![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Interim Change in Allowances To Produce Methyl Bromide for Developing Countries
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: April 29, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 82)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 21135-21137]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29ap02-40]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[FRL-7202-7]
RIN 2060-AJ74
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Interim Change in Allowances
To Produce Methyl Bromide for Developing Countries
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: With this action, EPA is proposing to extend the time
companies are allocated limited production rights to manufacture methyl
bromide solely for export to developing countries. The rule published
in the Federal Register on November 28, 2000 (65 FR 70795), allocated
additional production allowances, called Article 5 allowances, for the
manufacture of methyl bromide solely for export to developing countries
only until January 1, 2002. Today's action extends this time limit on
the allocation of Article 5 allowances for methyl bromide until January
1, 2005, in accordance with the Clean Air Act.
Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, EPA is extending
the time companies are allocated limited production rights to
manufacture methyl bromide solely for export to developing countries as
a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views
this changes as noncontroversial and anticipates no relevant adverse
comments. The rationale for this extension appears in the preamble to
the direct final rule. If no relevant adverse comments are received in
response to the direct final rule, no further activity is contemplated
on this proposed rule. The EPA believes today's action is
noncontroversial because it does not result in any change in policy and
merely extends the time period for an existing provision of the
regulation.
DATES: Written comments on this proposed rule must be received on or
before May 29, 2002, unless a public hearing is requested. Comments
must then be received on or before 30 days following the public
hearing. Any party requesting a public hearing must notify the contact
person listed below by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on May 9, 2002. If
a hearing is held, EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register
announcing the hearing information. Inquires regarding a public hearing
should be directed to the contact person listed below.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed rulemaking (companion to the
direct final rule) should be submitted in duplicate (two copies) to:
Air Docket No. A-92-13, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Mail Code 6102, Washington, D.C., 20460. If
sending comments by courier, they should be delivered to Air Docket No.
A-92-13, USEPA, 401 M Street, SW, Room M-1500, Washington, D.C., 20460.
Comments must be identified with Docket No. A-92-13 and must be
identified as comments on this proposed rule (companion to the direct
final rule). Inquiries regarding a public hearing should be directed to
the Stratospheric Ozone Protection Hotline at 1-800-269-1996.
Materials relevant to this proposed rulemaking are contained in
Docket No. A-92-13. The Docket is located in room M-1500, First Floor,
Waterside Mall at the courier delivery address above. The materials may
be inspected from 8 a.m. until 4 p.m. Monday through Friday. A
reasonable fee may be charged by EPA for copying docket materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Land, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Global Programs Division, Office of Atmospheric
Programs, 6205J, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC, 20460,
(202)-564-9185, land.tom@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA believes that the revision in the
direct final rule published in today's Federal Register is
noncontroversial; however, should the Agency receive relevant adverse
comment on this rule, it will publish a notice informing the public
that the revision did not take effect. All relevant adverse comments
received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on
this document. Any parties interested in commenting on today's revision
to part 82, subpart A should do so at this time. For additional
information, see the direct final rule published in the Final Rules
section of this Federal Register.
Supporting Analyses
a. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 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 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.
Today's rule contains no federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of the Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. The rule imposes no enforceable duty
on any State, local, or tribal government or the private sector.
Rather, it extends the availability of an exemption from a regulatory
prohibition. Thus, today's rule is not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA.
We determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments;
therefore, we are not required to develop a plan with regard to small
governments under section 203. Finally, because this rule does not
contain a significant intergovernmental mandate, the Agency is not
required to develop a process to obtain input from elected state,
local, and tribal officials under section 204.
b. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.
The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice
[[Page 21136]]
and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure
Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations,
and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) a small business that is
identified by the North American Industry Classification System code
(NAICS) in the Table below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size
standard
Type of enterprise NAIC code (number of
employees)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organic Chemicals Wholesaling............... 422690 100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a
city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final
rule will not impose any requirements on small entities, as it
regulates large, multinational corporations that either produce, import
or export class I, group VI ozone-depleting substances.
c. 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 a ``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 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
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 by OMB and EPA that this action 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.
d. Applicability of Executive Order 13045--Children's Health Protection
Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
EPA interprets Executive Order 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
Executive Order 13045 because it implements an exemption established in
the Montreal Protocol and adopted by Congress in section 604(e)(3) of
the Clean Air Act.
e. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not add any information collection requirements or
increase burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) renewed
the approval of the information collection requirements and assigned
OMB control number 2060-0170 (EPA ICR No. 1432.18).
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.
f. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
This rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This rule extends an exemption used
by large, multinational corporations that either produce, import or
export class I, group VI ozone-depleting substances. It has no effect
on State or local governments. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not
apply to this rule.
g. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments)
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,'' (59 FR 22951, November 6, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
This final rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have
substantial
[[Page 21137]]
direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the
Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes,
as specified in Executive Order 13175. This rule extends an exemption
used by large, multinational corporations that either produce, import
or export class I, group VI ozone-depleting substances. It has no
effect on tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
h. The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, Section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs 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, and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This
rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA did not
consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
i. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as
defined in Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)) because it is not likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The proposed rule
would simply extend the time period for production of methyl bromide
explicitly for export to developing countries and therefore have no
adverse impacts on energy supply, distribution or use.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Chemicals, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: April 22, 2002.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 02-10417 Filed 4-26-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P