97-22511. List of Regulated Substances and Thresholds for Accidental Release Prevention  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 164 (Monday, August 25, 1997)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 45130-45132]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-22511]
    
    
    
    [[Page 45129]]
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    Part VIII
    
    
    
    
    
    Environmental Protection Agency
    
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    
    
    40 CFR Part 68
    
    
    
    List of Regulated Substances and Thresholds for Accidental Release 
    Prevention; Final Rule
    
    Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 164 / Monday, August 25, 1997 / Rules 
    and Regulations
    
    [[Page 45130]]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 68
    
    [FRL-5881-8]
    
    
    List of Regulated Substances and Thresholds for Accidental 
    Release Prevention
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final 
    action to modify the list of regulated substances and threshold 
    quantities authorized by section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act as 
    amended. EPA is vacating the listing and related threshold for 
    hydrochloric acid solutions with less than 37% concentrations of 
    hydrogen chloride. The current listing and threshold for all other 
    regulated substances, including hydrochloric acid solutions with 37% or 
    greater concentrations and the listing and threshold for anhydrous 
    hydrogen chloride, are unaffected by today's rulemaking. Today's action 
    implements, in part, a settlement agreement between EPA and the General 
    Electric Company (GE) to resolve GE's petition for review of the 
    rulemaking listing regulated substances and establishing thresholds 
    under the accidental release prevention regulations.
    
    DATES: This rule is effective August 25, 1997.
    
    ADDRESSES: Docket: The docket for this rulemaking is A-97-28. This rule 
    amends a final rule, the docket for which is A-91-74. The docket may be 
    inspected between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, at 
    EPA's Air Docket, Room M1500, Waterside Mall, 401 M St., SW, 
    Washington, DC 20460; telephone (202) 260-7548. A reasonable fee may be 
    charged for copying.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sicy Jacob, Chemical Engineer, 
    Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Office, Environmental 
    Protection Agency, MC 5104, 401 M St., SW, Washington, DC 20460, (202) 
    260-7249.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Regulated Entities
    
        Entities potentially affected by this action include the following 
    types of facilities if the facility has more than the 15,000-pound 
    threshold quantity of hydrochloric acid solutions with concentrations 
    of less than 37% hydrogen chloride.
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Example of regulated    
                     Category                             entities          
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chemical manufacturers....................  Industrial inorganics.      
    Petrochemical.............................  Plastics and resins.        
    Other manufacturers.......................  Pulp and paper mills,       
                                                 primary metal production,  
                                                 fabricated metal products, 
                                                 electronic and other       
                                                 electric equipment,        
                                                 transportation equipment,  
                                                 industrial machinery and   
                                                 equipment, food processors.
    Wholesalers...............................  Chemical distributors.      
    Federal sources...........................  Defense and energy          
                                                 installations.             
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
    guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this 
    action. This table lists types of entities that the EPA is now aware 
    could potentially be affected by this action. Other types of entities 
    not listed in the table could be affected. To determine whether your 
    facility is affected by this action, you should carefully examine 
    today's notice. If you have questions regarding the applicability of 
    this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the 
    preceding For Further Information Contact section.
        The following outline is provided to aid in reading this preamble 
    to the rule:
    
    Table of Contents
    
    I. Introduction and Background
        A. Statutory Authority
        B. Regulatory History
        C. List Rule Litigation
    II. Discussion of the Final Rule and Public Comments
    III. Judicial Review
    IV. Required Analyses
        A. Executive Order 12866
        B. Regulatory Flexibility
        C. Paperwork Reduction
        D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
        E. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
    
    I. Introduction and Background
    
    A. Statutory Authority
    
        This final rule is being issued under sections 112(r) and 301 of 
    the Clean Air Act (Act) as amended.
    
