Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Telomers Telomers in the Environment:

in the Environment:

EPA's Current Understanding of Sources EPA's Current Understanding of Sources and Pathways and Pathways December 8, 2003 December 8, 2003 A " Road Map" for a Path Forward Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Proposed Path Forward ° At the October 9, 2003 meeting of the Telomers Monitoring Work Group, EPA proposed to focus its efforts initially on additional data needed for priority setting and screening.

° Based on the data collected and analyzed,

additional studies would be prioritized. Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Proposed Path Forward ( continued)

° EPA has reviewed its Data Needs Tables and the data available thus far. EPA has identified tests needed to to better understand sources of PFOA entering the environment and pathways leading to human exposures.

° The results of these tests will enable the Agency to establish priorities for future studies ° Some of EPA's Data Needs have been met by industry;

others are included in LOI commitments or ECA proposals, and some are still outstanding.

° All of EPA's Data Needs are critical to understanding sources and pathways. Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Proposed Path Forward ( continued)

° This presentation is a " Road Map" which describes EPA's current understanding of sources and pathways, available data, and telomer basic data needs which will enable further priority setting.

° Once these basic data are available, additional priorities will be identified for further testing and monitoring.

° This is an overall summary; the details of the data and EPA's Data Needs are described in the relevant dockets. Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Primary Questions ° In order to understand and prioritize the potential telomer sources and pathways, EPA needs to understand whether telomers can undergo transformation to PFOA in the environment.

° In addition, EPA needs to better understand the sources of PFOA entering the environment and pathways leading to human exposures.

° Point source releases could result in levels that could be significant; additional screening level information is needed to better understand these sources. Draft 12 08 2003 EPA ° Incineration:

  Incineration testing to determine incineration byproducts ( proposed ECA)

° Degradation:

  Zahn Wellens Test OECD 302B ( LOI Commitment)

  SCAS Test for Insoluble and Volatile Chemicals ( OPPTS 835.5045) and Aerobic/ Anaerobic Transformation in Soil ( OECD 307) for telomer based materials ( ECA agreement in principle)

ECA Tests Proposed, LOI Commitments, and Outstanding Data Needs Draft 12 08 2003 EPA ° Degradation ( continued):

  Aerobic Sewage Treatment Simulation Test ( OECD 303A) ( ECA agreement in principle)

  Anaerobic Biodegradability of Organic Compounds in Digested Sludge: Measurement of Gas Production ( OECD 311) ( ECA agreement in principle)

  Aerobic and Anaerobic Transformations in Aquatic Sediment Systems ( OECD 308) ( ECA agreement in principle) ECA Tests Proposed, LOI Commitments, and Outstanding Data Needs Draft 12 08 2003 EPA ° Degradation ( continued)

  Abiotic degradation tests: UV/ Visible Absorption ( OPPTS 830.7050), Direct Photolysis in Water ( OPPTS 835.2210), and Indirect Photolysis Screening Test ( OPPTS 835.5270) ( outstanding data needs)

° Article testing:

  TRP has an LOI commitment; an update will be provided at the December 2003 Workgroup meeting ECA Tests Proposed, LOI Commitments, and Outstanding Data Needs ( continued) Draft 12 08 2003 EPA ° Monitoring:

  Mill Pilot Study ( LOI commitment)

  Material balance information from manufacturing and customer sites to supplement the Mill Pilot Study ( outstanding data need)

  Manufacturing facilities and off site from these facilities:

concentrations in air, surface water, groundwater, wastewater treatment, soil, sludges, and biota ( outstanding data need).

  Use facilities and off site from these facilities: air, surface water, groundwater, wastewater treatment, groundwater, soil,

sludges, and biota ( outstanding data need).

ECA Tests Proposed, LOI Commitments, and Outstanding Data Needs ( continued) Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Take Advantage of Available Information:

° EPA has asked whether preliminary information on the storage stability testing could be made available. These data would be very helpful as we develop the biodegradation ECA.

° EPA and TRP agree that the Telomer 8 2 Alcohol test data should be used to inform degradation testing to be conducted. Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Possible Future Data Needs

Examples:

° Incineration:

  Physical/ chemical , fate and transport properties of incineration byproducts ( to be determined based on incineration results)

° Additional monitoring for PFOA and PFOA precursors, to be prioritized based on screening level test results and other available data.

° Other studies as indicated from results of tests or monitoring conducted, or other available data. Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Telomers: The Road Map A Summary of the Telomer Lifecycle; Potential Sources and Pathways; Data Which Are Available, Pending, and Needed;

and EPA's Rationale for Additional Data Needs Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Wastewater Air Solid Waste/

sludge Groundwater ( Spillage, Leaching,

Direct Injection) Container waste rinsate Air POTW Treatment Discharge to Surface Water Sludge Disposal ( Land, Landfill,

Incineration)

Landfill, Incineration,

Recycling Soil, Biota Soil, Biota Product Life Cycle:

Product Life Cycle: Telomers Telomers Chemical Manufacturing Chemical Use in Manufacture of Articles Shipping Article Use, Breakdown,

Disposal Soil, Biota Continue to Environmental Fate Disposal Surface & groundwater Surface & groundwater Surface & groundwater Indoor air Outdoor air Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Wastewater Air Solid Waste/

sludge Groundwater ( Spillage, Leaching,

Direct Injection) POTW Treatment Discharge to Surface Water Sludge Disposal ( Land, Landfill,

Incineration) Landfill, Incineration,

Recycling Soil, Biota Soil, Biota Manufacture of Manufacture of Telomers Telomers Chemical Manufacturing Soil, Biota Return to Product Life Cycle Ingestion ?

Ingestion ?

Ingestion, Inhalation ? Ingestion ?

Ingestion ? Inhalation ? Ingestion ? Data Sources And Needs Continue to Environmental Fate Surface & groundwater Groundwater Pending:

LOI/ other: some ongoing monitoring is being conducted.

ECA: Incineration ( under development); Outstanding Data Needs:

ECA: materials balance,

monitoring of concentrations on and off site in air, surface water,

groundwater, wastewater, soil,

sludges, biota Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Wastewater Container waste rinsate POTW Treatment Discharge to Surface Water Sludge Disposal ( Land, Landfill,

Incineration) Soil, Biota Shipping of Shipping of Telomers Telomers Shipping Return to Product Life Cycle Ingestion ?

Ingestion ?

Ingestion ? Data Sources And Needs Continue to Environmental Fate Groundwater Pending:

LOI: none ECA: none Outstanding Data Needs:

ECA: none at present Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Wastewater Solid Waste/

sludge Air POTW Treatment Discharge to Surface Water Sludge Disposal ( Land, Landfill,

Incineration)

Landfill, Incineration,

Recycling Soil, Biota Manufacture of Manufacture of Telomer Telomer based Articles based Articles Chemical Use in Manufacture of Articles Soil, Biota ( Carpet, textiles,

paper, leather ) Return to Product Life Cycle Data Sources And Needs Ingestion ?

Ingestion ?

Inhalation ?

Ingestion,

Inhalation ? Ingestion,

Inhalation ? Ingestion ? Continue to Environmental Fate Pending:

LOI: Mill Pilot study ECA: Incineration ( under development) Outstanding Data Needs:

ECA: materials balance,

monitoring of concentrations on and off site in air, surface water, groundwater,

wastewater, landfill leachate,

soil, sludges, biota Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Wastewater POTW Treatment Discharge to Surface Water Sludge Disposal ( Land, Landfill,

Incineration) Indoor air Outdoor air Dermal contact ?

