Jump to main content.

Technical Correction to Partial Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule, ``Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Reconsideration of Petition Criteria and Incorporation of Montreal Protocol Decisions''

Related Material

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 

[Federal Register: July 21, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 139)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 39040-39041]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21jy99-21]                         

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[AD-FRL-6400-9]

 
Technical Correction to Partial Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule, 
``Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Reconsideration of Petition 
Criteria and Incorporation of Montreal Protocol Decisions''

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule, technical correction.

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

SUMMARY: This technical action corrects two typographical errors in the 
October 5, 1998, partial withdrawal of a direct final rule (63 FR 
53290). The errors are in the CFR citations referring to the Part 
affected by that paragraph. 40 CFR 80.4 was printed instead of 40 CFR 
82.4, the part of the Code which addresses stratospheric ozone 
protection.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 21, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials supporting the rulemaking are 
contained in Public Docket No. A-92-13. The docket is available for 
public inspection and copying between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, at the EPA's Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
Center, Waterside Mall, Room M-1500, first floor, 401 M Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20460, or by calling 202/260-7548 or 260-7549. A 
reasonable fee may be charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Land, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Program Implementation Branch, Stratospheric 
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, 6205J 401 M 
Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, 202/564-9185.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On August 4, 1998, EPA promulgated a direct final rule consisting 
of a variety of amendments to the accelerated phaseout regulation, 
intended to: reflect changes in U.S. obligations under the Montreal 
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol); ensure 
compliance through the petition system for importation of used ozone-
depleting substances; and change various requirements to ease the 
burden on affected companies. EPA received numerous comments on various 
sections of the rule. Where adverse comments were received, EPA 
withdrew those specific provisions, proposed the withdrawn provisions, 
and will ultimately promulgate a final rule that addresses the 
provisions. The Federal Register notice withdrawing the provisions was 
published on October 5, 1998, through a Partial Withdrawal of Direct 
Final Rule.

II. Correction to 63 FR 53290

    In the October 5, 1998 withdrawal, 63 FR 53290, paragraphs (6) and 
(7) under the section entitled, Dates, the Code of Federal Regulations 
(CFR) cite is incorrectly published as 40 CFR 80.4. The numbers after 
``CFR'' indicate the part of the Code of Federal Regulations where the 
regulation can be found. The corrected part is 82.4 in both (6) and 
(7).

[[Page 39041]]

Therefore, the corrected version should read:
    ``(6) The addition of paragraph (t)(3) in newly designated 40 CFR 
82.4(t).
    (7) The addition of paragraph (u)(3) in newly designated 40 CFR 
82.4 (u).''

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Good Cause Finding

    By promulgating these technical corrections directly as a final 
rule, the EPA is foregoing an opportunity for public comment on a 
notice of proposed rulemaking Section 553(b) of title 5 of the United 
States Code and section 307(b) of the CAA permit an agency to forego 
notice and comment when ``the agency for good cause finds (and 
incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefore in 
the rules issues) that notice and public procedure thereon are 
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' The 
EPA finds that notice and comment regarding these minor technical 
corrections are unnecessary due to their noncontroversial nature and 
because they do not substantively change the requirements of the 
partial withdrawal, the direct final amendment from which the 
provisions were withdrawn, or the accelerated phaseout regulation for 
which the amendments are intended, once promulgated. The EPA finds that 
this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) for a determination 
that the issuance of a notice of proposed rulemaking is unnecessary.

B. Executive Orders 12866, 13045, 13083, 13084, Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act, Regulatory Flexibility Act, and Administrative Procedure 
Act

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. In addition, 
this action does not impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded 
mandate, or impose any significant or unique impact on small 
governments as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not require prior consultation 
with State, local, and tribal government officials as specified by 
Executive Order 12875 (58 FR 58093, October 28, 1993) or Executive 
Order 13084 (63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998), or involve special 
consideration of environmental justice related issues as required by 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Because this 
action is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the 
Administrative Procedure Act or any other statue, it is not subject to 
the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This rule also is not subject to Executive 
Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because EPA interprets E.O. 
13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that are based on 
health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 
5-501 of the Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This 
rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not establish an 
environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that 
before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must 
submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House 
of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. 
Section 808 allows the issuing agency to make a good cause finding that 
notice and public procedure is impracticable, unnecessary or contrary 
to the public's interest. This determination must be supported by a 
brief statement, 5 U.S.C. 802(2). As stated previously, EPA has made 
such a good cause finding, including the reasons therefor, and 
established an effective date of April 26, 1999. EPA will submit 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 United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

C. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (the NTTAA), Pub. L. 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
note), directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, business practices, etc.) That are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standard bodies. The NTTAA requires the 
EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency 
decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus 
standards.
    This regulatory action makes technical corrections to errors in 
citation and does not involve any technical standards that would 
require the Agency to consider voluntary consensus standards pursuant 
to section 12(d) of the NTTAA.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Chemicals, Chlorofluorocarbons, Exports, 
Hydrochlorofluorocarbons, Imports, Ozone layer, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: July 10, 1999.
Robert Perciasepe,
Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 99-18481 Filed 7-20-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.