[Federal Register: April 2, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 63)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 16706-16711]
[DOCID:fr02ap10-27]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

 40 CFR Parts 721

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918; FRL-8818-2]
RIN 2070-AB27

Proposed Significant New Use Rule for 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-
tetrafluoro-

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY:  EPA is proposing a significant new use rule (SNUR) under
section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for the
chemical substance identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (CAS
No. 754-12-1) which was subject to premanufacture notice (PMN) P-07-
601. This proposed rule would require persons who intend to
manufacture, import, or process the substance for an activity that is
designated as a significant new use to notify EPA at least 90 days
before commencing that activity. The required notification would
provide EPA with the opportunity to evaluate the intended use and, if
necessary, to prohibit or limit the activity before it occurs.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 3, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: OPPT Document Control Office (DCO), EPA
East Bldg., Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC.
Attention: Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918. The DCO is open from
8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the DCO is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the DCO's normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2008-0918. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless

the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or
otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The
regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means
EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only
in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in
hard copy, at the OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room hours of
operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading Room
is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is
(202) 566-0280. Docket visitors are required to show photographic
identification, pass through a metal detector, and sign the EPA visitor
log. All visitor bags are processed through an X-ray machine and
subject to search. Visitors will be provided an EPA/DC badge that must
be visible at all times in the building and returned upon departure.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Colby
Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division
(7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address: TSCA-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For technical information contact: Kenneth Moss, Chemical Control
Division (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture,
import, process, or use the chemical substance contained in this
proposed rule. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not
limited to:
     Manufacturers, importers, or processors of the subject
chemical substance (NAICS codes 325 and 324110), e.g., chemical
manufacturing and petroleum refineries.
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine
whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability provisions in Sec.  721.5. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    This action may also affect certain entities through pre-existing
import certification and export notification rules under TSCA. Chemical
importers are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612) import
certification requirements promulgated at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127
and 19 CFR 127.28 (the corresponding EPA policy appears at 40 CFR part
707, subpart B). Chemical importers must certify that the shipment of
the chemical substance complies with all applicable rules and orders
under TSCA. Importers of chemicals subject to a final SNUR must certify
their compliance with the SNUR requirements. In addition, any persons
who export or intend to export a chemical substance that is the subject
of this proposed rule on or after May 3, 2010 are subject to the export
notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)) (see
Sec.  721.20) and must comply with the export notification requirements
in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM
that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and
then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version
of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the
comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be
submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is proposing a significant new use rule (SNUR) under section
5(a)(2) of TSCA for the chemical substance

identified as 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN P-07-601; CAS No.
754-12-1). This SNUR would require persons who intend to manufacture,
import, or process the chemical substance for any activity designated
as a significant new use to notify EPA at least 90 days before
commencing the activity.
    In the Federal Register of February 1, 2010 (75 FR 4983) (FRL-8438-
4), EPA issued a direct final SNUR for the substance in accordance with
the procedures at Sec.  721.170(d)(4)(i). EPA received notice of intent
to submit adverse comments on this SNUR. Therefore, as required by at
Sec.  721.170(d)(4)(i), EPA is withdrawing the direct final SNUR, which
is published elsewhere in this Federal Register and is now issuing this
proposed SNUR on this substance. The record for the direct final SNUR
on this substance was established as docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0918. That
record includes information considered by the Agency in developing the
direct final rule and the notice of intent to submit adverse comments.

B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to
determine that a use of a chemical substance is a ``significant new
use.'' EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all
relevant factors, including those listed in TSCA section 5(a)(2). Once
EPA determines that a use of a chemical substance is a significant new
use, TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) requires persons to submit a significant
new use notice (SNUN) to EPA at least 90 days before they manufacture,
import, or process the chemical substance for that use. The mechanism
for reporting under this requirement is established under Sec.  721.5.

C. Applicability of General Provisions

    General provisions for SNURs appear in 40 CFR part 721, subpart A.
These provisions describe persons subject to the rule, recordkeeping
requirements, exemptions to reporting requirements, and applicability
of the rule to uses occurring before the effective date of the final
rule. Provisions relating to user fees appear at 40 CFR part 700.
According to Sec.  721.1(c), persons subject to this SNUR must comply
with the same notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as
submitters of PMNs under TSCA section 5(a)(1)(A). In particular, these
requirements include the information submission requirements of TSCA
section 5(b) and 5(d)(1), the exemptions authorized by TSCA section
5(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and (h)(5), and the regulations at 40 CFR part
720. Once EPA receives a SNUN, EPA may take regulatory action under
TSCA section 5(e), 5(f), 6, or 7 to control the activities for which it
has received the SNUN. If EPA does not take action, EPA is required
under TSCA section 5(g) to explain in the Federal Register its reasons
for not taking action.
    Chemical importers are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C.
2612) import certification requirements promulgated at 19 CFR 12.118
through 12.127, and 19 CFR 127.28 (the corresponding EPA policy appears
at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B). Chemical importers must certify that
the shipment of the chemical substance complies with all applicable
rules and orders under TSCA. Importers of chemical substances subject
to a final SNUR must certify their compliance with the SNUR
requirements. In addition, any persons who export or intend to export a
chemical substance identified in a final SNUR are subject to the export
notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611 (b)) (see
Sec.  721.20) and must comply with the export notification requirements
in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D.

III. Significant New Use Determination

    Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA states that EPA's determination that a use
of a chemical substance is a significant new use must be made after
consideration of all relevant factors, including:
     The projected volume of manufacturing and processing of a
chemical substance.
     The extent to which a use changes the type or form of
exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.
     The extent to which a use increases the magnitude and
duration of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical
substance.
     The reasonably anticipated manner and methods of
manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of a
chemical substance.
    In addition to these factors enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2),
the statute authorized EPA to consider any other relevant factors.
     To determine what would constitute a significant new use for the
chemical substance that is the subject of this proposed SNUR, EPA
considered relevant information about the toxicity of the chemical
substance, likely human exposures and environmental releases associated
with possible uses, and the four bulleted TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors
listed in this Unit.
     For the chemical substance 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN P-
07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1), EPA did not find that the use scenarios
described in the PMN triggered the determination set forth under
section 5(e) of TSCA. EPA did, however, determine that certain changes
from the use scenario described in the PMN could result in increased
exposures, thereby constituting a ``significant new use.'' EPA has
determined that activities proposed as a ``significant new use''
satisfy the two requirements stipulated in Sec.  721.170(c)(2), i.e.,
these significant new use activities: ``(i) are different from those
described in the premanufacture notice for the substance, including any
amendments, deletions, and additions of activities to the
premanufacture notice, and (ii) may be accompanied by changes in
exposure or release levels that are significant in relation to the
health or environmental concerns identified'' for the PMN substance.