Ingestion ? Soil, Biota Telomers Telomers: Article Use, Breakdown,

: Article Use, Breakdown,

and Disposal and Disposal Article Use, Breakdown,

Disposal Landfill, Incineration,

Recycling Return to Product Life Cycle Data Sources And Needs Inhalation ? Ingestion ?

Ingestion ? Continue to Environmental Fate Ingestion ? Pending:

LOI: article testing ECA: none Outstanding Data Needs:

ECA: to be determined after update on LOI article testing Draft 12 08 2003 EPA V o la tiliza tio n V o la tiliza tio n ,

T ra n s p o rt o n p a rtic u la te s Runoff,

Particulate erosion FLUOROPOLYMERS   Fate in the Environment Environmental Fate of Environmental Fate of Telomers Telomers Return to Product Life Cycle Water Air Soil Biodegradation Hydrolysis Photolysis Sorption Biodegradation Sorption Photolysis Treatment Hydrolysis Photolysis Irrigation W et, dry deposition W et, dry deposition Pending:

LOI: Zahn Wellens ( OECD 302B)

ECA: SCAS, Soil ( OECD 307),

STP ( OECD 303A), Sediment ( OECD 308), Sludge ( OECD 311); Outstanding Data Needs:

ECA: Abiotic tests Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Environmental Fate:

Environmental Fate:

Biodegradation in Water Biodegradation in Water Available Data Available Data Preliminary laboratory studies ( 28 days or less) show that 8 Preliminary laboratory studies ( 28 days or less) show that 8 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol B Alcohol undergoes rapid biodegradation via intermediates to PFOA. The ma undergoes rapid biodegradation via intermediates to PFOA. The major products jor products are intermediates that have the potential to be transformed to P are intermediates that have the potential to be transformed to PFOA over a FOA over a longer period of time.

longer period of time. References References Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA The TRP LOI Commitment includes the The TRP LOI Commitment includes the Zahn Zahn Wellens Wellens test ( OECD 302B)

test ( OECD 302B)

References References EPA has identified information on the biodegradation of EPA has identified information on the biodegradation of telomer telomer based polymers,

based polymers,

precursors and 8 precursors and 8 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol in aerobic / anaerobic aquatic sediment B Alcohol in aerobic / anaerobic aquatic sediment systems as important data needs to determine if these processes systems as important data needs to determine if these processes can lead to the can lead to the release of PFOA. This information would be determined using OEC release of PFOA. This information would be determined using OECD 308 D 308 Aerobic/ Anaerobic Transformation in Aquatic Sediment Systems. References References Also,

Also, Anaerobic Sludge Digestion OECD 311 testing is needed Anaerobic Sludge Digestion OECD 311 testing is needed because because preliminary laboratory tests show potential for rapid biodegradat reliminary laboratory tests show potential for rapid biodegradat ion ultimately ion ultimately leading to PFOA leading to PFOA. Return to Environmental Fate Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Environmental Fate: Hydrolysis in Environmental Fate: Hydrolysis in Water and Soil Water and Soil Available Data Available Data 8 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol does not hydrolyze.

B Alcohol does not hydrolyze. Reference Reference Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA None.

None. Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale None at this time.

None at this time. Return to Environmental Fate Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Environmental Fate:

Environmental Fate: Photolysis Photolysis in in Water and Soil Water and Soil Available Data Available Data 8 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol does not absorb light in the UV range; direct B Alcohol does not absorb light in the UV range; direct photolysis photolysis cannot occur.

cannot occur.

Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA None.

None. Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Indirect Indirect photolysis photolysis of 8 of 8 2 TBA in water and soils as part of 2 TBA in water and soils as part of abiotic abiotic tests which tests which have been discussed in have been discussed in Telomer Telomer workgroup meetings and are outstanding data workgroup meetings and are outstanding data needs.

needs. Return to Environmental Fate Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Environmental Fate: Soil Environmental Fate: Soil Biodegradation Biodegradation Available Data Available Data Preliminary laboratory studies ( 28 days or less) show that 8 Preliminary laboratory studies ( 28 days or less) show that 8 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol B Alcohol undergoes rapid biodegradation via intermediates to PFOA. The m undergoes rapid biodegradation via intermediates to PFOA. The major products are ajor products are intermediates that have the potential to be transformed to PFOA intermediates that have the potential to be transformed to PFOA over a longer period over a longer period of time. Soil may be a significant pathway as it serves as an of time. Soil may be a significant pathway as it serves as an integrator and may integrator and may serve as a reservoir.

serve as a reservoir. References References Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA A proposed ECA would include the A proposed ECA would include the Aerobic / Anaerobic Transformation in Soil test ( OECD 307). Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Soil biodegradation data including biodegradation rates and identification of degradation products needs to be included as part of the OECD 307 testing. These data are needed to enable the Agency to determine if o determine if soils are a potential reservoir where telomers can degrade to produce PFOA and/ or PFOA precursors.

Return to Environmental Fate Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Environmental Fate: Sorption Environmental Fate: Sorption Available Data Available Data 8 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol adsorption/

B Alcohol adsorption/ desorption desorption isotherm data indicate moderate to isotherm data indicate moderate to strong sorption to soils and sediments.

strong sorption to soils and sediments. References References Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA None at this time; Possible future needs.

None at this time; Possible future needs.

Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Additional sorption or other data may be needed to determine whe Additional sorption or other data may be needed to determine whether ther degradation products are mobile in soils. These data could be degradation products are mobile in soils. These data could be needed to enable needed to enable the Agency to determine if soils or sediment are a significant r the Agency to determine if soils or sediment are a significant route of exposure oute of exposure for for telomers telomers or or telomer telomer degradation products which eventually break down to degradation products which eventually break down to PFOA.

PFOA. Return to Environmental Fate Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Environmental Fate: Atmospheric Environmental Fate: Atmospheric Photolysis Photolysis Available Data Available Data An atmospheric oxidation study on a substance similar to 8 An atmospheric oxidation study on a substance similar to 8 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol indicates the substance undergoes degradation to an Alcohol indicates the substance undergoes degradation to an aldehyde aldehyde. No . No information on the potential of the information on the potential of the aldehyde aldehyde to form PFOA is available.

to form PFOA is available.

Other studies show similar chemicals degrade to Other studies show similar chemicals degrade to perfluorocarboxylic perfluorocarboxylic acids.

acids.

Based on this information, EPA concludes that the 8 Based on this information, EPA concludes that the 8 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol B Alcohol degrades in the atmosphere to unknown products.

degrades in the atmosphere to unknown products. Reference Reference Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA None.

None. Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale The identity and fate of degradation products in the atmosphere The identity and fate of degradation products in the atmosphere could be could be needed. This information would help determine if this transform needed. This information would help determine if this transformation ation pathway could be a significant route to PFOA, and an exposure pa pathway could be a significant route to PFOA, and an exposure pathway for thway for PFOA.

PFOA. Return to Environmental Fate Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Environmental Fate: Aerobic Environmental Fate: Aerobic Wastewater Treatment Wastewater Treatment Available Data Available Data None.

None. Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Draft ECA proposal specifies Draft ECA proposal specifies Modified SCAS Test for Insoluble and Volatile Modified SCAS Test for Insoluble and Volatile Chemicals ( SCAS) b Chemicals ( SCAS) biodegradation testing for iodegradation testing for Telomer Telomer Based Polymers Based Polymers ( TBPss TBPss). Note: SCAS ( OPPTS 835.5045) is not a wastewater treatment ). Note: SCAS ( OPPTS 835.5045) is not a wastewater treatment simulation test.

simulation test. Reference Reference Data to determine if Data to determine if Telomer Telomer Based Polymer Products (

Based Polymer Products ( TBPPs TBPPs) degrade to degrade to PFOA and PFOA precursors in wastewater treatment using OECD 303A PFOA and PFOA precursors in wastewater treatment using OECD 303A Aerobic Sewage Treatment Simulation Test.

Aerobic Sewage Treatment Simulation Test. Reference Reference These data are needed because preliminary laboratory tests show These data are needed because preliminary laboratory tests show potential potential for rapid biodegradation ultimately leading to PFOA.

for rapid biodegradation ultimately leading to PFOA. TBPPs TBPPs are expected to are expected to be released to wastewater treatment systems. It is also needed be released to wastewater treatment systems. It is also needed to to determine if wastewater treatment can lead to the release of PF determine if wastewater treatment can lead to the release of PFOA.

OA.

Return to Environmental Fate Draft 12 08 2003 EPA References:

References: Biodegradation Biodegradation Return Telomer Telomer Research Program ( 2003). Letter of Intent for the Research Program ( 2003). Letter of Intent for the Telomer Telomer Research Program. March 14, 2003. Letter to Stephen Johnson.

Research Program. March 14, 2003. Letter to Stephen Johnson.

Wang,

Wang, Ning Ning, Biodegradation of , Biodegradation of 14 14 C Labeled 8 Labeled 8 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol ( Modified B Alcohol ( Modified OECD 301D Closed Bottle Test),

OECD 301D Closed Bottle Test), Telomer Telomer Research Program, Arlington, VA, Study Research Program, Arlington, VA, Study completion date: October 24, 2003.

completion date: October 24, 2003.

Lange,

Lange, Cleston Cleston C., Biodegradation Screen Study for C., Biodegradation Screen Study for Telomer Telomer Type Alcohols,

Type Alcohols,

Pace Analytical Services, Inc., Minneapolis, MN, November 6, 200 Pace Analytical Services, Inc., Minneapolis, MN, November 6, 2002 ( AR226 2 ( AR226 1149).

1149).

Wang,

Wang, Ning Ning, Accelerated Biodegradation of 8 , Accelerated Biodegradation of 8 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol B Alcohol  A Preliminary Screening Study, E. I.

Preliminary Screening Study, E. I. Du Du Pont de Nemours and Company, Wilmington, DE,

Pont de Nemours and Company, Wilmington, DE,

Study completion date: March 20, 2003.

Study completion date: March 20, 2003.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ( OECD). O Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ( OECD). OECD ECD Guideline for Testing of Chemicals. Inherent biodegradability: M Guideline for Testing of Chemicals. Inherent biodegradability: Modified SCAS test.

odified SCAS test.

No. 302A. May 12, 1981.

No. 302A. May 12, 1981.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ( OECD). O Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ( OECD). OECD ECD Guideline For The Testing of Chemicals. Proposal for Updating Gu Guideline For The Testing of Chemicals. Proposal for Updating Guideline 303.

ideline 303.

Simulation Test Simulation Test  Aerobic Sewage Treatment: 303 A: Activated Sludge Units Aerobic Sewage Treatment: 303 A: Activated Sludge Units  303 B:

303 B:

Biofilms Biofilms. January 22, 2001.

. January 22, 2001. Draft 12 08 2003 EPA References:

References:

Atmospheric Atmospheric Photolysis Photolysis Return Ellis, D. A., J. W. Martin, S. A.

Ellis, D. A., J. W. Martin, S. A. Mabury Mabury, M. D.

, M. D. Sulbaek Sulbaek Andersen, and T. J.

Andersen, and T. J.

Wallington,

Wallington,   Atmospheric Lifetime of Atmospheric Lifetime of Fluorotelomer Fluorotelomer Alcohols Alcohols  Environmental Environmental Science and Technology, 37 ( 2003) 3816 Science and Technology, 37 ( 2003) 3816 3820, November 17, 2003.

3820, November 17, 2003.

Mabury Mabury, S. A.,

, S. A., Telomer Telomer Research program, Progress Report.

Research program, Progress Report.

September 1, 2001 to September 1, 2002. AR 226 September 1, 2001 to September 1, 2002. AR 226 1281.

1281.

LeBras LeBras, C. C.,

, C. C., Boussoutrot Boussoutrot, V., and , V., and Magneron Magneron, I. Study of the , I. Study of the Atmospheric Fate of Fluorinated Alcohols. Final Report, July 20 Atmospheric Fate of Fluorinated Alcohols. Final Report, July 2003.

03.

Kaiser, M. A., UV Spectrum of 8: 2 Kaiser, M. A., UV Spectrum of 8: 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol, Dupont Report B Alcohol, Dupont Report No. 12734, AR 226 No. 12734, AR 226 1290, March 21, 2003 1290, March 21, 2003 Draft 12 08 2003 EPA References:

References:

Hydrolysis Hydrolysis Return Berti Berti, William R., Aqueous Stability of 8 , William R., Aqueous Stability of 8 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol as a B Alcohol as a Function of pH,

Function of pH, DuPont DuPont Central Research & Development, Newark, Delaware,

Central Research & Development, Newark, Delaware,

April 25, 2003 ( AR226 April 25, 2003 ( AR226 1348).

1348). Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Primary References:

Primary References: Telomer Telomer Manufacturing, Monitoring Manufacturing, Monitoring 3M Environmental Laboratory, Environmental Monitoring 3M Environmental Laboratory, Environmental Monitoring  Multi Multi City City Study; Water, Sludge, Sediment, POTW Effluent and Landfill Study; Water, Sludge, Sediment, POTW Effluent and Landfill Leachate Leachate Samples.

Samples.

June 25, 2001.

June 25, 2001. Telomer Telomer Research Program ( 2000).

Research Program ( 2000). Telomer Telomer Research Program Research Program Update and Status Report, Presented to US EPA, OPPT. October 23 Update and Status Report, Presented to US EPA, OPPT. October 23, 2000. ( AR , 2000. ( AR 226 226 0947).

0947). Telomer Telomer Research Program ( 2003).

Research Program ( 2003). Letter of Intent for the Letter of Intent for the Telomer Telomer Research Program. March 14, 2003. Letter to Stephen Johnson.

Research Program. March 14, 2003. Letter to Stephen Johnson.

E. I.

E. I. DuPont DuPont de Nemours & Company ( 2003).

de Nemours & Company ( 2003). DuPont Telomer DuPont Telomer Manufacturing Sites: Environmental Assessment of PFOA Level s i Manufacturing Sites: Environmental Assessment of PFOA Level s in Air and n Air and Water. Corporate Remediation Group (

Water. Corporate Remediation Group ( DuPont DuPont/ URS Diamond). Wilmington, DE / URS Diamond). Wilmington, DE September 2003. Project # 508501 September 2003. Project # 508501 18983843.00003 18983843.00003 Kissa Kissa, Erik ( 2001). Fluorinated Surfactants and Repellants. Second , Erik ( 2001). Fluorinated Surfactants and Repellants. Second Edition. New York: Marcel Edition. New York: Marcel Dekker Dekker. 615 pp.

. 615 pp.

