[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 41 (Thursday, February 29, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7762-7763]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-4037]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[FRL-5427-7]
[RIN 2060-AF36]
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Proposal to Temporarily Extend
the Existing Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Through this action EPA is proposing to amend the Clean Air
Act section 608 refrigerant recycling regulations to extend the
effectiveness of the refrigerant purity requirements of Sec. 82.154(g)
and (h), which are currently scheduled to expire on March 18, 1996,
until December 31, 1996, or until EPA completes rulemaking to adopt
revised refrigerant purity requirements based on industry guidelines,
whichever comes first. EPA is proposing to extend the requirements in
response to requests from the air-conditioning and refrigeration
industry to avoid widespread contamination of the stock of
chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) and hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC)
refrigerants that could result from the lapse of the purity standard.
Such contamination would cause extensive damage to air-conditioning and
refrigeration equipment, release of refrigerants, and refrigerant
shortages with consequent price increases. Because the revisions merely
extend the currently requirements for a limited time, EPA does not
anticipate receiving adverse comments. Consequently revisions are also
being issued as a direct final rule in the final rules section of
today's Federal Register. The reader should review that document and
the accompanying regulatory text. If no significant adverse comments
are timely received, no further action will be taken with respect to
this proposal and the direct final rule will become final on the date
provided in that action.
DATES: Comments must be received by April 1, 1996. A public hearing, if
requested, will be held in Washington, DC. If such a hearing is
requested, it will be held on March 18, at 9:00 am, and the comment
period would then be extended to April 17, 1996. Anyone who wishes to
request a hearing should call Cindy Newberg at 202/233-9729 by March 7,
1996. Interested persons may contact the Stratospheric Protection
Hotline at 1-800-296-1996 to learn if a hearing will be held and to
obtain the date and location of any hearing. Any hearing will be
strictly limited to the subject matter of this proposal.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on this proposed action should be addressed
to
[[Page 7763]]
Public Docket No. A-92-01 VIII.G, Waterside Mall (Ground Floor)
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC
20460 in room M-1500.
The public hearing will be held at the EPA Auditorium, 401 M
Street, SW., Washington, DC.
All supporting materials are contained in Docket A-92-01. Dockets
may be inspected from 8 a.m. until 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. A
reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Newberg, Program Implementation
Branch, Stratospheric Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric
Programs, Office of Air and Radiation (6205-J), 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460, (202) 233-9729. The Stratospheric Ozone
Information Hotline at 1-800-296-1996 can also be contacted for further
information.
I. Supplementary Information
If no significant, adverse comments are timely received, no further
activity is contemplated in relation to this proposed rule and the
direct final rule in the final rules section of today's Federal
Register will be final and become effective in accordance with the
information discussed in that action. If significant adverse comments
are timely received the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments will be addressed in a subsequent final rule. The
Agency will not institute a second comment period on this proposed
rule; therefore, any parties interested in commenting should do so
during this comment period.
For more detailed information and the rationale, the reader should
review the information provided in the direct final rule in the final
rules section of today's Federal Register.
II. Summary of Supporting Analysis
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether this regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant'' regulatory action as
one that is likely to lead to a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely and materially affect a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined by OMB and EPA that this action to propose
amending the final rule is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject
to OMB review under the Executive Order.
B. Unfunded Mandates Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``Unfunded
Mandates Act'') requires that the Agency prepare a budgetary impact
statement before promulgating a rule that includes a Federal mandate
that may result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments,
in aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Section 203 requires the Agency to establish a plan for
obtaining input from and informing, educating, and advising any small
governments that may be significantly or uniquely affected by the rule.
Under section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, the Agency must
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact statement must
be prepared. The Agency must select from those alternatives the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule, unless the Agency explains why
this alternative is not selected or the selection of this alternative
is inconsistent with law.
Because this rulemaking is estimated to result in the expenditure
by State, local, and tribal governments or private sector of less than
$100 million in any one year, the Agency has not prepared a budgetary
impact statement or specifically addressed the selection of the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative. Because
small governments will not be significantly or uniquely affected by
this rule, the Agency is not required to develop a plan with regard to
small governments. As discussed in this preamble, this rule merely
extends the current reclamation requirements during consideration of a
more flexible approach that may result in reducing the burden of part
82 Subpart F of the Stratospheric Protection regulations on regulated
entities, including State, local, and tribal governments or private
sector entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
There is no additional information collection requirements
associated with this rulemaking EPA has determined that the Paperwork
Reduction Act does not apply. The initial Sec. 608 final rulemaking did
address all recordkeeping associated with the refrigerant purity
provisions. An Information Collection Request (ICR) document was
prepared by EPA and approved by the Office of Management and
Budget(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
This ICR is contained in the public docket A-92-01.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-602, requires that
Federal agencies examine the impacts of their regulations on small
entities. Under 5 U.S.C. 604(a), whenever an agency is required to
publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking, it must prepare and
make available for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis (RFA). Such an analysis is not required if the head of an
agency certifies that a rule will not have an economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
EPA believes that since this amendment merely extends a current
requirement designed to protect purity of refrigerants temporarily,
there will be no adverse effects for the regulated community, including
small entities. An examination of the impacts of these provisions was
discussed in the initial final rule promulgated under Sec. 608(58 FR
28660). That final rule assessed the impact the rule may have on small
entities. A separate regulatory impact analysis was developed. That
impact analysis accompanied the final rule and is contained in Docket
A-92-01.
I certify that this proposed amendment to the refrigerant recycling
rule will not have any additional negative economic impacts on any
small entities.
Dated: February 14, 1996.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-4037 Filed 2-28-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
