41652 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 149 /Tuesday, August 4, 1998 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[FRL–6129–3]

RIN 2060–AG48

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone:

Reconsideration of Petition Criteria

and Incorporation of Montreal Protocol

Decisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: With this action, EPA is

proposing revisions to the accelerated

phaseout regulation that governs the

production, import and export of

substances that deplete the ozone layer

under the authority of sections 602, 604,

605, 606, and 614 of the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990 (CAA). Today’s

proposed amendments are made to

reflect changes in U.S. obligations under

the Montreal Protocol on Substances

that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol)

due to recent decisions by signatory

countries to this international

agreement. Additionally, in response to

a petition submitted to EPA, the Agency

is proposing to remove the requirement

in the petition process for imports of

used class I controlled substances that a

person must certify knowledge of tax

liability. Other proposed amendments

are made to ease the burden on affected

companies while continuing to ensure

compliance with Title VI of the CAA

and meet U.S. obligations under the

Protocol.

Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal

Register, EPA is amending the

accelerated phaseout regulation as a

direct final rule without prior proposal

because the Agency views many of these

distinct revisions as noncontroversial

and anticipates no relevant adverse

comments. A detailed list of the many

distinct revisions is set forth in the

direct final rule. If no relevant adverse

comments are received on the direct

final rule, no further activity is

contemplated in relation to this

proposed rule. The EPA believes that

many of the distinct revisions are

noncontroversial because they address

various implementation issues without

major changes in policy.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by September 3, 1998, 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

August 14, 1998. If a hearing is

requested it will be held September 1,

1998, and EPA will publish a document

in the Federal Register announcing the

hearing information and the extended

comment period.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the

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,

401 M Street, SW, Room M–1500,

Washington, DC, 20460. Comments

must be identified with Docket No. A–

92–13 . 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 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, Stratospheric Protection

Division, Office of Atmospheric

Programs, 6205J, 401 M Street, SW.,

Washington, DC, 20460, (202) 564–9185.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA

believes that many of the distinct

revisions in the direct final rule

published in today’s Federal Register

are noncontroversial; however, should

the Agency receive relevant adverse

comment on the companion direct final

rule, it will publish a timely withdrawal

informing the public that the rule will

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. For additional

information, see the direct final rule

published in the Final Rules section of

this Federal Register.

For ease of reference to the distinct

revisions, the table of contents for the

direct final rule published in the Final

Rules section of this Federal Register is

as follows:

Table of Contents

I. Background

II. Revisions to the Stratospheric Ozone

Protection Program

A. Amendments to § 82.3—Definitions

1. Adding a Definition for the Term

‘‘Confer’’ that Pertains to Essential-Use

Allowances

2. Adding Destruction Technologies to the

List of Those Approved in the Definition

of Destruction

3. Simplifying the Definition of ‘‘Importer’’

4. Adding a Definition for the Phrase

‘‘Source Facility’’ that Pertains to the

Petition Process for Imports of Used

Controlled Substances

5. Clarifying the Definition of

Transhipment

B. Amendments to § 82.4—Prohibitions

1. Licensing System for Imports and

Exports of Listed Controlled

Substances—both Newly

Manufactured and Previously Used

2. Control of Exported Products that Rely

on Class I Controlled Substances for their

Continuing Functioning to Article 5

Parties

3. Prohibit Imports and Exports of HBFCs

from or to Non-Parties to the Protocol

4. Application Process for Exemptions to

the HCFC Phaseout for Specific National

Security Uses.

5. Simplify Procedure for Apportioning

Essential-Use Allowances and EssentialUse Exemptions through a Notice

6. Prohibit Import of Class I Controlled

Substances for Essential-Uses Except by

Companies Allocated Essential-Use

Allowances

C. Amendments to § 82.9—Availability of

Production Allowances in Addition to

Baseline Production Allowances

1. Clarification of Increases or Decreases of

Article 5 Allowances due to

International Transfers

D. Amendments to § 82.12—Transfers

1. Increases or Decreases of Essential-Use

Allowances due to Emergency

International Transfers

E. Amendments to § 82.13—Recordkeeping

and Reporting Requirements

1. Removal of Producer Requirement to

Report the Quantity of Used Material

Received that Contains Recycled or

Reclaimed Controlled Substances

2. Add to the Producer Recordkeeping and

Reporting Requirements the Need to

Maintain and Submit a Certification that

a Quantity of Class I Controlled

Substance will be used as a Process

Agent.

