83 FR 19026 - Air Quality: Revision to the Regulatory Definition of Volatile Organic Compounds-Exclusion of cis-1,1,1,4,4,4-hexafluorobut-2-ene (HFO-1336mzz-Z)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 84 (May 1, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 84 (May 1, 2018)
| Page Range | 19026-19033 | |
| FR Document | 2018-09079 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 1, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 19026-19033] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-09079] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 51 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0175; FRL-9977-28-OAR] RIN 2060-AT52 Air Quality: Revision to the Regulatory Definition of Volatile Organic Compounds--Exclusion of cis-1,1,1,4,4,4-hexafluorobut-2-ene (HFO-1336mzz-Z) AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to revise the regulatory definition of volatile organic compounds (VOC) under the Clean Air Act (CAA). This action proposes to add cis- 1,1,1,4,4,4-hexafluorobut-2-ene (also known as HFO-1336mzz-Z; CAS number 692-49-9) to the list of compounds excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC on the basis that this compound makes a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone (O3 ) formation. [[Page 19027]] DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 2, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ- OAR-2017-0175, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, Cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Souad Benromdhane, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts Division, Mail Code C539-07, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone: (919) 541-4359; fax number: (919) 541-5315; email address: benromdhane.souad@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Docket. The EPA has established a docket for this rulemaking under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0175. All documents in the docket are listed in the 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, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in Regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, Room 3334, EPA WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the EPA Docket Center is (202) 566-1742. Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR- 2017-0175. 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 http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 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 email. The http://www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means 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 http://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 not include special characters or any form of encryption and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about the EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. Table of Contents I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me? B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA? II. Background A. The EPA's VOC Exemption Policy B. Petition To List HFO-1336mzz-Z as an Exempt Compound III. The EPA's Assessment of the Petition A. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone Formation B. Potential Impacts on Other Environmental Endpoints 1. Contribution to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion 2. The Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program Acceptability Findings 3. Toxicity 4. Contribution to Climate Change C. Conclusions IV. Proposed Rule V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations L. Judicial Review VI. References I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me? Entities potentially affected by this proposed rule include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: State and local air pollution control agencies that adopt and implement regulations to control air emissions of VOC; and industries manufacturing and/or using HFO-1336mzz-Z for use in polyurethane rigid insulating foams, and refrigeration and air conditioning. Potential entities that may be affected by this action include: Table 1--Potentially Affected Entities by North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) Code ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Description of regulated Category NAICS code entities ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Industry.................. 326140 Polystyrene Foam Product Manufacturing. Industry.................. 326150 Urethane and Other Foam Product (except Polystyrene) Manufacturing. Industry.................. 333415 Air-Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment and Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing. [[Page 19028]] Industry.................. 3363 Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing. Industry.................. 336611 Ship Building and Repairing. Industry.................. 336612 Boat Building. Industry.................. 339999 All other Miscellaneous Manufacturing. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities that might be affected by this deregulatory action. This table lists the types of entities that the EPA is now aware of that could potentially be affected to some extent by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be affected to some extent. To determine whether your entity is directly or indirectly affected by this action, you should consult your state or local air pollution control and/or air quality management agencies. B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA? Submitting CBI. Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on 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 comments that includes information claimed as CBI, you must submit a copy of the comments that does not contain the information claimed as CBI for inclusion in the public docket. If you submit a CD-ROM or disk that does not contain CBI, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and the EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the following address: OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-02), OAQPS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0175. II. Background A. The EPA's VOC Exemption Policy Tropospheric O3 , commonly known as smog, is formed when VOC and nitrogen oxides (NOX ) react in the atmosphere in the presence of sunlight. Because of the harmful health effects of O3 , the EPA and state governments limit the amount of VOC that can be released into the atmosphere. Volatile organic compounds form O3 through atmospheric photochemical reactions, and different VOC have different levels of reactivity. That is, different VOC do not react to form O3 at the same speed or do not form O3 to the same extent. Some VOC react slowly or form less O3 ; therefore, changes in their emissions have limited effects on local or regional O3 pollution episodes. It has been the EPA's policy since 1971 that certain organic compounds with a negligible level of reactivity should be excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC in order to focus VOC control efforts on compounds that significantly affect O3 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 VOC. The EPA lists compounds that it has determined to be negligibly reactive in its regulations as being excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC (40 CFR 51.100(s)). The CAA requires the regulation of VOC for various purposes. Section 302(s) of the CAA specifies that the EPA has the authority to define the meaning of ``VOC'' and, hence, what compounds shall be treated as VOC for regulatory purposes. The policy of excluding negligibly reactive compounds from the regulatory definition of VOC was first laid out in the ``Recommended Policy on Control of Volatile Organic Compounds'' (42 FR 35314, July 8, 1977) (from here forward referred to as the 1977 Recommended Policy) and was supplemented subsequently with the ``Interim Guidance on Control of Volatile Organic Compounds in Ozone State Implementation Plans'' (70 FR 54046, September 13, 2005) (from here forward referred to as the 2005 Interim Guidance). 