Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 41747 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule and is consistent with 

statutory requirements. Section 203 

requires EPA to establish a plan for 

informing and advising any small 

governments that may be significantly 

or uniquely impacted by the rule. 

EPA has determined that the limited 

approval/limited disapproval action 

proposed does not include a Federal 

mandate that may result in estimated 

costs of $100 million or more to either 

State, local, or tribal governments in the 

aggregate, or to the private sector. This 

Federal action proposes to approve and 

disapprove pre-existing requirements 

under State or local law, and imposes 

no new requirements. Accordingly, no 

additional costs to State, local, or tribal 

governments, or to the private sector, 

result from this action. 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) revokes and replaces Executive 

Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 

(Enhancing the Intergovernmental 

Partnership). Executive Order 13132 

requires EPA to develop an accountable 

process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and 

timely input by State and local officials 

in the development of regulatory 

policies that have federalism 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 

federalism implications’’ is defined in 

the Executive Order to include 

regulations that 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.’’ Under 

Executive Order 13132, EPA may not 

issue a regulation that has federalism 

implications, that imposes substantial 

direct compliance costs, and that is not 

required by statute, unless the Federal 

government provides the funds 

necessary to pay the direct compliance 

costs incurred by State and local 

governments, or EPA consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the proposed 

regulation. EPA also may not issue a 

regulation that has federalism 

implications and that preempts State 

law unless the Agency consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the proposed 

regulation. 

This rule 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, because it 

merely proposes to approve or 

disapprove a State rule implementing a 

federal standard, and does not alter the 

relationship or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities established in the 

CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 

6 of the Executive Order do not apply 

to this rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA 

to develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

tribal officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have tribal 

implications.’’ This proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications, as specified 

in Executive Order 13175. 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. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this rule. 

EPA specifically solicits additional 

comment on this proposed rule from 

tribal officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045, because it 

approves a State rule implementing a 

Federal standard. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This rule is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is 

not a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12 of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal 

agencies to evaluate existing technical 

standards when developing a new 

regulation. To comply with NTTAA, 

EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary 

consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available 

and applicable when developing 

programs and policies unless doing so 

would be inconsistent with applicable 

law or otherwise impractical. 

The EPA believes that VCS are 

inapplicable to this action. Today’s 

action does not require the public to 

perform activities conducive to the use 

of VCS. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 

7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA lacks the discretionary authority 

to address environmental justice in this 

rulemaking. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: June 29, 2011. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–17784 Filed 7–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 82 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0672; FRL–9439–3] 

RIN 2060–AQ39 

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: 

Extension of Global Laboratory and 

Analytical Use Exemption for Essential 

Class I Ozone-Depleting Substances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to extend 

the global laboratory and analytical use 

exemption for the production and 

import of Class I ozone-depleting 

substances through December 31, 2014, 

consistent with the recent actions by the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
41748 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

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

substance produced in the United States, plus the 

amount imported into the United States, minus the 

amount exported from the United States to other 

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

of the Clean Air Act). 

Parties to the Montreal Protocol on 

Substances that Deplete the Ozone 

Layer. The exemption allows persons in 

the United States to produce and import 

controlled substances for laboratory and 

analytical uses that have not been 

already identified by EPA as 

nonessential. EPA is also seeking 

comment on adding to the list of 

procedures that are excluded from the 

exemption uses that are noted in 

Decision XXI/6 (from the 21st Meeting of 

the Parties [MOP] to the Montreal 

Protocol). EPA is not proposing to add 

these procedures at this time. 

DATES: Written comments on this 

proposed rule must be received by the 

EPA Docket on or before September 13, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2010–0672, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 202–566–1741. 

• Mail: Docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2010– 

0672, Air and Radiation Docket and 

Information Center, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mail code: 6102T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery: Docket EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2010–0672, Air and Radiation 

Docket at EPA West, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Room B108, Washington, 

DC 20460. 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–2010– 

0672. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

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, 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 EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ifeyinwa Davis by regular mail: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Stratospheric Protection Division 

(6205J), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20460; by courier 

service or overnight express: 1301 L 

Street, NW., Workstation 1027N, 

Washington, DC 20005; by telephone: 

202–343–9234; or by e-mail: 

davis.ifeyinwa@epa.gov. You may also 

visit the EPA’s Ozone Protection Web 

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

strathome.html for further information 

about EPA’s Stratospheric Ozone 

Protection regulations, the science of 

ozone layer depletion, and other related 

topics. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

A. What should I consider when preparing 

my comments? 

II. Extension of the Global Laboratory and 

Analytical Use Exemption 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

I. General Information 

A. What should I consider when 

preparing my comments? 