    B. Regulatory History
    
        The Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), section 112(r), requires EPA to 
    promulgate an initial list of at least 100 substances (``regulated 
    substances'') that, in the event of an accidental release, are known to 
    cause or may be reasonably expected to cause death, injury, or serious 
    adverse effects to human health and the environment. The CAA also 
    requires EPA to establish a threshold quantity for each chemical at the 
    time of listing. Stationary sources that have more than a threshold 
    quantity of a regulated substance are subject to accident prevention 
    regulations promulgated under CAA section 112(r)(7), including the 
    requirement to develop risk management plans.
        On January 31, 1994, EPA promulgated the list of regulated 
    substances and thresholds that identify stationary sources subject to 
    the accidental release prevention regulations (59 FR 4478) (the ``List 
    Rule''). This list included hydrochloric acid solutions with 
    concentrations of 30% or greater. Such solutions were assigned a 
    threshold quantity of 15,000 pounds. EPA subsequently promulgated a 
    rule requiring owners and operators of stationary sources with listed 
    substances above their threshold quantities to develop programs 
    addressing accidental releases and to make publicly available risk 
    management plans (``RMPs'') summarizing these programs. (61 FR 31668, 
    June 20, 1996) (the ``RMP Rule''). For further information on these 
    regulations, section 112(r), and related statutory provisions, see 
    these notices. These rules can be found in 40 CFR part 68, ``Chemical 
    Accident Prevention Provisions,'' and collectively are referred to as 
    the accidental release prevention regulations.
    
    C. List Rule Litigation
    
        The General Electric Company (GE) filed a petition for judicial 
    review of the List Rule regarding EPA's listing criteria under the List 
    Rule, the listing of certain substances in the List Rule, the setting 
    of threshold quantities for certain substances in particular and all 
    regulated toxic substances generally, and the petition process for 
    adding and deleting regulated substances to the list. Recognizing that 
    the public's interest would best be served by settlement of all issues 
    raised in this litigation, GE and EPA agreed to a settlement on April 
    7, 1997. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, on May 22, 1997 
    (62 FR 27992), EPA proposed to vacate the listing and related threshold 
    for hydrochloric acid solutions with less than 37% concentrations of 
    hydrogen chloride. EPA is today taking final action on this proposal.
    
    II. Discussion of the Final Rule and Public Comments
    
        Today's final rule adopts without modification the May 22, 1997 (62 
    FR 27992), proposal to vacate provisions of the accidental release 
    prevention regulations that specifically address hydrochloric acid 
    solutions with less than 37% hydrogen chloride. The basis
    
    [[Page 45131]]
    
    and purpose of this rulemaking is set out in the above referenced 
    proposal. As discussed in the proposal, this action addresses the 
    essential element of the dispute between EPA and GE while eliminating 
    the collateral uncertainty that would exist about the regulatory status 
    of the remaining chemicals if the litigation proceeded. EPA has 
    vigorously advocated responsible accident prevention efforts by 
    industry even before enactment of section 112(r). The Agency is 
    concerned that prolonging this dispute may encourage owners and 
    operators of sources who are solely concerned about regulatory 
    compliance to defer engaging in responsible accident prevention 
    activities. By implementing the settlement agreement with GE and by 
    implementing the settlement agreements reached in the other two 
    challenges to the List Rule, EPA will be able to retain on the list of 
    regulated substances nearly all of the chemicals originally listed and 
    eliminate uncertainty about their regulatory status. As also discussed 
    in the proposal, the general duty clause of section 112(r)(1) and the 
    retention on the list of solutions with concentrations of 37% or 
    greater ensures that today's rule is protective of public health in 
    several respects.
        EPA received 11 letters commenting on the proposed rule. All of the 
    comments were from industry and trade associations. All commenters 
    supported vacating the listing of hydrochloric acid in concentration 
    below 37%. Several of them specifically supported EPA's stated position 
    that this proposal is protective of public health in several respects 
    and that this action will eliminate uncertainty in the regulated 
    community regarding RMP compliance for hydrochloric acid solutions.
        Several commenters brought up technical issues regarding the basis 
    for listing hydrochloric acid in aqueous solution. EPA stated in the 
    proposed rule that it was not reopening the rulemaking record on the 
    listing of hydrochloric acid within the range of 30% to 37%. Any 
    technical issues related to the listing of hydrochloric acid solutions 
    will be addressed if EPA undertakes future regulatory actions regarding 
    such solutions. In agreeing to the settlement with GE and in this 
    related rulemaking, EPA has not conceded or acknowledged any technical 
    deficiencies in its original listing of HCl solutions with less than 
    37% concentration.
        One commenter said that solutions at 37%, as well as those below 
    37%, should be delisted. EPA considers this issue outside the scope of 
    the current rulemaking. The listing of solutions at 37% and above was 
    decided in the original List Rule and was not reopened by this 
    rulemaking; objections to the listing of 37% solutions should have been 
    made by seeking review of the original List Rule and are now untimely. 
    To the extent that the commenter wishes to reopen the technical merits 
    of listing solutions that are precisely 37% HCl, EPA would address that 
    issue along with other technical issues if EPA were to take further 
    action on hydrochloric acid solutions.
        Two commenters referred to comments submitted on the original 
    proposal to list hydrochloric acid solution. EPA addressed comments on 
    the proposed List Rule when it promulgated the final rule (January 31, 
    1994).
        Several commenters questioned the accident history of hydrochloric 
    acid solutions and stated that EPA's accident database does not support 
    listing hydrochloric acid solutions. To the extent to which it is 
    relevant, EPA will consider the up-to-date accident history if it takes 
    any further regulatory actions on the listing of hydrochloric acid 
    solutions.
        One commenter stated that EPA overestimated the number of regulated 
    sources that would not have to comply with the List rule as a result of 
    this vacatur. EPA's estimate of 800 sources was based on preliminary, 
    conservative assumptions that EPA used to determine that a regulatory 
    impact analysis was not required and was not related to the basis for 
    the proposal. The number and type of sources that are affected by a 
    listing are irrelevant under sections 112(r)(3) and (4). The Agency 
    recognizes that this estimate may represent a conservative picture of 
    the effect of the rule on the regulated community.
        One commenter stated his understanding that hydrochloric acid 
    solutions of 36.94% would not be covered by the RMP rule. EPA confirms 
    that all solutions that can be accurately measured at less than 37% are 
    excluded.
        EPA also proposed on May 22, 1997, to extend the RMP rule 
    compliance deadline for hydrochloric acid solutions with concentrations 
    of 30% to 37% if EPA did not take final action to vacate the 
    hydrochloric acid listing as proposed. Because EPA is vacating the 
    listing of such solutions by the final action today, no action is 
    necessary on this alternative proposal. If EPA were to relist these 
    solutions in the future, then sources would have three years from the 
    new listing to comply with the RMP rule.
        Finally, as stated in the proposal, EPA wishes to clarify that this 
    rule will not affect in any way the listing of anhydrous hydrogen 
    chloride. Anhydrous hydrogen chloride will retain its 5000-pound 
    threshold. Threshold determination provisions for regulated toxic 
    substances would apply to anhydrous hydrogen chloride. Anhydrous 
    mixtures of hydrogen chloride would be subject to the mixture 
    provisions for regulated toxic substances. Aqueous mixtures of 
    hydrochloric acid would be affected to the extent that the minimum 
    concentration cutoff would be revised.
        Based on the reasons discussed above, EPA is vacating the listing 
    in part 68 of hydrochloric acid solutions at concentrations of less 
    than 37% (from 30% up to 37%) hydrogen chloride. Solutions of 37% or 
    greater will not be affected by today's rule and remain on the list. In 
    addition, EPA is vacating other provisions of the accidental release 
    prevention regulations insofar as they apply to hydrochloric acid 
    solutions at concentrations less than 37% hydrogen chloride. For 
    example, the reference to ``hydrochloric acid (conc 30% or greater)'' 
    in the toxic endpoint table for 40 CFR part 68 will be revised to refer 
    to concentrations of 37% or greater.
    
