[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 11 (Thursday, January 16, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2676-2683]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26292]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 721

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0595; FRL-10002-68]
RIN 2070-AB27

Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances (20-1.B)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing significant new use rules (SNURs) under the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for chemical substances that are
the subject of premanufacture notices (PMNs). This action would require
persons to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing manufacture
(defined by statute to include import) or processing of any of these
chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a significant
new use by this proposed rule. This action would further require that
persons not commence manufacture or processing for the significant new
use until they have submitted a Significant New Use Notice, and EPA has
conducted a review of the notice, made an appropriate determination on
the notice under TSCA, and has taken any risk management actions as are
required as a result of that determination.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 18, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0595, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     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: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.

    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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:
(202) 564-9232; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email 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,
process, or use the chemical substances contained in this proposed
rule. The following list of North American Industrial Classification
System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:
     Manufacturers or processors of one or more subject
chemical substances (NAICS codes 325 and 324110), e.g., chemical
manufacturing and petroleum refineries.
    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. 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 these proposed SNURs
would need to certify their compliance with the SNUR requirements
should these proposed rules be finalized. The EPA policy in support of
import certification appears at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. In
addition, pursuant to 40 CFR 721.20, any persons who export or intend
to export a chemical substance that is the subject of this proposed
rule on or after February 18, 2020 are subject to the export
notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)) 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 CBI to EPA through regulations.gov
or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you
claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail
to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify
electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment
that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that
does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for
inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part
2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

II. Background

A. What action is the Agency taking?

    EPA is proposing significant new use rules for six chemical
substances that are the subjects of PMNs: P-16-291, P-16-486, P-17-184,
P-18-232, P-18-236, and P-18-264. These proposed SNURs would require
persons who intend to manufacture or process any of these chemical
substances for an activity that is designated as a significant new use
to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity.
    The record for the proposed SNURs on these chemicals was
established as docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0595. That record includes
information considered by the Agency in developing these proposed
SNURs.

B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    TSCA section 5(a)(2) (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 the four TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors
listed in Unit III. In the case of a determination other than not
likely to present unreasonable risk, the applicable review period must
also expire before manufacturing or processing for the new use may
commence.

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 rule.
Provisions relating to user fees appear at 40 CFR part 700. Pursuant to
40 CFR 721.1(c), persons subject to these SNURs must comply with the
same SNUN 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 sections 5(b)
and 5(d)(1), the exemptions authorized by TSCA sections 5(h)(1),
5(h)(2), 5(h)(3) and 5(h)(5), and the regulations at 40 CFR part 720.
Once EPA receives a SNUN, EPA must either determine that the use is not
likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury under the conditions
of use for the chemical substance or take such regulatory action as is
associated with an alternative determination before the manufacture or
processing for the significant new use can commence. If EPA determines
that the use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk, EPA is
required under TSCA section 5(g) to make public, and submit for
publication in the Federal Register, a statement of EPA's findings.

III. Significant New Use Determination

    TSCA section 5(a)(2) 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 determining what would constitute a significant new use for the
chemical substances that are the subject of these SNURs, EPA considered
relevant information about the toxicity of the chemical substances, and
potential human exposures and environmental releases that may be
associated with the conditions of use of the substances, in

the context of the four bulleted TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors listed in
this unit. During its review of these chemicals, EPA identified certain
conditions of use that are not intended by the submitters, but
reasonably foreseen to occur. EPA is proposing to designate those
reasonably foreseen conditions of use as significant new uses.

IV. Substances Subject to This Proposed Rule

    EPA is proposing significant new use and recordkeeping requirements
for six chemical substances in 40 CFR part 721, subpart E. In this
unit, EPA provides the following information for each chemical
substance:
     PMN number.
     Chemical name (generic name, if the specific name is
claimed as CBI).
     Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Registry number (if
assigned for non-confidential chemical identities).
     Basis for the SNUR.
     Potentially Useful Information. This is information
identified by EPA that would help characterize the potential health
and/or environmental effects of the chemical substance in support of a
request by the PMN submitter to modify the TSCA Order, or if a
manufacturer or processor is considering submitting a SNUN for a
significant new use designated by the SNUR.
     CFR citation assigned in the regulatory text section of
these proposed rules.
    The regulatory text section of these proposed rules specifies the
activities designated as significant new uses. Certain new uses,
including production volume limits and other uses designated in the
proposed rules, may be claimed as CBI.
    The chemical substances that are the subject of these proposed
SNURs are undergoing premanufacture review. In addition to those
conditions of use intended by the submitter, EPA has identified certain
other reasonably foreseen conditions of use. EPA has preliminarily
determined that the chemicals under their intended conditions of use
are not likely to present an unreasonable risk. However, EPA has not
assessed risks associated with the reasonably foreseen conditions of
use for these chemicals. EPA is proposing to designate these reasonably
foreseen and other potential conditions of use as significant new uses.
As a result, those conditions of use are no longer reasonably foreseen
to occur without first going through a separate, subsequent EPA review
and determination process associated with a SNUN.
    The substances subject to these proposed rules are as follows:

PMN Number: P-16-291.

    Chemical name: 1,3-Cyclohexanedimethanamine adduct (generic).
    CAS number: Not available.
    Basis for action: The PMN states that the generic (non-
confidential) use of the substance will be as a curing agent. Based on
the physical/chemical properties of the PMN substance and Structure
Activity Relationships (SAR) analysis of test data on analogous
substances, EPA has identified concerns for irritation and corrosion to
all tissues, skin sensitization, and aquatic toxicity if the chemical
substance is used in ways other than as intended by the PMN submitter.
Other conditions of use of the PMN substance that EPA intends to assess
before they occur include the following:
    1. Use in a consumer product; and
    2. Release of a manufacturing, processing, or use stream associated
with any use of the PMN substance into the waters of the United States
exceeding a surface water concentration of 74 ppb.
    The proposed SNUR would designate as a ``significant new use''
these conditions of use.
    Potentially useful information: EPA has determined that certain
information may be potentially useful to characterize the health and
environmental effects of the PMN substance if a manufacturer or
processor is considering submitting a SNUN for a significant new use
that would be designated by this proposed SNUR. EPA has determined that
the results of skin and eye irritation, skin sensitization, and aquatic
toxicity testing would help characterize the potential health and
environmental effects of the PMN substance.
    CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.11447.

PMN Number: P-16-486.

    Chemical name: Polychloropropane (generic).
    CAS number: Not available.
    Basis for action: The PMN states that the generic (non-
confidential) use of the substance will be as a site-limited
intermediate in the production of a refrigerant precursor. Based on the
physical/chemical properties of the PMN substance, test data for the
PMN substance, and SAR analysis of test data on analogous substances,
EPA has identified concerns for reproductive effects and developmental
toxicity, effects on the liver, kidney and nasal turbinates, and
aquatic toxicity if the chemical substance is used in ways other than
as intended by the PMN submitter. Other conditions of use of the PMN
substance that EPA intends to assess before they occur include the
following:
    1. Use other than as a site-limited chemical intermediate;
    2. Manufacture, processing, or use other than in an enclosed
process;
    3. Use of sampling methods other than the ``zero-contact'' methods
described in the PMN; and
    4. Disposal other than by incineration.
    The proposed SNUR would designate as a ``significant new use''
these conditions of use.
    Potentially useful information: EPA has determined that certain
information may be potentially useful to characterize the health and
environmental effects of the PMN substance if a manufacturer or
processor is considering submitting a SNUN for a significant new use
that would be designated by this proposed SNUR. EPA has determined that
the results of absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination
(ADME), DNA binding, and chronic aquatic toxicity studies would help
characterize the potential health and environmental effects of the PMN
substance.
    CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.11448.

PMN Number: P-17-184.

    Chemical name: 1-Propanaminium, 2-hydroxy-N, N-dimethyl-N-[3-[(1-
oxooctyl)amino]propyl]-3-sulfo-, inner salt.
    CAS number: 1612795-77-3.
    Basis for action: The PMN states that the use of the substance will
be in firefighting foams; industrial all-purpose cleaners;
transportation washes; and personal care product uses not regulated
under TSCA. Based on the physical/chemical properties of the PMN
substance, test data for the PMN substance, and SAR analysis of test
data on analogous substances, EPA has identified concerns for
irritation to skin and mucous membranes; systemic effects;
developmental effects; and lung effects if the chemical substance is
used in ways other than as intended by the PMN submitter. Other
conditions of use of the PMN substance that EPA intends to assess
before they occur include the following:
    1. Use other than in firefighting foams, industrial all-purpose
cleaners, and transportation washes;
    2. Processing to greater than 10% by weight in the final formulated
products; and
    3. Use without a NIOSH-certified respirator with an APF of at least
1000, where there is a potential for inhalation exposures.

    The proposed SNUR would designate as a ``significant new use''
these conditions of use.
    Potentially useful information: EPA has determined that certain
information may be potentially useful to characterize the health and
environmental effects of the PMN substance if a manufacturer or
processor is considering submitting a SNUN for a significant new use
that would be designated by this proposed SNUR. EPA has determined that
the results of specific target organ toxicity testing would help
characterize the potential health and environmental effects of the PMN
substance.
    CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.11449.

PMN Number: P-18-232.

    Chemical name: Polyol, reaction products with formaldehyde and
methanol (generic).
    CAS number: Not available.
    Basis for action: The PMN states that the use of the substance will
be as hydrogen sulfide scavenger in oil and gas applications. Based on
the physical/chemical properties of the PMN substance and SAR analysis
of test data on the PMN substance and analogous substances, EPA has
identified concerns for irritation, sensitization, mutagenicity,
carcinogenicity, and aquatic toxicity if the chemical substance is used
in ways other than as intended by the PMN submitter. Other conditions
of use of the PMN substance that EPA intends to assess before they
occur include the following:
    1. Manufacture, processing, or use in a manner that results in
inhalation exposure; and
    2. Manufacture (including import) beyond the confidential annual
production volume described in the PMN.
    The proposed SNUR would designate as a ``significant new use''
these conditions of use.
    Potentially useful information: EPA has determined that certain
information may be potentially useful to characterize the health and
environmental effects of the PMN substance if a manufacturer or
processor is considering submitting a SNUN for a significant new use
that would be designated by this proposed SNUR. EPA has determined that
the results of toxicokinetics, skin and eye irritation, skin
sensitization, neurotoxicity, reproductive effects, developmental
toxicity, specific target organ toxicity, cancer and aquatic toxicity
testing would help characterize the potential health and environmental
effects of the PMN substance.
    CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.11450.

PMN Number: P-18-236.

    Chemical name: Metal, alkenoic acid-alkyl alkenoate-alkyl
substituted alkenoate polymer carbopolycycle complexes (generic).
    CAS number: Not available.
    Basis for action: The PMN states that the generic (non-
confidential) use of the substance will be as a paint additive. Based
on the physical/chemical properties of the PMN substance and SAR
analysis of test data on analogous substances, EPA has identified
concerns for respiratory and skin sensitization, reproductive toxicity,
specific target organ toxicity and aquatic toxicity if the chemical
substance is used in ways other than as intended by the PMN submitter.
Other conditions of use of the PMN substance that EPA intends to assess
before they occur include the following:
    1. Manufacture, processing, or use in a manner that results in
inhalation exposure;
    2. Use for other than the confidential use described in the PMN;
and
    3. Release of a manufacturing, processing, or use stream associated
with any use of the PMN substance into the waters of the United States
exceeding a surface water concentration of 50 ppb.
    The proposed SNUR would designate as a ``significant new use''
these conditions of use.
    Potentially useful information: EPA has determined that certain
information may be potentially useful to characterize the health and
environmental effects of the PMN substance if a manufacturer or
processor is considering submitting a SNUN for a significant new use
that would be designated by this proposed SNUR. EPA has determined that
the results of specific target organ toxicity and aquatic toxicity
testing would help characterize the potential health and environmental
effects of the PMN substance.
    CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.11451.

PMN Number: P-18-264.

    Chemical name: Phosphonomethylated ether diamine (generic).
    CAS number: Not available.
    Basis for action: The PMN states that the generic (non-
confidential) use of the substance will be as an intermediate. Based on
the physical/chemical properties of the PMN substance and SAR analysis
of test data on analogous substances, EPA has identified concerns for
eye irritation, chelation effects, reproductive toxicity, and
developmental toxicity, and aquatic toxicity if the chemical substance
is used in ways other than as intended by the PMN submitter. Other
conditions of use of the PMN substance that EPA intends to assess
before they occur include the following:
     Manufacture, processing, or use in a manner that results
in inhalation exposure.
    The proposed SNUR would designate as a ``significant new use'' this
condition of use.
    Potentially useful information: EPA has determined that certain
information may be potentially useful to characterize the health and
environmental effects of the PMN substance if a manufacturer or
processor is considering submitting a SNUN for a significant new use
that would be designated by this proposed SNUR. EPA has determined that
the results of eye irritation, reproductive toxicity, specific target
organ toxicity, and aquatic toxicity testing would help characterize
the potential health and environmental effects of the PMN substance.
    CFR citation: 40 CFR 721.11452.

V. Rationale and Objectives of the Proposed Rule

A. Rationale

    During review of the PMNs submitted for the chemical substances
that are the subject of these proposed SNURs and as further discussed
in Unit IV, EPA identified certain other reasonably foreseen conditions
of use, in addition to those conditions of use intended by the
submitter. EPA has preliminarily determined that the chemical under the
intended conditions of use is not likely to present an unreasonable
risk. However, EPA has not assessed risks associated with the
reasonably foreseen conditions of use. EPA is proposing to designate
these conditions of use as significant new uses to ensure that they are
no longer reasonably foreseen to occur without first going through a
separate, subsequent EPA review and determination process associated
with a SNUN.

B. Objectives

    EPA is proposing these SNURs because the Agency wants:
     To have an opportunity to review and evaluate data
submitted in a SNUN before the notice submitter begins manufacturing or
processing a listed chemical substance for the described significant
new use.
     To be obligated to make a determination under TSCA section
5(a)(3) regarding the use described in the SNUN, under the conditions
of use. The Agency will either determine under section 5(a)(3)(C) that
the significant

new use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk, including an
unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation
identified as relevant by the Administrator under the conditions of
use, or make a determination under section 5(a)(3) (A) or (B) and take
the required regulatory action associated with the determination,
before manufacture or processing for the significant new use of the
chemical substance can occur.
     To be able to complete its review and determination on
each of the PMN substances, while deferring analysis on the significant
new uses proposed in these rules unless and until the Agency receives a
SNUN.
    Issuance of a proposed 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 https://www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory.

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

    To establish a significant new use, EPA must determine that the use
is not ongoing. The chemical substances subject to this proposed rule
were undergoing premanufacture review at the time of signature of this
proposed rule and were not on the TSCA Inventory. In cases where EPA
has not received a notice of commencement (NOC) and the chemical
substance has not been added to the TSCA Inventory, no person may
commence such activities without first submitting a PMN. Therefore, for
the chemical substances subject to these proposed SNURs, EPA concludes
that the proposed significant new uses are not ongoing.
    EPA designates December 2, 2019 (date of web posting) as the cutoff
date for determining whether the new use is ongoing. The objective of
EPA's approach is to ensure that a person cannot defeat a SNUR by
initiating a significant new use before the effective date of the final
rule.
    Persons who begin commercial manufacture or processing of the
chemical substances for a significant new use identified on or after
that date would have to cease any such activity upon the effective date
of the final rule. To resume their activities, these persons would have
to first comply with all applicable SNUR notification requirements and
EPA would have to take action under section 5 allowing manufacture or
processing to proceed. In developing this proposed rule, EPA has
recognized that, given EPA's general practice of posting proposed rules
on its website a week or more in advance of Federal Register
publication, this objective could be thwarted even before Federal
Register publication of the proposed rule.

VII. Development and Submission of Information

    EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 does not require development of
any particular new information (e.g., generating test data) before
submission of a SNUN. There is an exception: If a person is required to
submit information for a chemical substance pursuant to a rule, Order
or consent agreement under TSCA section 4 (15 U.S.C. 2603), then TSCA
section 5(b)(1)(A) (15 U.S.C. 2604(b)(1)(A)) requires such information
to be submitted to EPA at the time of submission of the SNUN.
    In the absence of a rule, Order or consent agreement under TSCA
section 4 covering the chemical substance, persons are required only to
submit information in their possession or control and to describe any
other information known to or reasonably ascertainable by them (see 40
CFR 720.50). However, upon review of PMNs and SNUNs, the Agency has the
authority to require appropriate testing. Unit IV. lists potentially
useful information for all SNURs listed here. Descriptions are provided
for informational purposes. The potentially useful information
identified in Unit IV. will be useful to EPA's evaluation in the event
that someone submits a SNUN for the significant new use. Companies who
are considering submitting a SNUN are encouraged, but not required, to
develop the information on the substance, which may assist with EPA's
analysis of the SNUN.
    EPA strongly encourages persons, before performing any testing, to
consult with the Agency pertaining to protocol selection. Furthermore,
pursuant to TSCA section 4(h), which pertains to reduction of testing
in vertebrate animals, EPA encourages consultation with the Agency on
the use of alternative test methods and strategies (also called New
Approach Methodologies, or NAMs), if available, to generate the
recommended test data. EPA encourages dialog with Agency
representatives to help determine how best the submitter can meet both
the data needs and the objective of TSCA section 4(h).
    The potentially useful information described in Unit IV. may not be
the only means of providing information to evaluate the chemical
substance associated with the significant new uses. However, submitting
a SNUN without any test data may increase the likelihood that EPA will
take action under TSCA sections 5(e) or 5(f). EPA recommends that
potential SNUN submitters contact EPA early enough so that they will be
able to conduct the appropriate tests.
    SNUN submitters should be aware that EPA will 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 substances.

VIII. SNUN Submissions

    According to 40 CFR 721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN must comply
with the same notification requirements and EPA regulatory procedures
as persons submitting a PMN, including submission of test data on
health and environmental effects as described in 40 CFR 720.50. SNUNs
must be submitted on EPA Form No. 7710-25, generated using e-PMN
software, and submitted to the Agency in accordance with the procedures
set forth in 40 CFR 720.40 and 721.25. E-PMN software is available
electronically at https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca.

IX. Economic Analysis

    EPA has evaluated the potential costs of establishing SNUN
requirements for potential manufacturers and processors of the chemical
substances subject to this proposed rule. EPA's complete economic
analysis is available in the docket under docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2019-0595.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulations and Regulatory Review

    This proposed rule would establish SNURs for 8 new chemical
substances that were the subject of PMNs. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR
3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    According to the 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 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.
    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 does 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,
Regulatory Support Division, Office of Mission Support (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 (RFA)

    Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., the
Agency hereby certifies that promulgation of this proposed SNUR would
not have a significant adverse economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities. 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 final 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 SNURs covering over 1,000 chemicals,
the Agency receives only a small number of notices per year. For
example, the number of SNUNs received was seven in Federal fiscal year
(FY) 2013, 13 in FY2014, six in FY2015, 12 in FY2016, 13 in FY2017, and
11 in FY2018, only a fraction of these were from small businesses. In
addition, the Agency currently offers relief to qualifying small
businesses by reducing the SNUN submission fee from $16,000 to $2,800.
This lower fee reduces the total reporting and recordkeeping of cost of
submitting a SNUN to about $10,116 for qualifying small firms.
Therefore, the potential economic impacts of complying with this
proposed 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 (UMRA)

    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 will be impacted by this proposed
rule. As such, EPA has determined that this proposed rule does not
impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or otherwise
have any effect on small governments subject to the requirements of
UMRA sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538 et seq.).

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    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 (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999).

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

    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 nor uniquely affect the
communities of Indian Tribal governments, nor does it involve or impose
any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
do not apply to this proposed rule.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (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: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (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 (NTTAA)

    In addition, since this action does not involve any technical
standards, NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 note, does not apply to
this action.

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

    This action does not entail special considerations of environmental
justice related issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721

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

    Dated: November 26, 2019.
Tala Henry,
Deputy Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
    Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR part 721 be amended as
follows:

PART 721--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 721 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 2625(c).

0
2. Add Sec. Sec.  721.11447 through 721.11452 to subpart E to read as
follows:

Subpart E--Significant New Uses for Specific Chemical Substances

Sec.
* * * * *
721.11447 1,3-Cyclohexanedimethanamine adduct (generic).
721.11448 Polychloropropane (generic).
721.11449 1-Propanaminium, 2-hydroxy-N, N-dimethyl-N-[3-[(1-
oxooctyl)amino]propyl]-3-sulfo-, inner salt.
721.11450 Polyol, reaction products with formaldehyde and methanol
(generic).
721.11451 Metal, alkenoic acid-alkyl alkenoate-alkyl substituted
alkenoate polymer carbopolycycle complexes (generic).
721.11452 Phosphonomethylated ether diamine (generic).
* * * * *

Sec.  721.11447  1,3-Cyclohexanedimethanamine adduct (generic).

    (a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to
reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified generically as 1,3-
cyclohexanedimethanamine adduct (PMN P-16-291) 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(o).
    (ii) Release to water. Requirements as specified in Sec.
721.90(a)(4), (b)(4), and (c)(4), where N=74.
    (b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph (b).
    (1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in Sec.
721.125(a) through (c), (i), and (k) 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.

Sec.  721.11448  Polychloropropane (generic).

    (a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to
reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified generically as
polychloropropane (PMN P-16-486) 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(a), (b), (c), and (h). It is a significant
new use to use sampling methods other than the ``zero-contact'' methods
described in the PMN.
    (ii) Disposal. Requirements as specified in Sec.  721.85 (a)(1),
(b)(1), and (c)(1).
    (b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph (b).
    (1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in Sec.
721.125(a) through (c) (i), and (j) 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.

Sec.  721.11449  1-Propanaminium, 2-hydroxy-N, N-dimethyl-N-[3-[(1-
oxooctyl)amino]propyl]-3-sulfo-, inner salt.

    (a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to
reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified generically as 1-
Propanaminium, 2-hydroxy-N, N-dimethyl-N-[3-[(1-oxooctyl-amino]propyl]-
3-sulfo-, inner salt (PMN P-17-184; CASRN 1612795-77-3) 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) Protection in the workplace. Requirements as specified in Sec.
721.63(a)(4) and (5), (b)(concentration set at 1.0%) and (c). When
determining which persons are reasonable likely to be exposed as
required for Sec.  721.63(a)(4), engineering control measures (e.g.,
enclosure or confinement of the operation, general and local
ventilation) or administrative control measures (e.g., workplace
policies and procedures) shall be considered and implemented to prevent
exposures, where feasible. For purposes of Sec.  721.63(a)(5),
respirators must provide a National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health assigned protection factor of at least 1000.
    (ii) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. It is a
significant new use to manufacture, process or use the substance for
use other than firefighting foams, industrial all-purpose cleaners, and
transportation washes. It is a significant new use to process the
substance to greater than 10% by weight in the final formulated
products.
    (b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph (b).
    (1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in Sec.
721.125(a) through (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.

Sec.  721.11450  Polyol, reaction products with formaldehyde and
methanol (generic).

    (a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to
reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified generically as polyol,
reaction products with formaldehyde and methanol (PMN P-18-232) 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. It is a
significant new use to manufacture, processing or use of the substance
in a manner that results in inhalation exposure. It is a significant
new use to manufacture the substance at greater than the confidential
annual production volume described in the PMN.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph (b).
    (1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in Sec.
721.125(a) through (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.
    (3) Determining whether a specific use is subject to this section.
The provisions of Sec.  721.1725(b)(1) apply to paragraph (a)(2)(i) of
this section.

Sec.  721.11451  Metal, alkenoic acid-alkyl alkenoate-alkyl substituted
alkenoate polymer carbopolycycle complexes (generic).

    (a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to
reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified generically as metal,
alkenoic acid-alkyl alkenoate-alkyl substituted alkenoate polymer
carbopolycycle complexes (PMN P-18-236) 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). It is a significant new use to
manufacture, processing or

use of the PMN substance in a manner that results in inhalation
exposure.
    (ii) Release to water. Requirements as specified in Sec.
721.90(a)(4), (b)(4), and (c)(4), where N=50.
    (b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph (b).
    (1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in Sec.
721.125(a) through (c), (i), and (k) 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.
    (3) Determining whether a specific use is subject to this section.
The provisions of Sec.  721.1725(b)(1) apply to paragraph (a)(2)(i) of
this section.

Sec.  721.11452  Phosphonomethylated ether diamine (generic).

    (a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to
reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified generically as
phosphonomethylated ether diamine (PMN P-18-264) 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. It is a
significant new use to manufacture, processing or use of the PMN
substance in a manner that results in inhalation exposure.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph (b).
    (1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in Sec.
721.125(a) through (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. 2019-26292 Filed 1-15-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 19, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60167-60168]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27099]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0639; FRL-9971-11]

Receipt of a Pesticide Petition Filed for Residues of Aluminum
tris (O-ethylphosphonate) In or On Fruit, Citrus, Group 10-10

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notification of filing of petition and request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the Agency's receipt of an initial
filing of a pesticide petition requesting the modification of
regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various
commodities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 18, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0639, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael L. Goodis, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

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 email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or

disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or
environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides discussed in this
document, compared to the general population.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    EPA is announcing receipt of a pesticide petition filed under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, requesting the modification of regulations in 40 CFR part
180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various food
commodities. The Agency is taking public comment on the request before
responding to the petitioner. EPA is not proposing any particular
action at this time. EPA has determined that the pesticide petition
described in this document contains data or information prescribed in
FFDCA section 408(d)(2), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(2); however, EPA has not
fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or
whether the data supports granting of the pesticide petition. After
considering the public comments, EPA intends to evaluate whether and
what action may be warranted. Additional data may be needed before EPA
can make a final determination on this pesticide petition.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petition that is the
subject of this document, prepared by the petitioner, is included in a
docket EPA has created for this rulemaking. The docket for this
petition is available at http://www.regulations.gov.
    As specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), EPA
is publishing notification of the petition so that the public has an
opportunity to comment on this request for the modification of
regulations for residues of pesticides in or on food commodities.
Further information on the petition may be obtained through the
petition summary referenced in this unit.
    PP 6F8517. (EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0639). Tessenderlo Kerley, Inc., 2255
N. 44th St., Suite 300, Phoenix, AZ 85008, requests to amend the
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.415 for residues of the fungicide, aluminum
tris (O-ethylphosphonate), in or on fruit, citrus, group 10 from 5.0
parts per million (ppm) to fruit, citrus, Group 10-10 at 9.0 ppm.
Adequate enforcement methodology available in the Pesticide Analytical
Manual (PAM II, Method II) is used to measure and evaluate the chemical
aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate). Contact: RD.

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a.

    Dated: November 27, 2017.
Michael L. Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2017-27099 Filed 12-18-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 6, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 554-555]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29296]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4493-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2020-0001]

Puerto Rico; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (FEMA-4493-DR), dated March 27,
2020, and related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on December 13, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, David Maurstad,
of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for
this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Thomas Von Essen as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Pete Gaynor,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2020-29296 Filed 1-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


MEMORANDUM  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1

DATE:		July 30, 2015

TO:		Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id:
OAR–2013-0602

FROM:		Lora Strine, EPA

SUBJECT:	May 19, 2015 Meeting Regarding Proposed Clean Power Plan for
Existing Power Plants

SUMMARY

A phone call was held between EPA and Jonas Monast, NI on May 19, 2015
to discuss the proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants. The
Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014.

ATTENDEES

Nicholas Institute

Jonas Monast

US EPA

Implementation Workgroup

Godfrey, Janice; Strine, Lora; Boswell, Colin; Burns, Ward; Cain,
Alexis; Culligan, Kevin; Dalcher, Debra; Donaldson, Guy; Drake, Robert;
Dressler, Jason; Farris, Laura; Fellner, Christian; Fulton, Abby;
Gonzalez, Larry; Gordon, Michael; Haber, Matt; Hackel, Angela; Hoffman,
Howard; Hutson, Nick; Johnson, Mary; Johnson, Terry; Kakade, Seema;
Ketcham-Colwill, Jim; Lau, Gavin; Lawrence, Rob; Lee, Anita; Linn,
Emily; Lloyd, David; McConnell, Robert; Miller, Julia; Mitchell, Ken;
Mulholland, Denise; Murray, Beth; Narvaez, Madonna; Newman, Erin;
Orlando, Danny; Ortega, Kellie; Patel, Ketan; Rosenberg, Julie;
Santiago, Juan; Saracino, Ray; Sherry, Christopher; Solomon, David;
Srivastava, Ravi; Steib, Clovis; Stevens, Gabrielle; Torres, Elineth;
Wieber, Kirk; Williamson, Timothy; Wong, Shutsu; Zenick, Elliott;
Moskal, John; Elman, Barry; Conroy, David; Greene, Cynthia; Shatas,
Angie; Raymond Forde; Gardella, Anthony; Mangels, Karl; Mark, Jeremy;
Victor, Meg; Daly, Carl; Aisling, Kathleen; Swanson, Nicholas; Wortman,
Eric; Hansen, Mark; Olszewski, Joshua; Thomas, Carrie; Vijayan, Abi;
Argentieri, Sabrina; Evans, DavidA; Marten, Alex; Sheriff, Glenn


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 17 (Wednesday, January 26, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4579-4584]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1624]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R02-OAR-2010-1025; FRL-9253-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plan; New
Jersey and New York; Disapproval of Interstate Transport State
Implementation Plan Revision for the 2006 24-Hour PM[ihel2].[ihel5]
NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to our authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA
is proposing to disapprove the New Jersey and the New York State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted to address significant
contribution to nonattainment or interference with maintenance in
another State with respect to the 2006 24-hour fine particle
(PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). On
January 20, 2010, New Jersey submitted a SIP revision to address
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA concerning interstate transport
requirements, and sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA concerning
infrastructure requirements. On March 23, 2010, New York submitted a
SIP revision to address the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA
concerning interstate transport, and sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the
CAA concerning infrastructure SIP requirements. In this action, EPA is
proposing to disapprove the portion of the New Jersey and the New York
SIP revisions that addresses the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirement
prohibiting a State's emissions from significantly contributing to
nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in any other
State. The rationale for the disapproval action of the SIP revision is
described in this proposal.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 25, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R02-
OAR-2010-1025, 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: Raymond Werner, Chief, Air Programs Branch, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,
New York 10007-1866.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Raymond
Werner, Chief, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-
1866. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's
normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official business
hours are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R02-OAR-
2010-1025. 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. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    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 Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 2 Office, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor,
New York, New York 10007-1866. EPA requests that if at all possible,
you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy
of the docket Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., excluding legal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth Fradkin
(fradkin.kenneth@epa.gov), Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th
Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This section provides
additional information by addressing the following questions:

I. What action Is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for this action?
III. What is EPA's evaluation of New Jersey's submittal?
IV. What is EPA's evaluation of New York's submittal?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA taking?

    We are proposing to disapprove portions of the submissions from the
State of New Jersey and the State of New York that were to demonstrate
that the States have adequately addressed elements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). Those elements require a State's SIP to contain
adequate provisions to prohibit air pollutant emissions from sources
within a State from significantly contributing to nonattainment in or
interference with maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS in any other State. We are proposing to determine that the New
Jersey and New York submissions do not contain adequate provisions to
prohibit air pollutant emissions from within the States that
significantly contribute to nonattainment in or interference with
maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in other
downwind States. The remaining elements of the submittal, including the
section 110 infrastructure, and section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) regarding
interference with measures required in the applicable SIP for another
State designed to prevention of significant deterioration of air
quality and protect visibility, are not addressed in this action and
will be acted on in a separate rulemaking.

II. What is the background for this action?

    On December 18, 2006, EPA revised the 24-hour average
PM2.5 primary and secondary NAAQS from 65 micrograms per
cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) to 35 [micro]g/m\3\. Section 110(a)(1) of
the CAA requires States to submit infrastructure SIPs to address a new
or revised NAAQS within 3 years after promulgation of such standards,
or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe.\1\ As provided by
section 110(k)(2), within 12 months of a determination that a submitted
SIP is complete under 110(k)(1), the Administrator shall act on the
plan. As authorized by section 110(k)(3) of the CAA, where the portions
of the State submittals are severable, EPA may decide to approve only
those severable portions of the submittals that meet the requirements
of the CAA. When the deficient provisions are not severable from all of
the submitted provisions, EPA must propose disapproval of the
submittals, consistent with section 110(k)(3) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The rule for the revised PM2.5 NAAQS was signed
by the Administrator and publically disseminated on September 21,
2006. Because EPA did not prescribe a shorter period for 110(a) SIP
submittals, these submittals for the 2006 24-hour NAAQS were due on
September 21, 2009, three years from the September 21, 2006
signature date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 110(a)(2) lists the elements that infrastructure SIPs
must address, as applicable, including section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), which
pertains to interstate transport of certain emissions. On September 25,
2009, EPA issued its ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5)
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)'' (2009 Guidance). EPA
developed the 2009 Guidance to make recommendations to States for
making submissions to meet the requirements of section 110, including
110(a)(2)(D)(i), for the revised 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
    As identified in the 2009 Guidance, the ``good neighbor''
provisions in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) require each State to submit a
SIP that prohibits emissions that adversely affect another State in the
ways contemplated by the statute. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) contains four
distinct requirements related to the impacts of interstate transport.
The SIP must prevent sources in the State from emitting pollutants in
amounts which will: (1) Contribute significantly to nonattainment of
the NAAQS in other States; (2) interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS
in other States; (3) interfere with provisions to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality in other States; or (4) interfere with
efforts to protect visibility in other States.
    In the 2009 Guidance, EPA indicated that SIP submissions from
States, pertaining to the ``significant contribution'' and ``interfere
with maintenance'' requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), must
contain adequate provisions to prohibit air pollutant emissions from
within the State that contribute significantly to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any other State. EPA further
indicated that the State's submission must explain whether or not
emissions from the State have this impact and, if so, address the
impact. EPA stated that the State's conclusion must be supported by an
adequate technical analysis. EPA recommended the various types of
information that could be relevant to support the State SIP submission,
such as information concerning emissions in the State, meteorological
conditions in

the State and the potentially impacted States, monitored ambient
concentrations in the State, and air quality modeling. Furthermore, EPA
indicated that States should address independently the ``interfere with
maintenance'' requirement. This requires an evaluation of impacts on
areas of other States that are meeting the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, not merely areas designated nonattainment.
Lastly, in the 2009 Guidance, EPA stated that States could not rely on
the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to comply with CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) requirements for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS because CAIR does not address this NAAQS.
    EPA promulgated CAIR on May 12, 2005, (70 FR 25162). CAIR required
States to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides
(NOX) that significantly contribute to, and interfere with
maintenance of the 1997 NAAQS for PM2.5 and/or ozone in any
downwind State. CAIR was intended to provide States covered by the rule
with a mechanism to satisfy their CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
obligations to address significant contribution to downwind
nonattainment and interference with maintenance in another State with
respect to the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. Many States
adopted the CAIR provisions and submitted SIPs to EPA to demonstrate
compliance with the CAIR requirements in satisfaction of their
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) obligations for those two pollutants.
    EPA was sued by a number of parties on various aspects of CAIR, and
on July 11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit issued its decision to vacate and remand both CAIR and
the associated CAIR Federal Implementation Plans (FIP) in their
entirety. North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 (DC Cir. Jul. 11, 2008).
However, in response to EPA's petition for rehearing, the Court issued
an order remanding CAIR to EPA without vacating either CAIR or the CAIR
FIPs. North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (DC Cir. Dec. 23, 2008). The
Court thereby left CAIR in place in order to ``temporarily preserve the
environmental values covered by CAIR'' until EPA replaces it with a
rule consistent with the Court's opinion. Id. at 1178. The Court
directed EPA to ``remedy CAIR's flaws'' consistent with its July 11,
2008 opinion, but declined to impose a schedule on EPA for completing
that action. Id.
    In order to address the judicial remand of CAIR, EPA has proposed a
new rule to address interstate transport pursuant to section
110(a)(2)(D)(i), the ``Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce
Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone'' (Transport
Rule).\2\ As part of the proposed Transport Rule, EPA specifically
examined the section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirement that emissions from
sources in a State must not ``significantly contribute to
nonattainment'' and ``interfere with maintenance'' of the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS by other States. The modeling performed for the
proposed Transport Rule shows that New Jersey and New York
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance
of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in downwind areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See ``Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce Interstate
Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone; Proposed Rule,'' 75
FR 45210 (August 2, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 20, 2010, EPA received a SIP revision from the State of
New Jersey that was to address the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) pertaining to interstate transport and sections
110(a)(1) and (2) pertaining to infrastructure for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. On March 23, 2010, EPA received a SIP revision
from the State of New York that was to address the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) pertaining to interstate transport and sections
110(a)(1) and (2) pertaining to infrastructure for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. In this rulemaking, EPA is addressing only the
requirements that pertain to prohibiting sources in New Jersey and New
York from emitting air pollutants that will significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS in other States.
    In its submission, the State of New Jersey provided an analysis
showing that the State significantly contributed to nonattainment or
interferes with the maintenance of the 2006 24 hour PM2.5
NAAQS in seven northeastern and Mid-Atlantic States (i.e. Connecticut,
Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, and
Pennsylvania). New Jersey included a list of measures that were
recently adopted by the State to reduce PM2.5,
SO2, NOX, and volatile organic carbon (VOC)
emissions.
    In its submission, the State of New York provided a list of
measures from the attainment SIP revision for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS submitted by New York on October 27, 2009, including CAIR program
rules, and the attainment SIP revision submitted by New York on
February 8, 2008 for the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, that are expected to
help achieve compliance with the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
New York also provided a commitment to the adoption of measures
identified by EPA as needed as to address the interstate transport for
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS upon EPA's completion of the
rulemaking.

III. What is EPA's evaluation of New Jersey's submittal?

    On January 20, 2010, New Jersey submitted a SIP revision to address
the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. New Jersey provided an analysis showing that
the State significantly contributed to seven northeastern and Mid-
Atlantic States (i.e. Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, New York, and Pennsylvania). New Jersey based its
assessment on a weight-of-evidence analysis approach using the results
of four modeling analysis to determine significant contribution: EPA
modeling performed for CAIR and the NOX SIP call,\3\
Regional Haze SIP modeling performed by the Northeast States for
Coordinated Air Use Management (NECAUM), and State Collaborative
Modeling performed by the Midwestern, Mid-Atlantic, and Northeastern
States to estimate interstate impacts and assess future control
programs for ozone and particulate matter standards. New Jersey
included a list of measures that were recently adopted by the State to
reduce PM2.5, SO2, NOX, and VOC
emissions. In its SIP revision, New Jersey indicated that it was
confident that these actions were more than adequate to address its
contribution to downwind areas. New Jersey also provided a list of
measures that it was either proposing or evaluating that would further
reduce PM2.5 emissions. However, modeling conducted by EPA
for the proposed Transport Rule demonstrates that emissions from New
Jersey significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in downwind
areas. EPA's 2009 Guidance directed that a State's SIP submission
pertaining to the requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) must be
supported by an adequate technical analysis. In the 2009 Guidance, EPA
recommended the various types of information that could be relevant to
support a State's SIP submission. EPA has determined that the New
Jersey demonstration does not meet the requirements of

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) because the State did not evaluate or demonstrate
with a technical analysis that the emissions reduction measures
provided in the SIP revision assure that New Jersey does not contribute
significantly to nonattainment, or interfere with maintenance of the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Additionally, the SIP submittal
did not go through public notice and comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In October, 1998, EPA finalized the ``Finding of Significant
Contribution and Rulemaking for Certain States in the Ozone
Transport Assessment Group Region for Purposes of Reducing Regional
Transport of Ozone''--commonly called the ``NOX SIP
Call.'' See 63 FR 57356 (October 27, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The submitted provisions are severable. Therefore, EPA is proposing
to disapprove those provisions which address the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
demonstration and to take no action at this time on the remainder of
the demonstration.
    Under section 179(a) of the CAA, final disapproval of a submittal
that addresses a requirement of a Part D Plan (42 U.S.C. 7501-515) or
is required in response to a finding of substantial inadequacy as
described in 7410(k)(5) (SIP call) starts a sanctions clock. The
provisions in the submittal we are disapproving were not submitted to
meet either of those requirements. Therefore, if EPA takes final action
to disapprove this submittal, no sanctions will be triggered.
    The full or partial disapproval of a State implementation plan
revision triggers the requirement under section 110(c) that EPA
promulgate a FIP no later than 2 years from the date of the disapproval
unless the State corrects the deficiency, and the Administrator
approves the plan or plan revision before the Administrator promulgates
such FIP. The proposed Transport Rule, when final, is the FIP that EPA
intends to implement for the State.

IV. What is EPA's evaluation of New York's submittal?

    On March 23, 2010, New York submitted a SIP revision to address the
requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. New York indicated that emission reductions
from measures proposed in the attainment SIP revision submitted by New
York on October 27, 2009 for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, including
CAIR program rules, are expected to help achieve compliance with the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. New York further stated that all
of the measures are expected to be adequate based on EPA's prior CAIR
assessment, the effects of New York's attainment SIP revision for the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, the attainment SIP revision submitted by
New York on February 8, 2008 for the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, and the
supporting effects of New York's permitting programs. The State of New
York also commits to the adoption of measures identified by EPA as
needed as to address the interstate transport for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS upon EPA's completion of the rulemaking.
    The modeling conducted by EPA for the proposed Transport Rule
demonstrates that emissions from New York significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS in downwind areas. EPA's 2009 Guidance directed
that a State's SIP submission pertaining to the requirement of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) must be supported by an adequate technical analysis.
EPA recommended the various types of information that could be relevant
to support a State's SIP submission. The State did not evaluate or
demonstrate with a technical analysis that the emission reduction
measures provided in the SIP revision assure that New York does not
contribute significantly to, or interfere with maintenance of the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The State's submittal indicates that it
is meeting its 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) obligations with respect to the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in part by virtue of the continuing
applicability of CAIR program requirements at both the Federal and
State levels. However, CAIR was promulgated before the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS were revised in 2006 and does not address
interstate transport with respect to the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS.\4\ Thus, EPA's 2009 Guidance explicitly notes that reliance on
CAIR cannot be used to comply with section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the
respective 2006 NAAQS. Because New York's submittal relies on CAIR to
address the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS this submission is deficient. Several States
claim that controls planned for, or already installed on, sources
within the State to meet the CAIR provisions satisfied section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
However, States will not be able to permanently rely upon the emissions
reductions predicted by CAIR, because EPA needs to address the concerns
of the Court as outlined in its decision remanding CAIR. For this
reason, EPA cannot approve New York's SIP submission pertaining to the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) because it relies on CAIR
for emission reduction measures. Based upon our evaluation, EPA is
proposing to disapprove the New York SIP revision because it does not
meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Further, as explained above and in the Transport Rule
proposal [75 FR 45210 (August 2, 2010)], the DC Circuit in North
Carolina v. EPA found that EPA's quantification of States'
significant contribution and interference with maintenance in CAIR
was improper and remanded the rule to EPA. CAIR remains in effect
only temporarily.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The submitted provisions are severable from each other. Therefore,
EPA is proposing to disapprove those provisions that relate to the
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) demonstration and to take no action on the remainder
of the demonstration at this time.
    Under section 179(a) of the CAA, final disapproval of a submittal
that addresses a requirement of a Part D Plan (42 U.S.C. 7501-7515) or
is required in response to a finding of substantial inadequacy as
described in section 7410(k)(5) of the Act (SIP call) starts a
sanctions clock. The provisions in the submittal we are disapproving
were not submitted to meet either of those requirements. Therefore, if
EPA takes final action to disapprove this submittal, no sanctions will
be triggered.
    The full or partial disapproval of a State implementation plan
revision triggers the requirement under section 110(c) that EPA
promulgate a FIP no later than 2 years from the date of the
disapproval, unless the State corrects the deficiency, and the
Administrator approves the plan or plan revision before the
Administrator promulgates such FIP. The proposed Transport Rule, when
final, is the FIP that EPA intends to implement for the State.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to act on State law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by State law.

A. 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.

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.,
because this proposed SIP disapproval under section 110 and subchapter
I, part D of the Clean Air Act will not in-and-of itself create any new
information collection

burdens but simply disapproves certain State requirements for inclusion
into the SIP. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements 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 not-for-profit enterprises, 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 as
defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13
CFR 121.201; (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 proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule does not
impose any requirements or create impacts on small entities. This
proposed SIP disapproval under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of
the Clean Air Act will not in-and-of itself create any new requirements
but simply disapproves certain State requirements for inclusion into
the SIP. Accordingly, it affords no opportunity for EPA to fashion for
small entities less burdensome compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables or exemptions from all or part of the rule. The fact that
the Clean Air Act prescribes that various consequences (e.g., higher
offset requirements) may or will flow from this disapproval does not
mean that EPA either can or must conduct a regulatory flexibility
analysis for this action. Therefore, this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of this
proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related
to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for State, local, or Tribal governments or the private
sector.'' EPA has determined that the proposed disapproval action does
not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of
$100 million or more to either State, local, or Tribal governments in
the aggregate, or to the private sector. This action proposes to
disapprove pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and
imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State,
local, or Tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from
this action.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    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, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    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, because it merely disapproves
certain State requirements for inclusion into the SIP 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, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have Tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP
EPA is proposing to disapprove would not apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial
direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law. 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 is not an
economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety
risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This proposed SIP disapproval under section 110 and subchapter I, part
D of the Clean Air Act will not in-and-of itself create any new
regulations but simply disapproves certain State requirements for
inclusion into the SIP.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions 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.
    The EPA believes that this action is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of NTTAA because application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act.

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 lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this proposed action. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's
role is to approve or disapprove State choices, based on the criteria
of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely proposes to
disapproves certain State requirements for inclusion into the SIP under
section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act and will not
in-and-of itself create any new requirements. Accordingly, it does not
provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects,
using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive
Order 12898.

Statutory Authority

    The statutory authority for this action is provided by sections 110
of the CAA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7410).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Particulate matter.

    Dated: January 4, 2011.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2011-1624 Filed 1-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P