[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 63 (Monday, April 3, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16830-16836]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8202]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 372
[OPPTS-400032A; FRL-4944-8]
RIN 2070-AC00
Ammonia; Ammonium Sulfate (Solution); Ammonium Nitrate
(Solution); Water Dissociable Ammonium Salts; Toxic Chemical Release
Reporting; Community Right-to-Know
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Amended proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is amending its March 30, 1990 proposal to grant a
petition to delete ammonium sulfate (solution) from the list of toxic
chemicals subject to reporting under section 313 of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA). The March 30,
1990 proposal was based on EPA's belief that releases of ammonium
sulfate (solution) can be more effectively covered by the EPCRA section
313 ammonia listing. EPA is amending the proposed rule in order to
allow the public to comment on data not available or included at the
time of the original proposal. EPA is also expanding the proposal to
include the deletion of ammonium nitrate (solution) as a separately
listed toxic chemical on the EPCRA section 313 list because EPA
believes that releases of ammonium nitrate (solution) are more
effectively covered by the EPCRA section 313 listings for ammonia and
the recently added water dissociable nitrate compounds category. In
addition, EPA is proposing to modify the ammonia listing to make it
clear that aqueous ammonia from all water dissociable ammonium salts is
reportable under the EPCRA section 313 listing for ammonia. In the
March 30, 1990 proposal, EPA discussed two options for the reporting of
aqueous ammonia, as total ammonia or as some proportion of total
ammonia. Today, EPA is proposing that 10 percent of total aqueous
ammonia be reported under the ammonia listing.
DATES: Written comments must be received by May 3, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maria J. Doa, Petitions Coordinator,
202-260-9592, for specific information on this amended proposed rule,
or for more information on EPCRA section 313, the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Hotline, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mail Code 5101, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460, Toll free: 1-800-
535-0202, in Virginia and Alaska: 703-412-9877 or Toll free TDD: 1-800-
553-7672.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
This amended proposal is issued under section 313(d) and (e)(1) of
the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA),
42 U.S.C. 11023. EPCRA is also referred to as Title III of the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) (Pub. L.
99-499).
B. Background
Section 313 of EPCRA requires certain facilities manufacturing,
processing, or otherwise using listed toxic chemicals to report their
environmental releases of such chemicals annually. Beginning with the
1991 reporting year, such facilities must also report pollution
prevention and recycling data for such chemicals, pursuant to section
6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. 13106). When enacted,
section 313 established an initial list of toxic chemicals that was
comprised of more than 300 chemicals and 20 chemical categories.
Section 313(d) authorizes EPA to add chemicals to or delete chemicals
from the list, and sets forth criteria for these actions. EPA has added
chemicals to and deleted chemicals from the original statutory list.
Under section 313(e)(1), any person may petition EPA to add chemicals
to or delete chemicals from the list. Pursuant to EPCRA section
313(e)(1), EPA must respond to petitions within 180 days either by
initiating a rulemaking or by publishing an explanation of why the
petition is denied.
EPA issued a statement of petition policy and guidance in the
Federal Register of February 4, 1987 (52 FR 3479), to provide guidance
regarding the recommended content and format for petitions. On May 23,
1991 (56 FR 23703), EPA issued a statement of policy and guidance
regarding the recommended content of petitions to delete individual
members of the section 313 metal compound categories. EPA has published
a statement [[Page 16831]] clarifying its interpretation of the section
313(d)(2) criteria for adding and deleting chemicals from the section
313 list (59 FR 61439, November 30, 1994).
Facilities that manufacture, process, or otherwise use ammonia,
ammonium sulfate (solution), ammonium nitrate (solution), and other
water dissociable ammonium salts may be affected by this amended
proposed rule if they meet the following criteria: (1) The facility has
the equivalent of 10 or more full-time employees; and (2) the facility
is included in Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Codes 20
through 39; and (3) the facility manufactures (defined to include
importing), processes, or otherwise uses the chemicals listed above in
quantities equal to or greater than 25,000 pounds for manufacturing or
processing and 10,000 pounds for otherwise using.
II. Description of Petition and Original Proposed Rule
A. Description of Petition
On January 23, 1989, EPA received a petition from Allied-Signal
Inc. to delete ammonium sulfate (solution) from the EPCRA section 313
list of toxic chemicals. The petition was based on Allied-Signal Inc.'s
contention that ammonium sulfate (solution) does not meet the EPCRA
section 313 criteria for listing. Specifically, Allied-Signal Inc.
claimed that: (1) Ammonium sulfate is not known to cause and cannot
reasonably be anticipated to cause significant adverse acute human
health effects at concentration levels that are reasonably likely to
exist beyond facility site boundaries as a result of continuous, or
frequently recurring releases, (2) ammonium sulfate does not show
potential for causing in humans cancer or teratogenic effects, serious
or irreversible reproductive dysfunction, neurological disorders,
heritable genetic mutations, or other chronic health effects, and (3)
ammonium sulfate does not show potential for adverse effects on the
environment due to toxicity, persistency in the environment, and/or
tendency to bioaccumulate in the environment.
B. Review of Proposed Rule
On March 30, 1990, EPA issued a proposed rule in the Federal
Register (55 FR 12144), proposing to delete ammonium sulfate (solution)
from the EPCRA section 313 list of toxic chemicals. This proposal,
hereafter referred to as ``the original proposal,'' was based on EPA's
belief that the only concerns identified for ammonium sulfate
(solution) were for the aqueous ammonia present in the solution and
that this aqueous ammonia is more appropriately reported under the
EPCRA section 313 listing for ammonia. Aqueous ammonia is
coincidentally manufactured when ammonium salts that dissociate in
water (such as ammonium sulfate) are dissolved in water. Therefore,
releases of these ammonium salt solutions are environmentally
equivalent to the release of aqueous ammonia generated by dissolving
anhydrous ammonia in water.
The original proposal and the combined docket for the original
proposal and this proposed amendment contain complete discussions and
documentation of EPA's technical review of ammonium sulfate (solution),
aqueous ammonia, and the options EPA has considered for resolving the
reporting requirements under the ammonia listing. The following two
sections summarize EPA's technical evaluation and options as discussed
in the original proposal.
1. Summary of technical review. The chemistry of ammonia in water
(i.e., aqueous ammonia) has been extensively studied and is well
understood. When anhydrous ammonia or water dissociable ammonium salts
(such as ammonium sulfate) are dissolved in water an equilibrium is
reached between two forms of ammonia, the un-ionized form (NH3)
and the ionized form (NH4+). The term ``total ammonia''
refers to the sum of both the un-ionized and ionized forms of ammonia
and is synonymous with the term ``aqueous ammonia.'' The relative
proportions of each form of ammonia are mainly dependent on the pH and
temperature of the solution, with the amount of the un-ionized form
increasing with both increased pH and increased temperature. These two
forms rapidly interconvert and the relative proportions of each form
change instantly with changes in the pH and temperature of the
solution. The concentration of the un-ionized form of ammonia increases
10-fold with each one unit increase in pH and approximately doubles
with every 10 deg.C increase in temperature. There are differences in
the concentrations of the un-ionized form of ammonia between equimolar
solutions of aqueous ammonia generated by dissolving dissociable
ammonium salts versus anhydrous ammonia. These differences are due to
the buffering effects (mainly reflected as pH differences) of the
counter ions from the ammonium salts and disappear when both solutions
are released to the environment.
EPA preliminarily concluded that there were no known significant
human health effects associated with ammonium sulfate (solution). EPA
also preliminarily concluded that the ecotoxicity concerns for ammonium
sulfate (solution) were limited to the aqueous ammonia (i.e., total
ammonia) present in these solutions and that the sulfate portion was
not of concern. The toxicity of aqueous ammonia to aquatic organisms
has been extensively studied and is well understood. The toxicity of
aqueous ammonia solutions is primarily attributable to the un-ionized
form of ammonia with the ionized form being relatively less toxic.
Because both the toxicity of aqueous ammonia and the concentration of
the un-ionized form of ammonia vary with the pH and temperature of the
solution, aqueous ammonia toxicity cannot be represented solely by the
concentration of unionized ammonia. Thus, the toxicity of an aqueous
solution of ammonia cannot be represented by a single value but must be
expressed as a function of pH and temperature. Since the un-ionized
ammonia concentration changes with pH and temperature, it is necessary
to calculate the total ammonia concentration in order to determine the
toxicity of the solution as the pH and temperature conditions change.
EPA's Office of Water has conducted a detailed study of the
toxicity of aqueous ammonia which is provided in the criteria document,
Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - 1984. No new information
has become available to the Agency that has significantly changed the
conclusions reached in this document. Therefore, this document remains
the Agency's aquatic toxicity hazard assessment for aqueous ammonia.
The criteria developed for this document were derived from toxicity
tests conducted with several ammonium compounds, including ammonium
sulfate. The criteria are estimates of the highest concentrations that
should not cause toxicity to aquatic organisms and are expressed as a
function of pH and temperature. The criteria are presented in terms of
both the concentrations of the un-ionized form of ammonia and the
concentration of total ammonia.
In the original proposal, EPA reported that the majority (95
percent) of the ammonium sulfate consumed in the U.S. is used as a
fertilizer and that, based on reports submitted to the Toxic Release
Inventory (TRI), in 1987, 90.2 million pounds of ammonium sulfate
(solution) were released to water and/or publicly-owned treatment works
(POTWs). EPA conducted a limited exposure assessment based on data
obtained from the TRI. The assessment focused on releases to surface
waters [[Page 16832]] and POTWs since these releases will have a direct
impact on aquatic ecosystems. EPA determined that 30 percent of the
facilities reviewed were not being regulated through their State
programs for discharges of ammonia.
2. Summary of options in the original proposal. EPA considered
three options for responding to the petition:
(i) Deny the petition.
(ii) Grant the petition and propose to delete ammonium sulfate
(solution) from the EPCRA section 313 list of toxic chemicals.
(iii) Grant the petition and propose to delete ammonium sulfate
(solution) while at the same time, use the rulemaking to revise release
reporting of ammonia.
EPA recognized that certain facilities might not be aware of the
chemistry of aqueous solutions of ammonium salts. Therefore, under
option (iii), EPA discussed three options concerning how to inform the
regulated community of the technical determination that these solutions
are equivalent to solutions of aqueous ammonia generated by dissolving
anhydrous ammonia in water. The options considered were:
(a) Create an ``ammonium salts'' category to make the technical
determination more explicit.
(b) Modify the ammonia listing to read as follows: ammonia
(includes total ammonia resulting from solutions of water dissociable
salts).
(c) Revise EPA's guidance for ammonia reporting.
EPA believed that creating an ammonium salts category would be
confusing and could potentially cause problems concerning double
reporting and reporting on salts that do not dissociate. EPA believed
that modification of the ammonia listing was not necessary in order to
capture releases of aqueous ammonium salt solutions and that it would
reinforce the artificial distinction between releases of aqueous
solutions of ammonia generated from anhydrous ammonia and those
generated from water dissociable ammonium salts. EPA, therefore, issued
technical guidance clarifying the reporting requirements under the
ammonia listing.
In the same issue of the Federal Register in which the proposal was
published, a notice of availability was published (55 FR 12148)
notifying the public and the regulated community of the availability of
a guidance document on the reporting of ammonia releases. The guidance
document explained that manufacturing, processing, or otherwise using
aqueous solutions of ammonium salts that dissociate in water is
equivalent to manufacturing, processing, or otherwise using aqueous
ammonia solutions generated by dissolving anhydrous ammonia (an EPCRA
section 313 listed toxic chemical) in water. Therefore, those
facilities that manufacture, process, or otherwise use aqueous
solutions of ammonium salts that dissociate in water should make
threshold determinations under EPCRA section 313 to assess whether
reporting for releases under the ammonia listing is required.
In the original proposal, EPA also discussed two options for
reporting releases of aqueous ammonia:
(1) Report releases of total ammonia; or
(2) Report a proportion of the releases of total ammonia.
In discussing the two options, EPA stated that reporting total
ammonia would allow communities to determine the proportion of un-
ionized ammonia and ionized ammonia present in the receiving stream
based on the pH and temperature characteristics of the stream. This
information allows communities to easily determine the un-ionized
ammonia and ionized ammonia loading resulting from facility releases of
aqueous ammonia. EPA stated that although the ionized form of ammonia
is less toxic to aquatic organisms than the un-ionized form of ammonia,
it is present in a higher proportion under environmental conditions and
may present the greater hazard. EPA also stated that reporting releases
as a proportion of the amount of un-ionized ammonia released would
result in data that cannot be used as well since it must be
extrapolated to determine the amount of total ammonia released.
EPA proposed the second option in recognition of the fact that the
un-ionized form of ammonia is more toxic than the ionized form of
ammonia and that under environmental conditions only a proportion of
total ammonia contains un-ionized ammonia. EPA requested comment on
whether a proportion, which would be the same for all facilities, of
releases of total ammonia should be reported. EPA stated that this
proportion would be a worst-case estimate of the proportion of the un-
ionized form of ammonia present in processing waters reflecting an
upper bound level of the amount of the un-ionized form of ammonia
formed. EPA also requested comment on what proportion of total ammonia
should be used as an estimate.
III. Rationale for Amending the Proposal
The issue of what forms of ammonia should be reportable under the
ammonia listing has been the source of ongoing discussions between EPA
and affected parties since the publication of the original proposal.
This has resulted in a significant amount of additional information
becoming available to EPA, and is one of the reasons EPA is amending
the proposed rule. This information has been placed in the docket for
this rulemaking. Also, due to the recent addition of a nitrate
compounds category to the EPCRA section 313 list of toxic chemicals (59
FR 61439, November 30, 1994), EPA believes that it would be appropriate
to expand the proposed rule to include the deletion of ammonium nitrate
(solution) as a separately listed chemical under EPCRA section 313.
Therefore, EPA decided to publish this amended proposal to allow for
adequate public notice and comment.
The following sections discuss this additional information as well
as the expansion of the proposal to include the deletion of ammonium
nitrate (solution).
A. Additional Information
1. Average pH and temperature of U.S. waters (Ref. 1). Data
concerning the pH and temperature of lakes, rivers, and streams in the
U.S. were not discussed or provided in the original proposal. This
information is important since the pH and temperature of these
receiving bodies will determine the proportion of aqueous ammonia that
will exist in the more toxic un-ionized form. EPA has analyzed data
tabulated from the Agency's STORET data base for all 50 states and
found that at the 50th percentile for pH and temperature in surface
waters, approximately 1 percent of aqueous ammonia would exist in the
un-ionized form, at the 90th percentile it would be 10 percent, and at
the 95th percentile it would be 15 percent. This information suggests
an upper boundary for the amount of the un-ionized form of ammonia that
will be generated from the releases of aqueous ammonia.
2. Toxicity data (Ref. 2). Additional data concerning the toxicity
of aqueous ammonia to one aquatic organism has become available since
the original proposal was issued. This new data indicate that the
amphipod Hyalella azteca shows no dependency towards pH and temperature
with regards to chronic toxicity from aqueous ammonia. This suggests
that, for this organism, aqueous ammonia toxicity is not due primarily
to the un-ionized form of ammonia and that, for this organism, the
ionized form may be equally as toxic as the un-ionized form.
3. Environmental fate of aqueous ammonia (Ref. 3). Aqueous ammonia
does not persist or bioaccumulate in the [[Page 16833]] environment as
ammonia. In surface waters the important and competitive processes that
remove aqueous ammonia are nitrification and volatilization. The rate
of volatilization of ammonia from surface waters is highest at the
sources of releases, while nitrification processes tend to be more
significant in lakes, slow moving rivers, and estuaries. Nitrification,
which is one process within the nitrogen cycle, involves two steps that
yield metabolic energy for two specific microorganisms. In the first
step, Nitrosomonas converts ammonia to nitrite and in the second step,
Nitrobacter converts nitrite to nitrate. Because the nitrogen cycle is
dynamic, industrial releases of aqueous ammonia should not result in
dramatic buildups of ammonia in surface waters. Nitrification is
responsive to high inputs of ammonia such as those from industrial
releases. However, it should be noted that high nitrification may lead
to low levels of dissolved oxygen and the eutrophication of a water
body. This effect is typically limited to coastal waters and estuaries
where nitrogen is the limiting nutrient. Aqueous ammonia may also be
removed by adsorption to particles which then settle to the sediment
where soil-type processes take over. The ionized form of ammonia is
also assimilated by most plants.
4. Additional exposure information (Ref. 4). EPA has conducted an
additional exposure analysis of releases of aqueous ammonia to surface
waters. This exposure assessment analyzed the releases of ammonium
sulfate (solution) and ammonium nitrate (solution) that were reported
to the TRI for reporting year 1992. Releases of ammonia reported under
the ammonia listing were not included since this data are a mixture of
reports of total ammonia releases and un-ionized ammonia releases and
EPA has no way to readily determine how a facility calculated its
releases. Although this exposure assessment represents only a small
portion of the aqueous ammonia released to surface waters, it was
helpful in identifying facilities that might be releasing aqueous
ammonia in concentrations that exceed water quality criteria. The
results showed that not all facilities with significant releases of
these ammonium salts are covered by permits that control releases of
aqueous ammonia and for those that are covered by such permits
violations of these permits occur.
EPA has recently clarified how exposure information is used in
listing and delisting decisions under EPCRA section 313 (59 FR 61432,
November 30, 1994). EPA does not consider exposure information when
evaluating whether highly ecotoxic chemicals meet the EPCRA section
313(d)(2)(C) listing criteria. EPA believes that for highly ecotoxic
chemicals it is sufficient to consider only hazard when determining
whether a chemical meets the EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(C) listing
criteria. EPA only considers exposure information when evaluating low
or moderately ecotoxic chemicals. EPA considers the un-ionized form of
ammonia to be highly toxic to aquatic organisms; therefore, EPA did not
consider exposure information in evaluating whether aqueous ammonia
from ammonium sulfate (solution) contributes to aquatic toxicity. The
exposure information provided in this amended proposal and in the
original proposal was not used as a basis for determining whether
ammonium sulfate (solution) meets the EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(C)
listing criteria, but was provided as additional information since many
states issue permits that require monitoring or limitation of ammonia
releases.
5. Science Advisory Board review (Ref. 5). In order to help resolve
the scientific issues concerning the reporting of aqueous ammonia under
the EPCRA section 313 ammonia listing, EPA asked the Agency's Science
Advisory Board (SAB) to review the issues. The SAB assigned the review
to the Toxics Reporting Subcommittee of the Ecological Processes and
Effects Committee which met in Washington, DC on January 4, 1995, in a
public meeting to discuss the issue. EPA submitted two questions for
the subcommittee to respond to:
(i) What is the most appropriate way to report releases of aqueous
ammonia under EPCRA section 313: as un-ionized ammonia or as total
ammonia?
(ii) Does total ammonia meet the EPCRA section 313 listing
criteria?
The SAB responded with a letter to the Agency dated February 2,
1995. In this letter the SAB concluded that the acute toxicity of the
un-ionized form of ammonia to aquatic life is approximately 100 times
greater than the ionized form of ammonia and that the toxicity of the
two forms is approximately additive. With regard to what form of
ammonia should be reported under EPCRA section 313, the SAB stated
that, for aquatic toxicity, reporting concentrations of the un-ionized
form of ammonia at a standard pH and temperature would address this
endpoint. The SAB also stated that for other effects such as nitrogen
nutrient enrichment, the specific forms of ammonia are not very
relevant since both have the same nutrient enrichment properties. The
SAB went on to conclude, ``Thus, the question of whether to list or how
to list ammonia or any of its forms is not a scientific issue but
strictly a matter of policy for the Agency to decide.''
With regard to whether total ammonia meets the EPCRA section 313
criteria, the SAB stated that, based on their evaluation of the
criteria, total ammonia meets the EPCRA section 313 criteria only if,
as stated in the statute, the Administrator determines that it causes a
significant adverse effect on the environment of sufficient seriousness
to warrant reporting.
B. Proposed Deletion of Ammonium Nitrate (solution)
Ammonium nitrate (solution) is a solution of aqueous ammonia and
nitrate ions. On November 30, 1994 (59 FR 61432), EPA added a water
dissociable nitrate compounds category to EPCRA section 313 . The
addition of this category and reporting of aqueous ammonia from water
dissociable ammonium salts under the ammonia listing obviate the need
to have ammonium nitrate (solution) as a separately listed chemical
under EPCRA section 313. EPA believes that the aqueous ammonia from
ammonium nitrate (solution) is more appropriately reported under the
EPCRA section 313 ammonia listing and that the nitrate portion of
ammonium nitrate (solution) is more appropriately reported under the
new water dissociable nitrate compounds category. Although EPA is
proposing to delete ammonium nitrate (solution), this action would not
result in any loss of information concerning releases of this material.
IV. Proposed Actions and Rationale
A. Proposed Actions
EPA is proposing to take the following four actions:
1. Delete ammonium sulfate (solution) from the EPCRA section 313
list of toxic chemicals.
2. Require that threshold and release determinations for aqueous
ammonia be based on 10 percent of the total ammonia present in aqueous
solutions of ammonia.
3. Modify the ammonia listing by adding the following qualifier:
ammonia (includes anhydrous ammonia and aqueous ammonia from water
dissociable ammonium salts and other sources; 10 percent of total
aqueous ammonia is reportable under this listing).
4. Delete ammonium nitrate (solution) as a separately listed
chemical on the EPCRA section 313 list of toxic
chemicals. [[Page 16834]]
B. Rationale for Proposed Actions
The rationale for proposing each of these actions is discussed
below.
1. Deletion of ammonium sulfate (solution). EPA agrees with the
petitioner's claim that ammonium sulfate (solution) does not meet the
human health listing criteria under EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(A) and (B).
However, EPA does not agree with the petitioner's claim that ammonium
sulfate (solution) does not show potential for adverse effects on the
environment because when a facility dissolves ammonium sulfate in
water, that facility, in effect, manufactures aqueous ammonia. The un-
ionized form of ammonia present in aqueous ammonia is highly toxic to
aquatic organisms and therefore meets the EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(C)
criteria for listing. An aqueous solution of ammonium sulfate is
environmentally equivalent to aqueous ammonia generated from anhydrous
ammonia because when each of these solutions is released to receiving
waters the amount of un-ionized ammonia present is dependent upon
environmental conditions. In fact, ammonium sulfate is one of the many
ammonium salts used by researchers as a source of aqueous ammonia for
aquatic toxicity studies.
EPA does not believe that the sulfate portion of ammonium sulfate
(solution) meets the EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(A), (B), or (C) criteria.
EPA has previously reviewed the toxicity of sodium sulfate (54 FR 7217
and 54 FR 25850) and concluded that sulfate from sodium sulfate did not
meet the EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(A), (B), or (C) criteria.
EPA believes that the only component of ammonium sulfate (solution)
that meets the EPCRA section 313 listing criteria is the aqueous
ammonia present in this solution. EPA believes that this aqueous
ammonia is more appropriately reported under the EPCRA section 313
ammonia listing, therefore it is appropriate to delete ammonium sulfate
(solution) from the EPCRA section 313 list of toxic chemicals. Ten
percent of the ammonium portion of ammonium sulfate (solution) would
remain reportable under the ammonia listing.
2. Reporting 10 percent of total ammonia. EPA has considered all
data available to the Agency concerning the chemistry, toxicity, and
environmental fate of aqueous ammonia and believes that: (1) Aqueous
ammonia does not persist or bioaccumulate in the environment as
ammonia, (2) the most toxic form of ammonia is the un-ionized form, (3)
the un-ionized form of ammonia makes up a relatively small percentage
of total ammonia under most environmental conditions, (4) reporting a
percentage of total aqueous ammonia under the ammonia listing would
adequately represent the toxicity of aqueous ammonia, and (5) reporting
un-ionized ammonia without pH and temperature data would not provide
sufficient information to quantify potential hazards from releases. EPA
believes that reporting aqueous ammonia as 10 percent of total ammonia
is appropriate since, based on the 90th percentile pH and temperature
data for U.S. waters, releases of aqueous ammonia will consist of no
more than approximately 10 percent of the un-ionized form of ammonia.
Reporting aqueous ammonia as a percentage of total ammonia would also
allow for easy determination of the amount of total ammonia released.
The amount of total ammonia released, along with the site-specific pH
and temperature data for the receiving body, are required in order to
calculate the amount of un-ionized ammonia released to any one specific
water body. Under this proposal, facilities would be required to
include 10 percent of the total ammonia in aqueous solutions in all
threshold and release determinations under the EPCRA section 313
listing for ammonia. The proposal to report 10 percent of total ammonia
is consistent with the original proposal in which EPA asked for comment
on whether a proportion of total ammonia, that would be the same for
all facilities, should be reported. This proposal is also consistent
with the SAB conclusion that reporting un-ionized ammonia under
standard conditions adequately addresses the aquatic toxicity endpoint.
Also, users of TRI data who wish to assess the contribution of ammonia
to nitrogen loading in nitrogen limited waters could extrapolate from
the reported data.
3. Modification of the ammonia listing. In the original proposal,
EPA discussed three ways to clarify that aqueous ammonia from water
dissociable ammonium salts is reportable under the ammonia listing. One
method considered was to add a modifier to the ammonia listing to read:
ammonia (includes total ammonia resulting from solutions of water
dissociable salts). EPA was concerned, however that such a modification
would reinforce the artificial distinction between releases of aqueous
solutions of ammonia generated from anhydrous ammonia and those
generated from water dissociable ammonium salts, a distinction which is
not present under environmental conditions. However, EPA is now
concerned that without such a qualifier the regulated community might
not realize that the aqueous ammonia from water dissociable ammonium
salts is reportable under the ammonia listing. EPA guidance in response
to inquires concerning what is reportable under the ammonia listing has
been that aqueous ammonia from water dissociable ammonium salts is
reportable under the listing. However, even after publishing this
guidance in 1990 (55 FR 12148), EPA has continued to receive numerous
inquires regarding what should be reported. Therefore, EPA proposes to
add a qualifier to the ammonia listing to clarify that aqueous ammonia
from water dissociable ammonium salts is reportable under the ammonia
listing. EPA believes that modification of the ammonia listing to
specify that the listing includes anhydrous ammonia and aqueous ammonia
from water dissociable ammonium salts and other sources, would aid the
regulated community in determining whether they are required to report
and would eliminate any confusion over what is reportable under the
ammonia listing. This modification would also include the proposal
discussed above to limit reporting of aqueous ammonia to 10 percent of
total aqueous ammonia. Upon finalization of this proposed rule, EPA
will publish a revised guidance document for the ammonia listing.
4. Deletion of ammonium nitrate (solution). EPA is proposing to
delete ammonium nitrate (solution) because the recent addition of the
water dissociable nitrate compounds category (59 FR 61432, November 30,
1994) and reporting of aqueous ammonia from water dissociable ammonium
salts under the ammonia listing negate the need for a separate listing
for this chemical solution. EPA does not believe that this would be a
significant change since the releases of ammonium nitrate (solution)
would still be reported under the EPCRA section 313 listing for ammonia
and the nitrate compounds category. Under the nitrate compounds
category, the amount of ammonium nitrate in solution would be counted
in threshold determinations for the category, but only the amount of
nitrate ion would be counted in release and transfer determinations,
therefore no double counting of releases would occur. This proposal
would simply consolidate the reporting of ammonium nitrate (solution)
under existing EPCRA section 313 listings. The original proposal
discussed the reporting of water dissociable ammonium salts under the
ammonia listing. Since ammonium nitrate is a water dissociable ammonium
salt and since no loss of [[Page 16835]] information would result from
this deletion, EPA believes that it is appropriate to add this proposal
to this rulemaking.
V. Effective Dates
The changes described in this amended proposal (with the exception
of the deletion of ammonium nitrate (solution)) would be effective on
the date of publication of the final rule, which EPA expects to occur
prior to July 1, 1995. These changes would therefore be effective for
the 1994 reporting year.
Section 313(d)(4) of EPCRA provides, ``Any revision [to the section
313 list] made on or after January 1 and before December 1 of any
calendar year shall take effect beginning with the next calendar year.
Any revision made on or after December 1 of any calendar year and
before January 1 of the next calendar year shall take effect beginning
with the calendar year following such next calendar year.'' EPA
interprets this delayed effective date provision to apply only to
actions that add chemicals to the section 313 list; EPA may, at its
discretion, make deletions from the list and amendments to listings
immediately effective.
EPA believes that the purpose behind section 313(d)(4) is to allow
facilities adequate planning time to incorporate newly added chemicals
to their TRI release data collection processes. A facility would not
need additional planning time not to report releases of a delisted
chemical. Moreover, where EPA has determined that a chemical does not
satisfy the criteria of section 313(d)(2)(A) through (C), no purpose is
served by requiring facilities to collect release data or file release
reports for that chemical, or, therefore, by leaving that chemical on
the section 313 list for any additional period of time. Nothing in the
legislative history suggests that section 313(d)(4) was intended to
apply to deletions as well as additions. Thus, a reasonable
construction of section 313(d)(4), given the overall purposes and
structure of EPCRA--to provide the public with information about
chemicals which meet the criteria for inclusion on the section 313 list
-- is to apply the delayed effective date requirement only to additions
to the list. This construction of section 313(d)(4) is also consistent
with previous rules deleting chemicals from the section 313 list.
An immediately effective date for the actions in this amended
proposal is also consistent with 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), since a deletion
from the section 313 list relieves a regulatory burden. EPA believes
the combined effect of the changes in this amended proposal would be to
reduce the burden by clarifying what is reportable under the ammonia
listing and by simplifying the reporting requirements for ammonia. In
addition, the proposal to require facilities to include 10 percent of
total ammonia in aqueous solutions in threshold determinations might
relieve some facilities from the obligation to report for aqueous
ammonia.
If EPA were to publish a final rule before July 1, 1995, the
following effective dates and requirements would apply.
1. Deletion of ammonium sulfate (solution). The deletion of
ammonium sulfate (solution) would be effective for the 1994 reporting
year (reports due July 1, 1995).
2. Deletion of ammonium nitrate (solution). The deletion of
ammonium nitrate (solution) would be effective for the 1995 reporting
year (reports due July 1, 1996). EPA is proposing to delay the
effective date of this provision to coincide with the effective date of
the recently added water dissociable nitrate compounds category (59 FR
61432, November 30, 1994). The requirement that aqueous ammonia from
ammonium nitrate (solution) be reported under the ammonia listing as 10
percent of total aqueous ammonia would also be effective for the 1995
reporting year.
3. Reporting 10 percent of total aqueous ammonia. The requirement
that 10 percent of total aqueous ammonia be reported under the ammonia
listing for aqueous ammonia from all water dissociable ammonium salts
(except ammonium nitrate (solution)) would be effective for the 1994
reporting year. EPA believes that facilities that have been subject to
record keeping requirements for ammonium sulfate (solution) already
have the information needed to calculate threshold and release
quantities for 10 percent total aqueous ammonia. Specifically, a
facility would multiply the appropriate ammonium sulfate (solution)
quantities by 2.7 percent, which represents 10 percent of the weight
percent of aqueous ammonia from ammonium sulfate (solution).
Facilities that currently report or make threshold determinations
for the aqueous ammonia from other water dissociable ammonium salts may
not be keeping the kind of information in their records that would
allow them to calculate 10 percent of total aqueous ammonia from their
un-ionized ammonia data. EPA recognizes that issuance of the final rule
may come so late in the reporting year that some of these facilities
may not be able to comply with this requirement before the July 1, 1995
reporting date. Accordingly, for this one year, such facilities could
continue to use the pH and temperature of their process and waste
streams to estimate the quantities of un-ionized ammonia present for
threshold and release determinations, respectively.
Facilities that had already reported under the current requirements
at the time the final rule is issued would not be required to resubmit
their reports under the new requirements. They could, however, withdraw
their reports if they did not meet the threshold for ammonia under the
revised ammonia listing.
VI. Request for Public Comment
EPA requests public comment on the actions discussed in this
amended proposed rule. Comments should be submitted to the address
listed under the ADDRESSES unit. All comments must be received on or
before May 3, 1995. In developing the final rule, EPA will consider
comments submitted in response to this amended proposal and comments
previously submitted on the original proposal.
VII. Rulemaking Record
The record supporting the original proposal and proposed amendment
is contained in docket number OPPTS-400032. All documents, including an
index of the docket, are available in the TSCA Nonconfidential
Information Center (NCIC), also known as, TSCA Public Docket Office
from noon to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.
TSCA NCIC is located at EPA Headquarters, Rm. NE-B607, 401 M St., SW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
VIII. References
(1) Data from EPA's STORET water quality data base as tabulated in,
Industry Comments for the U.S. EPA Science Advisory Board Ecological
Processes and Effects Committee on Delisting of Ammonium Sulfate Under
EPCRA Section 313 and Reporting of Ammonia Releases, December 16, 1994,
by BP Chemicals Inc., Monsanto, and Sterling Chemicals.
(2) Uwe Borgmann, Chronic Toxicity of Ammonia to the Amphipod
Hyalella azteca; Importance of Ammonium Ion and Water Hardness,
Environmental Pollution, 86 (1994) 329-335.
(3) Summary Review of Health Effects Associated with Ammonia, U.S.
EPA Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, EPA/600/8-89/052F
June 1989.
(4) U.S. EPA, OPPT, EETD, EAB, Water Quality Modeling of Ammonium
Sulfate (solution) and Ammonium Nitrate (solution) Toxic Release
[[Page 16836]] Inventory (TRI) Surface Water Releases and Transfers to
POTWs, March 13, 1995.
(5) Letter of February 2, 1995 to Carol M. Browner, Administrator
U.S. EPA from Dr. Genevieve Matanoski, Chair, Executive Committee,
Science Advisory Board.
IX. Regulatory Assessment Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. Under section 3(f),
the order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action
likely to lead to a rule (1) Having an annual effect on the economy of
$100 million or more, or adversely and materially affecting a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities
(also referred to as ``economically significant''); (2) creating
serious inconsistency or otherwise interfering with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3) materially altering the budgetary
impacts of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs; or (4)
raising novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive
Order. Pursuant to the terms of this Executive Order, it has been
determined that this amended proposed rule is not ``significant'' and
therefore not subject to OMB review.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, the Agency must
conduct a small business analysis to determine whether a substantial
number of small entities would be significantly affected by a proposed
rule. Because the amended proposed rule does not create any new
requirements and consolidates other requirements, it would not
significantly affect facilities, including small entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This amended proposed rule does not result in any new information
collection requirements subject to the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372
Environmental protection, Chemicals, Community right-to-know,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and Toxic chemicals.
Dated: March 29,1995.
Susan H. Wayland,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances.
Therefore it is proposed that, 40 CFR part 372 be amended as
follows:
PART 372--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 372 would continue to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11023 and 11048.
Sec. 372.65 [Amended]
2. Sections 372.65(a) and (b) are amended by removing the entire
entry for ammonium sulfate (solution) and ammonium nitrate (solution)
and by adding the following language to the ammonia listing ``includes
anhydrous ammonia and aqueous ammonia from water dissociable ammonium
salts and other sources; 10 percent of total aqueous ammonia is
reportable under this listing'' under paragraph (a) and removing the
entire CAS No. entry for 7783-20-2 and 6484-52-2 under paragraph (b).
[FR Doc. 95-8202 Filed 3-30-95; 1:29 pm]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