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 VOC for regulatory purposes and, therefore, are 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 Recommended Policy. The EPA has used three different metrics to compare the reactivity of a specific compound to that of ethane: (i) The rate constant for reaction with the hydroxyl radical (OH) (known as kOH ); (ii) the maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) on a reactivity per unit mass basis; and (iii) the MIR expressed on a reactivity per mole basis. Differences between these three metrics are discussed below. The kOH is the rate constant of the reaction of the compound with the OH radical in the air. This reaction is often, but not always, the first and rate-limiting step in a series of chemical reactions by which a compound breaks down in the air and contributes to O3 formation. If this step is slow, the compound will likely not form O3 at a very fast rate. The kOH values have long been used by the EPA as metrics of photochemical reactivity and O3 -forming activity, and they were the basis for most of the EPA's early exemptions of negligibly reactive compounds from the regulatory definition of VOC. The kOH metric is inherently a molar-based comparison, i.e., it measures the rate at which molecules react. The MIR, both by mole and by mass, is a more updated metric of photochemical reactivity derived from a computer-based photochemical model, and it has been used as a metric of reactivity since 1995. This metric considers the complete O3 -forming activity of a compound over multiple hours and through multiple reaction pathways, not merely the first reaction step with OH. Further explanation of [[Page 19029]] the MIR metric can be found in Carter (1994). The EPA has considered the choice between MIRs with a molar or mass basis for the comparison to ethane in past rulemakings and guidance. In the 2005 Interim Guidance, the EPA stated: [A] comparison to ethane on a mass basis strikes the right balance between a threshold that is low enough to capture compounds that significantly affect ozone concentrations and a threshold that is high enough to exempt some compounds that may usefully substitute for more highly reactive compounds. When reviewing compounds that have been suggested for VOC-exempt status, EPA will continue to compare them to ethane using kOH expressed on a molar basis and MIR values expressed on a mass basis. The 2005 Interim Guidance notes that the EPA will consider a compound to be negligibly reactive if it is equal to or less reactive than ethane based on either kOH expressed on a molar basis or MIR values expressed on a mass basis. The molar comparison of MIR is more consistent with the original smog chamber experiments, which compared equal molar concentrations of individual VOCs, supporting the selection of ethane as the threshold, while the mass-based comparison of MIR is consistent with how MIR values and other reactivity metrics are applied in reactivity-based emission limits. It is, however, important to note that the mass-based comparison is slightly less restrictive than the molar-based comparison in that a few more compounds would qualify as negligibly reactive. Given the two goals of the exemption policy articulated in the 2005 Interim Guidance, the Agency believes that ethane continues to be an appropriate threshold for defining negligible reactivity. And, to encourage the use of environmentally beneficial substitutions, the EPA believes that a comparison to ethane on a mass basis strikes the right balance between a threshold that is low enough to capture compounds that significantly affect ozone concentrations and a threshold that is high enough to exempt some compounds that may usefully substitute for more highly reactive compounds. The 2005 Interim Guidance also noted that concerns have sometimes been raised about the potential impact of a VOC exemption on environmental endpoints other than O3 concentrations, including fine particle formation, air toxics exposures, stratospheric O3 depletion, and climate change. The EPA has recognized, however, that there are existing regulatory or non-regulatory programs that are specifically designed to address these issues, and the EPA continues to believe in general that the impacts of VOC exemptions on environmental endpoints other than O3 formation can be adequately addressed by these programs. The VOC exemption policy is intended to facilitate attainment of the O3 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and VOC exemption decisions will continue to be based primarily on consideration of a compound's contribution to O3 formation. However, if the EPA 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, then the EPA may exercise its judgment accordingly in deciding whether to grant an exemption. B. Petition To List HFO-1336mzz-Z as an Exempt Compound DuPont Chemicals & Fluoroproducts (DuPont) submitted a petition to the EPA on February 14, 2014, requesting that cis-1,1,1,4,4,4- hexafluorobut-2-ene (HFO-1336mzz-Z; CAS number 692-49-9) be exempted from the regulatory definition of VOC. The petition was based on the argument that HFO-1336mzz-Z has low reactivity relative to ethane. The petitioner indicated that HFO-1336mzz-Z may be used in a variety of applications as a replacement for foam expansion or blowing agents with higher global warming potential (GWP) (>700 GWP) for use in polyurethane rigid insulating foams, among others. It is also a new developmental refrigerant as a potential working fluid for Organic Rankine Cycles (ORC).\1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Konstantinos Kontomaris, 2014, HFO-1336mzz-Z High Temperature Chemical Stability and Use as a Working Fluid in Organic Rankine Cycles. International Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Conference. Perdue University: https://www.chemours.com/Refrigerants/en_US/products/Opteon/Stationary_Refrigeration/assets/downloads/2014_Purdue-Paper-Opteon-MZ.pdf. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- To support its petition, DuPont referenced several documents, including one peer-reviewed journal article on HFO-1336mzz-Z reaction rates (Baasandorj, M. et al., 2011). DuPont also provided a supplemental technical report on the MIR of HFO-1336mzz-Z (Carter, 2011a). Per this report, the MIR of HFO-1336mzz-Z is 0.04 gram (g) O3 /g HFO-1336mzz-Z on the mass-based MIR scale. This reactivity rate is 86 percent lower than that of ethane (0.28 g O3 /g ethane). The reactivity rate kOH for the gas-phase reaction of OH radicals with HFO-1336mzz-Z (kOH ) has been measured to be 4.91 x 10-13 centimeter (cm)\3\/ molecule-seconds at ~296 degrees Kelvin (K) (Pitts et al., 1983, Baasandorj et al., 2011). This kOH rate is twice as high as that of ethane (kOH of ethane = 2.4 x 10-13 cm\3\/molecule-sec at ~298 K) and, therefore, suggests that HFO- 1336mzz-Z is twice as reactive as ethane. In most cases, chemicals with high kOH values also have high MIR values, but for HFO- 1336mzz-Z, the products that are formed are expected to be mostly smaller perfluorinated compounds, which are not reactive in the atmosphere and do not form ozone (Baasandorj et al., 2011). Based on the current scientific understanding of tetrafluoroalkene reactions in the atmosphere, it is unlikely that the actual O3 impact on a mass basis would equal or exceed that of ethane in the scenarios used to calculate VOC reactivity (Baasandorj et al., 2011; Carter, 2011a). To address the potential for stratospheric O3 impacts, the petitioner contended that, because the atmospheric lifetime of HFO- 1336mzz-Z due to loss by OH reaction was estimated to be ~20 days and it does not contain chlorine or bromine, it is not expected to contribute to the depletion of the stratospheric O3 layer. III. The EPA's Assessment of the Petition The EPA is responding to the petition by proposing to exempt HFO- 1336mzz-Z from the regulatory definition of VOC. This action is based on consideration of the compound's low contribution to tropospheric O3 and the low likelihood of risk to human health or the environment, including stratospheric O3 depletion, toxicity, and climate change. Additional information on these topics is provided in the following sections. A. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone Formation As noted in studies cited by the petitioner, HFO-1336mzz-Z has a MIR value of 0.04 g O3 /g VOC for ``averaged conditions,'' versus 0.28 g O3 /g VOC for ethane (Carter, 2011). Therefore, the EPA considers HFO-1336mzz-Z to be negligibly reactive and eligible for VOC-exempt status in accordance with the Agency's long-standing policy that compounds should so qualify where either reactivity metric (kOH expressed on a molar basis or MIR expressed on a mass basis) indicates that the compound is less reactive than ethane. While the overall atmospheric reactivity of HFO-1336mzz-Z was not studied in an experimental smog chamber, the chemical mechanism derived from other chamber studies (Carter, 2011) was used to model the complete formation of O3 [[Page 19030]] for an entire single day under realistic atmospheric conditions (Carter, 2011a). Therefore, the EPA believes that the MIR value calculated in the Carter study submitted by the petitioner is reliable. Table 2 presents three reactivity metrics for HFO-1336mzz-Z as they compare to ethane. Table 2--Reactivities of Ethane and HFO-1336mzz-Z ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maximum incremental Maximum kOH (cm\3\/ reactivity incremental Compound molecule-sec) (MIR) (g O3/ reactivity mole VOC) (MIR) (g O3/g VOC) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ethane.......................................................... 2.4 x 10-13 8.4 0.28 HFO-1336mzz-Z................................................... 4.91 x 10-13 6.6 0.04 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes: 1. kOH value at 298 K for ethane is from Atkinson et al., 2006 (page 3626). 2. kOH value at 296 K for HFO-1336mzz-Z is from Baasandorj, 2011. 3. Mass-based MIR value (g O3/g VOC) of ethane is from Carter, 2011. 4. Mass-based MIR value (g O3/g VOC) of HFO-1336mzz-Z is from a supplemental report by Carter, 2011a. 5. Molar-based MIR (g O3/mole VOC) values were calculated from the mass-based MIR (g O3/g VOC) values using the number of moles per gram of the relevant organic compound. The reaction rate of HFO-1336mzz-Z with the OH radical (kOH ) has been measured to be 4.91 x 10-13 cm\3\/ molecule-sec (Baasandorj et al., 2011); other reactions with O3 and the nitrate radical were negligibly small. The corresponding reaction rate of ethane with OH is 2.4 x 10-13 cm\3\/molecule-sec (Atkinson et al., 2006). The data in Table 2 show that HFO-1336mzz-Z has a slightly higher kOH value than ethane, meaning that it initially reacts faster in the atmosphere than ethane. However, a molecule of HFO-1336mzz-Z is less reactive than a molecule of ethane in terms of complete O3 -forming activity as shown by the molar-based MIR (g O3 /mole VOC) values. Additionally, one gram of HFO-1336mzz-Z has a lower capacity than one gram of ethane to form O3 . Thus, following the 2005 Interim Guidance, HFO-1336mzz-Z is eligible to be exempted from the regulatory definition of VOC based on both the molar- and mass-based MIR. B. Potential Impacts on Other Environmental Endpoints The EPA's proposed decision to exempt HFO-1336mzz-Z from the regulatory definition of VOC is based on our findings above. However, as noted in the 2005 Interim Guidance, the EPA reserves the right to exercise its judgment in certain cases where an exemption is likely to result in a significant increase in the use of a compound and a subsequent significantly increased risk to human health or the environment. In this case, the EPA is proposing to find that exemption of HFO-1336mzz-Z would not result in an increase of risk to human health or the environment, with regard to stratospheric O3 depletion, toxicity and climate change. Additional information on these topics is provided in the following sections. 1. Contribution to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion HFO-1336mzz-Z is unlikely to contribute to the depletion of the stratospheric O3 layer. The O3 depletion potential (ODP) of HFO-1336mzz-Z is expected to be negligible based on several lines of evidence: The absence of chlorine or bromine in the compound and the atmospheric reactions described in Carter (2008). Because HFO-1336mzz-Z has a kOH value that is twice as high as that of ethane (see section III.A ``Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone Formation''), it will decay before it has a chance to reach the stratosphere and, thus, will not participate in O3 destruction. 2. The Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program Acceptability Findings The SNAP program is the EPA's program to evaluate and regulate substitutes for end-uses historically using ozone-depleting chemicals. Under section 612(c) of the CAA, the EPA is required to identify and publish lists of acceptable and unacceptable substitutes for class I or class II ozone-depleting substances. Per the SNAP program findings, the ODP of HFO-1336mzz-Z is zero. The SNAP program has listed HFO-1336mzz-Z as an acceptable substitute for a number of foam blowing end-uses provided in 79 FR 62863, October 21, 2014 (USEPA, 2014), and as an acceptable substitute in the refrigeration and air conditioning sector in heat transfer, as well as in chillers and industrial process air conditioning provided in 81 FR 32241, May 23, 2016 (USEPA, 2016). 3. Toxicity Based on screening assessments of the health and environmental risks of HFO-1336mzz-Z, the SNAP program anticipated that users will be able to use the compound without significantly greater health risks than presented by use of other available substitutes for the same uses (USEPA, 2014, 2016). The EPA anticipates that HFO-1336mzz-Z will be used consistent with the recommendations specified in the manufacturer's safety data sheet (SDS) (DuPont, 2011). According to the SDS, potential health effects from inhalation of HFO-1336mzz-Z include skin or eye irritation or frostbite. Exposure to high concentrations of HFO-1336mzz-Z from misuse or intentional inhalation abuse may cause irregular heartbeat. In addition, HFO-1336mzz-Z could cause asphyxiation if air is displaced by vapors in a confined space. The Workplace Environmental Exposure Limit (WEEL) committee of the Occupational Alliance for Risk Science (OARS) reviewed available animal toxicity data and recommends a WEEL for the workplace of 500 parts per million (ppm) (3350 mg/m\3\) time-weighted average (TWA) for an 8-hour workday (OARS, 2014). This WEEL was derived based on reduced male body weight in the 13-week rat inhalation toxicity study (Dupont, 2011). The WEEL is also protective against skeletal fluorosis, which may occur at higher exposures because of metabolism. The EPA anticipates that users will be able to meet the WEEL and address potential health risks by following requirements and recommendations in the SDS and other safety precautions common to the refrigeration and air conditioning industry. HFO-1336mzz-Z is not regulated as a hazardous air pollutant (HAP) under [[Page 19031]] title I of the CAA. Also, it is not listed as a toxic chemical under section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) gives the EPA authority to assess and prevent potential unreasonable risks to human health and the environment before a new chemical substance is introduced into commerce. Section 5 of TSCA requires manufacturers and importers to notify the EPA before manufacturing or importing a new chemical substance by submitting a Premanufacture Notice (PMN) prior to the manufacture (including import) of the chemical. Under the TSCA New Chemicals Program, the EPA then assesses whether an unreasonable risk may, or will, be presented by the expected manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, use, and disposal of the new substance. The EPA has determined, however, that domestic manufacturing, use in non- industrial products, or use other than as described in the PMN may cause serious chronic health effects. To mitigate risks identified during the PMN review of HFO-1336mzz-Z, the EPA issued a Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) under TSCA on June 5, 2015, to require persons to submit a Significant New Use Notice to the EPA at least 90 days before they manufacture or process HFO-1336mzz-Z for uses other than those described in the PMN (80 FR 32003, 32005, June 5, 2015). The required notification will provide the EPA