1. Confidential Business Information. 

Do not submit confidential business 

information (CBI) to EPA through 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

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 EPA, mark the 

outside of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI 

and then identify electronically within 

the disk or CD–ROM the specific 

information that is claimed as CBI. In 

addition to one complete version of the 

comment that includes information 

claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment 

that does not contain the information 

claimed as CBI must be submitted for 

inclusion in the public docket. 

Information so marked will not be 

disclosed except in accordance with 

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date, and page number). 

• Follow directions—The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. Extension of the Global Laboratory 

and Analytical Use Exemption 

The Montreal Protocol on Substances 

that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal 

Protocol) is the international agreement 

to reduce and eventually eliminate the 

production and consumption1 of ozoneVerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15JYP1.SGM 15JYP1

emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 41749 

2Class I controlled substances are listed at 40 CFR 

part 82, subpart A, Appendix A. 

depleting substances (ODS). The 

elimination of production and 

consumption of ODSs is accomplished 

through adherence to phaseout 

schedules for specific controlled 

substances. Section 604 of the Clean Air 

Act requires EPA to promulgate 

regulations phasing out production and 

consumption of Class I ODS according 

to a prescribed schedule. EPA has 

accelerated this phaseout schedule 

pursuant to Section 606 of the Clean Air 

Act, which requires the Agency to 

promulgate an accelerated phaseout 

schedule in response to Montreal 

Protocol modifications that accelerate 

the international phaseout. EPA’s 

phaseout regulations for ODS are 

codified at 40 CFR part 82, subpart A. 

As of January 1, 1996, production and 

import of most Class I controlled 

substances—including 

chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, 

carbon tetrachloride, and methyl 

chloroform2—were phased out in 

developed countries, including the 

United States. 

However, the Montreal Protocol 

provides exemptions that allow for the 

continued import and/or production of 

ODSs for specific uses. Under the 

Montreal Protocol, for most Class I 

ODSs, the Parties may collectively grant 

exemptions to the ban on production 

and import of ODS for uses that they 

determine to be ‘‘essential.’’ For 

example, with respect to CFCs, Article 

2A(4) provides that the phaseout will 

apply ‘‘save to the extent that the Parties 

decide to permit the level of production 

or consumption that is necessary to 

satisfy uses agreed by them to be 

essential.’’ Similar language appears in 

the control provisions for halons (Art. 

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

methyl chloroform (Art. 2E), 

hydrobromofluorocarbons (Art. 2G), and 

chlorobromomethane (Art. 2I). As 

defined by Decision IV/25 of the Parties, 

use of a controlled substance is essential 

only if (1) it is necessary for the health, 

safety or is critical for the functioning of 

society (encompassing cultural and 

intellectual aspects), and (2) there are no 

available technically and economically 

feasible alternatives or substitutes that 

are acceptable from the standpoint of 

environment and health. 

Decision X/19 (taken in 1998) allowed 

a general exemption for essential 

laboratory and analytical uses through 

December 31, 2005. EPA codified this 

exemption at 40 CFR part 82, subpart A. 

While the Clean Air Act does not 

specifically provide for this exemption, 

EPA determined that an exemption for 

essential laboratory and analytical uses 

was allowable under the Act as a de 

minimis exemption. EPA addressed the 

de minimis exemption in the final rule 

of March 13, 2001 (66 FR 14760). 

Decision X/19 also requested the 

Montreal Protocol’s Technology and 

Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP), a 

group of technical experts from various 

Parties, to report annually to the Parties 

to the Montreal Protocol on laboratory 

and analytical procedures that could be 

performed without the use of controlled 

substances. It further stated that at 

future Meetings of the Parties (MOPs), 

the Parties would decide whether such 

procedures should no longer be eligible 

for exemptions. Based on the TEAP’s 

recommendation, the Parties to the 

Montreal Protocol decided in 1999 

(Decision XI/15) that the general 

exemption no longer applied to the 

following uses: testing of oil and grease 

and total petroleum hydrocarbons in 

water; testing of tar in road-paving 

materials; and forensic finger-printing. 

EPA incorporated this exclusion at 

Appendix G to subpart A of 40 CFR part 

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

At the 18th MOP, the Parties 

acknowledged the need for methyl 

bromide for laboratory and analytical 

procedures, and added methyl bromide 

to the approved ODSs under the 

essential laboratory and analytical use 

exemption. Decision XVIII/15 outlined 

specific uses and exclusions for methyl 

bromide under the exemption. EPA 

incorporated specific uses of methyl 

bromide in the essential laboratory and 

analytical use exemption at Appendix G 

to subpart A of 40 CFR part 82 on 

December 27, 2007 (72 FR 73264). 

In November 2009, at the 21st MOP, 

the Parties in Decision XXI/6 extended 

the global laboratory and analytical use 

exemption through December 31, 2014. 

Decision XXI/6 lists laboratory and 

analytical uses of ODSs for which the 

TEAP and its Chemicals Technical 

Options Committee (CTOC), determined 

that alternative procedures exist. 

However, the Parties did not exclude 

any additional procedures from the 

exemption for laboratory and analytical 

uses. The Parties asked the TEAP and 

the CTOC to continue to consider 

possible alternatives and report back to 

the Parties. 

EPA’s regulations regarding this 

exemption at 40 CFR 82.8(b) currently 

state, ‘‘A global exemption for Class I 

controlled substances for essential 

laboratory and analytical uses shall be 

in effect through December 31, 2011, 

subject to the restrictions in appendix G 

of this subpart, and subject to the 

recordkeeping and reporting 

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

There is no amount specified for this 

exemption.’’ Because certain laboratory 

procedures continue to require the use 

of Class I substances in the United 

States, because non-ODS replacements 

for the Class I substances have not been 

identified for all uses, and because the 

Parties, via Decision XXI/6, extended 

this exemption through December 31, 

2014, EPA is proposing to revise 40 CFR 

82.8(b) to reflect the extension of the 

exemption to December 31, 2014. For a 

more detailed discussion of the reasons 

for the exemption, refer to the March 13, 

2001, final rule (66 FR 14760). As 

discussed in the March 2001 rule, the 

controls in place for laboratory and 

analytical uses provide adequate 

assurance that very little, if any, 

environmental damage will result from 

the handling and disposal of the small 

amounts of Class I ODS used in such 

applications. 

EPA is seeking comment on adding to 

the list of procedures that are excluded 

from the exemption under 40 CFR part 

82, appendix G. EPA is not proposing to 

add these procedures at this time. The 

following uses are noted in Decision 

XXI/6 as being laboratory and analytical 

procedures for which the TEAP and its 

CTOC have concluded that alternatives 

exist. 

(a) Analyses in which the ODS is used as a 

solvent for spectroscopic measurements: 

(i) of hydrocarbons (oil and grease) in 

water or soil 

(ii) of simethicone (polydimethylsiloxane) 

(iii) when recording infrared and nuclear 

magnetic resonance (NMR) spectra, 

including hydroxyl index 

(b) Analyses in which the ODS is used as a 

solvent for electrochemical methods of 

analysis of: 

(i) cyanocobalamin 

(ii) bromine index 

(c) Analyses involving selective solubility in 

the ODS of: 

(i) cascarosides 

(ii) thyroid extracts 

(iii) polymers 

(d) Analyses in which the ODS is used to 

preconcentrate the analyte, for: 

(i) liquid chromatography (HPLC) of drugs 

and pesticides 

(ii) gas chromatography of organic 

chemicals such as steroids 

(iii) adsorption chromatography of organic 

chemicals 

(e) Titration of iodine with thiosulfate 

(iodometric analyses) for determination 

of: 

(i) iodine 

(ii) copper 

(iii) arsenic 

(iv) sulphur 

(f) Iodine and bromine index measurements 

(titrations) 

(g) Miscellaneous analyses, namely 

(i) stiffness of leather 

(ii) jellification point 

(iii) specific weight of cement 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
41750 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

(iv) gas mask cartridge breakthrough 

(h) Use of ODS as a solvent in organic 

chemical reactions 

(i) O- and N-difluoromethylation 

(i) General use as laboratory solvent, namely 

(i) washing of NMR tubes 

(ii) removal of greases from glassware 

EPA is seeking comment on whether 

alternative procedures exist in the 

United States for each of these 

laboratory applications. EPA notes that 

unlike the procedures already listed in 

Appendix G to 40 CFR part 82, the list 

developed by the TEAP and its CTOC 

has not been adopted by the Parties to 

the Montreal Protocol. Commenters 

should be aware that if EPA were to add 

these procedures to the list of 

procedures that are excluded from the 

exemption in Appendix G, then no 

further production or import of ODS for 

these laboratory procedures would be 

permitted. In the supply chain, ODS 

distributors would not be able to obtain 

quantities for those purposes. 

EPA is seeking comments on today’s 

proposal and the alternative approach 

described above, noting that the path 

forward for the general exemption for 

laboratory and analytical procedures 

under the Montreal Protocol is not clear. 

The Parties to the Montreal Protocol 

could decide between now and 

December 31, 2014, to exclude 

additional procedures from the general 

exemption; to replace the general 

exemption with a list of specifically 

approved procedures; or not to extend 

the exemption beyond December 31, 

2014. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore 

not subject to review under Executive 

Order 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden. This 

action extends the existing global 

laboratory and analytical use exemption 

allowing the production and import of 

Class I ozone-depleting substances until 

December 31, 2014. The Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

previously approved the information 

collection requirements contained in the 

existing regulations at 40 CFR 82.8(a) 

under the provisions of the Paperwork 

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

and has assigned OMB control number 

2060–0170. The OMB control numbers 

for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR part 82 

are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The RFA generally requires an agency 

to prepare a regulatory flexibility 

analysis of any rule subject to notice 

and comment rulemaking requirements 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

or any other statute unless the agency 

certifies that the rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impact 

of today’s proposed rule on small 

entities, small entity is defined as: (1) 

Pharmaceutical preparations 

manufacturing businesses (NAICS code 

325412) that have fewer than 750 

employees; (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s proposed rule on 

small entities, I certify that this action 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. In determining whether a rule 

has a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, the 

impact of concern is any significant 

adverse economic impact on small 

entities, since the primary purpose of 

the regulatory flexibility analyses is to 

identify and address regulatory 

alternatives ‘‘which minimize any 

significant economic impact of the rule 

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

Thus, an agency may certify that a rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities if the rule relieves regulatory 

burden, or otherwise has a positive 

economic effect on all of the small 

entities subject to the rule. 

This action, once finalized, will 

provide an otherwise unavailable 

benefit to those companies that obtain 

ozone-depleting substances under the 

essential laboratory and analytical use 

exemption. We have therefore 

concluded that today’s proposed rule 

will relieve regulatory burden for all 

small entities. We continue to be 

interested in the potential impact 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. This action merely 

extends the essential laboratory and 

analytical use exemption from the 1996 

and 2005 phaseouts of Class I ODS until 

December 31, 2014. Therefore, this 

action is not subject to the requirements 

of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. 

This action is also not subject to the 

requirements of section 203 of UMRA 

because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This action 

merely extends the essential laboratory 

and analytical use exemption from the 

1996 and 2005 phaseouts of Class I ODS 

until December 31, 2014. Thus, 

Executive Order 13132 does not apply 

to this action. In the spirit of Executive 

Order 13132, and consistent with EPA 

policy to promote communications 

between EPA and State and local 

governments, EPA specifically solicits 

comment on this proposed action from 

State and local officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). This rule does not significantly or 

uniquely affect the communities of 

Indian tribal governments, nor does it 

impose any enforceable duties on 

communities of Indian tribal 

governments. This action merely 

extends the essential laboratory and 

analytical use exemption from the 1996 

and 2005 phaseouts of Class I ODS until 

December 31, 2014. Thus, Executive 

Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. EPA specifically solicits 

additional comment on this proposed 

action from tribal officials. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 136 / Friday, July 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 41751 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 

19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only 

to those regulatory actions that concern 

health or safety risks, such that the 

analysis required under section 5–501 of 

the EO has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

EO 13045 because it does not establish 

an environmental standard intended to 

mitigate health or safety risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This 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 

22, 2001)) because it is not likely to 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

This proposed rule does not pertain to 

any segment of the energy production 

economy nor does it regulate any 

manner of energy use. Therefore, we 

have concluded that this proposed rule 

is not likely to have any adverse energy 

effects. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA), Public Law 104– 

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

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. This 

proposed rule does not involve 

technical standards. Therefore, 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 (EO) 12898 (59 FR 

7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this 

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. The controls in place 

for laboratory and analytical uses 

provide adequate assurance that very 

little, if any, environmental impact will 

result from the handling and disposal of 

the small amounts of Class I ODS used 

in such applications. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Chemicals, 

Chlorofluorocarbons, Imports, Methyl 

Chloroform, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: July 8, 2011. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 40 CFR Part 82 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 82—PROTECTION OF 

STRATOSPHERIC OZONE 

1. The authority citation for part 82 

continues to read as follows: 

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

7671q. 

2. Section 82.8 is amended by revising 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 82.8 Grant of essential use allowances 

and critical use allowances. 

* * * * * 

(b) A global exemption for Class I 

controlled substances for essential 

laboratory and analytical uses shall be 

in effect through December 31, 2014, 

subject to the restrictions in appendix G 

of this subpart, and subject to the 

recordkeeping and reporting 

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

There is no amount specified for this 

exemption. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–17905 Filed 7–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–R04–SFUND–2011–0573; FRL– 

9438–5] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the Hipps Road Landfill Superfund 

Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 4 is issuing a 

Notice of Intent To Delete the Hipps 

Road Landfill Superfund Site (Site) 

located in Jacksonville, Florida, from 

the National Priorities List (NPL) and 

requests public comments on this 

proposed action. The NPL, promulgated 

pursuant to section 105 of the 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is 

an appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and 

the State of Florida, through the Florida 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, have determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than operation, 

maintenance, and five-year reviews 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

August 15, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID no. EPA–R04– 

SFUND–2011–0573, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: miller.scott@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 404–562–8896. 

• Mail: Scott Miller, Remedial Project 

Manager, Superfund Remedial Branch, 

Section C, Superfund Division, U.S. 

EPA Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, GA 30303. 

• Hand delivery: Same address as 

above. 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–R04–SFUND–2011– 

0573. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS