Exhibits from the December 1, 2001, FACOSH meeting

Ex. 1	Communication from Dennis Bushta, FACOSH management
representative, giving his proxy vote to Curtis Bowling, FACOSH
management representative

Ex. 2	Communication from Donald Bathurst, FACOSH management
representative, giving his proxy vote to Curtis Bowling, FACOSH
management representative

Ex. 3	Communication from William “Chico” McGill, labor
representative, giving his proxy vote to William Dougan, labor
representative

Ex. 4	Agenda for the December 1, 2011, FACOSH meeting

Ex. 5	Office of Federal Agency Program briefing memo to FACOSH members
about the December 1, 2011, FACOSH meeting

Ex. 6	Report and Recommendations on Occupational Exposure Limits from
the Emerging Issues Subcommittee

Ex. 7	PowerPoint on the Subcommittee Report on Occupational Exposure
Limits

Ex. 8	FACOSH Training Recommendations Approved by Secretary of Labor
Hilda Solis

Ex. 9	Office of Personnel Management Plan and Timeline on the
Development of Qualification Standards

Ex. 10	PowerPoint on Recent Developments in the Federal Employees’
Compensation Act presented by Mr. Gary Steinberg

Ex. 11	Federal Agency Targeting Inspection Program, 2008-11

Ex. 12	2011 Federal Training Week Schedule and Attendance Numbers

Ex. 13	Directory of Field Federal Safety and Health Councils

Ex. 14	2010 Field Federal Safety and Health Council National Office
Award Recipients


                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

            DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                    OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                             WASHINGTON, DC

                                   	Issued by the Department of
Transportation on March 12, 2004

		       NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2002-14049

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of  Polar Air Cargo, Inc.     filed   2/24/2004   for:

XX  Adjustment to its Hong-Kong fifth-freedom frequency allocation and
U.S. selection of points as follows:

Order 2003-9-9 allocated Polar Air Cargo, Inc. three frequencies for
services in the Delhi/Penang-Hong Kong fifth-freedom market.  Polar
began those services, but suspended operations due to too few
frequencies for connections and due to issues with the Hong Kong Civil
Aviation Department regarding the scope of Polar’s operating
flexibility.  Polar seeks permission to use these frequencies for
Jakarta-Hong Kong service instead of Delhi/Penang service.  Polar states
that this request would not change the number of Hong Kong fifth-freedom
frequencies allocated to Polar and notes that no other carrier requested
Jakarta service in the proceeding allocating the frequencies.  Polar
believes that its request for an adjustment could be granted without
prejudice to any other carrier.

No answers were filed to the application.

Applicant rep:    Jeffrey A. Manley<PHONE_NUMBER>      DOT Analyst:
Linda Senese<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken:  March 12,  2004.

Action taken by:   PAUL L. GRETCH

		     Director, Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the October 19, 2002,
Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the United States
and the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the
People’s Republic of China, and with the air transport agreement
between the Government of the United States and the Government of the
Republic of Indonesia.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:     XX  Holder’s
Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity

	      XX  Conditions stated ordering paragraphs 2 and 3 in Order
2003-9-9

 (See Reverse Side)

2

________________________________________________________________________
____________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the exemption was consistent with the public
interest, and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted or dismissed, we denied all requests in the
referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 4 (Friday, January 6, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 983-985]
[FR Doc No: 2023-00014]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 890

[Docket No. FDA-2022-N-3184]

Medical Devices; Physical Medicine Devices; Classification of the
Virtual Reality Behavioral Therapy Device for Pain Relief

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).

ACTION: Final amendment; final order.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) is
classifying the virtual reality behavioral therapy device for pain
relief into class II (special controls). The special controls that
apply to the device type are identified in this order and will be part
of the codified language for the virtual reality behavioral therapy
device for pain relief's classification. We are taking this action
because we have determined that classifying the device into class II
(special controls) will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness of the device. We believe this action will also enhance
patients' access to beneficial innovative devices.

DATES: This order is effective January 6, 2023. The classification was
applicable on November 16, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kaitlin Olsen, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 4212, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Upon request, FDA has classified the virtual reality behavioral
therapy device for pain relief as class II (special controls), which we
have determined will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness. In addition, we believe this action will enhance
patients' access to beneficial innovation, in part by placing the
device into a lower device class than the automatic class III
assignment.
    The automatic assignment of class III occurs by operation of law
and without any action by FDA, regardless of the level of risk posed by
the new device. Any device that was not in commercial distribution
before May 28, 1976, is automatically classified as, and remains
within, class III and requires premarket approval unless and until FDA
takes an action to classify or reclassify the device (see 21 U.S.C.
360c(f)(1)). We refer to these devices as ``postamendments devices''
because they were not in commercial distribution prior to the date of
enactment of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976, which amended the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).
    FDA may take a variety of actions in appropriate circumstances to
classify or reclassify a device into class I or II. We may issue an
order finding a new device to be substantially equivalent under section
513(i) of the FD&C Act (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(i)) to a predicate device
that does not require premarket approval. We determine whether a new
device is substantially equivalent to a predicate device by means of
the procedures for premarket notification under section 510(k) of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360(k)) and part 807 (21 CFR part 807).
    FDA may also classify a device through ``De Novo'' classification,
a common name for the process authorized under section 513(f)(2) of the
FD&C Act. Section 207 of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization
Act of 1997 (Pub. L. 105-115) established the first procedure for De
Novo classification. Section 607 of the Food and Drug Administration
Safety and Innovation Act (Pub. L. 112-144) modified the De Novo
application process by adding a second procedure. A device sponsor may
utilize either procedure for De Novo classification.
    Under the first procedure, the person submits a 510(k) for a device
that has not previously been classified. After

receiving an order from FDA classifying the device into class III under
section 513(f)(1) of the FD&C Act, the person then requests a
classification under section 513(f)(2).
    Under the second procedure, rather than first submitting a 510(k)
and then a request for classification, if the person determines that
there is no legally marketed device upon which to base a determination
of substantial equivalence, that person requests a classification under
section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act.
    Under either procedure for De Novo classification, FDA is required
to classify the device by written order within 120 days. The
classification will be according to the criteria under section
513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act. Although the device was automatically placed
within class III, the De Novo classification is considered to be the
initial classification of the device.
    When FDA classifies a device into class I or II via the De Novo
process, the device can serve as a predicate for future devices of that
type, including for 510(k)s (see section 513(f)(2)(B)(i) of the FD&C
Act). As a result, other device sponsors do not have to submit a De
Novo request or premarket approval application to market a
substantially equivalent device (see section 513(i) of the FD&C Act,
defining ``substantial equivalence''). Instead, sponsors can use the
less-burdensome 510(k) process, when necessary, to market their device.

II. De Novo Classification

    On March 30, 2021, FDA received AppliedVR Inc.'s request for De
Novo classification of the EaseVRx. FDA reviewed the request in order
to classify the device under the criteria for classification set forth
in section 513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act.
    We classify devices into class II if general controls by themselves
are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness, but there is sufficient information to establish special
controls that, in combination with the general controls, provide
reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for
its intended use (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(a)(1)(B)). After review of the
information submitted in the request, we determined that the device can
be classified into class II with the establishment of special controls.
FDA has determined that these special controls, in addition to the
general controls, will provide reasonable assurance of the safety and
effectiveness of the device.
    Therefore, on November 16, 2021, FDA issued an order to the
requester classifying the device into class II. In this final order,
FDA is codifying the classification of the device by adding 21 CFR
890.5800.\1\ We have named the generic type of device virtual reality
behavioral therapy device for pain relief, and it is identified as a
device intended to provide behavioral therapy for patients with pain.
Therapy is administered via a virtual reality display that utilizes a
software program containing the behavioral therapy content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ FDA notes that the ``ACTION'' caption for this final order
is styled as ``Final amendment; final order,'' rather than ``Final
order.'' Beginning in December 2019, this editorial change was made
to indicate that the document ``amends'' the Code of Federal
Regulations. The change was made in accordance with the Office of
Federal Register's (OFR) interpretations of the Federal Register Act
(44 U.S.C. chapter 15), its implementing regulations (1 CFR 5.9 and
parts 21 and 22), and the Document Drafting Handbook.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDA has identified the following risks to health associated
specifically with this type of device and the measures required to
mitigate these risks in table 1.