IV. Substance Subject to this Proposed Rule and Basis for the Action

    EPA is proposing to establish significant new use and recordkeeping
requirements for the chemical substance identified as 1-Propene,
2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro- (PMN P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1). The specific
activities proposed as significant new uses and other requirements are
listed in 40 CFR 721.10182 of the proposed regulatory text.
PMN Number P-07-601
Chemical name: 1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-.
CAS number: 754-12-1.
Basis for action: The PMN states that the substance will be used as a
motor vehicle air conditioning (MVAC) refrigerant in new passenger cars
and vehicles (i.e., as defined in 40 CFR 82.32 (c) and (d)). Initial
charging of MVAC units with the PMN substance will be done by the motor
vehicle original equipment manufacturer. All servicing, maintenance,
and disposal involving the PMN substance will be done only by Clean Air
Act (CAA) section 609 certified technicians using CAA section 609
certified refrigerant handling equipment. Based on test data on the PMN
substance, EPA identified health concerns for developmental toxicity
and lethality to workers and consumers if they were exposed to a
significant amount of the PMN substance via inhalation. The PMN
substance has an ozone depletion potential of zero, and, based on test
data, has a low global warming potential (GWP100 of about 4). For the
use scenario described in the PMN, significant industrial or commercial
worker exposure is unlikely

due to the use of CAA section 609 certified refrigerant handling
equipment and other protective measures. Potential consumer (vehicle
passenger) exposure from refrigerant leaks into the passenger
compartment of a vehicle is not expected to present significant risk of
serious health effects. Flammability concerns with the PMN substance
are being addressed through regulatory actions by EPA's Office of Air
and Radiation (see the following paragraph). Further, ``do-it-
yourself'' consumer exposures are not expected because the PMN
substance only will be sold or distributed in 20-pound containers or
larger. Therefore, EPA has not determined that the manufacturing,
processing, or use of the substance as described in the PMN may present
an unreasonable risk. EPA has determined, however, that (1) use of the
substance other than as a MVAC refrigerant in new passenger cars and
vehicles as defined in 40 CFR 82.32 (c) and (d), (2) initial charging
of MVAC units with the PMN substance by any person other than CAA
section 609 certified technicians without using CAA section 609
certified refrigerant handling equipment, (3) servicing, maintenance,
and disposal involving the PMN substance by persons other than CAA
section 609 certified technicians without using CAA section 609
certified refrigerant handling equipment, or (4) sale or distribution
of the PMN substance in containers smaller than 20-pounds (net weight)
may cause serious health effects in accordance with 40 CFR
721.170(b)(3)(i).
    This proposed SNUR is intended to complement recently proposed and
forthcoming regulations on the PMN substance under the CAA in that this
SNUR addresses health risk issues of the subject refrigerant. On
October 19, 2009, EPA published a proposed rule on the PMN substance
entitled ``Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: New Substitute in the
Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning Sector under the Significant New
Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program'' (74 FR 53445) (FRL-8969-7). The
SNAP Program, mandated under section 612 of the CAA, requires EPA to
develop a program for evaluating alternatives to ozone-depleting
substances and to create lists of substitutes for specific uses that do
not present greater overall risk to human health and the environment
than other alternatives that are available. In the October 19, 2009,
action, EPA proposed to find HFO-1234yf acceptable, subject to certain
use conditions, as a substitute for CFC-12 in new motor vehicle air
conditioning systems (passenger cars and trucks). The proposed use
conditions include incorporation of engineering strategies and/or
devices to mitigate flammability risks for this substance (see Unit V.
of the proposed SNAP rule). Use of most flammable refrigerants,
including the PMN substance, in existing MVAC systems as a retrofit has
previously been determined by EPA to be unacceptable. The proposed SNAP
rule would require a petition and a new SNAP submission specifically
for the use of the PMN substance in existing MVAC equipment as a
retrofit before EPA would consider allowing such use (see Unit VI. of
the proposed SNAP rule). EPA also intends to promulgate a follow-on
rulemaking under section 609 of the CAA to address service equipment,
technician certification, and end-of-life disposal specifications.
Recommended testing: EPA has determined that the results of an acute
inhalation toxicity study (OPPTS Harmonized Test Guideline 870.1300 or
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 403 test
guideline) with rabbits would help characterize the human health
effects of the PMN substance. Exposure concentrations of 10,000,
50,000, and 100,000 parts per million (ppm) should be used. Further,
rabbits should be exposed for 1 hour, and pregnant rabbits should be
exposed on Gravid Day 12.
CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.10182.

V. Rationale and Objectives of the Proposed Rule

A. Rationale

    During the review of the chemical substance P-07-601, EPA
determined that one or more of the criteria of concern established at
Sec.  721.170 were met, as discussed in Unit IV.

B. Objectives

    EPA is proposing this SNUR for a chemical substance that has
undergone premanufacture review because the Agency wants to achieve the
following objectives with regard to the significant new uses designated
in this proposed rule:
     EPA would receive notice of any person's intent to
manufacture, import, or process a listed chemical substance for the
described significant new use before that activity begins.
     EPA would have an opportunity to review and evaluate data
submitted in a SNUN before the notice submitter begins manufacturing,
importing, or processing a listed chemical substance for the described
significant new use.
     EPA would be able to regulate prospective manufacturers,
importers, or processors of a listed chemical substance before the
described significant new use of that chemical substance occurs,
provided that regulation is warranted pursuant to TSCA sections 5(e),
5(f), 6, or 7.
    Issuance of a SNUR for a chemical substance does not signify that
the chemical substance is listed on the TSCA Inventory. Guidance on how
to determine if a chemical substance is on the TSCA Inventory is
available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems/pubs/
invntory.htm.

VI. Applicability of the Proposed Rule to Uses Occurring Before
Effective Date of the Final Rule

    To establish a significant ``new'' use, EPA must determine that the
use is not ongoing. EPA solicits comments on whether any of the uses
proposed as significant new uses are ongoing.
    As discussed in the Federal Register of April 24, 1990 (55 FR
17376), EPA has decided that the intent of TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) is
best served by designating a use as a significant new use as of the
date of publication of the proposed rule rather than as of the
effective date of the final rule. If uses begun after publication of
the proposed rule were considered ongoing rather than new, it would be
difficult for EPA to establish SNUR notice requirements because a
person could defeat the SNUR by initiating the significant new use
before the rule became final, and then argue that the use was ongoing
before the effective date of the final rule. Thus, persons who begin
commercial manufacture, import, or processing with the chemical
substances that would be regulated as a ``significant new use'' through
this proposed rule, must cease any such activity before the effective
date of the rule if and when finalized. To resume their activities,
these persons would have to comply with all applicable SNUR notice
requirements and wait until the notice review period, including all
extensions, expires.
    EPA has promulgated provisions to allow persons to comply with this
proposed SNUR before the effective date. If a person were to meet the
conditions of advance compliance under Sec.  721.45(h), the person
would be considered to have met the requirements of the final SNUR, for
those activities.

VII. Test Data and Other Information

    EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 does not require developing any
particular test data before submission of a SNUN, except where the
chemical substance subject to the SNUR is also subject to a test rule
under TSCA section 4 (see TSCA section 5(b)).

Persons are required only to submit test data in their possession or
control and to describe any other data known to or reasonably
ascertainable by them (see Sec.  720.50). However, upon review of PMNs
and SNUNs, the Agency has the authority to require appropriate testing.
EPA recommended certain testing listed in Unit IV. Descriptions of
tests are provided for informational purposes. EPA strongly encourages
persons, before performing any testing, to consult with the Agency
pertaining to protocol selection. To access the OPPTS harmonized test
guidelines referenced in this document electronically, please go to
http://www.epa.gov/oppts and select ``Test Methods and Guidelines.''
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) test
guidelines are available from the OECD Bookshop at http://
www.oecdbookshop.org or SourceOECD at http://www.sourceoecd.org.
    The recommended test(s) may not be the only means of addressing the
potential risks of the chemical substance. However, SNUNs submitted for
significant new uses without any test data may increase the likelihood
that EPA will take action under TSCA section 5(e), particularly if
satisfactory test results have not been obtained from a prior PMN or
SNUN submitter. EPA recommends that potential SNUN submitters contact
EPA early enough so that they will be able to conduct the appropriate
test(s).
    SNUN submitters should be aware that EPA would be better able to
evaluate SNUNs which provide detailed information on the following:
     Human exposure and environmental release that may result
from the significant new use of the chemical substance.
     Potential benefits of the chemical substance.
     Information on risks posed by the chemical substance
compared to risks posed by potential substitutes.

VIII. SNUN Submissions

    As stated in Unit II.C., according to Sec.  721.1(c), persons
submitting a SNUN must comply with the same notice requirements and EPA
regulatory procedures as persons submitting a PMN, including submission
of test data on health and environmental effects as described in Sec.
720.50. SNUNs must be submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency
on EPA Form No. 7710-25 in accordance with the procedures set forth in
Sec. Sec.  721.25 and 720.40. This form is available from the
Environmental Assistance Division (7408M), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001 (see Sec. Sec.  721.25 and 720.40). Forms and
information are also available electronically at http://www.epa.gov/
opptintr/newchems.

IX. Economic Analysis

    EPA has evaluated the potential costs of establishing SNUN
requirements for potential manufacturers, importers, and processors of
the chemical substance at the time of the direct final rule. The
Agency's complete economic analysis is available in the public docket
for the direct final rule (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0918).

X. References

    The official record for this proposed rule has been established.
The following is a listing of the documents that have been placed in
the proposed rule phase of the docket under docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPPT-2008-0918, which is available for inspection as specified under
ADDRESSES. These documents serve as supplementary information specific
to P-07-601 (aka HFO-1234yf) for consideration when submitting
comments.
    1. Letter Confirming Release of CBI Claims for HFO-1234yf Gradient
Report.
    2. Gradient Corporation. 2008. Risk Assessment for Alternative
Refrigerant HFO-1234yf.
    3. WIL Research Laboratories, LLC. 2008. An Inhalation Prenatal
Developmental Toxicity Study of HFO-1234yf (2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene)
in Rabbits.
    4. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2009.
Addendum to Risk Assessment: PMN P-07-601.

XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866

    This proposed rule would establish a SNUR for a chemical substance
that was the subject of a PMN. The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    According to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., an Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information that requires OMB
approval under the PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and included on the related
collection instrument or form, if applicable. EPA would amend the table
in 40 CFR part 9 to list the OMB approval number for the information
collection requirements contained in this proposed rule. This listing
of the OMB control numbers and their subsequent codification in the CFR
satisfies the display requirements of PRA and OMB's implementing
regulations at 5 CFR part 1320. This Information Collection Request
(ICR) was previously subject to public notice and comment prior to OMB
approval, and given the technical nature of the table, EPA finds that
further notice and comment to amend it is unnecessary. As a result, EPA
finds that there is ``good cause'' under section 553(b)(3)(B) of the
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), to amend this
table without further notice and comment.
    The information collection requirements related to this action have
already been approved by OMB pursuant to PRA under OMB control number
2070-0012 (EPA ICR No. 574). This action would not impose any burden
requiring additional OMB approval. If an entity were to submit a SNUN
to the Agency, the annual burden is estimated to average between 30 and
170 hours per response. This burden estimate includes the time needed
to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and
maintain the data needed, and complete, review, and submit the required
SNUN.
    Send any comments about the accuracy of the burden estimate, and
any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including
through the use of automated collection techniques, to the Director,
Collection Strategies Division, Office of Environmental Information
(2822T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. Please remember to include the OMB control
number in any correspondence, but do not submit any completed forms to
this address.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency hereby certifies that promulgation
of this SNUR would not have a significant adverse economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The rationale supporting this
conclusion is discussed in this unit. The requirement to submit a SNUN
applies to any person (including small or large entities) who intends
to engage in any activity described in the rule as a ``significant

new use.'' Because these uses are ``new,'' based on all information
currently available to EPA, it appears that no small or large entities
presently engage in such activities. A SNUR requires that any person
who intends to engage in such activity in the future must first notify
EPA by submitting a SNUN. Although some small entities may decide to
pursue a significant new use in the future, EPA cannot presently
determine how many, if any, there may be. However, EPA's experience to
date is that, in response to the promulgation of over 1,400 SNURs, the
Agency receives on average only 5 notices per year. Of those SNUNs
submitted from 2006-2008, only one appears to be from a small entity.
In addition, the estimated reporting cost for submission of a SNUN (see
Unit IX.) is minimal regardless of the size of the firm. Therefore, the
potential economic impacts of complying with this SNUR are not expected
to be significant or adversely impact a substantial number of small
entities. In a SNUR that published in the Federal Register of June 2,
1997 (62 FR 29684) (FRL-5597-1), the Agency presented its general
determination that final SNURs are not expected to have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, which was
provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Based on EPA's experience with proposing and finalizing SNURs,
State, local, and Tribal governments have not been impacted by these
rulemakings, and EPA does not have any reasons to believe that any
State, local, or Tribal government would be impacted by this proposed
rule. As such, EPA has determined that this proposed rule would not
impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or otherwise
have any affect on small governments subject to the requirements of
sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4).

E. Executive Order 13132

    This action would not have a substantial direct effect on 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, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).

F. Executive Order 13175

    This proposed rule would not have Tribal implications because it is
not expected to have substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes. This
proposed rule would not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian Tribal governments, nor would it involve or
impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), do not apply to this proposed rule.

G. Executive Order 13045

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because this is not an economically
significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and
this action does not address environmental health or safety risks
disproportionately affecting children.

H. Executive Order 13211

    This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001),
because this action is not expected to affect energy supply,
distribution, or use and because this action is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    In addition, since this action does not involve any technical
standards, section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note), does not apply to this action.

J. Executive Order 12898

    This action does not entail special considerations of environmental
justice related issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898, entitled
Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: March 25, 2010.
Barbara A. Cunningham,
Acting Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
    Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR part 721 be amended as
follows:

PART 721--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 721 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 2625(c).
    2. Add Sec.  721.10182 to subpart E to read as follows:

Sec.  721.10182  1-Propene, 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoro-.

    (a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to
reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified as 1-propene, 2,3,3,3-
tetrafluoro- (PMN P-07-601; CAS No. 754-12-1; also known as HFO-1234yf)
is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses
described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
    (2) The significant new uses are:
    (i) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. Requirements
as specified in Sec.  721.80(j) (use as a motor vehicle air
conditioning (MVAC) refrigerant in new passenger cars and vehicles as
defined in 40 CFR 82.32 (c) and (d). The initial charging of MVAC units
with the PMN substance will be done by the motor vehicle original
equipment manufacturer. All servicing, maintenance, and disposal
involving the PMN substance will be done only by Clean Air Act (CAA)
section 609 certified technicians using CAA section 609 certified
refrigerant handling equipment. The PMN substance only will be sold or
distributed in 20-pound (net weight) containers or larger.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph.
    (1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in Sec.
721.125 (a), (b), (c), and (i) are applicable to manufacturers,
importers, and processors of this substance.
    (2) Limitations or revocation of certain notification requirements.
The provisions of Sec.  721.185 apply to this section.

[FR Doc. 2010-7191 Filed 4-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register: February 6, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 24)]
[Notices]
[Page 6110-6111]
[DOCID:fr06fe06-91]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. PA-35; File No. S7-04-06]

Privacy Act of 1974: Establishment of a New System of Records:
Automated Emergency Notification System (SEC-53)

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Notice of the establishment of a new system of records.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act of
1974, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 552a, the Securities and Exchange Commission
gives notice of a proposed Privacy Act system of records: ``Automated
Emergency Notification System (SEC-53).'' This system will contain
emergency contact information for current members, employees, and
selected contractors of the Commission.

DATES: The new system will become effective March 20, 2006 unless
further notice is given. The Commission will publish a new notice if
the effective date is delayed to review comments or if changes are made
based on comment received. To be assured of consideration, comments
should be received on or before March 8, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number S7-04-06 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.

All submissions should refer to File Number S7-04-06. This file number
should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help us
process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one
method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's
Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/other.shtml). Comments are

also available for public inspection and copying in the Commission's
Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. All
comments received will be posted without change; we do not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara A. Stance, Chief Privacy
Officer, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Operations Center,
6432 General Green Way, Mail Stop 0-7, Alexandria, VA 22312-2413, (202)
551-7209.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission gives notice of the proposed
establishment of a new system of records, entitled ``Automated
Emergency Notification System (SEC-53).'' The new system will contain
emergency contact information for current members, employees, and
selected contractors of the Commission.
    The Commission has submitted a report of the new system of records
to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs,
the House Committee on Government Reform, and the Office of Management
and Budget, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) of the Privacy Act of 1974, as
amended, and Appendix I to OMB Circular A-130, ``Federal Agency
Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals,'' as
amended on February 20, 1996 (61 FR 6435).
    Accordingly, the Commission is adding a new system of records to
read as follows:
SEC-53

SYSTEM NAME:
    Automated Emergency Notification System.

SYSTEM LOCATION:
    Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE, Washington,
DC 20549.

CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM:
    Members and employees of the Commission, and selected contractors.

CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
    Name, Commission division or office, home zip code, work and
personal electronic mail addresses, work, home and cellular telephone
numbers, and Blackberry PIN numbers.

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:
    5 U.S.C. 301 and Executive Order 12656 of Nov. 18, 1988 on
Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities.

PURPOSE(S):
     The purpose of this system of records is to maintain emergency
contact information for current members, employees and selected
contractors of the Commission. The system provides for high-speed
message delivery that reaches all Commission personnel in response to
threat alerts issued by the Department of Homeland Security, weather
related emergencies or other critical situations that disrupt the
operations and accessibility of a worksite. The system also provides
for personnel accountability during an emergency, through personnel
sign-in and rapid alert and notification.

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES
OF USERS AND THE PURPOSE OF SUCH USES:
    In addition to the conditions of disclosure under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b),
Commission staff may provide these records to any Federal government
authority for the purpose of coordinating and reviewing agency
continuity of operations plans or emergency contingency plans developed
for responding to Department of Homeland Security threat alerts,
weather related emergencies or other critical situations.

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING,
AND DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
STORAGE:
     Records are maintained in a computerized database and on paper.
Paper documents are kept in filing cabinets in secured facilities.

RETRIEVABILITY:
    Records may be retrieved by the individual's name or by the
categories listed above under ``Categories of Records in the System.''

SAFEGUARDS:
    Records are safeguarded by restricted computer passwords, locked
file cabinets, and safes. Access to the records is restricted to those
who require the records in the performance of official duties related
to the purposes for which the system is maintained.

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:
    Periodic purging and disposal of those records concerning
individuals no longer members, employees or contractors of the
Commission. Otherwise, records are retained and disposed of in
accordance with the appropriate National Archives and Records
Administration General Records Schedules.

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:
    Executive Director, Office of the Executive Director, U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549-1627.

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES:
    All requests to determine whether this system of records contains a
record pertaining to the requesting individual may be directed to the
Privacy Act Officer, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission,
Operations Center, 6432 General Green Way, Mail Stop 0-7, Alexandria,
VA 22312-2413.

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:
    Persons wishing to obtain information on the procedures for gaining
access to or contesting the contents of this record may contact the
Privacy Act Officer, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission,
Operations Center, 6432 General Green Way, Mail Stop 0-7, Alexandria,
VA 22312-2413.

CONTESTING RECORDS PROCEDURES:
    See record access procedures above.

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:
    Information is provided by current members and employees of the
Commission and selected contractors.

EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM:
    None.

    Dated: January 31, 2006.

    By the Commission.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-1574 Filed 2-3-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 111 (Thursday, June 11, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27737-27738]
[FR Doc No: E9-13593]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2008-0831-200825(b); FRL-8915-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans Georgia: State
Implementation Plan Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision submitted by the Georgia Department of Natural
Resources, through the Georgia Environmental Protection Division, on
June 25, 2008. The revisions include modifications to Georgia's Air
Quality Rules found at Chapters 391-3-1-.01, and 391-3-1-.02,
pertaining to ``Definitions,'' and ``Emission Limitations and
Standards,'' respectively. This action is being taken pursuant to
section 110 of the Clean Air Act.
    In the Final Rules Section of this Federal Register, EPA is
approving the State's SIP revision as a direct final rule without prior
proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal
and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments
are received in response to this rule, no further activity is
contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule
will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period on this document. Any parties
interested in commenting on this document should do so at this time.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 13, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2008-0831, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2008-0831,'' Regulatory Development Section,

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Stacy Harder, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The
Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stacy Harder, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-9042. Ms. Harder can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information see the direct
final rule which is published in the Rules Section of this Federal
Register.

    Dated: June 1, 2009.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. E9-13593 Filed 6-10-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 102 (Thursday, May 26, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30545-30550]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13003]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-R01-OAR-2010-1080; A-1-FRL-9285-8]

Approval of the Clean Air Act, Section 112(l), Authority for
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for
Dry Cleaning Facilities: State of Maine Department of Environmental
Protection

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'').

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act (``CAA'') and
Federal regulations promulgated thereunder, the Maine Department of
Environmental Protection (``ME DEP'') submitted a request for approval
to implement and enforce the amended ``Chapter 125: Perchloroethylene
Dry Cleaner Regulation'' (Maine Dry Cleaner Rule) as a partial
substitution for the amended National Emissions Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants for Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities (``Dry
Cleaning NESHAP''), as it applies to area sources. EPA has reviewed
this request and has determined that the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule
satisfies the requirements necessary for partial substitution approval.
Thus, EPA is hereby granting ME DEP the authority to implement and
enforce its amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule in place of the Dry Cleaning
NESHAP for area sources, but EPA is retaining its authority with
respect to major source dry cleaners and dry cleaners installed in a
residence between July 13, 2006, and June 24, 2009. This approval makes
the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule Federally enforceable.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective July 25, 2011, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by June 27, 2011. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect. The incorporation by reference of certain publications
listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register
as of July 25, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R01-OAR-2010-1080 by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R01-OAR-2010-1080'', Ida E. McDonnell, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Five
Post Office Square, Suite 100 (OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Ida E.
McDonnell, Manager, Air Permits, Toxics and Indoor Programs Unit,
Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
EPA New England Regional Office, Five Post Office Square, 5th floor,
(OEP5-02), Boston, MA 02109-3912. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional
Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to
4:30, excluding legal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-
2010-1080. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (``CBI'') or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov, or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. EPA will forward copies of all submitted
comments to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Office of Ecosystem
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, Five Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays.
    In addition, copies of the State submittal are also available for
public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the
Maine Department of Environmental Protection, State House Station 17,
Augusta, Maine, 04333-0017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lancey, Air Permits, Toxics and
Indoor Programs Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Five
Post Office Square, Suite 100 (OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912,
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. Background and Purpose
II. What requirements must a state rule meet to substitute for a
section 112 rule?
III. How will EPA determine equivalency for state alternative NESHAP
requirements?
IV. What significant changes did EPA make to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP
and how did ME DEP address those changes?
    A. What definitions were added to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and
the Amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule?
    B. What control requirements were added for new dry cleaners
installed after December 21, 2005?
    C. What requirements were added for dry cleaners installed in a
building with a residence after December 21, 2005?
    D. What requirements were added for transfer machines?
    E. What monitoring requirements were added?

    F. How did the reporting requirements change?
V. What is epa's action regarding Maine's amended Dry Cleaner Rule?
VI. Final Action
VII. Judicial Review
    VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. Background and Purpose

    Under CAA section 112(l), EPA may approve state or local rules or
programs to be implemented and enforced in place of certain otherwise
applicable Federal rules, emissions standards, or requirements. The
Federal regulations governing EPA's approval of state and local rules
or programs under section 112(l) are located at 40 CFR part 63, subpart
E. See 58 FR 62262 (November 26, 1993), as amended by 65 FR 55810
(September 14, 2000). Under these regulations, a state air pollution
control agency has the option to request EPA's approval to substitute a
state rule for the applicable Federal rule (e.g., the National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants). Upon approval by EPA, the
state agency is authorized to implement and enforce its rule in place
of the Federal rule.
    EPA promulgated the Dry Cleaning NESHAP on September 22, 1993. See
58 FR 49354 (codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart M, ``National
Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning
Facilities''). On August 12, 2003, EPA received ME DEP's request to
implement and enforce ``Chapter 125: Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaner
Regulation'' in lieu of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP as applied to area
sources. On April 24, 2006, EPA approved the Maine Dry Cleaner Rule in
place of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area sources pursuant to the
provisions of 40 CFR part 63, subpart E. See 71 FR 20895.
    Under 40 CFR 63.91(e)(3), if EPA amends or otherwise revises a
promulgated CAA section 112 rule or requirement in a way that increases
its stringency, EPA will notify any state with a delegated alternative
of the need to revise its equivalency demonstration. EPA will consult
with the state to set a time frame for the state to submit a revised
equivalency demonstration. EPA will then review and approve the revised
equivalency demonstration according to the procedures in 40 CFR part
63, subpart E. More stringent NESHAP amendments to a delegated
alternative apply to all sources until EPA determines that the approved
or revised alternative requirements are equivalent to the more
stringent amendments.
    On July 27, 2006, September 21, 2006 and July 11, 2008, EPA
promulgated amendments to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP. See 71 FR 42724, 71
FR 55280 and 73 FR 39871. In a letter dated October 25, 2006, EPA
notified ME DEP that EPA had published more stringent amendments to the
Dry Cleaning NESHAP and of the need for ME DEP to revise its
equivalency demonstration. Accordingly, ME DEP revised the Maine Dry
Cleaner Rule with an effective date of June 24, 2009. On December 11,
2009, ME DEP submitted a request for approval to implement and enforce
the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule in place of the amended Dry Cleaning
NESHAP. On March 4, 2010, EPA determined that Maine's submittal was
complete. As explained below, EPA has reviewed the State's submission
and determined that the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule is no less
stringent than the amended Dry Cleaning NESHAP, as applied to area
sources.
    In addition, in the Federal Register on May 13, 2009, EPA corrected
a sequential numbering error in 40 CFR 63.99. See 74 FR 22437. In this
rulemaking, paragraph (a)(19) of section 63.99, the subparagraph for
the state of Maine, was redesignated as paragraph (a)(20). However, the
reference to paragraph (a)(19)(iii) in the incorporation by reference
section 63.14(d)(6) was not corrected to refer to paragraph
(a)(20)(iii) at that time. Therefore, today's notice also corrects the
reference in 40 CFR 63.14(d)(6) to appropriately refer to paragraph
(a)(20)(iii).
    Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

II. What requirements must a State rule meet to substitute for a
section 112 rule?

    A state must demonstrate that it has satisfied the general
delegation/approval criteria contained in 40 CFR 63.91(d). The process
of providing ``up-front approval'' assures that a state has met the
delegation criteria in Section 112(l)(5) of the CAA (as codified in 40
CFR 63.91(d)), that is, that the state has demonstrated that its NESHAP
program contains adequate authorities to assure compliance with each
applicable Federal requirement, adequate resources for implementation,
and an expeditious compliance schedule. Under 40 CFR 63.91(d)(3),
interim or final Title V program approval satisfies the criteria set
forth in 40 CFR 63.91(d) for ``up-front approval.'' On October 18,
2001, EPA promulgated full approval of ME DEP's operating permits
program with an effective date of December 17, 2001. See 66 FR 52874.
Accordingly, ME DEP has satisfied the up-front approval criteria of 40
CFR 63.91(d).
    Additionally, the ``rule substitution'' option requires EPA to make
a detailed and thorough evaluation of the state's submittal to ensure
that it meets the stringency and other requirements of 40 CFR 63.93. A
rule will be approved if the state or local government demonstrates:
(1) the state and local rules contain applicability criteria that are
no less stringent than the corresponding Federal rule; (2) the state
and local rule requires levels of control and compliance and
enforcement measures that would achieve emission reductions from each
affected source that are no less stringent than would result from the
otherwise applicable Federal standard; (3) the schedule for
implementation and compliance is consistent with the deadlines
established in the otherwise applicable Federal rule; and (4) the state
requirements include additional compliance and enforcement measures as
specified in 40 CFR 63.93(b)(4). See 40 CFR 63.93(b). After reviewing
ME DEP's amended partial rule substitution request and equivalency
demonstration for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP as it applies to area
sources, EPA has determined this request meets all the requirements
necessary for approval under CAA section 112(l) and 40 CFR 63.91 and
63.93.

III. How will EPA determine equivalency for state alternative NESHAP
requirements?

    Before we can approve alternative requirements in place of a part
63 emissions standard, the state must

submit to us detailed information that demonstrates how the alternative
requirements compare with the otherwise applicable Federal standard.
Under 40 CFR part 63 subpart E, the level of control in the state rule
must be at least as stringent as the level of control in the Federal
rule. In addition, in order for equivalency to be granted, the level of
control and compliance and enforcement measures (``MRR'') of the state
rule, taken together as a whole, must be equivalent to the level of
control and MRR of the Federal rule, taken together as a whole. A
detailed discussion of how EPA will determine equivalency for state
alternative NESHAP requirements is provided in the preamble to EPA's
proposed Subpart E amendments on January 12, 1999. See 64 FR 1908.

IV. What significant changes did EPA make to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP
and how did ME DEP address those changes?

    The following discussion explains the changes that EPA made to the
Dry Cleaning NESHAP and how ME DEP addressed these changes in the
amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule. The April 24, 2006 Federal Register
Notice initially approving the Maine Dry Cleaner Rule as a substitute
for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP contains a more detailed discussion of the
differences between the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and the Maine Dry Cleaner
Rule. See 71 FR 20895.

A. What definitions were added to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and the
amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP added definitions for halogenated
hydrocarbon detector, perchloroethylene gas analyzer, residence, vapor
leak, and vapor barrier. The amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule adopted the
same definitions, with the exception of vapor barrier and residence.
Residence is defined in the Dry Cleaner NESHAP as any dwelling or
housing in which people reside, excluding short-term housing that is
occupied by the same person for a period of less than 180 days (such as
a hotel room). Maine's amended Dry Cleaner Rule defines residence as
``any dwelling or housing in which people reside,'' without exclusion
for short-term housing. Maine's definition is more stringent. ME DEP
did not adopt the definition of vapor barrier into its amended Maine
Dry Cleaner Rule because the requirement is no longer necessary.
Specifically, the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule specifies that dry
cleaning machines installed in a building with a residence after
December 21, 2005 must comply with the NESHAP provisions under Section
63.320(b)(2)(ii). See Chapter 125 Section 3.A.(2). Section
63.320(b)(2)(ii) of the Dry Cleaner NESHAP requires any facility
installed in a building with a residence between December 21, 2005 and
July 13, 2006 (i.e., those facilities which were required to utilize a
vapor barrier under the Dry Cleaning NESHAP) to eliminate perc
emissions by July 27, 2009. Therefore, any facility which was required
to install a vapor barrier is effectively prohibited from operating
under the Dry Cleaner NESHAP and the amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule as
of July 27, 2009. The amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule is equivalent to
the Dry Cleaner NESHAP.

