3f2a3b743d352c">[email protected]</span></a>.

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\          NAICS \b\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fire Suppression....................              2899    325998, 423990
Refrigerants........................        2869, 3585    238220, 336111
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Standard 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: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a4c8cbcac38ad4c5c9e4c1d4c58ac3cbd2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="660a0908014816070b2603160748010910">[email protected]</span></a>.

[[Page 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: 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (HFE 134), 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (HFE-236cal2), 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (HFE-
338pcc13), and 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>
H (H-Galden 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 (NO<INF>X</INF>) 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 k<INF>OH</INF>) 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 k<INF>OH</INF> 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 k<INF>OH</INF> 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 k<INF>OH</INF> 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 k<INF>OH</INF> 
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

[[Page 16984]]

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 k<INF>OH</INF> 
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 k<INF>OH</INF> 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: 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (HFE 134), 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (HFE-236cal2), 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (HFE-
338pcc13), and 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>
H (H-Galden 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--HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H 
(HFE-134), HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (HFE-
236cal2), HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H 
(HFE-338pcc13), and 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>
H (H-Galden 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 ozone-depleting 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. H-
Galden HFPEs may be used in non-mechanical 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Information on the SNAP program can be found on the 
following Web page: www.epa.gov/ozone/snap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 k<INF>OH</INF> rate constant. Measurements of the reaction 
rate of HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (HFE-134) with OH have been 
estimated at 298 K to be 2.9x10<SUP>-15</SUP> (cm\3\/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 2.4x10<SUP>-15</SUP> 
(cm\3\/molecule-sec) for HFE-236cal2, 4.7x10-15 (cm\3\/molecule-sec) 
for HFE-338pcc13, and 4.9x10<SUP>-15</SUP> (cm\3\/molecule-sec) for H-
Galden 1040X. The k<INF>OH</INF> values for these four HFPEs are 
significantly lower than the reaction rate for ethane which has a 
k<INF>OH</INF> value of 2.4x10<SUP>-13</SUP> (cm\3\/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

[[Page 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 kOH (cm\3\/        kOH ratio
          Chemical formula                CAS No.               Name           (molecule-sec))     relative to
                                                                                     \1\             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: \1\ K 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 H-
Galden 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 (CO<INF>2</INF>) 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               GWP relative to
          Chemical formula                CAS No.               Name           CO2  (20 years)   GWP relative to
                                                                                     \1\        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: \1\ Forster, 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 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (known as HFE-134), 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (known as HFE-236cal2), 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (known as 
HFE-338pcc13), and 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>
H (known as H-Galden 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

[[Page 16986]]

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

[[Page 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.


Sec.  51.100  [Amended]

    2. In Sec.  51.100 in paragraph (s)(1) introductory text, remove 
the words ``methyl acetate, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxy-propane 
(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) 
1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-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-
methoxy-propane (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; 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (HFE134); 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (HFE-236cal2); 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>H (HFE-
338pcc13); 
HCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>CF<INF>2</INF>OCF<INF>2</INF>
H (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


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>