Table 1--Virtual Reality Behavioral Therapy Device for Pain Relief Risks
                         and Mitigation Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Identified risks to health              Mitigation measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adverse tissue reaction................  Biocompatibility evaluation.
Electric shock or burn or interference   Electromagnetic compatibility
 with other devices.                      testing, and Electrical,
                                          mechanical, and thermal safety
                                          testing.
Nausea and motion sickness.............  Clinical performance testing,
                                          and Labeling.
Discomfort.............................  Clinical performance testing,
                                          and Labeling.
Ineffective treatment..................  Clinical performance testing,
                                          Software verification,
                                          validation, and hazard
                                          analysis, and Labeling.
Use error or improper device use         Labeling.
 leading to a delay in treatment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDA has determined that special controls, in combination with the
general controls, address these risks to health and provide reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness. For a device to fall within this
classification, and thus avoid automatic classification in class III,
it would have to comply with the special controls named in this final
order. The necessary special controls appear in the regulation codified
by this order. This device is subject to premarket notification
requirements under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act.

III. Analysis of Environmental Impact

    The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) that this action is
of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This final order establishes special controls that refer to
previously approved collections of information found in other FDA
regulations and guidance. These collections of information are subject
to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The collections
of information in 21 CFR part 860, subpart D, regarding De Novo
classification have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0844;
the collections of information in 21 CFR part 814, subparts A through
E, regarding premarket approval, have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0231; the collections of information in part 807, subpart
E, regarding premarket notification submissions, have been approved
under OMB control number 0910-0120; the collections of information in
21 CFR part 820, regarding quality system regulation, have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0073; and the collections of
information in 21 CFR part 801, regarding labeling, have been approved
under OMB control number 0910-0485.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 890

    Medical devices.

    Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner

of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 890 is amended as follows:

PART 890--PHYSICAL MEDICINE DEVICES

0
1. The authority citation for part 890 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 360l, 371.

0
2. Add Sec.  890.5800 to subpart F to read as follows:

Sec.  890.5800  Virtual reality behavioral therapy device for pain
relief.

    (a) Identification. A virtual reality behavioral therapy device for
pain relief is a device intended to provide behavioral therapy for
patients with pain. Therapy is administered via a virtual reality
display that utilizes a software program containing the behavioral
therapy content.
    (b) Classification. Class II (special controls). The special
controls for this device are:
    (1) Clinical performance testing under the labeled conditions for
use must validate the model of behavioral therapy as implemented by the
device and evaluate all adverse events.
    (2) The patient-contacting components of the device must be
demonstrated to be biocompatible.
    (3) Software verification, validation, and hazard analysis must be
performed.
    (4) Electromagnetic compatibility and electrical, mechanical, and
thermal safety testing must be performed.
    (5) Labeling must include the following:
    (i) A warning regarding the risk of nausea and motion sickness;
    (ii) A warning regarding the risk of discomfort from the device;
and
    (iii) A summary of the clinical testing with the device.

    Dated: January 3, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-00014 Filed 1-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: April 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 71)]
[Notices]
[Page 19424-19426]
[DOCID:fr14ap10-99]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2010-0005]

Request for Nominations To Serve on the Advisory Committee on
Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH)

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for nominations to serve on the Advisory Committee on
Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH).

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

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and
Health invites interested parties to submit nominations for membership
on ACCSH.

DATES: Nominations for ACCSH must be submitted (postmarked, sent,
transmitted, or received) by June 14, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may submit nominations and supporting materials by any
one of the following methods:
    Electronically: Nominations, including attachments, may be
submitted electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, the Federal e-
Rulemaking Portal. Follow the online instructions for submitting
nominations;
    Facsimile: If your nomination and supporting materials, including
attachments, do not exceed 10 pages, you may fax it to the OSHA Docket
Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>;
    Mail, express delivery, hand delivery, messenger or courier
service: Submit your nomination and supporting materials to the OSHA
Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2010-0005, U.S. Department of Labor, N-
2625, 200

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
2350 (TTY number<PHONE_NUMBER>). Deliveries (hand, express mail,
messenger, and courier service) are accepted during the Department of
Labor's and OSHA Docket Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m.-4:45
p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All nominations and supporting materials must include
the agency name and docket number for this Federal Register notice
(Docket No. OSHA-2010-0005). Because of security-related procedures,
submitting nominations by regular mail may result in a significant
delay in their receipt. Please contact the OSHA Docket Office for
information about security procedures for submitting nominations by
hand delivery, express delivery, and messenger or courier service. For
additional information on submitting nominations, see the ``Public
Participation'' heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below.
    All submissions in response to this Federal Register notice,
including personal information provided, will be posted without change
at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions interested
parties about submitting personal information such as social security
numbers and birthdates.
    Docket: To read or download submissions in response to this Federal
Register notice, go to Docket No. OSHA-2010-0005 at http://
www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some documents (e.g.,
copyrighted material) are not publicly available to read or download
through that Webpage. All submissions, including copyrighted material,
are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For press inquiries: Ms. Jennifer
Ashley, Director, OSHA, Office of Communications, U.S. Department of
Labor, Room N-3647, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For general information: Mr. Michael M.X. Buchet, OSHA, Office of
Construction Services, Directorate of Construction, Room N-3468, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20210; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health invites interested parties to submit
nominations for membership on ACCSH.
    Background. ACCSH is a continuing advisory committee established
under Section 107 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act
(Construction Safety Act)(40 U.S.C. 3704(d)(4)), to advise the
Secretary of Labor in formulating construction safety and health
standards as well as on policy matters arising under the Construction
Safety Act (CSA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
(OSH Act)(29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.). In particular, 29 CFR 1911.10(a) and
1912.3(a) provide that the Assistant Secretary shall consult ACCSH
whenever the Agency proposes any safety or health standard that affects
the construction industry.
    ACCSH operates in accordance with the CSA, the OSH Act, the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA)(5 U.S.C. App. 2), and regulations issued
pursuant to those statutes (29 CFR part 1912, 41 CFR part 102-3). ACCSH
generally meets two to four times a year.
    ACCSH membership. ACCSH is comprised of 15 members appointed by the
Assistant Secretary. The categories of ACCSH membership and the number
of new members to be appointed are:
     Five members who are qualified by experience and
affiliation to present the viewpoint of employers in the construction
industry: Two employer representatives will be appointed;
     Five members who are similarly qualified to present the
viewpoint of employees in the construction industry: Two employee
representatives will be appointed;
     Two representatives of State safety and health agencies:
One representative of State safety and health agencies will be
appointed;
     Two public members, qualified by knowledge and experience
to make a useful contribution to the work of ACCSH, such as those who
have professional or technical experience and competence with
occupational safety and health in the construction industry: One public
representative will be appointed; and
     One representative designated by the Department of Health
and Human Services and appointed by the Secretary of Labor serves an
indefinite term: No appointment is needed.
    ACCSH members serve staggered two-year terms, unless they resign,
cease to be qualified, become unable to serve, or are removed (29 CFR
1912.3(e)). A qualified ACCSH member whose term has expired may
continue to serve until a successor is appointed. ACCSH members may be
appointed to successive terms. Any member absent from two consecutive
ACCSH meetings may be removed or replaced. No member of ACCSH, other
than members who represent employers or employees, shall have an
economic interest in any proposed rule that affects the construction
industry (29 CFR 1912.6).
    The Department of Labor is committed to equal opportunity in the
workplace and seeks broad-based and diverse ACCSH membership. Any
interested person or organizations may nominate one or more individuals
for membership on ACCSH. Interested persons also are invited and
encouraged to submit statements in support of particular nominees.
    Submission requirements. Nominations must include the following
information:
    (1) Nominee's contact information (address, telephone, e-mail) and
current employment or position;
    (2) Nominee's resume or curriculum vitae, including prior
membership on ACCSH and other relevant organizations and associations;
    (3) Categories of membership (employer, employee, public, State
safety and health agency) that the nominee is qualified to represent;
    (4) A summary of background, experience and qualifications that
addresses the nominee's suitability for each of the nominated
membership categories;
    (5) Articles or other documents the nominee has authored that
indicate the nominee's knowledge, experience and expertise in
occupational safety and health, particularly as it pertains to the
construction industry; and
    (6) A statement that the nominee is aware of the nomination, is
willing to regularly attend and participate in ACCSH meetings, and has
no conflicts of interest that would preclude membership on ACCSH.
    Member selection. Information received through this nomination
process in addition to other relevant sources of information will
assist the Assistant Secretary in selecting members for ACCSH. In
selecting ACCSH members, the Assistant Secretary will consider
individuals nominated in response to this Federal Register notice as
well as other qualified individuals. OSHA will publish the list of new
ACCSH members in the Federal Register.

Public Participation

    Instructions for submitting nominations: All nominations,
supporting documents, attachments and other materials must identify the
Agency name and the docket number for this notice (Docket No. OSHA-
2010-

0005). You may submit materials: (1) Electronically at http://
www.regulations.gov, (2) by FAX, or (3) by hard copy. You may
supplement electronic submissions by attaching electronic files.
Alternatively, if you wish to supplement electronic submissions with
hard copy documents you must submit them to the OSHA Docket Office and
clearly identify your electronic submission by Agency name and docket
number (Docket No. OSHA-2010-0005), so that the materials can be
attached to the electronic submission.
    Materials submitted by mail may experience significant delays
because of security-related procedures. For information about security
procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand, express
delivery, messenger or courier service, please contact the OSHA Docket
Office.
    All submissions, including personal information provided, will be
posted in the docket without change, therefore, OSHA cautions
interested parties about submitting personal information such as social
security numbers and birth dates.
    Guidance on submitting nominations and supporting materials is
available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov and from the OSHA
Docket Office.
    Access to docket. All submissions in response to this Federal
Register notice are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download from that Web page. All submissions,
including materials not available on-line, are available for inspection
and copying at the OSHA Docket Office (see ADDRESSES section). For
information about accessing materials in Docket No. OSHA-2010-0005,
including materials not available on-line, contact the OSHA Docket
Office.
    Access to Federal Register notice. Electronic copies of this
Federal Register document are available at http://www.regulations.gov.
This document, as well as news releases and other relevant information,
is available at OSHA's Web page at http://www.osha.gov.

Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, PhD, MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice
under the authority granted by section 7 of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 656), section 107 of the Contract Work
Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 3704), the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2), 29 CFR part 1912, 41 CFR part 102-3,
and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2007 (72 FR 31160).

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 7th day of April 2010.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2010-8531 Filed 4-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


3 1 CHAPTER THREE TOTAL BURDEN AND COST SAVINGS This chapter presents the total burden and cost savings associated with the proposed Tier III rule. Because the proposed rule will affect all TRI reports, the universe of affected forms considered in this analysis equals the number of forms filed in RY2002, the most current year for which TRI data are available. First year reporters under the proposed rule are approximated by the number of first year reporters in RY2002. Total burden and cost savings are estimated separately for PBT Form Rs, non PBT Form Rs, and non PBT Form As. Table 3 1 summarizes the number and type of report in RY 2002.

TABLE 3 1 UNIVERSE OF AFFECTED FORMS UNDER THE PROPOSED RULE Form R Form A First Year Non  PBT Forms 880 324 PBT Forms 458 NA*

Subsequent Years Non PBT Forms 65,006 11,594 PBT Forms 15,085 NA*

* Facilities may not use Form A for PBT chemicals.

Following the methodology presented in Chapter Two, unit burden and cost savings were derived. This information is then combined with the number of affected Form Rs and As to estimate total burden and cost savings. Tables 3 2 and 3 3 show the national burden and cost saving estimates for first year reporters and subsequent reporters, respectively. Table 3 2 shows an estimated total burden savings of 2,034 hours and total cost savings of $ 87,423 for first year reporters as a result of the proposed rule. Subsequent year reporters are estimated to experience a total burden savings of 43,140 hours and total cost savings of $ 1,772,217 as shown in Table 3 3. 3 2 TABLE 3 2 NATIONAL BURDEN AND COST SAVINGS FOR FIRST YEAR REPORTERS Form Type Number of Forms Burden Savings per Form ( hours) Total Burden Savings ( hours) Cost Saving per Form Total Cost Savings Form R Non PBT Forms 880 0.96 842 $ 40.89 $ 35,979 PBT Forms 458 2.23 1,023 $ 97.05 $ 44,449 Form A Non PBT Forms 324 0.52 168 $ 21.59 $ 6,994 Total 1,662 2,034 $ 87,423 Note: Due to rounding, the total may not equal the sum of the column.

TABLE 3 3 NATIONAL BURDEN AND COST SAVINGS FOR SUBSEQUENT YEAR REPORTERS Form Type Number of Forms Burden Savings per Form ( hours) Total Burden Savings ( hours) Cost Saving per Form Total Cost Savings Form R Form R Non PBT 65,006 0.39 25,167 $ 15.72 $ 1,021,833 Form R PBT 15,085 1.11 16,681 $ 46.99 $ 708,841 Form A Form A Non PBT 11,594 0.11 1,292 $ 3.58 $ 41,543 Total 91,685 43,140 $ 1,772,217 Note: Due to rounding, the total may not equal the sum of the column.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 33 (Friday, February 19, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8550-8551]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03518]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-02736.

Extension:
    Form 18-K, SEC File No. 270-108, OMB Control No. 3235-0120.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Form 18-K (17 CFR 249.318) is an annual report form used by foreign
governments or political subdivisions of foreign governments that have
securities listed on a United States exchange. The information to be
collected is intended to ensure the adequacy and public availability of
information available to investors. We estimate that Form 18-K takes
approximately 8 hours to prepare and is filed by approximately 35

respondents for a total annual reporting burden of 280 hours (8 hours
per response x 35 responses).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the performance of the
functions of the agency, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the
burden imposed by the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    Please direct your written comment to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: February 16, 2016.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-03518 Filed 2-18-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 71 (Friday, April 12, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21871-21879]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08667]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0580 FRL-9798-4]
RIN 2060-AM09

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Revision of the Venting
Prohibition for Specific Refrigerant Substitutes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to amend the
regulations promulgated as part of the National Recycling and Emission
Reduction Program under section 608 of the Clean Air Act. EPA is
proposing to exempt from the prohibition under section 608 on venting,
release and disposal certain refrigerant substitutes listed as
acceptable or acceptable subject to use conditions in regulations
promulgated as part of EPA's Significant New Alternative Policy Program
under section 612 of the Act on the basis of current evidence that
their venting, release and disposal does not pose a threat to the
environment.

DATES: Written comments on this proposed rule must be received by the
EPA Docket on or before on June 11, 2013. Any Party requesting a public
hearing must notify the contact listed below under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on April 29, 2013.
If a hearing is held, it will take place on or about May 7, 2013 at EPA
Headquarters in Washington, DC. EPA will post a notice in our Web site,
http://www.epa.gov/ozone/strathome.html, announcing further information
should a hearing take place.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0580. All documents in the docket are listed on the
www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (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
through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy from the EPA Air and
Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. This Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sally Hamlin Stratospheric Protection
Division, Office of Air and Radiation, MC 6205J, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposed action, if finalized as
proposed, would extend the exemption from the venting prohibition at 40
CFR 82.154(a)(1) to certain refrigerant substitutes in certain end-uses
for which EPA has found the refrigerant substitutes acceptable or
acceptable subject to use conditions under CAA section 612 and the
implementing regulations at 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart G. Specifically,
EPA is proposing to exempt from the venting prohibition isobutane (R-
600a) and R-441A, which were listed as acceptable, subject to use
conditions, as refrigerant substitutes in household refrigerators,
freezers, and combination refrigerators and freezers, and propane (R-
290), which was listed as acceptable, subject to use conditions, as a
refrigerant substitute in retail food refrigerators and freezers
(standalone units only).

Table of Contents

I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. What abbreviations and acronyms are used in this action?
C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. How does the national recycling and emission reduction program
work?
III. What is EPA's determination of whether venting, release or
disposal poses a threat to the environment?
IV. What revision to the venting prohibition is EPA proposing?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory 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 That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
VI. References

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Potentially regulated entities may include, but are not limited to,
the following.

  Table 1--Potentially Regulated Entities, by North American Industrial
                   Classification System (NAICS) Code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Description of regulated
         Category               NAICS Code              entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Services..................             811412  Appliance repair and
                                                maintenance.
Industry..................             333415  Manufacturers of
                                                refrigerators, freezers,
                                                and other refrigerating
                                                or freezing equipment,
                                                electric or other; heat
                                                pumps not elsewhere
                                                specified or included
                                                (NESOI); and parts
                                                thereof.
Industry..................     562920, 423930  Facilities separating and
                                                sorting recyclable
                                                materials from non-
                                                hazardous waste streams
                                                (e.g., scrap yards) and
                                                merchant wholesale
                                                distribution of
                                                industrial scrap and
                                                other recyclable
                                                materials.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide regarding entities likely to be regulated by this proposed
action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be
affected. To determine whether your company is regulated by this
action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria
contained in section 608 of the Clean Air Act (CAA, the Act) as
amended, and relevant implementing regulations at 40 CFR Part 82,
Subpart F. If you have any questions about whether this proposed action
applies to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding section, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What abbreviations and acronyms are used in this action?

ASHRAE--American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers
ANSI--American National Standards Institute
CAA--Clean Air Act
CAS--Chemical Abstracts Service
CBI--confidential business information
CFC--chlorofluorocarbon
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
EPA--United States Environmental Protection Agency
EO--Executive Order
FR--Federal Register
GWP--Global warming potential
HCFC-22--the chemical chlorodifluoromethane, CAS Reg No. 75-45-6
HCFC-142b--the chemical 1-chloro-1,1-difluoroethane, CAS Reg No. 75-
68-3
HFC--hydrofluorocarbon
HFC-134a--the chemical 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane, CAS Reg. No. 811-
97-2
IDLH--Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health
LFL--lower flammability limit
MVAC--motor vehicle air conditioning
NIOSH--National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
NPRM--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA--National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
ODP--ozone depletion potential
ODS--ozone-depleting substance
OMB--United States Office of Management and Budget
OSHA--United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PEL--Permissible Exposure Level
ppm--parts per million
REL--Recommended Exposure Level
RFA--Regulatory Flexibility Act
SBREFA--Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
SNAP--Significant New Alternatives Policy
STEL--Short Term Exposure Limit
TWA--Time Weighted Average
UMRA--Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

1. Confidential Business Information (CBI)
    Do not submit confidential business information (CBI) to EPA
through http://www.regulations.gov or email. Submit information that
you claim to be CBI to the person listed under the heading FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. Clearly mark the part 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 2.2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments
    When submitting comments, remember to do the following:
    (a) Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    (b) 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.
    (c) Explain why you agree or disagree with the proposal; suggest
alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.
    (d) Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used in preparing your comments.
    (e) If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    (f) Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    (g) Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    (h) Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. How does the national recycling and emission reduction program
work?

A. What are the statutory requirements under section 608 of the Clean
Air Act?

    Section 608 of the Act as amended, titled National Recycling and
Emission Reduction Program, requires EPA to establish regulations
governing the use and disposal of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) used
as refrigerants, such as certain chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), during the service, repair, or
disposal of appliances and industrial process refrigeration (IPR),
including air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment. Section 608
also prohibits any person in the course of maintaining, servicing,
repairing, or disposing of an appliance or industrial process
refrigeration, to knowingly vent or otherwise knowingly release or
dispose of such ODS used as refrigerants therein in a manner which
permits such substances to enter the environment. This prohibition
similarly applies to the venting, release, or disposal of substitutes
for such ODS used as refrigerants, unless the Administrator determines
that venting, releasing, or disposing of such a substitute does not
pose a threat to the environment.
    Section 608 is divided into three subsections. Briefly, section
608(a) requires EPA to promulgate regulations to reduce the use and the
emissions of class I substances (e.g., CFCs and halons) and class II
substances (HCFCs) to the lowest achievable level and to maximize the
recapture and recycling of such substances. Section 608(b) requires
that the regulations promulgated pursuant to subsection (a) contain
standards and requirements for the safe disposal of class I and class
II substances. Finally, section 608(c) contains self-effectuating
provisions that prohibit any person from knowingly venting, releasing
or disposing of any class I or class II substances, and their
substitutes, used as refrigerants in appliances or IPR in a manner
which permits such substances to enter the environment during
maintenance, repairing, servicing, or disposal of appliances or IPR.
    EPA's authority to propose the requirements in this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) is based on section 608. As noted above,
section 608(a) requires EPA to promulgate regulations regarding use and
disposal of class I and II substances to ``reduce the use and emission
of such substances to the lowest achievable level'' and ``maximize the
recapture and recycling of such substances.'' Section 608(a) further
provides that ``[s]uch regulations may include requirements to use
alternative substances (including substances which are not class I or
class II substances) * * * or to promote the use of safe alternatives
pursuant to section [612] or any combination of the foregoing.''
Section 608(c)(1) provides that, effective July 1, 1992, it is
``unlawful for any person, in the course of maintaining, servicing,
repairing, or disposing of an appliance or industrial process
refrigeration, to knowingly vent or otherwise knowingly release or
dispose of any class I or class II substance used as a refrigerant in
such appliance (or industrial process refrigeration) in a manner which
permits such substance to enter the environment.'' The statute exempts
from this self-effectuating prohibition ``[d]e minimis releases
associated with good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or safely
dispose'' of such a substance. To implement and enforce the venting
prohibition \1\, EPA, as codified in its regulations, interprets
releases to meet the criteria for exempted ``de minimis'' releases if
they occur when the recycling and recovery requirements of regulations
promulgated under sections 608 and 609 are followed. 40 CFR
82.154(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In this proposal, EPA sometimes uses the shorthand ``venting
prohibition'' to refer to the section 608(c) prohibition of
knowingly venting, releasing, or disposing of class I or class II
substances, and their substitutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Effective November 15, 1995, section 608(c)(2) of the Act extends
the prohibition in section 608(c)(1) to knowingly venting or otherwise
knowingly releasing or disposing of any refrigerant substitute for
class I or class II substances by any person maintaining, servicing,
repairing, or disposing of appliances or IPR. This prohibition applies
to any such substitute substance unless the Administrator determines
that such venting, releasing, or disposing ``does not pose a threat to
the environment.'' Thus, section 608(c) provides EPA authority to
promulgate regulations to interpret, implement, and enforce this
venting prohibition, including authority to implement section 608(c)(2)
by exempting certain substitutes for class I or class II substances
from the prohibition when the Administrator determines that such
venting, release, or disposal does not pose a threat to the
environment.

B. What are the regulations against venting, releasing or disposing of
refrigerant substitutes?

    Final regulations promulgated under section 608 of the Act,
published on May 14, 1993 (58 FR 28660), established a recycling
program for ozone-depleting refrigerants recovered during the servicing
and maintenance of air-conditioning and refrigeration appliances. In
the same 1993 final rule, EPA also promulgated regulations implementing
the section 608(c) prohibition on knowingly venting, releasing or
disposing of class I or class II controlled substances.\2\ These
regulations substantially reduced the use and emissions of ozone-
depleting refrigerants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ A list of ozone-depleting substances is available in
Appendices A and B to Subpart A of Part 82.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 11, 1998, EPA proposed to implement and clarify the
requirements of section 608(c)(2) of the Act by clarifying how the
prohibition on venting extends to substitutes for CFC and HCFC
refrigerants (63 FR 32044). EPA issued a final rule March 12, 2004 (69
FR 11946) and a second rule on April 13, 2005 (70 FR 19273) clarifying

how the venting prohibition in section 608(c) applies to refrigerant
substitutes (e.g., hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons
(PFCs) in part or whole) during the maintenance, service, repair, or
disposal of appliances. These regulations were codified at 40 CFR part
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
82, subpart F. The regulation at 40 CFR 82.154(a) states that:

``[e]ffective June 13, 2005, no person maintaining, servicing,
repairing, or disposing of appliances may knowingly vent or
otherwise release into the environment any refrigerant or substitute
\3\ from such appliances, with the exception of the following
substitutes in the following end-uses:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Substitute,'' as defined at 40 CFR part 82, subpart F, is
``any chemical or product, whether existing or new, that is used by
any person as an EPA approved replacement for a class I or II ozone-
depleting substance in a given refrigeration or air-conditioning
end-use.'' 40 CFR 82.152.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    i. Ammonia in commercial refrigeration, or in [IPR] or in
absorption units;
    ii. Hydrocarbons in [IPR] (processing of hydrocarbons);
    iii. Chlorine in [IPR] (processing of chlorine and chlorine
compounds);
    iv. Carbon dioxide in any application;
    v. Nitrogen in any application; or
    vi. Water in any application.
    (2) The knowing release of a refrigerant or non-exempt
substitute subsequent to its recovery from an appliance shall be
considered a violation of this prohibition. De minimis releases
associated with good faith attempts to recycle or recover
refrigerants or non-exempt substitutes are not subject to this
prohibition.''

    As explained in EPA's earlier rulemaking concerning refrigerant
substitutes, EPA has not promulgated regulations requiring
certification of refrigerant recycling/recovery equipment intended for
use with substitutes to date (70 FR 19275; April 13, 2005). However, as
EPA has noted, the lack of a current regulatory provision should not be
considered as an exemption from the venting prohibition for substitutes
that are not expressly exempted in Sec.  82.154(a). Id. EPA has also
noted that, in accordance with section 608(c) of the Act, the
regulatory prohibition at Sec.  82.154(a) reflects the statutory
references to de minimis releases of substitutes as they pertain to
good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose of non-
exempted substitutes. Id.

III. What is EPA's determination of whether venting, release or
disposal poses a threat to the environment?

    Section 608(c)(2) extends the prohibition on venting in section
608(c)(1) to substitutes for class I or class II substances, unless the
Administrator determines that such venting, releasing, or disposing
does not pose a threat to the environment. As explained above, in
earlier rulemakings, EPA has exempted some refrigerant substitutes in
specified end uses from the venting prohibition under CAA section 608,
as addressed under 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1).
    Today EPA is proposing a determination to exempt from the venting
prohibition three hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes that EPA has
previously listed as acceptable or acceptable subject to use conditions
in the specified end uses under the Significant New Alternatives Policy
(SNAP) program (76 FR 78832, December 20, 2011) as the venting,
release, or disposal of these substitutes does not pose a threat to the
environment. Specifically, EPA is proposing to exempt from the venting
prohibition isobutane (R-600a) and R-441A, which were listed as
acceptable, subject to use conditions, as refrigerant substitutes in
household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrigerators and
freezers, and propane (R-290), which was listed as acceptable, subject
to use conditions, as a refrigerant substitute in retail food
refrigerators and freezers (standalone units only).
    This proposed exemption to the venting prohibition would not apply
to refrigerants that are hydrocarbon blends containing any amount of
any CFC, HCFC, HFC\4\, or PFC. EPA is seeking comment on this proposal
that blends of hydrocarbons with any amount of any CFC, HCFC, HFC, or
PFC not be exempt from the current prohibition on venting, release or
disposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) also include Hydrofluoroolefins
(HFOs), which have at least one double bond between carbon atoms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SNAP program, established under section 612 of the CAA,
requires EPA to publish a list of substitutes for class I and class II
substances that are unacceptable for certain uses and those that are
acceptable for specific uses. In identifying acceptable substitutes
under section 612(c), EPA is required to consider whether those
substitutes present a significantly greater risk to human health and
the environment as compared with other substitutes that are currently
or potentially available. On March 18, 1994, EPA published the original
rulemaking under section 612 of the CAA (59 FR 13044) which established
the process for administering the SNAP program and issued EPA's first
lists identifying acceptable and unacceptable substitutes in major
industrial use sectors. The regulations are codified at 40 CFR Part 82,
subpart G.
    For purposes of section 608(c)(2) of the CAA, EPA considers two
factors in determining whether or not venting, release, or disposal of
a substitute refrigerant during the maintenance, service, repair or
disposing of appliances poses a threat to the environment. See 69 FR
11948 (March 12, 2004). First, EPA determines whether venting, release,
or disposal of the substitute refrigerant poses a threat to the
environment due to inherent characteristics of the refrigerant, such as
global warming potential. Second, EPA determines whether and to what
extent such venting, release, or disposal actually takes place during
the maintenance, servicing, repairing, or disposing of appliances, and
to what extent such venting, release, or disposal is controlled by
other authorities, regulations, or practices. To the extent that such
releases are adequately controlled by other authorities, EPA defers to
those authorities.
    In addressing these two factors, the analysis below discusses the
potential environmental impacts and existing authorities, practices,
and controls for isobutane (R-600a) and R-441A as substitutes in
household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrigerators and
freezers; and propane (R-290) as a substitute in retail food
refrigerators and freezers (standalone units only). These refrigerants
and end-uses were evaluated and determined to be acceptable or
acceptable subject to use conditions under SNAP in the December 20,
2011 final rule.

A. Potential Environmental Impacts

    In the December 20, 2011 SNAP rule, EPA's analysis of environmental
impacts for these refrigerant substitutes discussed four types of
environmental risks: ozone depletion potential, global warming
potential, volatile organic compound (VOC) effects, and ecosystem risks
(76 FR 78838). For this proposal, EPA's discussion of potential
environmental impacts for these refrigerant substitutes similarly
focuses on the environmental risks associated with ozone depletion
potential, global warming potential, VOC effects, and ecosystem risks.
    Hydrocarbons are VOCs. Hydrocarbons as VOCs can contribute to
ground-level ozone (smog) formation and therefore indirectly contribute
to global warming since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
has identified ground-level ozone as a greenhouse gas.\5\ EPA's 1994
risk screen document, which was

developed for the initial rule establishing the SNAP program listing
hydrocarbons acceptable for an end-use (i.e., industrial process
refrigeration--processing of hydrocarbons), describes the potential
emissions of VOCs from all substitutes for all end-uses in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning sector as likely to be insignificant
relative to VOCs from all other sources (i.e., other industries, mobile
sources, and biogenic sources).\6\ A more recent analysis indicates
that in the extremely unlikely event that all appliances in end-uses
recently found acceptable or acceptable with use conditions under SNAP
(76 FR 78838; December 20, 2011) were to leak their entire hydrocarbon
charge over the course of a year, the resulting increase in annual VOC
emissions, as a percent of all annual VOC emissions in the U.S., would
be negligible.\7\ Therefore, the use of these hydrocarbons in the
household refrigeration and retail food refrigeration end-uses is
sufficiently small that it would not have a noticeable impact on local
air quality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2001.
    \6\ EPA, 1994. Significant New Alternative Policy Technical
Background Document.
    \7\ As EPA noted in the December 20, 2011 SNAP rule, as a
percent of annual VOC emissions in the U.S., this represents
approximately 5 x 10-\6\ percent (for isobutane in the
household food refrigeration end-use), 5 x 10-\6\ percent
(for propane in the retail food refrigeration end-use), and 3 x
10-\7\ percent (for R-441A in the household food
refrigeration end-use) (76 FR 78838).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The global warming potential (GWP) of hydrocarbons is very low
(i.e., less than 10). When compared to the GWP of other refrigerant
substitutes, the GWPs of hydrocarbons are hundreds or thousands of
times smaller, signifying significantly reduced global warming impact
on a molecule per molecule basis. For example, the refrigerant
substitutes R134A, R404A, R407C, and R410A have a GWP of 1430, 3920,
1770, and 2090, respectively over a 100 year time horizon compared with
the hydrocarbons in this rule that have a GWP of less than 10
integrated over a 100 year time horizon.\8\ As noted in the preceding
paragraph, the volume of hydrocarbons listed as acceptable or
acceptable with use conditions under SNAP that could be released from
the specific uses relevant to this proposal would be small. Relative to
the enormous volume of carbon dioxide (CO2) that is emitted
to the atmosphere, with its global warming potential (GWP) of one (1),
the volume of hydrocarbons that are listed as refrigerant substitutes
under SNAP that might be released to the atmosphere is so small that it
would have a negligible impact on the global climate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Global warming potential values are from the IPCC Fourth
Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007 (AR4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hydrocarbons have an ozone depletion potential (ODP) of zero.\9\
The hydrocarbons listed as acceptable or acceptable with use conditions
under SNAP do not contain chlorine or bromine, the two most prominent
elements in chemicals that deplete stratospheric ozone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ A chemical's ODP is the ratio of its impact on stratospheric
ozone compared to the impact of an identical mass of
trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11). The ODP of CFC-11 is defined as
1.0. The GWP quantifies a substance's potential integrated climate
forcing relative to carbon dioxide (CO2) over a specified
time horizon. The 100-year integrated GWPs of isobutane, propane,
and hydrocarbon blend R-441A were estimated to be 8, 3, and less
than 5, respectively (76 FR 78838; December 20, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, EPA expects that releases of these hydrocarbons into the
environment from their use as refrigerant substitutes will not pose
significant ecosystem risks. Hydrocarbons are volatile and break down
in the atmosphere into naturally-occurring compounds in a relatively
short time frame, with atmospheric lifetimes between 7-8 days. Due to
their fast interaction with OH radicals in the atmosphere and resulting
decomposition, and the known degradation products from this reaction
with OH radicals, EPA does not expect any significant amount of
deposition to adversely affect aquatic or terrestrial ecosystems (76 FR
78838; December 20, 2011).
    Based on this analysis, EPA is proposing to find that the venting,
release, or disposal of isobutane (R-600a) and R-441A as substitutes in
household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrigerators and
freezers; and propane (R-290) as a substitute in retail food
refrigerators and freezers (standalone units only) is not expected to
pose a significant threat to the environment based on the inherent
characteristics of these substances.

B. Toxicity and Flammability

    In this section the Agency is providing information about toxicity
and flammability of the three hydrocarbon refrigerants listed as
acceptable or acceptable with use conditions under SNAP (76 FR 78832;
December 20, 2011). Additional information is available in that final
SNAP rule.
    Hydrocarbons, including propane, isobutane and the hydrocarbon
blend known as R-441A, are classified as A3 refrigerants by the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning
Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 34-2010, indicating that they have low
toxicity and high flammability. Like most refrigerants, hydrocarbons
can displace oxygen at high concentrations and cause asphyxiation. The
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
recommended exposure limits (RELs) time weighted average (TWAs) \10\
for propane, isobutane, and butane, are 1,000ppm, 800ppm, and 800ppm,
respectively. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
established a Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for propane of 1,000
ppm, and NIOSH established levels Immediately Dangerous to Life and
Health (IDLHs) of 20,000 ppm and 50,000 ppm for propane and butane,
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ REL-TWA is a time weighted average concentration for up to
a 10-hour workday during a 40-hour workweek (NIOSH, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In prior actions under SNAP, EPA has evaluated the risks
hydrocarbons used in certain refrigerant end uses could pose to workers
and consumers and found that occupational exposures to these
hydrocarbons should not pose a toxicity threat in these end-uses
because the time-weighted average (TWA) exposures were significantly
below industry and government occupational exposure limits (76 FR
78839; December 20, 2011).
    EPA estimated the maximum TWA exposure for worker exposure
scenarios and compared this value to relevant exposure limits for
isobutane, propane, and hydrocarbon blends. The modeling results
indicated that both the short-term (15-minute and 30-minute) and long-
term (8-hour) worker exposure concentrations at no point are likely to
exceed 2 percent (for isobutane), 50 percent (for propane), and 4
percent (for hydrocarbon blends) of the NIOSH REL for isobutane and
propane or the refrigerant components for the hydrocarbon blends (ICF,
2009). \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ SNAP hydrocarbon rule docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0286: 1) ICF,
2009. ICF Consulting. `Significant New Alternatives Policy Program
Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Sector--Risk Screen on
Substitutes for CFC-12 in Household Refrigerators and Household
Freezers--Substitute: Isobutane'', May 22, 2009. 2) ICF, 2009. ICF
Consulting. ``Significant New Alternatives Policy Program
Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Sector--Risk Screen on
Substitutes for CFC-12, HCFC-22 and R502 in Retail Food
Refrigeration--Substitute: Propane'', May 26, 2009. 3) ICF, 2009.
ICF Consulting. ``Significant New Alternatives Policy Program in the
Household Refrigeration Sector--Risk Screen on Substitutes for CFC-
12 and HCFC-22 in Household Refrigerators, Household Freezers and
Window AC Units--Substitute: HCR-188C'', July 17, 2009. 4) ICF,
2009. ICF Consulting. ``Significant New Alternatives Policy Program
in the Household Refrigeration Sector--Risk Screen on Substitutes
for CFC-12 and HCFC-22 in Household Refrigerators and Freezers-
Substitute: HCR-188C1'', November 6, 2009.

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

    EPA assessed the consumer and end-user exposure to the three
hydrocarbons in both the household refrigeration end-use and for the
retail food end-use. Even under the very conservative reasonable worst-
case scenarios that were modeled, EPA found that exposures to any of
the three hydrocarbons would not pose a toxicity threat because the
TWAs were significantly lower than the NOAEL and/or acute exposure
guideline level (AEGL).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has also evaluated the exposure risks to the general population
for the use of the three hydrocarbons as a refrigerant in their
respective end-uses. EPA concluded in a SNAP final rule (76 FR 78832;
December 20, 2011) that these hydrocarbons are unlikely to pose a
toxicity risk to the general population, when used according to the
applicable use conditions or regulations.
    Hydrocarbons have lower flammability limits (LFLs) \13\ ranging
from 16,000 ppm to 21,000 ppm.\14\ In prior rulemakings, EPA evaluated
the potential risks of fire from the use of hydrocarbons as
refrigerants in certain appliances, and engineering approaches to avoid
ignition sources from the appliance. To address flammability risks, EPA
issued recommendations for their safe use in certain end-uses through
SNAP rulemakings (59 FR 13044; 76 FR 78832) and specified use
conditions for some end-uses.\15\ These SNAP rules indicated that
existing regulatory requirements and industry standards and practices
adequately protect workers, the general population, and the environment
from the flammability risks from hydrocarbon refrigerants. Furthermore,
the Agency believes that the flammability risks and occupational
exposures to hydrocarbons are adequately regulated by OSHA, building,
and fire codes at a local and national level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ LFL is the minimum concentration in air at which flame
propagation occurs.
    \14\ Isobutane, propane and a hydrocarbon blend, R-441a, have a
LFL of 18,000ppm, 21,000ppm, and 16,000ppm, respectively.
    \15\ Use conditions for hydrocarbons in certain refrigeration
end-uses are found at 40 CFR part 82 subpart G, appendix R.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Authorities, Controls and Practices