B. What control requirements were added for new dry cleaners installed
after December 21, 2005?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires new area source dry cleaners which
commence construction after December 21, 2005, to be equipped with a
refrigerated condenser and a non-vented carbon adsorber. The carbon
adsorber must be desorbed in accordance with the manufacturer's
instruction. See 40 CFR 63.322(o)(2). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner
Rule required these control requirements for new dry cleaners installed
after February 12, 1997 and added clarifying language for these
controls on new dry cleaners installed after December 21, 2005. See
Chapter 125 Section 3.B(2) and Section 3.(C)(3). The Maine Dry Cleaner
Rule added the requirement for the carbon adsorber to be desorbed in
accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. See Chapter 125
Section 3.C(1)(a). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule is accordingly no
less stringent than the corresponding Federal rule.

C. What requirements were added for dry cleaners installed in a
building with a residence after December 21, 2005?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires a vapor barrier and other control
requirements for dry cleaners installed in a building with a residence
between December 21, 2005 and July 13, 2006. The Dry Cleaning NESHAP
requires that such dry cleaners eliminate perc emissions by July 27,
2009. See 40 CFR 63.322(o)(5)(i)-(ii) and 63.320(b)(2)(ii). The Maine
Dry Cleaner Rule specifies that such dry cleaners must comply with the
Dry Cleaner NESHAP Section 63.320(b)(2)(ii). See Chapter 125 Section
3.A(2). Under both the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and the amended Maine Dry
Cleaner Rule, such sources are effectively prohibited from operating as
of July 27, 2009. The Maine Dry Cleaner rule is equivalent to the Dry
Cleaning NESHAP.
    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP does not allow any dry cleaning systems to
be installed in a building with a residence as of July 13, 2006. See 40
CFR 63.322(o)(4) and 63.320(b)(3). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule
prohibits the installation of a dry cleaner co-located with a residence
as of June 24, 2009, and requires all new or relocated dry cleaning
machines located in a building with a residence which commenced
construction on or after December 21, 2005 to comply with 40 CFR Part
63.320(b)(2)(ii). See Chapter 125 Section 3.A(1) and (2). The amended
Maine Dry Cleaner rule does not prohibit dry cleaning machines from
being installed in a building with a residence between July 13, 2006
and June 24, 2009, the effective date of the amended Maine Dry Cleaner
rule. Therefore, EPA is retaining its authority with respect to dry
cleaners installed in a residence between July 13, 2006 and June 24,
2009, the effective date of the amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule. In
addition, the amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule prohibits the installation
of a co-located dry cleaner as of June 24, 2009. See Chapter 125
Section 3.(A)(1). A co-located dry cleaner includes dry cleaning
facilities located in a building with a residence, or with a day care
center, a health care facility, a prison, an elementary school, a
middle or high school or a pre-school, a senior center or a youth
center, or other facility inhabited by children or the elderly.
Therefore, this provision of the amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule is more
stringent than the Dry Cleaning NESHAP because it prohibits all co-
located dry cleaners as of June 24, 2009, in addition to prohibiting
co-located dry cleaners in a building with a residence as of June 24,
2009.
    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires all dry cleaners located in a
building with a residence to eliminate perc emissions by December 21,
2020. See 40 CFR 63.322(o)(5)(ii). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule
requires all co-located dry cleaners to cease operation on or before
December 21, 2020. See Chapter 125 Section 3.A(3). The amended Maine
Dry Cleaner rule is more stringent than the Dry Cleaning NESHAP because
this provision applies to all co-located facilities in addition to dry
cleaners installed in a building with a residence.

D. What requirements were added for transfer machines?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP effectively prohibits all transfer machines
as of July 28, 2008, by requiring the owner or

operator to eliminate emissions of perc during the transfer of articles
between the washer and the dryer(s) or reclaimer(s). See 40 CFR
63.320(b)(1)) and 63.322(o)(4). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule
prohibited the installation and use of transfer machines as of January
4, 2003. See Chapter 125 Section 3.(D). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner
rule is more stringent because it prohibited transfer machines earlier
than the Dry Cleaning NESHAP.

E. What monitoring requirements were added?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP added a requirement for area source dry
cleaners to conduct leak checks monthly using a halogenated hydrocarbon
detector or a PCE gas analyzer that is operated according to the
manufacturer's recommendation. See 40 CFR 63.322(o)(1). The amended
Maine Dry Cleaner rule requires vapor leak checks weekly with a
halogenated hydrocarbon detector or a PCE gas analyzer. See Chapter 125
Section 4.(C)(2). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule is more stringent
than the Dry Cleaning NESHAP because it requires leak checks with a
detector or analyzer to be conducted weekly.
    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP added a requirement that allows facilities
using a refrigerated condenser to monitor the refrigeration system high
pressure and low pressure as an alternative to monitoring for the
temperature of the perc vapor gas vapor-stream. See 40 CFR
63.323(a)(1). Maine added this requirement and is therefore equivalent
to the Dry Cleaning NESHAP. See Chapter 125 Section 4.(B).

F. How did the reporting requirements change?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP added a requirement for facilities to
submit a notification of compliance status by July 28, 2008. See 40 CFR
63.324(f). The amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule did not add this
requirement but all affected sources were required under the NESHAP to
submit this report and the date for submitting the report was prior to
the effective date of the Maine Dry Cleaner rule amendments. ME DEP did
develop a sample form for the July 28, 2008, NESHAP report and sent a
direct mailing to every dry cleaner in the state with the form,
notifying sources to submit the report to both EPA and ME DEP. In
addition, the amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule requires facilities to
register annually with the state. The Dry Cleaning NESHAP does not
require an annual report. The annual report was revised to include all
of the information required in the July 28, 2008, NESHAP report, except
for a statement of compliance. Given that the NESHAP report date has
passed, all dry cleaners in Maine were required to send in the report
with a statement of compliance under the NESHAP requirements, and that
Maine requires an annual report not required by the NESHAP, EPA has
determined that reporting requirements of the amended Maine Dry Cleaner
rule are equivalent to the requirements of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP.

V. What is EPA's action regarding Maine's amended Dry Cleaner Rule?

    After reviewing ME DEP's request for approval of the amended Maine
Dry Cleaner Rule, EPA has determined that Maine's regulation meets all
of the requirements necessary for partial rule substitution under
section 112(l) of the CAA and 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93. The amended Maine
Dry Cleaner rule, taken as a whole, is no less stringent than the Dry
Cleaning NESHAP, as applied to area sources. Therefore, EPA hereby
approves ME DEP's request to implement and enforce Chapter 125, as
amended on June 24, 2009, in place of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area
sources in Maine. EPA retains the requirements for major source dry
cleaners and dry cleaners installed in a residence between July 13,
2006 and June 24, 2009. As of the effective date of this action, the
amended Maine Dry Cleaner Rule is enforceable by EPA and by citizens
under the CAA. Although ME DEP has primary responsibility to implement
and enforce the amended Maine Dry Cleaner rule, EPA retains the
authority to enforce any requirement of the rule upon its approval
under CAA 112. See CAA section 112(l)(7).

