![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 82 [FRL-5427-7] [RIN 2060-AF36]
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: February 29, 1996 (Volume 61, Number 41)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 7762-7763] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
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