with the opportunity to evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity before it occurs. The EPA, therefore, believes that existing programs address the risk of toxicity associated with the use of HFO-1336mzz-Z. 4. Contribution to Climate Change The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC AR5) estimated the lifetime of HFO-1336mzz-Z to be approximately 22 days (Baasandorj et al., 2011), and the gas-phase degradation of HFO-1336-mzz-Z is not expected to lead to a significant formation of atmospherically long-lived species. The radiative efficiency of HFO-1336-mzz-Z was calculated to be 0.38 watts per square meter at the earth's surface per part per billion concentration of the material (W m-2 ppb-1) based on Baasandorj et al., 2011. The report estimated the resulting 100-year GWP to be 9, meaning that, over a 100-year period, one ton of HFO-1336mzz-Z traps 9 times as much warming energy as one ton of carbon dioxide (CO2 ) (IPCC, 2013). HFO-1336mzz-Z's GWP of 9 is lower than those of some of the substitutes in a variety of foam blowing end-uses and in centrifugal and positive displacement chillers, heat transfer, and industrial process air conditioning. HFO-1336mzz-Z was developed to replace other chemicals used for similar end-uses with GWP ranging from 725 to 5,750 such as CFC-11, CFC-113, HCFC-141b and HCFC-22. The petitioner claims that HFO-1336mzz-Z is a better alternative to other substitutes in foam expansion or blowing agents for use in polyurethane rigid insulating foams. Thermal test data and energy efficiency trials indicate that HFO-1336mzz-Z will provide superior insulating value and, thus, reduces climate change impacts both directly by its low GWP and indirectly by decreasing energy consumption throughout the lifecycle of insulated foams in appliances, buildings, refrigerated storage and transportation. C. Conclusions The EPA finds that HFO-1336mzz-Z is negligibly reactive with respect to its contribution to tropospheric O3 formation and, thus, may be exempted from the EPA's definition of VOC in 40 CFR 51.100(s). HFO-1336mzz-Z has been listed as acceptable for use in several industrial and commercial refrigeration and air conditioning end-uses, as well as for use as a blowing agent under the SNAP program (USEPA, 2014, 2016). The EPA has also determined that exemption of HFO- 1336mzz-Z from the regulatory definition of VOC will not result in an increase of risk to human health and the environment, and, to the extent that use of this compound does have impacts on other environmental endpoints, those impacts are adequately managed by existing programs. For example, HFO-1336mzz-Z has a similar or lower stratospheric O3 depletion potential than available substitutes in those end-uses, and the toxicity risk from using HFO- 1336mzz-Z is not significantly greater than the risk from using other available alternatives for the same uses. The EPA has concluded that non-tropospheric O3 -related risks associated with potential increased use of HFO-1336mzz-Z are adequately managed by SNAP. The EPA does not expect significant use of HFO-1336mzz-Z in applications not covered by the SNAP program. To the extent that the compound is used in other applications not already reviewed under SNAP or under the New Chemicals Program under TSCA, the SNUR in place under TSCA requires that any significant new use of a chemical be reported to the EPA using a Significant New Use Notice (SNUN). Any significant new use of HFO- 1336mzz-Z would, thus, need to be evaluated by the EPA, and the EPA will continually review the availability of acceptable substitute chemicals under the SNAP program. IV. Proposed Rule The EPA is responding to the petition by proposing to revise its regulatory definition of VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s) to add HFO-1336mzz-Z to the list of compounds that are exempt from the regulatory definition of VOC because it is less reactive than ethane based on a comparison of mass-based MIR, and molar-based MIR metrics and is, therefore, considered negligibly reactive. If finalized, then for an entity which uses or produces any of this compound and is subject to 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 O3 NAAQS, this compound will not be counted as a VOC in determining whether these regulatory obligations have been met. Also if finalized, this action would affect whether this compound is considered a VOC for state regulatory purposes to reduce O3 formation, if a state relies on the EPA's regulatory 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, no state may take credit for controlling this compound in its O3 control strategy. Consequently, reductions in emissions for this compound will not be considered or counted in determining whether states have met the rate of progress requirements for VOC in State Implementation Plans (SIPs) or in demonstrating attainment of the O3 NAAQS. V. 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 and was, therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs This action is expected to be an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory [[Page 19032]] action. This proposed rule is expected to provide meaningful burden reduction by exempting HFO-1336mzz-Z from the VOC regulatory definition and relieving manufacturers, distributers, and users from recordkeeping or reporting requirements. This action is voluntary in nature and has non-quantifiable cost savings given unpredictability in who or how much of it will be used. C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) This action does not impose an information collection burden under the PRA. It does not contain any recordkeeping or reporting requirements. D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action, if finalized, removes HFO-1336mzz-Z from the regulatory definition of VOC and, thereby, would relieve manufacturers, distributers, and users of the compound from tropospheric ozone requirements to control emissions of the compound. E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments, or the private sector. F. 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. G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. This action proposes to remove HFO-1336mzz-Z from the regulatory definition of VOC and, if finalized, would relieve manufacturers, distributers and users from tropospheric ozone requirements to control emissions of the compound. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. Since HFO-1336mzz-Z is utilized in specific industrial applications where children are not present and dissipates quickly (e.g., lifetime of 22 days) with short-lived end products, there is no exposure or disproportionate risk to children. This action proposes to remove HFO- 1336mzz-Z from the regulatory definition of VOC and, if finalized, would relieve manufacturers, distributers and users from tropospheric ozone requirements to control emissions of the compound. I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). This action proposes to remove HFO-1336mzz-Z from the regulatory definition of VOC and, if finalized, would relieve manufacturers, distributers, and users of the compound from tropospheric ozone requirements to control emissions of the compound. L. Judicial Review Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final actions by EPA. This section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed in the Courts of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit if (i) the agency action consists of ``nationally applicable regulations promulgated, or final action taken, by the Administrator,'' or (ii) such action is locally or regionally applicable, if ``such action is based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in taking such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such action is based on such a determination.'' The EPA proposes to find that any final action related to this rulemaking is ``nationally applicable'' or of ``nationwide scope and effect'' within the meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1). Through this rulemaking action, the EPA interprets section 302 of the CAA, a provision which has nationwide applicability. The EPA's proposed change to the regulatory definition of VOC would affect implementation plans and national regulatory programs implicating this pollutant. For this reason, the Administrator proposes to determine that any final action related to the proposed rule is of nationwide scope and effect for purposes of CAA section 307(b)(1). Thus, pursuant to CAA section 307(b) any petitions for review of any final actions regarding the rulemaking would be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the date of any final action published in the Federal Register. VI. References Atkinson, R., Baulch, D.L., Cox, R.A., Crowley, J.N., Hampson, Jr., R.F., Hynes, R.G., Jenkin, M. E., Kerr, J.A., Rossi, M.J., and Troe, J. (2006) Evaluated kinetic and photochemical data for atmospheric chemistry: Volume II--gas phase reactions of organic species. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 6: 3625-4055. Baasandorj, M., Ravishankara, A.R., Burkholder, J.B. (2011) Atmospheric chemistry of (Z)-CF3CH[boxH]CHCF3: OH radical reaction rate coefficient and global warming potential. J Phys Chem A. 2011 Sep 29;115(38):10539-49. doi: 10.1021/jp206195g. Carter, W.P.L. (1994) Development of ozone reactivity scales for volatile organic compounds. J. Air Waste Manage, 44: 881-899. Carter, W.P.L. (2008) Reactivity Estimates for Selected Consumer Product Compounds, Final Report to California Air Resources Board Contract No. 06-408, February 19, 2008. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/reactivity/consumer_products.pdf. Carter, W.P.L. (2011) SAPRC Atmospheric Chemical Mechanisms and VOC Reactivity Scales, at http://www.engr.ucr.edu/~carter/SAPRC/. Last updated in Sept. 14, 2013. Tables of Maximum Incremental Reactivity (MIR) Values available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/mir2009/mir2009.htm. May 11, 2011. Carter, W.P.L. (2011a) Estimation of the ground-level atmospheric ozone formation potentials of Cis 1,1,1,4,4,4-HexaFluoro-2-Butene, August 8, 2011. [[Page 19033]] DuPont Haskell. FEA-1100: 90-day inhalation toxicity study in rats; Unpublished Report DuPont-17453-785-1; Haskell Laboratory of Industrial Toxicology: Newark, DE, 2011. IPCC, 2007: 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, 996 pp. IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp. Pitts, J.N. Jr., Winer, A.M., Aschmann, S.M., Carter, W.P.L., and Atkinson, K. (1983), Experimental Protocol for Determining Hydroxyl Radical Reaction Rate Constants Environmental Science Research Laboratory, ORD, USEPA. EPA600/3-82-038. USEPA, 2014. Significant New Alternatives Policy Program; Foam Blowing Sector; Risk Screen on Substitutes in Rigid Polyurethane Appliance Foam; Rigid Polyurethane and Polyisocyanurate Laminated Boardstock; Rigid Polyurethane Commercial Refrigeration and Sandwich Panels; Rigid Polyurethane Slabstock and Other; Flexible Polyurethane; Integral Skin Polyurethane; and Phenolic Insulation Board and Bunstock. Substitute: HFO-1336mzz(Z) (Formacel[supreg] 1100); October 10, 2014. Available online at: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-10-21/pdf/2014-24989.pdf. USEPA, 2016. Significant New Alternatives Policy Program; Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Sector; Risk Screen on Substitutes for Use in Chillers and Industrial Process Air Conditioning Substitute: HFO-1336mzz(Z) (Opteon[supreg] MZ); May 23, 2016. Available online at: https://www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-05-23/pdf/2016-12117.pdf. 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: April 23, 2018. E. Scott Pruitt, Administrator. For reasons set forth in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend part 51 of chapter I of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows: PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 0 1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows: Authority: 3 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. Subpart F--Procedural Requirements 0 2. Section 51.100 is amended by revising paragraph (s)(1) introductory text to read as follows: Sec. 51.100 Definitions. * * * * * (s)(1) This includes any such organic compound other than the following, which have been determined to have negligible photochemical reactivity: methane; ethane; methylene chloride (dichloromethane); 1,1,1-trichloroethane (methyl chloroform); 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2- trifluoroethane (CFC-113); trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11); dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12); chlorodifluoromethane (HCFC-22); trifluoromethane (HFC-23); 1,2-dichloro 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (CFC- 114); chloropentafluoroethane (CFC-115); 1,1,1-trifluoro 2,2- dichloroethane (HCFC-123); 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a); 1,1- dichloro 1-fluoroethane (HCFC-141b); 1-chloro 1,1-difluoroethane (HCFC- 142b); 2-chloro-1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HCFC-124); pentafluoroethane (HFC-125); 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134); 1,1,1-trifluoroethane (HFC-143a); 1,1-difluoroethane (HFC-152a); parachlorobenzotrifluoride (PCBTF); cyclic, branched, or linear completely methylated siloxanes; acetone; perchloroethylene (tetrachloroethylene); 3,3-dichloro- 1,1,1,2,2-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225ca); 1,3-dichloro-1,1,2,2,3- pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225cb); 1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,5-decafluoropentane (HFC 43-10mee); difluoromethane (HFC-32); ethylfluoride (HFC-161); 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoropropane (HFC-236fa); 1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC-245ca); 1,1,2,3,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC-245ea); 1,1,1,2,3- pentafluoropropane (HFC-245eb); 1,1,1,3,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC- 245fa); 1,1,1,2,3,3-hexafluoropropane (HFC-236ea); 1,1,1,3,3- pentafluorobutane (HFC-365mfc); chlorofluoromethane (HCFC-31); 1 chloro-1-fluoroethane (HCFC-151a); 1,2-dichloro-1,1,2-trifluoroethane (HCFC-123a); 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4-nonafluoro-4-methoxy-butane (C4 F9 OCH3 or HFE-7100); 2- (difluoromethoxymethyl)-1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane ((CF3 )2 CFCF2 OCH3 ); 1- ethoxy-1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4-nonafluorobutane (C4 F9 OC2 H5 or HFE-7200); 2- (ethoxydifluoromethyl)-1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane ((CF3 )2 CFCF2 OC2 H5 ); 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; trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene; HCF2 OCF2 H (HFE-134); HCF2 OCF2 OCF2 H (HFE-236cal2); HCF2 OCF2 CF2 OCF2 H (HFE- 338pcc13); HCF2 OCF2 OCF2 CF2 OCF2 H (H-Galden 1040x or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or 180)); trans 1-chloro- 3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-ene; 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene; 2-amino-2- methyl-1-propanol; t-butyl acetate; 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2- trifluoroethoxy) ethane; cis-1,1,1,4,4,4-hexafluorobut-2-ene (HFO- 1336mzz-Z); and perfluorocarbon compounds which fall into these classes: * * * * * [FR Doc. 2018-09079 Filed 4-30-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![19026 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2018 / Proposed Rules
more Indian tribes, on the relationship V. Public Participation and Request for connecting the following points
between the Federal Government and Comments beginning at 15°04′09″ N, 145°36′44″ E,
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of We view public participation as thence to 15°04′48″ N, 145°35′42″ E,
power and responsibilities between the essential to effective rulemaking, and thence to 15°05′09″ N, 145°36′08″ E,
Federal Government and Indian tribes. will consider all comments and material thence to 15°04′48″ N, 145°37′23″ E, and
If you believe this proposed rule has received during the comment period. along the shore line back to the
implications for federalism or Indian Your comment can help shape the beginning point. These coordinates are
tribes, please contact the person listed outcome of this rulemaking. If you based on NAD 1983.