    III. Judicial Review
    
        Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), judicial review 
    of the actions taken by this final rule is available only on the filing 
    of a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District 
    of Columbia Circuit within 60 days of today's publication of this 
    action. Under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements that are 
    subject to today's notice may not be challenged later in civil or 
    criminal proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
    
    IV. Required Analyses
    
    A. Executive Order 12866
    
        Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
    Agency must judge whether the 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 result in a rule that may:
        (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
    adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
    economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
    health or safety, or state, local, or tribal government or communities;
    
    [[Page 45132]]
    
        (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
    action taken or planned by another agency;
        (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, 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 that this rule is not a ``significant 
    regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and, 
    therefore, is not subject to OMB review.
    
    B. Regulatory Flexibility
    
        EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory 
    flexibility analysis in connection with this final rule. EPA has also 
    determined that this rule will not have a significant negative economic 
    impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final rule will 
    not have a significant negative impact on a substantial number of small 
    entities because it will reduce the range of hydrochloric acid 
    solutions listed under part 68 and thus reduce the number of stationary 
    sources subject to part 68.
    
    C. Paperwork Reduction
    
        This rule does not include any information collection requirements 
    for OMB to review under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
    
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    
        Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. 
    L. 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
    effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
    governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
    generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
    analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
    may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
    the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
    one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
    is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
    and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
    the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative 
    that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
    do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
    section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
    costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
    Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that 
    alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
    requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
    governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
    section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
    provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling 
    officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
    input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant 
    Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
    advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
    requirements.
        EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal 
    mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for 
    State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private 
    sector in any one year. Today's rule will reduce the number of sources 
    subject to part 68. Thus, today's rule is not subject to the 
    requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. For the same reason, 
    EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements 
    that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
    
    E. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
    
        Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business 
    Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report 
    containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, 
    the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the 
    General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's 
    Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
    U.S.C. 804(2).
    
    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 68
    
        Environmental protection, Chemicals, Chemical accident prevention, 
    Extremely hazardous substances, Incorporation by reference, 
    Intergovernmental relations, Hazardous substances, Reporting and 
    recordkeeping requirements.
    
        Dated: August 19, 1997.
    Carol M. Browner,
    Administrator.
    
        For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, 
    subchapter C, part 68 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as 
    follows:
    
    PART 68--CHEMICAL ACCIDENT PREVENTION PROVISIONS
    
        1. The authority citation for part 68 continues to read as follows:
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7412(r), 7601(a)(1), 7661-7661f.
    
    
    Sec. 68.130 Tables 1 and 2   [Amended]
    
        2. In Sec. 68.130 List of substances, Table 1 is amended by 
    revising the listing in the column ``Chemical name'' from 
    ``Hydrochloric acid (conc 30% or greater)'' to ``Hydrochloric acid 
    (conc 37% or greater).''
        3. In Sec. 68.130 List of substances, Table 2 is amended by 
    revising the listing in the column ``Chemical name'' from 
    ``Hydrochloric acid (conc 30% or greater)'' to ``Hydrochloric acid 
    (conc 37% or greater),'' and by adding a note ``d'' between note ``c'' 
    and ``e'' at the end of the table to read as follows:
        ``d Toxicity of hydrogen chloride, potential to release hydrogen 
    chloride, and history of accidents.''
    
    
    Appendix A of Part 68   [Amended]
    
        4. Appendix A of Part 68 is amended by revising the listing in the 
    column ``Chemical name'' from ``Hydrochloric acid (conc 30% or 
    greater)'' to ``Hydrochloric acid (conc 37% or greater).''
    
    [FR Doc. 97-22511 Filed 8-22-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
8/25/1997
Published:
08/25/1997
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
97-22511
Dates:
This rule is effective August 25, 1997.
Pages:
45130-45132 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
FRL-5881-8
PDF File:
97-22511.pdf
Supporting Documents:
» Legacy Index for Docket A-97-28
» Accidental Release Prevention Requirements; Interpretations
» List of Regulated Substances and Thresholds for Accidental Release Prevention
» List of Regulated Substances and Thresholds for Accidental Release Prevention; Proposed Amendments
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 68.130