Daikin America Inc. ( 2003) Progress report on monitoring effor Daikin America Inc. ( 2003) Progress report on monitoring effor ts at ts at Daikin America, Inc. Decatur facility. Letter from Randy Daikin America, Inc. Decatur facility. Letter from Randy Roussel Roussel, Safety , Safety Manager, Daikin America, to USEPA/ OPPT Document Control Office.

Manager, Daikin America, to USEPA/ OPPT Document Control Office.

September 15, 2003. OPPT September 15, 2003. OPPT 2003 2003 0012 0012 0208.

0208. Continue Return Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Martin, Jonathan, Derek Muir, Cheryl Moody, David Ellis,

Martin, Jonathan, Derek Muir, Cheryl Moody, David Ellis, Wai Kwan Wai Kwan,

Keith Solomon, and Scott Keith Solomon, and Scott Mabury Mabury,   Collection of Airborne Fluorinated Collection of Airborne Fluorinated Organics and Analysis by Gas Chromatography/ Chemical Ionization Organics and Analysis by Gas Chromatography/ Chemical Ionization Mass Mass Spectrometry Spectrometry  Analytical Chemistry ( AR226 Analytical Chemistry ( AR226 1062).

1062).

Levine, A. D., E. L.

Levine, A. D., E. L. Libelo Libelo, G.

, G. Bugna Bugna, T. Shelley, H. Mayfield, T. B.

, T. Shelley, H. Mayfield, T. B.

Stauffer,

Stauffer,   Biogeochemical assessment of natural attenuation of JP Biogeochemical assessment of natural attenuation of JP 4

contaminated ground water in the presence of fluorinated surfact contaminated ground water in the presence of fluorinated surfactants ants  The The Science of the Total Environment, 208 ( 1997) 179 Science of the Total Environment, 208 ( 1997) 179 195.

195.

Kaiser, M. A., Water Solubility of 8: 2 Kaiser, M. A., Water Solubility of 8: 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol,

B Alcohol, DuPont DuPont Report No. 12718, Test Guideline OECD 105, AR226 Report No. 12718, Test Guideline OECD 105, AR226 1287, December 27,

1287, December 27,

2002.

2002. Kaiser M. A., Vapor Pressure of 8: 2 Kaiser M. A., Vapor Pressure of 8: 2 Telomer Telomer B Alcohol,

B Alcohol, DuPont DuPont Report No. 12735, AR 226 Report No. 12735, AR 226 1288, March 21, 2003.

1288, March 21, 2003.

Primary References:

Primary References: Telomer Telomer Manufacturing, Monitoring Manufacturing, Monitoring ( continued)

( continued) Return to Data Sources and Needs Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Manufacture of Manufacture of Telomers Telomers Available Data Available Data TRP members include Asahi Glass,

TRP members include Asahi Glass, Clariant Clariant, Daikin Industries, and , Daikin Industries, and DuPont DuPont.

Telomers Telomers are manufactured by are manufactured by DuPont DuPont at the Washington Works site in at the Washington Works site in Parkersburg, WV, and at the Chambers Works site in Deepwater, NJ Parkersburg, WV, and at the Chambers Works site in Deepwater, NJ. References References Information on the manufacturing process, facilities, locations,

Information on the manufacturing process, facilities, locations, uses/ applications uses/ applications of of telomers telomers, CAS # s, chemical names, synthetic sequences, and , CAS # s, chemical names, synthetic sequences, and production/ import volumes. ( LOI Commitment) Much of this info production/ import volumes. ( LOI Commitment) Much of this information is CBI,

rmation is CBI,

although some use and location information is non although some use and location information is non CBI.

CBI. References References DuPont DuPont has also submitted Monitoring of has also submitted Monitoring of DuPont Telomer DuPont Telomer Manufacturing Facilities Manufacturing Facilities ( LOI Commitment), which was completed September 29, 2003. Addi ( LOI Commitment), which was completed September 29, 2003. Additional tional monitoring data and methods have also been reviewed.

monitoring data and methods have also been reviewed. References References The Multi The Multi City study showed some PFOA contamination, but also measured PFO City study showed some PFOA contamination, but also measured PFOS.

S.

Because both Because both telomers telomers and and fluoropolymers fluoropolymers are manufactured in Decatur AL, and are manufactured in Decatur AL, and 3M previously manufacture PFOS at this site, there are legacy is 3M previously manufacture PFOS at this site, there are legacy issues associated sues associated with this site.

with this site. Reference Reference Continue Return to Product Life Cycle Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Manufacture of Manufacture of Telomers Telomers ( continued)

( continued)

Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Incineration Analysis Incineration Analysis   ECA Proposal is being drafted; anticipate results roughly ECA Proposal is being drafted; anticipate results roughly 18 months from start of the test, based on similar studies.

18 months from start of the test, based on similar studies.

Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Materials balance on the Materials balance on the telomer telomer manufacturing facilities. M manufacturing facilities. Monitoring of onitoring of concentrations on and off concentrations on and off site in air, surface water, groundwater, wastewater,

site in air, surface water, groundwater, wastewater,

soil,

soil, sludges sludges, biota.

, biota. Very little off Very little off site data are available to the Agency, and site data are available to the Agency, and thus, the extent of the contribution of these point sources to t thus, the extent of the contribution of these point sources to the general he general population exposures is largely unknown.

population exposures is largely unknown.

The materials balance data would provide basic information on th The materials balance data would provide basic information on the amount of e amount of release, the compartments to which the release, the compartments to which the telomers telomers are released, and the amount are released, and the amount contained in their products. The monitoring would enable the A contained in their products. The monitoring would enable the Agency to gency to determine additional priorities for testing and monitoring based determine additional priorities for testing and monitoring based on screening on screening level data for sources and pathways associated with level data for sources and pathways associated with telomer telomer manufacturing manufacturing facilities.

facilities. Return to Product Life Cycle Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Telomers Telomers: Shipping from : Shipping from Manufacturer to Customers Manufacturer to Customers Available Data Available Data EPA has some CBI information from one company about practices of EPA has some CBI information from one company about practices of this company with respect to what types of containers are used,

this company with respect to what types of containers are used, and and how the containers are handled.

how the containers are handled. Reference Reference Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA None.

None. Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale None at this time.

None at this time. Return to Product Life Cycle Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Telomers Telomers: Manufacture of Articles : Manufacture of Articles Available Data Available Data Information on uses/ applications of Information on uses/ applications of telomers telomers, and production/ import volumes, CAS , and production/ import volumes, CAS # s, chemical names ( LOI Commitment). Much of this information # s, chemical names ( LOI Commitment). Much of this information is CBI.

is CBI.

Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Mill pilot study ( LOI Commitment) will provide information on ho Mill pilot study ( LOI Commitment) will provide information on how much w much Telomer Telomer is is used per unit coverage, exhaust from baths, discharge media, as used per unit coverage, exhaust from baths, discharge media, as a result of bench a result of bench scale studies which are typically used to test new coatings and scale studies which are typically used to test new coatings and formulations. EPA formulations. EPA has concerns about scale up of this data,

has concerns about scale up of this data, representativeness representativeness, and the fact that , and the fact that these laboratory studies have not been used to estimate environm these laboratory studies have not been used to estimate environmental/ human ental/ human exposure.

exposure. Reference Reference TRP and 3M have agreed to work together to address monitoring at TRP and 3M have agreed to work together to address monitoring at Telomer Telomer user user sites to determine process release/ emissions and plant ambient t sites to determine process release/ emissions and plant ambient testing. They esting. They stipulate that there be no attribution to current and past suppl stipulate that there be no attribution to current and past suppliers, and that iers, and that monitoring be conducted under a non monitoring be conducted under a non ECA format. EPA, TRP, and 3M are ECA format. EPA, TRP, and 3M are discussing the proposed approach.

discussing the proposed approach. Continue Return to Product Life Cycle Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Telomers Telomers: Manufacture of Articles : Manufacture of Articles ( continued)

( continued)

Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Material balance information to supplement the mill pilot study.

