[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 24 (Thursday, February 5, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6481-6485]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02325]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 51

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0795; FRL-9922-OAR]
RIN 2060-AR65


Air Quality: Revision to the Regulatory Definition of Volatile 
Organic Compounds--Requirements for t-Butyl Acetate

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
amend the EPA's regulatory definition of volatile organic compounds 
(VOCs) under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The regulatory definition of VOCs 
currently excludes t-butyl acetate (also known as tertiary butyl 
acetate or TBAC; CAS NO: 540-88-5) for purposes of VOC emissions 
limitations or VOC content requirements on the basis that it makes a 
negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. However, the 
current definition includes TBAC as a VOC for purposes of all 
recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical dispersion modeling 
and inventory requirements which apply to VOCs. The regulatory 
definition requires that TBAC be uniquely identified in emission 
reports. TBAC is used as a solvent in paints, inks and adhesives, in 
which it substitutes for compounds that are regulated as VOCs. This 
proposed action would remove recordkeeping, emissions reporting, 
photochemical dispersion modeling and inventory requirements related to 
the use of TBAC as a VOC.
    The EPA has concluded that these requirements are not resulting in 
useful information. Furthermore, there is no evidence that TBAC is 
being used at levels that would cause concern for ozone formation. As 
these requirements are unnecessary and can be burdensome for states and 
industry, we are proposing to revoke these requirements and exclude 
TBAC from the regulatory definition of VOCs for all purposes. Note that 
the EPA is not reconsidering its determination that TBAC is 
``negligibly reactive'' with respect to ground-level ozone formation.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 6, 2015.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting a public 
hearing concerning the proposed regulation on or before March 9, 2015 
we will hold a public hearing on March 23, 2015. If a public hearing is 
requested, it will be held at 10 a.m. on the EPA campus in Research 
Triangle Park, NC, or at an alternate site nearby. Please refer to 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional information on the comment 
period and the public hearing.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2013-0795, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments
     Email: [email protected]. Include docket ID 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0795 in the subject line of the message.
     Fax: (202) 566-9744.
     Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center 
(EPA/DC), Mail Code: 28221T, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-
0795, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket Center, Room 3334, EPA 
WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004, 
Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0795. Such deliveries are only 
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special 
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2013-0795. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be 
included in the public docket without change and may be made available 
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov, 
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' 
system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact 
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you 
send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through 
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured 
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket 
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic 
comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other 
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or 
CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical 
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not 
be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use 
of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any 
defects or viruses. For additional information about the EPA's public 
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available

[[Page 6482]]

either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0795, EPA, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is 
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is 
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation 
Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Souad Benromdhane, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts 
Division, Mail Code C539-07, Environmental Protection Agency, Research 
Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone: (919) 541-4359; fax number: (919) 
541-5315; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?
    C. How can I find information about a possible public hearing?
II. Background
    A. The EPA's VOC Exemption Policy
    B. History of the VOC Exemption for TBAC Including the Unique 
Recordkeeping, Emissions Reporting, Photochemical Dispersion 
Modeling and Inventory Requirements
    C. Petition to Remove Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements 
from the TBAC Exemption
III. The EPA's Assessment of the Petition
IV. Proposed Action
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 (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    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 and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority and Low-Income Populations

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Entities potentially affected by this proposed rule include, but 
are not necessarily limited to, state and local air pollution control 
agencies that prepare VOC emission inventories and ozone attainment 
demonstrations for state implementation plans (SIPs). These agencies 
would be relieved of the requirements to separately inventory emissions 
of TBAC. This proposed action may also affect manufacturers, 
distributors and users of TBAC and TBAC-containing products, which may 
include paints, inks and adhesives. This action would allow state air 
agencies to no longer require these entities to report emissions of 
TBAC.

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

    1. Submitting CBI: Do not submit this information to the EPA 
through www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of 
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk 
or CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-
ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM 
the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as 
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information 
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. 
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, 
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other 
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and 
page number).
     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.
     Explain why you agree or disagree, suggest alternatives, 
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical 
information and/or data that you used.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the 
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

C. How can I find information about a possible public hearing?

    To request a public hearing or information pertaining to a public 
hearing, contact Ms. Eloise Shepherd, Health and Environmental Impacts 
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (C504-02), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; 
telephone number (919) 541-5507; fax number (919) 541-0804; email 
address: [email protected].

II. Background

A. The EPA's VOC Exemption Policy

    Tropospheric ozone, commonly known as smog, is formed when VOCs and 
nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the atmosphere in the 
presence of sunlight. Because of the harmful health effects of ozone, 
the EPA and state governments limit the amount of VOCs that can be 
released into the atmosphere. VOCs are organic compounds of carbon, 
many of which form ozone through atmospheric photochemical reactions. 
Different VOCs have different levels of reactivity. That is, they do 
not react to form ozone at the same speed or do not form ozone to the 
same extent. Some VOCs react slowly or form less ozone; therefore, 
changes in their emissions have limited effects on local or regional 
ozone pollution episodes. It has been the EPA's policy that organic 
compounds with a negligible level of reactivity should be excluded from 
the regulatory definition of VOCs so as to focus control efforts on 
compounds that do significantly increase ozone concentrations. The EPA 
also believes that exempting such compounds creates an incentive for 
industry to use negligibly reactive compounds in place of more highly 
reactive compounds that are regulated as VOCs. The EPA lists compounds 
that it has determined to be negligibly reactive in its regulations as 
being excluded from the regulatory definition of VOCs (40 CFR 
51.100(s)).
    The CAA requires the regulation of VOCs for various purposes. 
Section 302(s) of the CAA specifies that the EPA has the authority to 
define the meaning of ``VOCs,'' and hence what compounds shall be 
treated as VOCs for regulatory purposes. The policy of excluding 
negligibly reactive compounds from the regulatory definition of VOCs 
was first laid out in the ``Recommended Policy on Control of Volatile 
Organic Compounds'' (42 FR 35314, July 8, 1977) and was supplemented

[[Page 6483]]

subsequently with the ``Interim Guidance on Control of Volatile Organic 
Compounds in Ozone State Implementation Plans'' (70 FR 54046, September 
13, 2005). The EPA uses the reactivity of ethane as the threshold for 
determining whether a compound has negligible reactivity. Compounds 
that are less reactive than, or equally reactive to, ethane under 
certain assumed conditions may be deemed negligibly reactive and, 
therefore, suitable for exemption by EPA from the regulatory definition 
of VOCs. Compounds that are more reactive than ethane continue to be 
considered VOCs for regulatory purposes and, therefore, are subject to 
control requirements. The selection of ethane as the threshold compound 
was based on a series of smog chamber experiments that underlay the 
1977 policy.
    The EPA uses two different metrics to compare the reactivity of a 
specific compound to that of ethane: (1) The reaction rate constant 
(known as kOH) with the hydroxyl radical (OH) and (2) the 
maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) on ozone production per unit mass 
basis. Differences between these metrics and the rationale for their 
selection is discussed further in the 2005 Interim Guidance (70 FR 
54046, September 13, 2005).

B. History of the VOC Exemption for TBAC Including the Unique 
Recordkeeping, Emissions Reporting, Photochemical Dispersion Modeling 
and Inventory Requirements

    On January 17, 1997, ARCO Chemical Company (now known as and from 
here forward referred to as LyondellBasell) submitted a petition to the 
EPA which requested that the EPA add TBAC to the list of compounds 
which are designated negligibly reactive in the regulatory definition 
of VOCs at 40 CFR 51.100(s). The materials submitted in support of this 
petition are contained in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0084. LyondellBasell's 
case for TBAC being less reactive than ethane was based primarily on 
the use of relative incremental reactivity factors set forth in a 1997 
report by Carter, et al.\1\ Although the kOH values for TBAC 
are higher than for ethane, Carter's results indicated that the MIR 
value for TBAC, expressed in units of grams of ozone per gram of TBAC, 
was between 0.43 and 0.48 times the MIR for ethane, depending on the 
chemical mechanism used to calculate the MIR. In other words, TBAC 
formed less than half as much ozone as an equal weight of ethane under 
the conditions assumed in the calculation of the MIR scale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Carter, William P.L., Dongmin Luo, and Irina L. Malkina 
(1997). Investigation of the Atmospheric Ozone Formation Potential 
of T-Butyl Acetate, Report to ARCO Chemical Corporation, Riverside: 
College of Engineering Center for Environmental Research and 
Technology, University of California, 97-AP-RT3E-001-FR, http://
www.cert.ucr.edu/~carter/pubs/tbuacetr.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 30, 1999, the EPA proposed to revise the regulatory 
definition of VOCs to exclude TBAC, relying on the comparison of MIR 
factors expressed on a mass basis to conclude that TBAC is negligibly 
reactive (64 FR 52731, September 30, 1999). However, in the final rule, 
the EPA concluded at that time that even ``negligibly reactive'' 
compounds may contribute significantly to ozone formation if present in 
sufficient quantities and that emissions of these compounds need to be 
represented accurately in photochemical modeling analyses. In addition 
to these general concerns about the potential cumulative impacts of 
negligibly reactive compounds, the need to maintain recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements for TBAC was further justified by the potential 
for widespread use of TBAC, the fact that its relative reactivity falls 
close to the borderline of what has been considered negligibly 
reactive, and continuing efforts to assess long-term health risks.\2\ 
Based on these conclusions, the EPA promulgated a final rule under 
which TBAC was excluded from the definition of VOCs for purposes of VOC 
emissions limitations or VOC content requirements, but continued to be 
defined as a VOC for purposes of all recordkeeping, emissions 
reporting, and inventory requirements which apply to VOCs (69 FR 69298, 
November 29, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Between the EPA's proposed and final rule exempting TBAC as 
a VOC, the state of California raised concerns to the EPA about the 
potential carcinogenicity of tertiary-butanol, or TBA, the principal 
metabolite of TBAC. At the time, the EPA decided that there was 
insufficient evidence of health risks to affect the exemption 
decision, but persuaded LyondellBasell to voluntarily perform 
additional toxicity testing, use the testing results in a health 
risk assessment, and have the testing and assessment results 
reviewed in a peer consultation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the final rule, the EPA argued that the recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements were not new requirements for TBAC as industry 
and states were already subject to such requirements to report TBAC as 
a VOC prior to the exemption. However, in practice, the rule created a 
new, distinct recordkeeping and reporting burden by requiring that TBAC 
be ``uniquely identified'' in emission reports, rather than aggregated 
with other compounds as VOC. The final rule explained that the EPA was 
in the process of reviewing its overall VOC exemption policy and that 
the potential for retaining recordkeeping and reporting requirements 
for compounds exempted from the definition of VOCs in the future would 
be considered in that process. That process led to the development of 
the 2005 Interim Guidance (70 FR 54046, September 13, 2005), which 
encouraged the development of speciated inventories for highly reactive 
compounds and identified the voluntary submission of emissions 
estimates for exempt compounds as an option for further consideration, 
but did not recommend mandatory reporting requirements associated with 
future exemptions. Thus, TBAC is the only compound that is excluded 
from the VOCs definition for purposes of emission controls but is still 
considered a VOC for purposes of recordkeeping and reporting.

C. Petition to Remove Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements from the 
TBAC Exemption

    The EPA received a petition from LyondellBasell in December 2009, 
which was re-affirmed in November 2011, requesting the removal of 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements from the final rule to exempt 
TBAC from the regulatory VOCs definition. LyondellBasell contends that 
the emissions reporting requirements are redundant and present an 
unnecessary bureaucratic burden.

III. The EPA's Assessment of the Petition

    In most cases, when a negligibly reactive VOC is exempted from the 
definition of VOCs, emissions of that compound are no longer recorded, 
collected, or reported to states or the EPA as part of VOC emissions. 
When the EPA exempted TBAC from the VOCs definition for purposes of 
control requirements, the EPA created a new category of compounds and a 
new reporting requirement. The new definition required that emissions 
of TBAC be reported separately by states and, in turn, by industry. 
However, the EPA did not issue any guidance on how TBAC emissions 
should be tracked and reported, and implementation of this requirement 
by states has thus been inconsistent. A few states have modified their 
rules and emissions inventory processes to track TBAC emissions 
separately and provide that information to the EPA. Others appear to 
have included TBAC with other undifferentiated VOCs in their emissions 
inventories. Thus, the data that have been collected to date as a 
result of these requirements are

[[Page 6484]]

incomplete and inconsistent. In addition, the EPA has not established 
protocols for receiving and analyzing TBAC emissions data collected 
under the requirements of the rule.
    Although the reactivity of TBAC and other negligibly reactive 
compounds is low, if emitted in large quantities, they could still 
contribute significantly to ozone formation in some locations. However, 
without speciated emissions estimates or extensive speciated 
hydrocarbon measurements, it is difficult to assess the impacts of any 
one exempted compound or even the cumulative impact of all of the 
exempted compounds.
    In the 2004 TBAC rule, the EPA stated the primary objective of the 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements for TBAC was to address these 
cumulative impacts of ``negligibly reactive'' compounds and suggested 
that future exempt compounds may also be subject to such requirements. 
However, such requirements have not been included in any other proposed 
or final VOC exemptions since the TBAC decision. Having even high 
quality data on TBAC emissions alone is unlikely to be very useful in 
assessing the cumulative impacts of exempted compounds on ozone 
formation. Thus, the requirements are not achieving their primary 
objective to inform more accurate photochemical modeling in support of 
SIP submissions.
    With regard to the concerns related to efforts to characterize 
long-term health risks associated with TBAC and its metabolite 
tertiary-butyl alcohol (TBA), since the rule was finalized, 
LyondellBasell performed additional toxicity testing and a health risk 
assessment and submitted the peer-consultation results to the EPA in 
2009.\3\ In addition, in 2006, the State of California published its 
own assessment of the potential health effects associated with TBA and 
TBAC.\4\ The EPA is currently in the process of assessing the evidence 
for health risks from TBA through its Integrated Risk Information 
System (IRIS) program.\5\ A draft of this assessment is expected to be 
circulated for public comment in 2015. The existing toxicity 
information being examined in the IRIS assessment does not rely on any 
of the data collected through the recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements, and thus those requirements do not appear relevant to any 
likely future determinations about the health risks associated with 
TBAC or TBA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (2009). Report of 
the Peer Consultation of the Potential Risk of Health Effects from 
Exposure to Tertiary-Butyl Acetate, January 7-8, 2009, Northern 
Kentucky University METS Center, Erlanger, Kentucky, Volumes I and 
II, http://www.tera.org/Peer/TBAC/index.html.
    \4\ Luo, Dongmin, et al. (2006) Environmental Impact Assessment 
of Tertiary-Butyl Acetate, Staff Report, Sacramento: California 
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board, January 2006, 
http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/reactivity/tbacf.pdf http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/reactivity/tbaca1.pdf http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/reactivity/tbaca2.pdf.
    \5\ See http://www.epa.gov/iris/publicmeeting/iris_bimonthly-dec2013/mtg_docs.htm#etbe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing to revise certain aspects of the EPA's 
regulatory definition of VOCs under the CAA. The regulatory definition 
of VOCs currently excludes TBAC on the basis that it makes a negligible 
contribution to tropospheric ozone formation and contains a specific 
requirement for recordkeeping and reporting of TBAC emissions.
    The recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical dispersion 
modeling and inventory requirements for TBAC are not resulting in 
useful information. Furthermore, there is no evidence that TBAC is 
being used at levels that would cause concern for ozone formation. 
Additionally, the EPA believes these requirements, which are unique 
among all VOC-exempt compounds, are of limited utility because they do 
not provide sufficient information to judge the cumulative impacts of 
exempted compounds, and because they have not been consistently 
collected and reported. Because these requirements are not addressing 
any of the concerns as they were intended, the EPA proposes to revoke 
the requirements for TBAC and relieve industry and states of the 
associated information collection burden until such time that the EPA 
re-evaluates the necessity for reporting and recordkeeping of 
negligibly reactive compounds generally.
    This proposed action would remove recordkeeping, emissions 
reporting, photochemical dispersion modeling and inventory requirements 
related to the use of TBAC. This action would not affect the existing 
exclusion of TBAC from the regulatory definition of VOCs for purposes 
of emission limits and control requirements.
    We note that removal of the recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements does not indicate that the EPA has reached final 
conclusions about all aspects of the health effects posed by the use of 
TBAC or its metabolite TBA. The EPA is currently awaiting completion of 
the IRIS assessment on the potential risks involved with TBA and its 
toxicity. If it becomes clear that action is warranted due to the 
health risks of direct exposure to TBA or TBAC, the EPA will consider 
the range of authorities at its disposal to mitigate these risks 
appropriately.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was 
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the PRA. It does not contain any new recordkeeping or 
reporting requirements. This action would remove recordkeeping, 
emissions reporting, photochemical dispersion modeling and inventory 
requirements related to use of TBAC.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This 
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action 
would remove recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical 
dispersion modeling and inventory requirements related to use of TBAC.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandates as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, 
local or tribal governments or the private sector.

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.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. This proposed action would remove existing 
emission inventory reporting and other requirements that uniquely apply 
to

[[Page 6485]]

TBAC among all VOC-exempt compounds. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does 
not apply to this rule.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is 
not economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866, and because the 
EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed 
by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. This action 
would remove recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical 
dispersion modeling and inventory requirements related to use of TBAC.

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

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is 
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy. This action would remove existing 
emission inventory reporting and other requirements that uniquely apply 
to TBAC among all VOC-exempt compounds.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This action does not involve technical standards.

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

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risks addressed 
by this action will not have disproportionately high and adverse human 
health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations 
because it does not affect the level of protection provided to human 
health or the environment. The EPA did not conduct an environmental 
analysis for this rule because the EPA does not believe that removing 
the unique reporting requirements will lead to substantial and 
predictable changes in the use of TBAC in and near particular 
communities.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: January 29, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental 
Protection Agency proposes to amend part 51 of chapter I of title 40 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION ADOPTION AND SUBMITTAL OF 
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS SUBPART F PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 51, subpart F, continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7412, 7413, 7414, 7470-7479, 
7501-7508, 7601, and 7602.


Sec.  51.100  [Amended]

0
2. Section 51.100 is amended by:
0
a. Adding the term ``t-butyl acetate;'' before the phrase 
``perfluorocarbon compounds which fall into these classes:'' to 
paragraph (s)(1) introductory text; and
0
b. Removing and reserving paragraph (s)(5).

[FR Doc. 2015-02325 Filed 2-4-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P