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION submit a comment, please include the (b) Regulations. (1) The general
CONTACT section. docket number for this rulemaking, regulations governing safety zones
indicate the specific section of this contained in 33 CFR 165.23 apply. This
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act document to which each comment proposed rulemaking would prohibit
applies, and provide a reason for each persons and vessels not involved in the
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act exercise from being in the safety zone
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit unless authorized by the Captain of the
Federal agencies to assess the effects of Port (COTP) Guam or a designated
comments through the Federal
their discretionary regulatory actions. In representative.
eRulemaking Portal at http://
particular, the Act addresses actions www.regulations.gov. If your material (2) To seek permission to enter,
that may result in the expenditure by a cannot be submitted using http:// contact the COTP Guam or the COTP’s
State, local, or tribal government, in the www.regulations.gov, contact the person representative by VHF channel 16 or by
aggregate, or by the private sector of in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION telephone at 671–355–4821. Those in
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or CONTACT section of this document for
the safety zone must comply with all
more in any one year. Though this alternate instructions. lawful orders or directions given to
proposed rule would not result in such We accept anonymous comments. All them by the COTP or the COTP’s
an expenditure, we do discuss the comments received will be posted designated representative.
effects of this rule elsewhere in this without change to http:// (c) Enforcement period. This section
preamble. www.regulations.gov and will include will be enforced from 6 p.m. on
any personal information you have September 10, 2018 to 6 a.m. on
F. Environment provided. For more about privacy and September 11, 2018.
We have analyzed this proposed rule the docket, visit http:// Dated: April 6, 2018.
under Department of Homeland www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice. Christopher M. Chase,
Documents mentioned in this NPRM Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Security Directive 023–01, which guides
as being available in the docket, and all Port Guam.
the Coast Guard in complying with the
public comments, will be in our online [FR Doc. 2018–09188 Filed 4–30–18; 8:45 am]
National Environmental Policy Act of docket at http://www.regulations.gov
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
and can be viewed by following that
made a preliminary determination that website’s instructions. Additionally, if
this action is one of a category of actions you go to the online docket and sign up
that do not individually or cumulatively ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
for email alerts, you will be notified AGENCY
have a significant effect on the human when comments are posted or a final
environment. This proposed rule rule is published. 40 CFR Part 51
involves a safety zone vessel traffic
would be able to safely transit around. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 [EPA–HQ–OAR–2017–0175; FRL–9977–28–
Normally such actions are categorically Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation OAR]
excluded from further review under (water), Reporting and Reporting and RIN 2060–AT52
paragraph L[37] of Appendix A, Table 1 recordkeeping requirements, Security
of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01– measures, Waterways. Air Quality: Revision to the Regulatory
001–01, Rev. 01. A preliminary Record For the reasons discussed in the Definition of Volatile Organic
of Environmental Consideration preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to Compounds—Exclusion of cis-
supporting this determination is amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 1,1,1,4,4,4-hexafluorobut-2-ene (HFO-
available in the docket where indicated 1336mzz-Z)
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
under ADDRESSES. We seek any AGENCY: Environmental Protection
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
comments or information that may lead Agency (EPA).
to the discovery of a significant ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 ACTION: Proposed rule.
environmental impact from this continues to read as follows:
proposed rule. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; Agency (EPA) is proposing to revise the
G. Protest Activities 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation regulatory definition of volatile organic
No. 0170.1. compounds (VOC) under the Clean Air
The Coast Guard respects the First Act (CAA). This action proposes to add
Amendment rights of protesters. ■ 2. Add § 165.T14–0194 to read as
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
follows: cis-1,1,1,4,4,4-hexafluorobut-2-ene (also
Protesters are asked to contact the known as HFO–1336mzz–Z; CAS
person listed in the FOR FURTHER § 165.T14–0194 Safety Zone; Philippine number 692–49–9) to the list of
INFORMATION CONTACT section to Sea, Tinian. compounds excluded from the
coordinate protest activities so that your (a) Location. The following area is a regulatory definition of VOC on the
message can be received without safety zone: All waters off of Chulu and basis that this compound makes a
jeopardizing the safety or security of Babui Beach, Tinian, from surface to negligible contribution to tropospheric
people, places, or vessels. bottom, encompassed by a line ozone (O3) formation.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:55 Apr 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM 01MYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_19110/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2018 / Proposed Rules 19029
the MIR metric can be found in Carter to address these issues, and the EPA measured to be 4.91 × 10¥13 centimeter
(1994). continues to believe in general that the (cm)3/molecule-seconds at ∼296 degrees
The EPA has considered the choice impacts of VOC exemptions on Kelvin (K) (Pitts et al., 1983, Baasandorj
between MIRs with a molar or mass environmental endpoints other than O3 et al., 2011). This kOH rate is twice as
basis for the comparison to ethane in formation can be adequately addressed high as that of ethane (kOH of ethane =
past rulemakings and guidance. In the by these programs. The VOC exemption 2.4 × 10¥13 cm3/molecule-sec at ∼298 K)
2005 Interim Guidance, the EPA stated: policy is intended to facilitate and, therefore, suggests that HFO–
[A] comparison to ethane on a mass basis attainment of the O3 National Ambient 1336mzz–Z is twice as reactive as
strikes the right balance between a threshold Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and ethane. In most cases, chemicals with
that is low enough to capture compounds VOC exemption decisions will continue high kOH values also have high MIR
that significantly affect ozone concentrations to be based primarily on consideration values, but for HFO–1336mzz–Z, the
and a threshold that is high enough to of a compound’s contribution to O3 products that are formed are expected to
exempt some compounds that may usefully formation. However, if the EPA be mostly smaller perfluorinated
substitute for more highly reactive determines that a particular VOC compounds, which are not reactive in
compounds. exemption is likely to result in a the atmosphere and do not form ozone
When reviewing compounds that have
significant increase in the use of a (Baasandorj et al., 2011). Based on the
been suggested for VOC-exempt status, EPA
will continue to compare them to ethane compound and that the increased use current scientific understanding of
using kOH expressed on a molar basis and would pose a significant risk to human tetrafluoroalkene reactions in the
MIR values expressed on a mass basis. health or the environment that would atmosphere, it is unlikely that the actual
not be addressed adequately by existing O3 impact on a mass basis would equal
The 2005 Interim Guidance notes that or exceed that of ethane in the scenarios
programs or policies, then the EPA may
the EPA will consider a compound to be used to calculate VOC reactivity
exercise its judgment accordingly in
negligibly reactive if it is equal to or less (Baasandorj et al., 2011; Carter, 2011a).
deciding whether to grant an exemption.
reactive than ethane based on either kOH To address the potential for
expressed on a molar basis or MIR B. Petition To List HFO–1336mzz–Z as stratospheric O3 impacts, the petitioner
values expressed on a mass basis. an Exempt Compound contended that, because the
The molar comparison of MIR is more DuPont Chemicals & Fluoroproducts atmospheric lifetime of HFO–1336mzz–
consistent with the original smog (DuPont) submitted a petition to the Z due to loss by OH reaction was
chamber experiments, which compared EPA on February 14, 2014, requesting estimated to be ∼20 days and it does not
equal molar concentrations of that cis-1,1,1,4,4,4-hexafluorobut-2-ene contain chlorine or bromine, it is not
individual VOCs, supporting the (HFO–1336mzz–Z; CAS number 692– expected to contribute to the depletion
selection of ethane as the threshold, 49–9) be exempted from the regulatory of the stratospheric O3 layer.
while the mass-based comparison of definition of VOC. The petition was
MIR is consistent with how MIR values III. The EPA’s Assessment of the
based on the argument that HFO– Petition
and other reactivity metrics are applied 1336mzz–Z has low reactivity relative to
in reactivity-based emission limits. It is, ethane. The petitioner indicated that The EPA is responding to the petition
however, important to note that the HFO–1336mzz–Z may be used in a by proposing to exempt HFO–1336mzz–
mass-based comparison is slightly less variety of applications as a replacement Z from the regulatory definition of VOC.
restrictive than the molar-based for foam expansion or blowing agents This action is based on consideration of
comparison in that a few more with higher global warming potential the compound’s low contribution to
compounds would qualify as negligibly (GWP) (>700 GWP) for use in tropospheric O3 and the low likelihood
reactive. polyurethane rigid insulating foams, of risk to human health or the
Given the two goals of the exemption environment, including stratospheric O3
among others. It is also a new
policy articulated in the 2005 Interim depletion, toxicity, and climate change.
developmental refrigerant as a potential
Guidance, the Agency believes that Additional information on these topics
working fluid for Organic Rankine
ethane continues to be an appropriate is provided in the following sections.
Cycles (ORC).1
threshold for defining negligible To support its petition, DuPont
reactivity. And, to encourage the use of A. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone
referenced several documents, including Formation
environmentally beneficial one peer-reviewed journal article on
substitutions, the EPA believes that a HFO–1336mzz–Z reaction rates As noted in studies cited by the
comparison to ethane on a mass basis (Baasandorj, M. et al., 2011). DuPont petitioner, HFO–1336mzz–Z has a MIR
strikes the right balance between a also provided a supplemental technical value of 0.04 g O3/g VOC for ‘‘averaged
threshold that is low enough to capture report on the MIR of HFO–1336mzz–Z conditions,’’ versus 0.28 g O3/g VOC for
compounds that significantly affect (Carter, 2011a). Per this report, the MIR ethane (Carter, 2011). Therefore, the
ozone concentrations and a threshold of HFO–1336mzz–Z is 0.04 gram (g) O3/ EPA considers HFO–1336mzz–Z to be
that is high enough to exempt some negligibly reactive and eligible for VOC-
g HFO–1336mzz–Z on the mass-based
compounds that may usefully substitute exempt status in accordance with the
MIR scale. This reactivity rate is 86
for more highly reactive compounds. Agency’s long-standing policy that
percent lower than that of ethane (0.28
The 2005 Interim Guidance also noted compounds should so qualify where
g O3/g ethane). The reactivity rate kOH
that concerns have sometimes been either reactivity metric (kOH expressed
for the gas-phase reaction of OH radicals
raised about the potential impact of a on a molar basis or MIR expressed on
with HFO–1336mzz–Z (kOH) has been
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
VOC exemption on environmental a mass basis) indicates that the
endpoints other than O3 concentrations, 1 Konstantinos Kontomaris, 2014, HFO–1336mzz– compound is less reactive than ethane.
including fine particle formation, air Z High Temperature Chemical Stability and Use as While the overall atmospheric reactivity
toxics exposures, stratospheric O3 a Working Fluid in Organic Rankine Cycles. of HFO–1336mzz–Z was not studied in
depletion, and climate change. The EPA International Refrigeration and Air Conditioning an experimental smog chamber, the
Conference. Perdue University: https://
has recognized, however, that there are www.chemours.com/Refrigerants/en_US/products/
chemical mechanism derived from other
existing regulatory or non-regulatory Opteon/Stationary_Refrigeration/assets/downloads/ chamber studies (Carter, 2011) was used
programs that are specifically designed 2014_Purdue-Paper-Opteon-MZ.pdf. to model the complete formation of O3
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:26 Apr 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM 01MYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_19110/page/4.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2018 / Proposed Rules 19033
DuPont Haskell. FEA–1100: 90-day PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR ((CF3)2CFCF2OCH3); 1-ethoxy-
inhalation toxicity study in rats; PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND 1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4-nonafluorobutane
Unpublished Report DuPont–17453– SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION (C4F9OC2H5 or HFE–7200); 2-
785–1; Haskell Laboratory of Industrial (ethoxydifluoromethyl)-1,1,1,2,3,3,3-
Toxicology: Newark, DE, 2011.
PLANS
IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: The
heptafluoropropane
Physical Science Basis. Contribution of
■ 1. The authority citation for part 51 ((CF3)2CFCF2OC2H5); methyl acetate;
Working Group I to the Fourth continues to read as follows: 1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxy-
Assessment Report of the Authority: 3 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401– propane (n-C3F7OCH3, HFE–7000); 3-
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 7671q. ethoxy-1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-
Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. dodecafluoro-2-(trifluoromethyl) hexane
Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Subpart F—Procedural Requirements (HFE–7500); 1,1,1,2,3,3,3-
Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. heptafluoropropane (HFC 227ea);
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, ■ 2. Section 51.100 is amended by
methyl formate (HCOOCH3);
United Kingdom and New York, NY, revising paragraph (s)(1) introductory 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3-
USA, 996 pp. text to read as follows: methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane
IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The
Physical Science Basis. Contribution of § 51.100 Definitions. (HFE–7300); propylene carbonate;
Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment * * * * * dimethyl carbonate; trans-1,3,3,3-
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on (s)(1) This includes any such organic tetrafluoropropene; HCF2OCF2H (HFE–
Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, compound other than the following, 134); HCF2OCF2OCF2H (HFE–236cal2);
G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. which have been determined to have HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (HFE–338pcc13);
Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (H-Galden
P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge
negligible photochemical reactivity:
methane; ethane; methylene chloride 1040x or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or
University Press, Cambridge, United 180)); trans 1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop-
Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 (dichloromethane); 1,1,1-trichloroethane
(methyl chloroform); 1,1,2-trichloro- 1-ene; 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene; 2-
pp.
Pitts, J.N. Jr., Winer, A.M., Aschmann, S.M., 1,2,2-trifluoroethane (CFC–113); amino-2-methyl-1-propanol; t-butyl
Carter, W.P.L., and Atkinson, K. (1983), trichlorofluoromethane (CFC–11); acetate; 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-
Experimental Protocol for Determining dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC–12); trifluoroethoxy) ethane; cis-1,1,1,4,4,4-
Hydroxyl Radical Reaction Rate chlorodifluoromethane (HCFC–22); hexafluorobut-2-ene (HFO–1336mzz–Z);
Constants Environmental Science trifluoromethane (HFC–23); 1,2-dichloro and perfluorocarbon compounds which
Research Laboratory, ORD, USEPA. fall into these classes:
EPA600/3–82–038.
1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (CFC–114);
chloropentafluoroethane (CFC–115); * * * * *
USEPA, 2014. Significant New Alternatives [FR Doc. 2018–09079 Filed 4–30–18; 8:45 am]
Policy Program; Foam Blowing Sector; 1,1,1-trifluoro 2,2-dichloroethane
Risk Screen on Substitutes in Rigid (HCFC–123); 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Polyurethane Appliance Foam; Rigid (HFC–134a); 1,1-dichloro 1-fluoroethane
Polyurethane and Polyisocyanurate (HCFC–141b); 1-chloro 1,1-
Laminated Boardstock; Rigid difluoroethane (HCFC–142b); 2-chloro- FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
Polyurethane Commercial Refrigeration 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HCFC–124); COMMISSION
and Sandwich Panels; Rigid pentafluoroethane (HFC–125); 1,1,2,2-
Polyurethane Slabstock and Other; 47 CFR Part 76
Flexible Polyurethane; Integral Skin
tetrafluoroethane (HFC–134); 1,1,1-
Polyurethane; and Phenolic Insulation trifluoroethane (HFC–143a); 1,1- [MB Docket Nos. 18–92 and 17–105; FCC
Board and Bunstock. Substitute: HFO– difluoroethane (HFC–152a); 18–47]
1336mzz(Z) (Formacel® 1100); October parachlorobenzotrifluoride (PCBTF);
10, 2014. Available online at: https:// cyclic, branched, or linear completely Channel Lineup Requirements—
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-10-21/ methylated siloxanes; acetone; Modernization of Media Regulation
pdf/2014-24989.pdf. perchloroethylene (tetrachloroethylene); Initiative
USEPA, 2016. Significant New Alternatives 3,3-dichloro-1,1,1,2,2-
Policy Program; Refrigeration and Air AGENCY: Federal Communications
pentafluoropropane (HCFC–225ca); 1,3- Commission.
Conditioning Sector; Risk Screen on
Substitutes for Use in Chillers and
dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane ACTION: Proposed rule.
Industrial Process Air Conditioning (HCFC–225cb); 1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,5-
Substitute: HFO–1336mzz(Z) (Opteon® decafluoropentane (HFC 43–10mee); SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal
MZ); May 23, 2016. Available online at: difluoromethane (HFC–32); Communications Commission
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016- ethylfluoride (HFC–161); 1,1,1,3,3,3- (Commission) proposes to eliminate the
05-23/pdf/2016-12117.pdf. hexafluoropropane (HFC–236fa); requirement that cable operators
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51 1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC– maintain at their local office a current
245ca); 1,1,2,3,3–pentafluoropropane listing of the cable television channels
Environmental protection, (HFC–245ea); 1,1,1,2,3- that each cable system delivers to its
Administrative practice and procedure, pentafluoropropane (HFC–245eb); subscribers. In addition, the
Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting 1,1,1,3,3–pentafluoropropane (HFC– Commission invites comment on
and recordkeeping requirements, 245fa); 1,1,1,2,3,3-hexafluoropropane whether we should also eliminate the
Volatile organic compounds. (HFC–236ea); 1,1,1,3,3- requirement that certain cable operators
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
Dated: April 23, 2018. pentafluorobutane (HFC–365mfc); make their channel lineup available via
E. Scott Pruitt,
chlorofluoromethane (HCFC–31); 1 their online public inspection file. In
chloro-1-fluoroethane (HCFC–151a); 1,2- response to a Public Notice launching
Administrator.
dichloro-1,1,2-trifluoroethane (HCFC– the Commission’s Modernization of
For reasons set forth in the preamble, 123a); 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4-nonafluoro-4- Media Regulation Initiative,
EPA proposes to amend part 51 of methoxy-butane (C4F9OCH3 or HFE– commenters asked the Commission to
chapter I of title 40 of the Code of 7100); 2-(difluoromethoxymethyl)- consider eliminating both of these
Federal Regulations as follows: 1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane requirements because channel lineup
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:26 Apr 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM 01MYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_19110/page/8.svg)
Document Created: 2018-05-01 00:24:14
Document Modified: 2018-05-01 00:24:14
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule. | |
| Dates | Written comments must be received on or before July 2, 2018. | |
| Contact | Souad Benromdhane, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts Division, Mail Code C539-07, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone: (919) 541-4359; fax number: (919) | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 19026 | |
| RIN Number | 2060-AT52 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Administrative Practice and Procedure; Air Pollution Control; Ozone; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR