10700 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Subpart G—Colorado

2. Section 52.320 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(80) to read as

follows:

§ 52.320 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(80) On July 11, 1994, July 13, 1994,

September 29, 1995, and December 22,

1995, the Governor of Colorado

submitted revisions to the Colorado

State Implementation Plan (SIP) to

satisfy those CO nonattainment area SIP

requirements for Denver and Longmont,

Colorado due to be submitted by

November 15, 1992, and further

revisions to the SIP to shorten the

effective period of the oxygenated fuels

program. EPA is not taking action on the

SIP provision submitted on July 11,

1994 that calls for a prohibition of the

re-registration of abandoned and

impounded vehicles.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Regulation No. 11, Motor Vehicle

Emissions Inspection Program, 5 CCR

1001–13, as adopted on September 22,

1994, effective November 30, 1994.

Regulation No. 13, Oxygenated Fuels

Program, 5 CCR 1001–16, as adopted on

October 19, 1995, effective December

20, 1995.

PART 81—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 81

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

2. In 81.306, the Carbon Monoxide

table is amended by revising the entry

for ‘‘Denver-Boulder Area’’ to read as

follows:

§ 81.306 Colorado.

* * * * *

COLORADO—CARBON MONOXIDE

Designated area

Designation Classification

Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

* * * * * * *

Denver-Boulder Area:

The boundaries for the Denver nonattainment area for carbon monoxide (CO)

are described as follows: Start at Colorado Highway 52 where it intersects the

eastern boundary of Boulder County; Follow Highway 52 west until it intersects Colorado Highway 119; Follow northern boundary of Boulder city limits

west to the 6000-ft. elevation line; Follow the 6000-ft. elevation line south

through Boulder and Jefferson Counties to US 6 in Jefferson County; Follow

US 6 west to the Jefferson County-Clear Creek County line; Follow the Jefferson County western boundary south for approximately 16.25 miles; Follow a

line east for approximately 3.75 miles to South Turkey Creek; Follow South

Turkey Creek northeast for approximately 3.5 miles; Follow a line southeast

for approximately 2.0 miles to the junction of South Deer Creek Road and

South Deer Creek Canyon Road; Follow South Deer Creek Canyon Road

northeast for approximately 3.75 miles; Follow a line southeast for approximately five miles to the northern-most boundary of Pike National Forest where

it intersects the Jefferson County-Douglas County line; Follow the Pike National Forest boundary southeast through Douglas County to the Douglas

County-El Paso County line; Follow the southern boundary on Douglas County east to the Elbert County line; Follow the eastern boundary of Douglas

County north to the Arapahoe County line; Follow the southern boundary of

Arapahoe County east to Kiowa Creek; Follow Kiowa Creek northeast through

Arapahoe and Adams Counties to the Adams-Weld County line; Follow the

northern boundary of Adams County west to the Boulder County line; Follow

the eastern boundary of Boulder County north to Highway 52.

Adams County (part) ............................................................................................... ................ Nonattainment ....... 4/9/97 Serious.

Arapahoe County (part) ........................................................................................... ................ Nonattainment ....... 4/9/97 Serious.

Boulder County (part) .............................................................................................. ................ Nonattainment ....... 4/9/97 Serious.

Denver County (part) ............................................................................................... ................ Nonattainment ....... 4/9/97 Serious.

Douglas County (part) ............................................................................................. ................ Nonattainment ....... 4/9/97 Serious.

Jefferson County (part) ............................................................................................ ................ Nonattainment ....... 4/9/97 Serious.

1This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–5765 Filed 3–7–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 82

[FRL–5701–1]

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of acceptability.

SUMMARY: This notice expands the list of

acceptable substitutes for ozonedepleting substances (ODS) under the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s

(EPA) Significant New Alternatives

Policy (SNAP) program.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 10, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Information relevant to this

notice is contained in Air Docket A–91–

42, Central Docket Section, South

Conference Room 4, U.S. Environmental

Agency, 401 M Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20460. Telephone:

(202) 260–7548. The docket may be

inspected between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30

p.m. weekdays. As provided in 40 CFR

part 2, a reasonable fee may be charged

for photocopying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sally Rand at (202) 233–9739 or fax

(202) 233–9577, U.S. EPA, Stratospheric

Protection Division, 401 M Street, S.W.,

Mail Code 6205J, Washington, D.C.

20460; EPA Stratospheric Ozone

Protection Hotline at (800) 296–1996;

EPA World Wide Web Site at http://
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 10701

www.epa.gov/ozone/title6/snap/

snap.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Section 612 Program

A. Statutory Requirements

B. Regulatory History

II. Listing of Acceptable Substitutes

A. Refrigeration and Air Conditioning:

Substitutes for Class I Substances

B. Foam Blowing

III. Additional Information

Appendix A— Summary of Acceptable

Decisions

I. Section 612 Program

A. Statutory Requirements

Section 612 of the Clean Air Act

authorizes EPA to develop a program for

evaluating alternatives to ozonedepleting substances. EPA refers to this

program as the Significant New

Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program.

The major provisions of section 612 are:

Rulemaking—Section 612(c) requires

EPA to promulgate rules making it

unlawful to replace any class I

(chlorofluorocarbon, halon, carbon

tetrachloride, methyl chloroform,

methyl bromide, and

hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II

(hydrochlorofluorocarbon) substance

with any substitute that the

Administrator determines may present

adverse effects to human health or the

environment where the Administrator

has identified an alternative that (1)

reduces the overall risk to human health

and the environment, and (2) is

currently or potentially available.

Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable

Substitutes—Section 612(c) also

requires EPA to publish a list of the

substitutes unacceptable for specific

uses. EPA must publish a corresponding

list of acceptable alternatives for

specific uses.

Petition Process—Section 612(d)

grants the right to any person to petition

EPA to add a substance to or delete a

substance from the lists published in

accordance with section 612(c). The

Agency has 90 days to grant or deny a

petition. Where the Agency grants the

petition, EPA must publish the revised

lists within an additional 6 months.

90-day Notification—Section 612(e)

requires EPA to require any person who

produces a chemical substitute for a

class I substance to notify the Agency

not less than 90 days before new or

existing chemicals are introduced into

interstate commerce for significant new

uses as substitutes for a class I

substance. The producer must also

provide the Agency with the producer’s

unpublished health and safety studies

on such substitutes.

Outreach—Section 612(b)(1) states

that the Administrator shall seek to

maximize the use of federal research

facilities and resources to assist users of

class I and II substances in identifying

and developing alternatives to the use of

such substances in key commercial

applications.

Clearinghouse—Section 612(b)(4)

requires the Agency to set up a public

clearinghouse of alternative chemicals,

product substitutes, and alternative

manufacturing processes that are

available for products and

manufacturing processes which use

class I and II substances.

B. Regulatory History

On March 18, 1994, EPA published

the Final Rulemaking (FRM) (59 FR

13044) which described the process for

administering the SNAP program and

issued EPA’s first acceptability lists for

substitutes in the major industrial use

sectors. These sectors include:

Refrigeration and air conditioning; foam

blowing; solvent cleaning; fire

suppression and explosion protection;

sterilants; aerosols; adhesives, coatings

and inks; and tobacco expansion. These

sectors compose the principal industrial

sectors that historically consumed the

largest volumes of ozone-depleting

compounds.

As described in the final rule for the

SNAP program (59 FR 13044), EPA does

not believe that rulemaking procedures

are required to list alternatives as

acceptable with no limitations. Such

listings do not impose any sanction, nor

do they remove any prior license to use

a substance. Consequently, by this

notice EPA is adding substances to the

list of acceptable alternatives without

first requesting comment on new

listings.

EPA does, however, believe that

Notice-and-Comment rulemaking is

required to place any substance on the

list of prohibited substitutes, to list a

substance as acceptable only under

certain conditions, to list substances as

acceptable only for certain uses, or to

remove a substance from either the list

of prohibited or acceptable substitutes.

Updates to these lists are published as

separate notices of rulemaking in the

Federal Register.

The Agency defines a ‘‘substitute’’ as

any chemical, product substitute, or

alternative manufacturing process,

whether existing or new, that could

replace a class I or class II substance.

Anyone who produces a substitute must

provide the Agency with health and

safety studies on the substitute at least

90 days before introducing it into

interstate commerce for significant new

use as an alternative. This requirement

applies to substitute manufacturers, but

may include importers, formulators or

end-users, when they are responsible for

introducing a substitute into commerce.

EPA published Notices listing

acceptable alternatives on August 26,

1994 (59 FR 44240), January 13, 1995

(60 FR 3318), July 28, 1995 (60 FR

38729), February 8, 1996 (61 FR 4736),

and September 5, 1996 (61 FR 47012),

and published Final Rulemakings

restricting the use of certain substitutes

on June 13, 1995 (60 FR 31092), May 22,

1996 (61 FR 25585), and October 16,

1996 (61 FR 54030).

II. Listing of Acceptable Substitutes

This section presents EPA’s most

recent acceptable listing decisions for

substitutes for class I and class II

substances in the following industrial

sectors: refrigeration and air

conditioning, and foam blowing. In this

Notice, EPA has split the refrigeration

and air conditioning sector into two

parts: substitutes for class I substances

and substitutes for class II substances.

For copies of the full list, contact the

EPA Stratospheric Protection Hotline at

(800) 296–1996.

Parts A through C below present a

detailed discussion of the substitute

listing determinations by major use

sector. Tables summarizing today’s

listing decisions are in Appendix A. The

comments contained in Appendix A

provide additional information on a

substitute, but for listings of acceptable

substitutes, they are not legally binding

under section 612 of the Clean Air Act.

Thus, adherence to recommendations in

the comments is not mandatory for use

as a substitute. In addition, the

comments should not be considered

comprehensive with respect to other

legal obligations pertaining to the use of

the substitute. However, EPA

encourages users of acceptable

substitutes to apply all comments to

their use of these substitutes. In many

instances, the comments simply allude

to sound operating practices that have

already been identified in existing

industry and/or building-code

standards. Thus, many of the comments,

if adopted, would not require significant

changes in existing operating practices

for the affected industry.

A. Refrigeration and Air Conditioning:

Class I

1. Secondary Loop Systems

In the Notice published September 5,

1996 (61 FR 47012) EPA solicited

information about fluids used in

secondary loop systems. EPA believes

that the use of secondary fluids offers

potential environmental and safety

benefits, and requested this information

to determine whether it would be
10702 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

appropriate to list secondary fluids

formally under the SNAP program.

EPA received no comments or

information supporting the listing of

these fluids under SNAP. In fact, one

company provided information urging

EPA to not list secondary fluids under

SNAP. The company expressed concern

that listing secondary fluids would

discourage their use and would be

extremely burdensome to the Agency

and the regulated community. The

company also indicated that EPA had

vastly underestimated the number and

variety of fluids used as secondary

fluids.

EPA has decided not to list secondary

fluids under SNAP based on the above

discussion and the lack of information

or data suggesting that the use of these

fluids in secondary loops poses any

environmental or safety risk. EPA is also

sensitive to the resources required for

preparing submissions, reviews, and

listings and to the disincentive that

regulating them may create. However,

EPA will keep abreast of new secondary

fluids as they are introduced in the

market, and may revisit this decision as

appropriate. EPA will also include

information about secondary fluids in

outreach materials and encourage their

use where the potential for

environmental and safety benefits could

be attained.

2. Acceptable Substitutes

Note that EPA acceptability does not

mean that a given substitute will work

in a specific type of equipment within

an end-use. Engineering expertise must

be used to determine the appropriate

use of these and any other substitutes.

In addition, although some alternatives

are listed for multiple refrigerants, they

may not be appropriate for use in all

equipment or under all conditions.

a. HFC–236fa. HFC–236fa, when

manufactured using any process that

does not convert perfluoroisobutylene

(PFIB) directly to HFC–236fa in a single

step, is acceptable as a substitute for

CFC–114 in industrial process

refrigeration. HFC–236fa does not harm

the ozone layer because it does not

contain chlorine. HFC–236fa has an

extremely high 100-year GWP of 6,300,

but its lifetime is considerably shorter

than that of perfluorocarbons. HFC–

236fa is the only alternative submitted

to date that is safe for the ozone layer,

is low in toxicity, and can be a

substitute in industrial process heat

pumps. Note that the prohibition on

venting, which applies to all substitute

refrigerants, was mandated in section

608(c)(2) and took effect on November

15, 1995.

EPA is aware of several methods for

manufacturing HFC–236fa, including

one that produces HFC–236fa directly

from PFIB. PFIB is an extremely toxic

substance that could pose risks in very

small concentrations. Thus, EPA

believes it is appropriate to distinguish

among the different methods for

producing HFC–236fa.

B. Foam Blowing

1. Acceptable Substitutes

a. Polyisocyanurate and Polyurethane

Rigid Boardstock Foam. (a) Saturated

Light Hydrocarbons C3–C6. Saturated

Light Hydrocarbons C3–C6 are

acceptable substitutes for HCFCs in

polyisocyanurate and polyurethane

rigid boardstock foam. Hydrocarbons are

more flammable than CFCs and HCFCs

and use would likely require additional

investment to assure safe handling, use

and shipping. These hydrocarbons have

zero global warming potential (GWP)

but are volatile organic compounds

(VOCs) and must be controlled as such

under Title I of the Clean Air Act.

Relevant building codes and other safety

requirements necessary for use of

hydrocarbon-blown boardstock foam

would have to be met.

b. Polyurethane Rigid Appliance

Foam. (a) HFC–134a. HFC–134a (or

blends thereof) is an acceptable

substitute for HCFCs in polyurethane

rigid appliance foam. HFC–134a has low

toxicity and is non-flammable.

However, HFC–134a has relatively high

thermal conductivity and has the

potential to contribute to global

warming.

(b) Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–

C6. Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–C6

(or blends thereof) are acceptable

substitutes for HCFCs in polyurethane

rigid appliance foam. Hydrocarbons are

more flammable than CFCs and HCFCs

and use would likely require additional

investment to assure safe handling and

use. These hydrocarbons have zero

global warming potential (GWP) but are

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and

must be controlled as such under Title

I of the Clean Air Act.

(c) Carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide (or

blends thereof) is an acceptable

alternative to HCFCs in polyurethane

appliance foam.

III. Additional Information

Contact the Stratospheric Protection

Hotline at 1–800–296–1996, Monday–

Friday, between the hours of 10:00 a.m.

and 4:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time).

For more information on the Agency’s

process for administering the SNAP

program or criteria for evaluation of

substitutes, refer to the SNAP final

rulemaking published in the Federal

Register on March 18, 1994 (59 FR

13044). Federal Register notices can be

ordered from the Government Printing

Office Order Desk (202) 783–3238; the

citation is the date of publication. This

Notice may also be obtained on the

World Wide Web at http://

www.epa.gov/ozone/title6/snap/

snap.html.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: February 28, 1997.

Mary D. Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation.

Note: The following Appendix will not

appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

APPENDIX A: SUMMARY OF ACCEPTABLE DECISIONS, REFRIGERATION SECTOR

[Acceptable Decisions]

End-use Substitute Decision Comments

CFC–114, Industrial

Process Refrigeration.

HFC–236fa ................. Acceptable when manufactured using any

process that does not convert

perfluoroisobutylene (PFIB) directly to

HFC–236fa in a single step, is acceptable

as a substitute for CFC–114 in industrial

process refrigeration.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 10703

APPENDIX A: SUMMARY OF ACCEPTABLE DECISIONS, REFRIGERATION SECTOR—Continued

[Acceptable Decisions]

End-use Substitute Decision Comments

Foam Sector—Acceptable Decisions

HCFCs Rigid polyurethane and

polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock.

Saturated Light Hydrocarbons C3–C6.Acceptable ...................................................... Zero ODP and GWP but must adhere to

VOC regulations. Flammable.

HCFCs Rigid polyurethane appliance.HFC–134a .................. Acceptable ...................................................... Non-flammable and low toxicity but may contribute to global warming.

Saturated Light Hydrocarbons C3–C6Acceptable ................. Zero ODP and GWP but must adhere to

VOC regulations. Flammable..

Carbon Dioxide .......... Acceptable ...................................................... High thermal conductivity.

[FR Doc. 97–5887 Filed 3–7–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 180

[OPP–300459; FRL–5591–9]

RIN AB–78

Sulfentrazone; Establishment of

Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document establishes

tolerances for residues of the herbicide

sulfentrazone (N-[2,4-dichloro-5-[4-

(difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-

yl]phenyl]methanesulfonamide) and its

major metabolite 3-hydroxymethyl

sulfentrazone (N-[2,4-dichloro-5-[4-

(difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-

hydroxymethyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-

yl]phenyl]methanesulfonamide), in or

on the raw agricultural commodity

soybean seed at 0.05 ppm and for

combined inadvertent residues of

sulfentrazone, and its metabolites, 3-

hydroxymethyl sulfentrazone and 3-

desmethyl sulfentrazone [N-[2,4-

dichloro-5-[4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-

dihydro-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-lyl]phenyl]methanesulfonamide] in

cereal grains (excluding sweet corn)

forage at 0.2 ppm, straw at 0.6 ppm, hay

at 0.2 ppm, grain at 0.1 ppm, stover at

0.1 ppm, bran at 0.15 ppm and hulls at

0.30 ppm. FMC Corporation submitted a

petition to EPA under the Federal Food,

Drug and Cosmetic Act as amended by

the Food Quality Protection Act of l996

(Pub. L. 104-170) requesting the

tolerances.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation

becomes effective March 10, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and

hearing requests, identified by the

docket control number, [PF–670/OPP–

300459], may be submitted to: Hearing

Clerk (1900), Environmental Protection

Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. Fees

accompanying objections and hearing

requests shall be labeled Tolerance

Petition Fees and forwarded to: EPA

Headquarters Accounting Operations

Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), P.O. Box

360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. A copy

of any objections and hearing requests

filed with the Hearing Clerk should be

identified by the docket control number

and submitted to: Public Response and

Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring

copy of objections and hearing requests

to: Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson

Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202. A

copy of objections and hearing requests

filed with the Hearing Clerk may also be

submitted electronically to the OPP by

sending electronic mail (e-mail) to: oppdocket@epamail.epa.gov.

Copies of objections and hearing

requests must be submitted as an ASCII

file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Copies of objections and hearing

requests will also be accepted on disks

in WordPerfect 5.1 file format or ASCII

file format. All copies of objections and

hearing requests in electronic form must

be identified by the docket control

number PF–670/OPP–300459. No

Confidential Business Information (CBI)

should be submitted through e-mail.

Electronic copies of objections and

hearing requests on this rule may be

filed online at many Federal Depository

Libraries.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: Joanne I. Miller, Product Manager

(PM) 23, Registration Division (7505C),

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.

Office location and telephone number:

Rm. 237, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-305-

6224; e-mail:

miller.joanne@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the

Federal Register of November 6, 1996

(60 FR 57420) (FRL–5571–4), EPA

issued a notice pursuant to section

408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C.

346a(d), announcing the filing of a

pesticide tolerance petition by FMC

Corporation, 1735 Market Street,

Philadelphia, PA 19103. The petition

requested to amend 40 CFR part 180 by

establishing a tolerance for residues of

the herbicide sulfentrazone (N-[2,4-

dichloro-5-[4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-

dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-

triazol-1-yl] phenyl]methanesulfonamide) in or on raw agricultural

commodity soybean seed at 0.05 ppm

and rotational crop tolerances in cereal

grains from 0.1 to 0.5 ppm. There were

no comments received in response to

the notice of filing.

The data submitted in the petition

and other relevant material have been

evaluated. The toxicology data listed

below were considered in support of

these tolerances.

I. Toxicological Profile

1. A battery of acute toxicity studies

placed technical sulfentrazone in

Toxicity Categories III and IV. No

evidence of sensitization was observed

following dermal application in guinea

pigs.

2. A 90–day subchronic toxicity study

was conducted in rats, with dietary

intake levels of 0, 3.3, 6.7, 19.9, 65.8,

199.3, or 534.9 mg/kg/day for males and

0, 4, 7.7, 23.1, 78.1, 230.5, or 404.3

milligrams/kilograms/day (mg/kg/day)

for females respectively. No Observed

Effect Levels (NOELs) of 19.9 mg/kg/day

in males and 23.1 mg/kg/day in females

were based on clinical anemia.

3. A 90–day subchronic feeding study

was conducted in mice by dietary admix