Material balance information to supplement the mill pilot study. Monitoring of onitoring of concentrations on and off concentrations on and off site in air, surface water, groundwater, wastewater,

site in air, surface water, groundwater, wastewater,

soil,

soil, sludges sludges, biota.

, biota. Very little off Very little off site data are available to the Agency, and thus,

site data are available to the Agency, and thus,

the extent of the contribution of these point sources to the gen the extent of the contribution of these point sources to the general population eral population exposures is largely unknown.

exposures is largely unknown.

The material balance data are needed because EPA has concerns ab The material balance data are needed because EPA has concerns about the out the reliability of scaling up the mill pilot study. The monitoring w reliability of scaling up the mill pilot study. The monitoring would enable the ould enable the Agency to determine additional priorities for testing and monito Agency to determine additional priorities for testing and monitoring based on ring based on screening level data for sources and pathways associated with screening level data for sources and pathways associated with telomer telomer manufacturing facilities.

manufacturing facilities. Return to Product Life Cycle Draft 12 08 2003 EPA Telomers Telomers   " Aged" Articles and " In " Aged" Articles and " In Use" Articles Use" Articles Available Data Available Data None.

None. Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA Pending/ Expected Data via LOI or Proposed ECA TRP has an LOI commitment to test articles in commerce and aged TRP has an LOI commitment to test articles in commerce and aged articles.

articles.

EPA has identified some concerns with the proposed testing, and EPA has identified some concerns with the proposed testing, and TRP is TRP is seeking input from others on the proposed testing. EPA recomme seeking input from others on the proposed testing. EPA recommends using nds using an aggressive solvent extraction to determine whether PFOA is po an aggressive solvent extraction to determine whether PFOA is potentially tentially available in the article. Depending on the results of this test available in the article. Depending on the results of this test, a mass , a mass balance approach using test conditions which simulate actual use balance approach using test conditions which simulate actual use conditions and foreseeable misuse conditions for the in use and conditions and foreseeable misuse conditions for the in use and aged aged articles would be conducted. A final solvent extraction would b articles would be conducted. A final solvent extraction would be conducted e conducted to determine whether PFOA was generated during use of the articl to determine whether PFOA was generated during use of the articl e.

e.

References References Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale Additional Data Needed via ECA and Rationale TRP has agreed to update the work group at the December 2003 meeting.

Depending on the results of this meeting, the work group will develop a recommendation to the Plenary on this data need. Return to Product Life Cycle Draft 12 08 2003 EPA References:

References: Telomer Telomer Manufacture of Manufacture of Articles Articles Return Telomer Telomer Research Program ( 2003). Letter of Intent for the Research Program ( 2003). Letter of Intent for the Telomer Telomer Research Program. March 14, 2003. Letter to Stephen Johnson.

Research Program. March 14, 2003. Letter to Stephen Johnson.

Kissa Kissa, Erik ( 2001). Fluorinated Surfactants and Repellants.

, Erik ( 2001). Fluorinated Surfactants and Repellants.

Second Edition. New York: Marcel Second Edition. New York: Marcel Dekker Dekker. 615 pp.

. 615 pp. Draft 12 08 2003 EPA References:

References: Telomer Telomer " Aged" Articles " Aged" Articles and " In Use" Articles and " In Use" Articles Return Telomer Telomer Research Program ( 2003). Letter of Intent for the Research Program ( 2003). Letter of Intent for the Telomer Telomer Research Program. March 14, 2003. Letter to Stephen Johnson.

Research Program. March 14, 2003. Letter to Stephen Johnson.

American Society for Testing and Materials ( ASTM). Standard guid American Society for Testing and Materials ( ASTM). Standard guide for small for small scale emission chamber determinations from indoor scale emission chamber determinations from indoor materials/ products. ASTM D materials/ products. ASTM D 5116 5116 97. Available at 97. Available at www.

www. astm astm. org . org. Draft 12 08 2003 EPA References:

References: Telomer Telomer Sorption Sorption Return Dekleva Dekleva, Lynn ( 2003)

, Lynn ( 2003)   Adsorption/

Adsorption/ Desorption Desorption of Ammonium of Ammonium Perfluorooctanoate Perfluorooctanoate to Soil ( OECD 106)

to Soil ( OECD 106)  Study conducted at E. I.

Study conducted at E. I. du du Pont de Pont de Nemours and Company site in Newark, DE, Report number EMSER 17 Nemours and Company site in Newark, DE, Report number EMSER 17 03.

03.

Welsh, Stephen ( 1978)

Welsh, Stephen ( 1978)   Adsorption of FC 95 and FC 143 on soil.

Adsorption of FC 95 and FC 143 on soil.

Report 1, Project 9970612633, February 27, 1978. ( AR226 Report 1, Project 9970612633, February 27, 1978. ( AR226 0488)

0488) Draft 12 08 2003 EPA References:

References: Telomer Telomer Waste Water Waste Water Treatment Treatment OECD Guideline For The Testing of Chemicals. Proposal for Updati OECD Guideline For The Testing of Chemicals. Proposal for Updating ng Guideline 303. Simulation Test Guideline 303. Simulation Test  Aerobic Sewage Treatment: 303 A: Activated Aerobic Sewage Treatment: 303 A: Activated Sludge Units Sludge Units  303 B:

303 B: Biofilms Biofilms. January 22, 2001.

. January 22, 2001. Return Draft 12 08 2003 EPA References:

References: Shipping from Shipping from Telomer Telomer Manufacturers to Customers Manufacturers to Customers DCN 6303000.0036. Page 5, and mentioned in the cover letter.

DCN 6303000.0036. Page 5, and mentioned in the cover letter.

This reference contains Confidential Business Information ( CBI)

This reference contains Confidential Business Information ( CBI) and is not and is not available in the public docket.

available in the public docket. Return


[Federal Register: March 24, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 57)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 15416-15421]
[DOCID:fr24mr08-9]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0072; FRL-8545-5]

Finding of Failure To Submit State Implementation Plans Required
for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final Rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking a final action finding that several states
have failed to submit State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to satisfy
certain requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 1997 8-hour
ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Under the CAA and
EPA's implementing regulations, states with nonattainment areas
classified as moderate, serious, severe or extreme were required to
submit by June 15, 2007, SIPs: Demonstrating how each nonattainment
area would attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than the applicable dates established in the
implementing regulations; and demonstrating reasonable further progress
(RFP). Additionally, states were required by September 15, 2006, to
submit for these same areas SIPs demonstrating that sources specified
under the CAA were subject to reasonably available control technology
requirements (RACT). States that are part of the Ozone Transport Region
(OTR) were required to submit SIPs to meet the 1997 8-hour ozone RACT
requirement for the entire state by September 15, 2006. The RACT
requirement applies to all areas within the Ozone Transport Region,
regardless of the area's designation for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard. Some states have not yet submitted SIPs to satisfy these
requirements. The EPA is by this action making a finding of failure to
submit for those nonattainment areas and OTR areas that have not made
the required SIP submission(s). If EPA has not affirmatively found that
the state has submitted the required plan or plans within 18 months,
the offset sanction applies in the area. If within 6 additional months
EPA has still not affirmatively determined that the state has submitted
the required plan, the highway funding sanction applies in an area if
it is designated nonattainment. No later than 2 years after EPA makes
the finding, EPA must promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan if the
state has not submitted and EPA has not approved the required SIP.

DATES: Effective Date: This action is effective on March 24, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: General questions concerning this
notice should be addressed to Mr. Butch Stackhouse, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Policy Division, Mail Code:
C504-2, 109 TW Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For questions related to a specific state
please contact the appropriate regional office:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Regional offices                          States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Conroy, Branch Chief, Air Programs  Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode
 Branch, EPA New England, I Congress      Island, and Vermont.
 Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02203-
 2211.
Raymond Werner, Chief, Air Programs      New York.
 Branch, EPA Region II, 290 Broadway,
 25th Floor, New York, NY 10007-1866.
Christina Fernandez, Acting Branch       Virginia.
 Chief, Air Quality Planning Branch,
 EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
 Philadelphia, PA 19103-2187.
Jay Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs         Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and
 Branch, EPA Region V, 77 West Jackson    Wisconsin.
 Street, Chicago, IL 60604.
Dave Jesson, Air Planning Office, EPA    California.
 Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
 Francisco, CA 94105.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. Statutory Requirements
    B. Consequences of Findings of Failure to Submit
II. This Action
    A. Clean Air Determination Areas Receiving a Finding of Failure
to Submit
    B. OTR Attainment Areas Receiving a Finding of Failure to Submit
    C. Finding of Failure to Submit RFP Plans in California
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedures Act
    B. Effective Date Under the Administrative Procedures Act
    C. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    D. Paperwork Reduction Act
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    G. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    H. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
    I. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    J. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
    L. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
    M. Congressional Review Act

    N. Judicial Review

I. Background

    The CAA requires states with areas that are designated
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS to develop a SIP
providing how the state will attain and maintain the NAAQS. Part D of
title I of the CAA specifies the required elements of a SIP for an area
designated nonattainment. These requirements include, but are not
limited to, RFP, RACT, and an attainment demonstration. See CAA
sections 172 and 182. In addition, states that are part of the Ozone
Transport Region (OTR) must submit SIPs meeting the 1997 8-hour ozone
RACT requirement for the entire state or the portion of the state in
the OTR. A number of states have submitted RFP, RACT and attainment
demonstration SIPs as required under the CAA and EPA's implementing
regulations, but at present, some states have not yet submitted SIPs to
satisfy these requirements of the CAA. The EPA is by this action making
a finding of failure to submit for those areas that have not yet
submitted these required SIPs.

A. Statutory Requirements

    On July 18, 1997, EPA issued a revised ozone standard. At that
time, the ozone standard was 0.12 ppm measured over a 1-hour period.
EPA revised the NAAQS to rely on an 8-hour averaging period (versus 1
hour for the previous NAAQS), and the level of the standard was changed
from 0.12 ppm to 0.08 ppm (62 FR 38856). EPA's initial implementation
strategy for the 1997 8-hour standard was vacated and remanded by the
Supreme Court. Whitman v. American Trucking Associations, Inc., 531
U.S. 457 (2001). On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951) and on November 29,
2005 (70 FR 71612), EPA published final rules that addressed the
elements related to implementation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
(Phase 1 and Phase 2 Implementation Rules). In an April 30, 2004
rulemaking (69 FR 23858) EPA designated attainment and nonattainment
areas for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and specified the
classification for each nonattainment area. The 1997 8-hour ozone
designations took effect on June 15, 2004. The November 30, 2005 Phase
2 implementation rule set forth deadlines for state and local
governments to develop and submit to EPA implementation plans designed
to meet the 1997 8-hour standard by reducing air pollutant emissions
contributing to ground-level ozone concentrations. The Phase 2 Rule
required states with nonattainment areas to submit SIPs by June 15,
2007 demonstrating how each nonattainment area would attain the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard as expeditiously as practicable but no later than
specified dates and demonstrating how the area would make reasonable
further progress toward attainment in the years prior to the attainment
year. Additionally, the Phase 2 Rule required states to submit SIPs
requiring RACT for nonattainment areas and for areas within the OTR by
September 15, 2006.

B. Consequences of Findings of Failure To Submit

    The CAA establishes specific consequences if EPA finds that a state
has failed to submit a SIP or, with regard to a submitted SIP, EPA
determines it is incomplete or disapproves it. CAA section 179(a)(1).
Additionally, any of these findings also triggers an obligation for EPA
to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) if the states have
not submitted and EPA has not approved the required SIP within 2 years
of the finding. CAA section 110(c). The first finding, that a state has
failed to submit a plan or one or more elements of a plan required
under the CAA, is the finding relevant to this rulemaking.
    EPA is finding that 11 states have failed to make required SIP
submissions for 11 nonattainment areas and 3 states or portions of
states in the Ozone Transport Region. If EPA has not affirmatively
determined that a state has made the required complete submittals for
an area within 18 months of the effective date of this rulemaking,
pursuant to CAA section 179(a) and (b) and 40 CFR 52.31, the offset
sanction identified in CAA section 179(b)(2) will apply in the area
subject to the finding. If EPA has not affirmatively determined that
the state has made a complete submission within 6 months after the
offset sanction is imposed, then the highway funding sanction will
apply in areas designated nonattainment, in accordance with CAA section
179(b)(1) and 40 CFR 52.31.\1\ The 18-month clock will stop and the
sanctions will not take effect if, within 18 months after the date of
the finding, EPA finds that the state has made a complete submittal as
to each of the SIPs for which these findings are made. In addition, EPA
is not required to promulgate a FIP if the state makes the required SIP
submittal and EPA takes final action to approve the submittal within 2
years of EPA's finding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In accordance with section 179(b)(1)(A), the highway funding
sanction only applies in areas designated nonattainment for the
relevant standard and thus would not apply in the portions of the
OTR subject to RACT, but not designated nonattainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At approximately the same time as the signing of this notice, EPA
Regional Administrators are sending letters to the states informing
each state identified below that EPA is determining that they have
failed to make one or more of the required SIP submissions for the
specified areas. These letters, and any accompanying enclosures, have
been included in the docket to this rulemaking.

II. This Action

    In this action, EPA is making a finding of failure to submit for
states that have failed to make certain required SIP submittals. This
finding starts the 18-month emission offset sanctions clock, 24-month
highway funding sanctions clock and a 24-month clock for the
promulgation by EPA of a FIP. This action will be effective on March
24, 2008. The following states failed to make an attainment
demonstration, reasonable further progress, or reasonably available
control technology submittal required under Part D of Title 1 of the
CAA for the specific area(s) identified below.
    The areas for which states that did not submit the RACT SIP, RFP
SIP, and/or the attainment demonstration SIP are as follows:

Attainment Demonstrations \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This finding is for the attainment demonstration requirement
in section 182(b)(1), 182(c)(2)(A) and 182(d) and 40 CFR 51.908.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

NH, Boston-Manchester-Portsmouth (SE) Area
NY, Jefferson County Area
RI, Providence (all of RI) Area
IL, Chicago-Gary-Lake County Area
IN, Chicago-Gary-Lake County Area
WI, Milwaukee-Racine Area
WI, Sheboygan Area

RACT SIPs \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Except as noted, this finding is for the RACT SIPs required
under CAA section 182(b)(2) for VOC and section 182(f) for
NOX. This requirement applies to moderate areas under
182(b)(2) and applies to serious, severe and extreme areas as
provided in CAA section 182(c), (d) and (e), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

RI, Providence (all of RI) Area
VT, entire state in Ozone Transport Region
ME, entire state of Maine for the OTR VOC RACT requirement
ME, entire state of Maine for the OTR NOX RACT
requirement, with the exception of those areas that received a
NOX waiver \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ On February 3, 2006 (71 FR 5791), EPA approved a
NOX waiver for Northern Maine (specifically, Oxford,
Franklin, Somerset, Piscataquis, Penobscot, Washington, Aroostook,
and portions of Hancock and Waldo Counties). This approval exempts
major sources of NOX in this area from the requirements
to implement controls meeting RACT.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VA, Stafford County
IL, Chicago-Gary-Lake County Area
IL, St. Louis Area for NOX RACT requirement
IN, Chicago-Gary-Lake County Area
OH, Cleveland-Akron-Lorain Area for VOC RACT requirement

RFP SIPs \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ This finding is for the RFP requirement under CAA sections
172(c)(2) and 182(b)(1). See also 40 CFR 51.910.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

RI, Providence (all of RI) Area
NH, Boston-Manchester-Portsmouth (SE) Area
NY, Jefferson County Area
IL, Chicago-Gary-Lake County Area
IN, Chicago-Gary-Lake County Area
WI, Milwaukee-Racine Area
WI, Sheboygan Area
CA, Western Mojave Desert
CA, Sacramento Metro Area
CA, Ventura County (part) Area

A. Clean Air Determination Areas Receiving a Finding of Failure To
Submit

    For areas designated as ``moderate nonattainment'' areas, the CAA
requires states to develop SIPs describing how the state will attain
and maintain the ozone standard; such SIPs were to have been submitted
to EPA by June 15, 2007. The Boston-Manchester-Portsmouth (SE) area in
NH and Jefferson County, NY are designated ``moderate nonattainment.''
EPA has published proposed determinations that both areas are in
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR 7234 (February 7,
2008), and 73 FR 8637 (February 14, 2008). These actions were taken in
consideration of several years of air quality data in these areas
showing attainment of the NAAQS and in consultation with the states. In
the case of Jefferson County, on June 14, 2007 New York submitted to
EPA a formal clean data request.
    EPA is proceeding with rulemaking on the clean data determinations
for these two areas. A final determination of attainment would suspend
the attainment demonstration and RFP SIP requirements of 40 CFR 50.918.
EPA expects to take final action on these determinations as soon as
possible. If EPA issues a final determination of attainment, it will
stay the sanctions and FIP clocks. The stay for the 2:1 emission offset
sanction, highway sanction and FIP promulgation clocks will continue
for as long as the area air quality continues to attain the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard. The clocks will be permanently turned off if the areas
are redesignated to attainment.
    EPA is issuing findings of failure to submit to New Hampshire for
the Boston-Manchester-Portsmouth (SE) area and to New York for the
Jefferson County Area. As noted earlier, EPA has published proposed
determinations that both areas are in attainment of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.918, the states' obligation to
submit the reasonable further progress and attainment demonstrations
will be stayed as of the effective date of a final approval of the
clean air determination for these areas. This stay will remain in
effect for so long as the area remains in attainment and will no longer
apply if the area is redesignated to attainment.

B. OTR Attainment Areas Receiving a Finding of Failure To Submit

    The states of Maine and Vermont and Stafford County, VA have 8-hr
ozone RACT requirements because they are part of the OTR.\6\ The EPA is
issuing a finding of failure to submit to Maine, Vermont and Virginia
because they have not met the requirement (40 CFR 51.916(b)). EPA
understands that these three states are each working on a certification
that the RACT rules the states adopted and EPA approved under the 1-
hour ozone standard meet the RACT requirements applicable for the 1997
8-hour ozone standard. The FIP clocks will be stopped when the states
submit and EPA approves the RACT SIP. This is a formal SIP submittal
and the states must complete their notice-and-comment process prior to
submission. Maine, Vermont and Virginia should be able to complete the
process and submit the SIPs in time for EPA to take rulemaking action
on the submissions before the 24-month FIP clock expires. These OTR
areas are subject to nonattainment NSR and, therefore, would be subject
to the 2:1 emission offset sanctions if they fail to submit RACT rules
EPA affirmatively determines are complete within 18 months of this
finding. Because the areas are in attainment, the highway funding
sanction would not apply (40 CFR 52.31(e)(2)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The remaining portion of Virginia that is in the OTR is also
part of the Washington DC-MD-VA moderate 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area. EPA has received a RACT SIP addressing
Virginia's OTR and moderate RACT requirements for the Washington DC-
MD-VA moderate 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Findings of Failure To Submit RFP Plans in California

    EPA is making findings of failure to submit RFP plans for the
following three areas in California: Los Angeles-San Bernardino
Counties (Western Mojave Desert), Ventura, and Sacramento Metro
nonattainment areas. The findings of failure to submit are being made
because these areas did not submit the RFP plans that were due on June
15, 2007. On February 14, 2008, the state submitted a formal request to
EPA to voluntarily reclassify: (1) Western Mojave Desert from moderate
to severe-17; (2) Ventura from moderate to serious; and (3) Sacramento
Metro from serious to severe-15. Although EPA must grant such voluntary
reclassification, a reclassification does not provide a basis for
extending the submittal deadlines for SIP elements that were due for
these areas' initial classifications. Consequently this finding of
failure to submit is based on the states' failure to submit the RFP
plans that were due on June 15, 2007 for the area's current
classification; this finding does not apply with regard to any
additional RFP obligations that would be triggered by the
reclassification of these areas. The February 14, 2008 letter included
a commitment to submit to EPA the RFP for the current classifications
for the three areas, as well as the RFP and attainment requirements for
the requested higher classification for the Western Mojave Desert and
Ventura areas by April 30, 2008. With respect to the Sacramento Metro
area, we note that the state has submitted an RFP SIP for the 2008
milestone. Thus the finding applies only to the RFP component required
for the 2011 milestone.
    Both the Ventura and Western Mojave Desert areas are downwind from
the South Coast Air Basin (metropolitan Los Angeles), and the state has
indicated that RFP in the areas must depend in part upon reductions in
the South Coast area. The Phase 2 Rule to implement the 1997 8-hour
NAAQS set forth a policy that emission reductions from outside a
nonattainment area could be credited toward the 1997 8-hour ozone RFP
requirement. The rule stated that credit could be taken for VOC and NOX
emission reductions within 100 km and 200 km respectively outside the
nonattainment area (70 FR 71647; November 29, 2005). However, if a
regional NOX control strategy were in place in the state, reductions
could be taken from within the state. On July 17, 2007, EPA requested a
partial voluntary remand from the Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit on this policy provision. This provision was
challenged by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). EPA's
PM2.5 Implementation Rule (72 FR 20586, April 25, 2007)
adopted a different approach for crediting reductions of precursor
pollutants from ``outside'' the nonattainment area for ROP/RFP
purposes.\7\ Because the PM2.5