    Within the heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) sector
and the refrigeration sector, EPA has approved hydrocarbons under the
SNAP program for use in IPR (processing of hydrocarbons), in household
refrigeration, and in retail food (stand-alone units) refrigeration
systems. In these applications, hydrocarbons have the potential to come
into contact with workers, the general population, and the environment.
However, analyses performed for both this proposed rule and the SNAP
rules issued in 1994 and 2011 (59 FR 13044 and 76 FR 38832,
respectively) indicate that existing regulatory requirements and
industry practices designed to limit and control these substances
adequately control the emission of the listed hydrocarbon refrigerants.
EPA concludes that the limits and controls under other authorities,
regulations or practices adequately control the release and exposure to
the three hydrocarbons and mitigate risks from any possible release.
This conclusion is relevant to the second factor mentioned above in the
overall determination of whether venting, release, or disposal of a
substitute refrigerant poses a threat to the environment--that is, a
consideration of the extent that such venting, release, or disposal is
adequately controlled by other authorities, regulations, or practices.
As such, this conclusion is another part of the determination that the
venting, release or disposal of these three hydrocarbon refrigerants
does not pose a threat to the environment.
    Industry service practices for hydrocarbon refrigeration equipment,
according to industry and OSHA guidelines and standards, include
monitoring efforts, engineering controls, and operating procedures.
System alarms, flame detectors, and fire sprinklers are used to protect
worker, process, and storage areas. During servicing, OSHA requirements
are followed, including continuous monitoring of explosive gas
concentrations and oxygen levels.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The OSHA standards and requirements for servicing
hydrocarbons, as per 29 CFR 1910, include parts 1910.24 (on
ventilation), 1910.106 (on flammable and combustible liquids),
1910.110 (on storage and handling of liquified petroleum gases), and
1910.1000 (on toxic and hazardous substances).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In general, hydrocarbon emissions from refrigeration systems are
likely to be significantly smaller than those emanating from the
industrial process and storage systems, which are controlled for safety
reasons. Further, in the SNAP rule listing hydrocarbons as acceptable
subject to use conditions for use in household and commercial stand-
alone refrigerators and freezers, the amount of refrigerant from a
refrigerant loop is limited (57g for household refrigerators and
freezers and 150g for commercial stand-alone refrigerators and
freezers), indicating that hydrocarbon emissions are likely to be
relatively small and adequately controlled.
    Occupational exposures to hydrocarbons are primarily controlled by
OSHA requirements and national and local building and fire codes.
OSHA's Process Safety Management, confined space entry, and HAZWOPER
requirements apply to all hydrocarbon refrigerants. These requirements
include employee training, emergency response plans, air monitoring,
and written standard operating procedures.
    Hydrocarbons are regulated as VOCs under sections of the Clean Air
Act that address attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for ground level ozone, including those sections
addressing development of State Implementation Plans and those
addressing permitting of VOC sources.
    The release and/or disposal of many refrigerant substitutes,
including hydrocarbons, are controlled by other authorities including
those established by OSHA and NIOSH guidelines, various standards, and
state and local building codes. To the extent that release during the
maintenance, repair, servicing or disposal of appliances is controlled
by regulations and standards of other authorities, EPA believes these
practices and controls for the use of hydrocarbons are sufficiently
protective. These practice and controls could help mitigate any risk to
the environment that may be posed by the venting, release or disposal
of these three hydrocarbon refrigerants during the maintaining,
servicing, repairing, or disposing of appliances. This conclusion
addresses the second factor in the analysis described above and is thus
part of the determination that the venting, release or disposal of
these hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes does not pose a threat to the
environment.

D. Conclusion

    EPA has reviewed the potential environment impacts of three
hydrocarbon refrigerants in the end uses that we have listed as
acceptable or acceptable subject to use conditions under SNAP, as well
as the authorities, controls and practices in place for these three
hydrocarbon refrigerants. Based on this review, EPA concludes that
these three hydrocarbon refrigerants are not expected to pose a
significant threat to the environment based on the inherent
characteristics of these substances and the limited quantities used in
the relevant applications. EPA additionally concludes that existing
authorities, controls, and practices help mitigate environmental risk
from the release of these three hydrocarbon refrigerants. In light of
these two conclusions, EPA is proposing to determine, in accordance

with 608(c)(2), that based on current evidence and risk analyses, the
venting, release or disposal of these hydrocarbon refrigerants does not
pose a threat to the environment. EPA is therefore proposing to extend
the regulatory exemption from the venting prohibition at 40 CFR
82.154(a)(1) that is currently in place for hydrocarbons used in IPR,
to include the other uses for which hydrocarbons have been found
acceptable or acceptable subject to conditions of use under the SNAP
program. EPA requests comment on this proposed determination and
action.

IV. What revision to the venting prohibition is EPA proposing?

    EPA is proposing to revise the existing prohibition against knowing
venting of refrigerant substitutes, extending the exemption to certain
refrigerants consisting wholly of hydrocarbons and used in
refrigeration uses listed by EPA as acceptable or acceptable subject to
use conditions under EPA's SNAP program.\17\ This is separate from and
in addition to the current exemption for hydrocarbon refrigerants used
in IPR.\18\ EPA is proposing to find that for the purposes of CAA
section 608(c)(2), the venting, release or disposal of such hydrocarbon
refrigerants from appliances does not pose a threat to the environment,
considering both the inherent characteristics of these substances and
other authorities, controls and practices that apply to such
refrigerants. This proposed exemption to the venting prohibition would
apply to the three hydrocarbons where they are used in household food
refrigeration units and retail food refrigeration (stand-alone units);
a separate exemption has already been promulgated for certain
hydrocarbons in IPR (processing of hydrocarbons), and we are not
proposing to amend that exemption in this rulemaking. Today's proposal
would exempt from the prohibition against knowing venting during the
maintenance, servicing, repair or disposal of appliances three
hydrocarbon refrigerants listed as acceptable or acceptable subject to
use conditions by the SNAP program: propane, isobutane, and the
hydrocarbon blend R-441A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Hydrocarbons (propane or R-290, butane or R-600,
hydrocarbon blend A, and hydrocarbon blend B) were listed as
acceptable substitutes in industrial process refrigeration
(processing of hydrocarbons) (59 FR 13044). On December 20, 2011,
EPA published a final rule (76 FR 78832) listing certain
hydrocarbons (i.e., isobutane, propane, and hydrocarbon blend R-
441A) as acceptable subject to use conditions in some refrigeration
end-uses.
    \18\ See 40 CFR 82.154(a), 69 FR 11979, and 70 FR 19278.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today's proposed changes would not affect the existing regulatory
exemptions from the venting prohibition under 608(c)(2) for refrigerant
substitutes (i.e., ammonia in commercial refrigeration, or IPR, or in
absorption units; hydrocarbons in IPR--processing of hydrocarbons;
chlorine in IPR--processing of chlorine and chlorine compounds; carbon
dioxide in any application; nitrogen in any application; or water in
any application). EPA previously issued a determination finding these
refrigerant substitutes do not pose a threat to the environment and
amended the regulations at Sec.  82.154(a)(1) to exempt these
substitutes in these uses from the venting prohibition (69 FR 11946,
March 12, 2004; 70 FR 19278, April 13, 2005). EPA is not proposing to
amend those provisions, and therefore, this proposal should not affect
those prior exemptions to the venting prohibition.
    EPA requests comments on today's proposed determination exempting
from the venting prohibition three hydrocarbon refrigerants listed as
acceptable or acceptable subject to use conditions by the SNAP program
(propane, isobutane, and the hydrocarbon blend R-441A). Finally, EPA is
not proposing recapture or recycling requirements for hydrocarbons at
this time as the Agency believes that recovery equipment designed
specifically for flammable refrigerants is not yet widely manufactured
or commercially available in the U.S. However, EPA recommends the use
of recovery equipment designed for flammable refrigerants, when such
becomes available, in accordance with applicable safe handling
practices.\19\ While EPA is not proposing recapture or recycling
requirements at this time, EPA often provides information concerning
best practices used by technicians. Therefore, EPA requests comments on
whether hydrocarbon refrigerants should be first recovered and then
released to the atmosphere particularly in an area where ventilation or
access to outside environment is limited (e.g., room with no windows)
and whether this is already common practice today. In addition, EPA is
seeking comments about what recovery equipment should be used for
recovering isobutane (R-600a) and R-441A, from household refrigerators,
freezers, and combination refrigerators and freezers, as well as
recovering propane (R-290) from retail food refrigerators and freezers
(standalone units only).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ EPA provided recommendations on the safe use and handling
of hydrocarbons in a SNAP rulemaking listing certain hydrocarbons
acceptable subject to use conditions in some refrigeration end-uses
(76 FR 78855; December 20, 2011). Recommendations are also found at
40 CFR part 82, subpart G, appendix R.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This action
is an Agency determination. It contains no new requirements for
reporting. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously
approved the information collection requirements contained in the
existing regulations in subpart F of 40 CFR part 82 under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and
has assigned OMB control numbers 2060-0256. The OMB control numbers for
EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9.

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 is
primarily engaged in the repair and maintenance of appliances and
defined by NAIC code 811412 with annual receipts of less than 14
million dollars, or engaged in separating and sorting recyclable
materials from non-hazardous waste streams (e.g., scrap yards) and
defined by NAIC code 562920 with annual receipts of less than 19
million dollars, and merchant wholesale distribution of industrial
scrap and other recyclable materials and defined by NAIC code 423930
with

fewer than 100 employees (based on Small Business Administration size
standards), (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
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In
determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant
economic impact of the rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule
relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect
on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
    This proposed rule, if it becomes final, is primarily deregulatory
as it would exempt persons from the prohibition under section 608(c)(2)
of the Clean Air Act, and as implemented by regulations at 40 CFR
82.145(a)(1), against knowingly venting or otherwise knowingly
releasing or disposing of three specific hydrocarbon refrigerants
during the maintenance, servicing, repair or disposal of appliances. We
have therefore concluded that today's proposed rule will relieve
regulatory burden for all affected small entities. We continue to be
interested in the potential impacts of the 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. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. Thus, this action is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 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 is deregulatory in
nature and, if finalized as proposed, would create an exemption from a
statutory and regulatory requirement.

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 EO 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action is
deregulatory in nature and, if finalized as proposed, would create an
exemption from a statutory and regulatory requirement, which would be
benefit any state, local, or tribal government to the extent that they
are affected. Thus, EO 13132 does not apply to this proposed rule.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed action
from State and local officials.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in EO
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). The proposed rule, if finalized,
is deregulatory in nature and would create an exemption that could be
available for the tribal communities or Indian tribal governments.
Thus, EO 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule.

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

    This action is not subject to the EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) because it is not economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency does not believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. This action's health and risk
assessments are contained in sections III in the preamble. The public
is invited to submit comments or identify peer-reviewed studies and
data that assess effects of early life exposure to the three
hydrocarbon refrigerants that are the subject of this proposal.

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 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 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 proposed
rule does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA is not
considering 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; February 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this proposed rule exempting certain
hydrocarbons from the venting prohibition in end uses listed as
acceptable or acceptable subject to use conditions will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because the release of
hydrocarbons refrigerants would not pose a threat to the environment.
This proposed action would not have any disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on any

population, including any minority or low-income population.

VI. References

    The documents below are referenced in the preamble. All documents
are located in the Air Docket at the address listed in section titled
ADDRESSES at the beginning of this document. Unless specified
otherwise, all documents are available in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0580 at http://www.regulations.gov.

A.D. Little, 1991. Risk Assessment of Flammable Refrigerants for Use
in Home Appliances (draft report). Arthur D. Little, Inc., for EPA,
Division of Global Change. September 10, 1991. Docket item EPA-HQ-
OAR-2009-0286-0023.
ASHRAE, 2010. American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers
(ASHRAE). Standard 34-2010: Designation and Safety Classification of
Refrigerants. 2010. (Supersedes ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 34-2007.)
EPA, 1994. Significant New Alternatives Policy Technical Background
Document: Risk Screen on the Use of Substitutes for Class I Ozone-
Depleting Substances: Refrigeration and Air Conditioning.
Stratospheric Protection Division. March, 1994.
ICF, 2009. ICF Consulting. ``Significant New Alternatives Policy
Program Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Sector--Risk Screen on
Substitutes for CFC-12 in Household Refrigerators and Household
Freezers--Substitute: Isobutane'', May 22, 2009.
ICF, 2009. ICF Consulting. ``Significant New Alternatives Policy
Program Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Sector--Risk Screen on
Substitutes for CFC-12, HCFC-22 and R502 in Retail Food
Refrigeration--Substitute: Propane'', May 26, 2009.
ICF, 2009. ICF Consulting. ``Significant New Alternatives Policy
Program in the Household Refrigeration Sector--Risk Screen on
Substitutes for CFC-12 and HCFC-22 in Household Refrigerators,
Household Freezers and Window AC Units--Substitute: HCR-188C'', July
17, 2009.
ICF, 2009. ICF Consulting. ``Significant New Alternatives Policy
Program in the Household Refrigeration Sector--Risk Screen on
Substitutes for CFC-12 and HCFC-22 in Household Refrigerators and
Freezers- Substitute: HCR-188C1'', November 6, 2009.
ICF, 2011a. ICF Consulting. ``Significant New Alternatives Policy
Program Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Sector--Risk Screen on
Substitutes for CFC-12 and HCFC-22 in Household Refrigerators and
Household Freezers-- Substitute: Isobutane.'' June 2011.
ICF, 2011b. ICF Consulting. ``Significant New Alternatives Policy
Program Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Sector--Risk Screen on
Substitutes for CFC-12, HCFC-22 and R502 in Retail Food
Refrigeration--Substitute: Propane.'' June 2011.
ICF, 2011c. ICF Consulting. ``Significant New Alternatives Policy
Program in the Household Refrigeration Sector--Risk Screen on
Substitutes for CFC-12 and HCFC-22 in Household Refrigerators and
Freezers--Substitute: R-441.'' June 2011.
ICF, 2011d. ICF Consulting. ``Additional end-uses modeling for
household refrigerators and freezers.'' July 2011.
AR4, 2007, the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change
2007.
TEAP, 2010. United Nations Environment Programme. Report of the
Technology and Economic Assessment Panel. Available online at http://ozone.unep.org/teap/Reports/TEAP_Reports/teap-2010-progressreport-volume2-May2010.pdf.
UL, 2000. UL 250: Household Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th
edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers
Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System.
Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. August 25, 2000.
UL, 2010. UL 471. Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th
edition. Supplement SB: Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers
Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System.
Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. November 24, 2010.
UL, 2011. Revisiting Flammable Refrigerants. White Paper.
Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. February, 2011.
World Meteorological Organization (WMO), 2011. WMO Scientific
Assessment of at http://ozone.unep.org/Assessment_Panels/SAP/Scientific--Assessment--2010/index.shtml. Ozone Depletion: 2010.
Available online.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Recycling, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Stratospheric ozone layer.

    Dated: March 28, 2013.
Bob Perciasepe,
Acting Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is proposed
to be amended as follows:

PART 82--PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE

0
1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671-7671g.

0
2. Section 82.154 is amended by adding section vii to paragraph (a)(1)
to read as follows:

Sec.  82.154  Prohibitions.

    (a)(1) * * *
    (vii) Effective [DATE 60 days after publication of final rule in
the Federal Register], isobutane (R-600a) and R-441A as substitutes in
household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrigerators and
freezers; and propane (R-290) as a substitute in retail food
refrigerators and freezers (standalone units only).

[FR Doc. 2013-08667 Filed 4-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P