VI. Final Action

    EPA is approving the Maine Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaner
Regulation, Chapter 125, as amended on June 24, 2009, as a partial rule
substitution for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area sources in Maine. EPA
retains the requirements for major source dry cleaners and dry cleaners
installed in a residence between July 13, 2006 and June 24, 2009.
    EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the rule revision should
relevant adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective July
25, 2011 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant
adverse comments by June 27, 2011.
    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a notice
withdrawing the direct final rule and informing the public that the
direct final rule will not take effect. All public comments received
will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on the proposed
rule. All parties interested in commenting on the proposed rule should
do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is
advised that this rule will be effective on July 25, 2011 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if
EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule, and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of
the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are
not the subject of an adverse comment.

VII. Judicial Review

    Under CAA section 307(b)(1), judicial review of this final rule is
available only by filing a petition for review in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 25, 2011. Under
CAA section 307(b)(2), the requirements established by this final rule
may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal proceedings
brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
    Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that ``[o]nly an
objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable
specificity during the period for public comment (including any public
hearing) may be raised during judicial review.'' This section also
provides a mechanism for us to convene a proceeding for
reconsideration, ``[i]f the person raising an objection can demonstrate
to the EPA that it was impracticable to raise such objection within
[the period for public comment] or if the grounds for such objection
arose after the period for public comment (but within the time
specified for judicial review) and if such objection is of central
relevance to the outcome of the rule.'' Any person seeking to make such
a demonstration to us should submit a Petition for Reconsideration to
the Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, Five Post Office Square, Suite 100 (ORA01-
4), Boston, MA 02109-3912, with a copy to the person(s) listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the Regional
Counsel, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Five
Post Office Square, Suite 100 (ORA01-4), Boston, MA 02109-3912. Filing
a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
under CAA section 307(d)(7)(B) does not affect the finality of this
rule for the purposes of judicial review, does not extend the time
within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and does not
postpone the effectiveness of the rule.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action approves equivalent state requirements in place of
Federal requirements under CAA section 112(l). This type of action is
exempt from review under EO 12866.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This action allows the State of
Maine to implement equivalent state requirements in lieu of pre-
existing Federal requirements as applied only to area source dry
cleaners. Thus, this action does not require any person to submit
information.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes
of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business that meets the Small
Business Administration size standards found at 13 CFR 121.201 (coin
operated laundries and drycleaners as defined by NAICS code 812310 with
annual receipts of less than $7.0 million or drycleaning and laundry
services (except coin operated) as defined by NAICS code 812320 with
annual receipts of less than $4.5 million); (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school
district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and
(3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final
rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities because approvals under CAA section 112(l) and 40 CFR
63.93 do not create any new requirements. Such approvals simply allow a
state to implement and enforce equivalent requirements in place of the
Federal requirements that EPA is already imposing.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for State, local, or Tribal governments or the private
sector. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any State, local or
Tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this action is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. This
action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA
because it contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly
or uniquely affect small governments. This action allows the State of
Maine to implement equivalent state requirements in lieu of pre-
existing Federal requirements as applied only to area source dry
cleaners. Thus, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This action simply allows Maine to
implement equivalent alternative requirements to replace a Federal
rule, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power
and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this action.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have Tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action
allows the State of Maine to implement equivalent state requirements in
lieu of pre-existing Federal requirements as applied only to area
source dry cleaners. This action will not have substantial direct
effects on Tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal
government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian Tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it approves a
state program such that it allows the State of Maine to implement
equivalent state requirements in lieu of pre-existing Federal
requirements as applied only to area source dry cleaners.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

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

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

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    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
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This action allows the State of Maine to implement
equivalent state requirements in lieu of pre-existing Federal
requirements as applied only to area source dry cleaners. As explained
above, the state requirements contain standards that are at least
equivalent to the Federal standards; thus, we anticipate only a
positive impact from this action.

K. 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 July 25, 2011.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Authority: This action is issued under the authority of section
112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7412.

    Dated: May 13, 2011.
Ira W. Leighton,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

    40 CFR part 63 is amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--[Amended]

0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(6) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.14  Incorporation by reference.

    (d) * * *
    (6) Maine Department of Environmental Protection regulations at
Chapter 125, Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaner Regulation, effective as of
June 2, 1991, last amended on June 24, 2009. Incorporation By Reference
approved for Sec.  63.99(a)(20)(iii) of subpart E of this part.
* * * * *

Subpart E--[Amended]

0
3. Section 63.99 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(20)(iii) to read
as follows:

Sec.  63.99  Delegated Federal authorities.

    (a) * * *
    (20) * * *
    (iii) Affected area sources within Maine must comply with the Maine
Regulations Applicable to Hazardous Air Pollutants (incorporated by
reference as specified in Sec.  63.14) as described in paragraph
(a)(20)(iii)(A) of this section:
    (A) The material incorporated into the Maine Department of
Environmental Protection regulations at Chapter 125, Perchloroethylene
Dry Cleaner Regulation, effective as of June 2, 1991, last amended on
June 24, 2009, pertaining to dry cleaning facilities in the State of
Maine jurisdiction, and approved under the procedures in Sec.  63.93 to
be implemented and enforced in place of the Federal NESHAP for
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities (subpart M of this part),
effective as of July 11, 2008, for area sources only, as defined in
Sec.  63.320(h).
    (1) Authorities not delegated.
    (i) Maine is not delegated the Administrator's authority to
implement and enforce Maine regulations at Chapter 125, in lieu of
those provisions of subpart M of this part which apply to major
sources, as defined in Sec.  63.320(g).
    (ii) Maine is not delegated the Administrator's authority to
implement and enforce Maine regulations at Chapter 125, in lieu of
those provisions of subpart M of this part which apply to dry cleaning
systems installed in a building with a residence between July 13, 2006
and June 24, 2009, as defined in Sec.  63.320(b)(2)(i) and Sec.
63.322(o)(4).
    (2) [Reserved]
    (B) [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-13003 Filed 5-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P