Implementation Rule significantly modified the policy regarding which
emissions reductions are eligible to be credited towards a
nonattainment area's RFP requirement, EPA asked for a partial voluntary
remand of the Phase 2 Ozone Rule to consider whether it should be
revised for consistency with the PM2.5 Implementation Rule.
In response to EPA's request for a partial voluntary remand of the
Phase 2 Ozone Rule, NRDC asked the court for a vacatur, i.e., to
nullify this provision. The Court ultimately granted NRDC's petition
for vacatur. EPA issued a memorandum on October 11, 2007 stating that
we: (1) Sought a voluntary remand, (2) would be revising the rule, and
(3) advised the Regional Offices not to approve ROP/RFP SIPs that
obtained VOC or NOX reductions from outside the nonattainment area
until the new rulemaking was finalized.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``If the state justifies consideration of precursor
emissions for an area outside the nonattainment area, EPA will
expect state RFP assessments to reflect emissions changes from all
sources in this area. The State cannot include only selected sources
providing emission reductions in the analysis.'' (72 FR at 20636 (4/
25/07).)
    \8\ ``Partial Voluntary Remand Sought in the Ozone Phase 2 Rule
Concerning Rate of Progress (ROP) Reductions Obtained From Outside a
Nonattainment Area'' Memorandum of October 11, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is currently developing a proposed rule to address the court's
vacatur of the provision in the Phase 2 Ozone Implementation Rule that
allowed nonattainment areas to take credit for emission reductions
outside the nonattainment area from selected sources which differed
from what was in the PM2.5 Implementation Rule. Until we
issue that final rule, we could take rulemaking action on the RFP SIPs
on a case-by-case basis. We plan to issue the final rule as soon as
possible. However, sanctions clocks will terminate when states make
submittals that EPA affirmatively determines are complete and the FIP
clocks can be turned off if we take final action to approve the RFP
plans.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedure Act

    This is a final EPA action, but is not subject to notice-and-
comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5
U.S.C. 553(b). EPA believes that because of the limited time provided
to make findings of failure to submit regarding SIP submissions,
Congress did not intend such findings to be subject to notice-and-
comment rulemaking. However, to the extent such findings are subject to
notice-and-comment rulemaking, EPA invokes the good cause exception
pursuant to the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). Notice and comment are
unnecessary because no EPA judgment is involved in making a
nonsubstantive finding of failure to submit elements of SIP submissions
required by the CAA. Furthermore, providing notice and comment would be
impracticable because of the limited time provided under the statute
for making such determinations. Finally, notice and comment would be
contrary to the public interest because it would divert agency
resources from the critical substantive review of complete SIPs. See 58
FR 51270, 51272, n.17 (October 1, 1993); 59 FR 39832, 39853 (August 4,
1994).

B. Effective Date Under the Administrative Procedure Act

    This action will be effective on March 24, 2008. Under the APA, 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3), agency rulemaking may take effect before 30 days
after the date of publication in the Federal Register if the agency has
good cause to specify an earlier effective date. This action concerns
SIP submissions that are already overdue; and EPA previously cautioned
the affected states that the SIP submissions were overdue and that EPA
was considering taking this action. In addition, this action simply
starts a ``clock'' that will not result in sanctions against the states
for 18 months, and that the states may ``turn off'' through the
submission of complete SIP submittals. These reasons support an
effective date prior to 30 days after the date of publication.

C. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under the Executive Order. However, the
EPA submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review on February 12, 2008 and any changes made in response to
OMB's recommendations have been documented in the docket for this
action. The OMB released it on March 14, 2008.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
This rule relates to the requirement in the CAA for states to submit
SIPs under section Part D of title I of the CAA to satisfy elements
required for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The present final rule does
not establish any new information collection requirement. Burden means
that total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to
generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or
for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review
instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and
systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and
providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to
be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or
otherwise disclose the information. An Agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in the CFR are listed in
40 CFR part 9.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    This final rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), which generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis for any rule that will have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA applies only
to rules subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) or any other statute. This rule
is not subject to notice and comment requirements under the APA or any
other statute because although the rule is subject to the APA, the
Agency has invoked the ``good cause'' exemption under 5 U.S.C. 553(b),
therefore it is not subject to the notice and comment requirement.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal Agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on state, local and Tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandate'' that
may result in expenditures to state, local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the

UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most
cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the
objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when
they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows
EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-
effective or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator
publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that alternative
was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements
that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including
Tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the
UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for
notifying potentially affected small governments to have meaningful and
timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with
significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing,
educating, and advising small government on compliance with regulatory
requirements.
    This action does not include a Federal mandate within the meaning
of UMRA that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more in any
1 year by either state, local, or Tribal governments in the aggregate
or to the private sector, and therefore, is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. It does not create
any additional requirements beyond those of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
(62 FR 38652; 62 FR 38856, July 18, 1997), therefore, no UMRA analysis
is needed. EPA has determined that this action is not a Federal
mandate. The CAA provisions requires states to submit SIPs. This notice
merely provides a finding that the states have not met the requirement
to submit certain SIPs and begins a clock that could result in the
imposition of sanctions if the states continue to not meet this
statutory obligation. This notice does not, by itself, require any
particular action by any state, local, or Tribal government; or by the
private sector. For the same reasons, EPA has determined that this rule
contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.
    The EPA believes that any new controls imposed as a result of this
action will not cost in the aggregate $100 million or more annually.
Thus, this Federal action will not impose mandates that will require
expenditures of $100 million or more in the aggregate in any 1 year.

G. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by state and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the states, or the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not
have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship
between the national government and the states, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. The CAA establishes the scheme
whereby states take the lead in developing plans to meet the NAAQS and
the Federal Government acts as a backstop where states fail to take the
required actions. This rule will not modify the relationship of the
states and EPA for purposes of developing programs to implement the
NAAQS. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

H. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by Tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have Tribal implications.''
    EPA has concluded that this final rule will not have Tribal
implications. It will neither impose substantial direct compliance
costs on Tribal governments, nor preempt Tribal law. This rule responds
to the requirement in the CAA for states to submit SIPs to satisfy the
nonattainment area requirements of the CAA for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. The CAA requires states with areas that are designated
nonattainment for the NAAQS to develop a SIP describing how the state
will attain and maintain the NAAQS. There are Tribal governments within
certain nonattainment areas for which this rule turns on a sanctions
clock. However, this rule does not have Tribal implications because it
does not impose any compliance costs on Tribal governments nor does it
pre-empt Tribal law. The rule will not have a substantial direct effect
on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

I. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This final rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental
health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. This action should reduce the levels
of harmful pollutants in the air that should reduce harmful effects on
children.

J. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)) because it is not likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. In this action,
EPA is finding that several states have failed to submit SIPs to
satisfy certain nonattainment area requirements of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) for the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS).

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States. EPA has determined that this final
rule will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or low-income populations because it
does not directly affect the level of protection provided to human
health or the environment. This notice finds that certain states have
not met the requirement to submit one or more SIPs and begins a clock
that could result in the imposition of sanctions if the states continue
to not meet this statutory obligation. If the states fail to submit the
required SIPs or if they submit SIPs that EPA cannot approve, then EPA
will be required to develop the plans in lieu of the states.

L. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impracticable. VCS are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA
directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the
Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA
did not consider the use of any VCS.

M. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective March 24, 2008.

N. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit Court within 60 days from the date
final action is published in the Federal Register. Filing a petition
for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review
nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review
must be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action.
    Thus, any petitions for review of this action making findings of
failure to submit RACT, RFP, and attainment demonstration SIPs for the
nonattainment areas identified in section II above, must be filed in
the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60
days from the date final action is published in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: March 17, 2008.
Robert J. Meyers,
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. E8-5807 Filed 3-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P