3. Clarify the Need for Letters that Confer

Essential-Use Allowances and

Destruction and Transformation Credits

to Producers and that these Letters be

Submitted with Producer’s Quarterly

Reports

4. Changes to the Petition Process for

Importing Used Class I Controlled

Substances

a. Clarification that a Petition to Import

Used Class I Controlled Substances is

Submitted for One Individual Shipment

b. Changing the de minimis Quantity for an

Individual Shipment for which a Person

is Required to Submit a Petition to

Import Used Class I Controlled

Substances

c. Revised and Expanded Information

Requirements for a Petition to Import

Used Class I Controlled Substances

d. Removal of the Information Requirement

regarding the Tax for People Petitioning

to Import Used Class I Controlled

Substances

e. Clarification of the Timing for EPA

Review of a Petition f. Clarification of

Reasons for Disallowing Petitions to
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 149 /Tuesday, August 4, 1998 / Proposed Rules 41653

Import Used Class I Controlled

Substances

g. Requirement that the Petition and the

Non-Objection Letter from EPA for the

Import of Used Class I Controlled

Substances Accompany the Shipment

through U.S. Customs Clearance

5. Requirement that Importers of

Controlled Substances and Used

Controlled Substances use the

Harmonized Commodity Codes in this

Regulation in completing Customs Entry

Documents

6. Modify the Requirement for a Sales

Contract that Certifies Exported

Controlled Substances will be

Transformed or Destroyed

7. Applying the Recordkeeping and

Reporting Requirements to Material

obtained from Importers as well as

Producers for a Person that Transforms

or Destroys Class I Controlled Substances

8. Changes to the Recordkeeping and

Reporting Requirements for Entities

Allocated Essential-Use Allowances

9. Changes to the Reporting Requirement

for Distributors of Laboratory Supplies

under the Global Laboratory Essential

Use Exemption

III. Miscellaneous Additional Changes

Summary of Supporting Analysis

A. 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 by State, local

and tribal governments, in the aggregate,

or by the private sector, of $100 million

or more in any one year. If a written

statement is required under section 202,

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, unless the Agency explains

why this alternative is not selected or

the selection of this alternative is

inconsistent with law.

Section 203 of the UMRA 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. Section 204 of the

UMRA requires the Agency to develop

a process to allow elected state, local,

and tribal government officials to

provide input in the development of any

proposal containing a significant

Federal intergovernmental mandate.

EPA has determined that this rule

does not contain a Federal mandate that

may result in expenditures of $100

million or more by State, local and tribal

governments, in the aggregate, or by the

private sector, in any one year. Most of

the provisions in today’s rule fulfill the

obligations of the United States under

the international treaty, The Montreal

Protocol on Substances that Deplete the

Ozone Layer, as well as those

requirements specifically set forth by

Congress in sections 604, 606 and 614

of the Clean Air Act Amendments of

1990. The remainder merely serve to

clarify existing regulatory text and

therefore impose no new additional

enforceable duties on governmental

entities or the private sector. The

majority of the amendments do not

create significant additional costs for

either the public or the private sector

because they address various

implementation issues without major

changes in policy. Viewed as a whole,

today’s amendments do not create a

Federal mandate resulting in costs of

$100 million or more in any one year for

State, local and tribal governments, in

the aggregate, or for the private sector.

Thus, today’s rule is not subject to the

requirements of sections 202 and 205 of

the UMRA. EPA has also determined

that this rule contains no regulatory

requirements that might significantly or

uniquely affect small governments;

therefore, EPA is not required to

develop a plan with regard to small

governments under section 203. Finally,

because this proposal 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

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

generally requires an agency to conduct

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any

rule subject to notice and comment

rulemaking requirements 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 not-for-profit enterprises, and

small governmental jurisdictions.

The Agency performed an initial

screening analysis and determined that

this regulation does not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

EPA characterized the regulated

community by identifying the SIC codes

of the companies affected by this rule.

The Agency determined that the

members of the regulated community

affected by today’s rule are generally not

small businesses. Small governments

and small not-for-profit organizations

are not subject to the provisions of

today’s rule. The provisions in the

accelerated phaseout rule and today’s

action regulate large, multinational

corporations that either produce,

import, export, transform or destroy

ozone-depleting chemicals controlled by

this rule. To the extent that today’s

actions affect entities other than large,

multinational corporations, there are

few that are small entities and the

economic impact is negligible. Thus,

today’s rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. The rule

includes changes to recordkeeping or

reporting requirements. Those changes

included in today’s rule that increase

reporting burden only apply to large

companies (pharmaceutical companies

holding essential-use allowances). In

general, for small entities, the changes

in today’s action reduce reporting and

recordkeeping.

EPA concluded that this proposed

rule would not have a significant impact

on a substantial number of small

entities, therefore, I hereby certify that

this action will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. This rule,

therefore, does not require a regulatory

flexibility analysis.

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 EPA and

OMB that this rule is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ within the meaning

of the Executive Order.
41654 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 149 /Tuesday, August 4, 1998 / Proposed Rules

D. Applicability of E.O. 13045—

Children’s Health Protection

This proposed rule is not subject to

E.O. 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of

Children from Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,

April 23, 1997), because it does not

involve decisions on environmental

health risks or safety risks that may

disproportionately affect children.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

The revised information collection

requirements in these amendments have

been submitted for approval to OMB

under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An Information

Collection Request (ICR) document has

been prepared by EPA (ICR No. 1432.17)

and a copy may be obtained from Sandy

Farmer by mail at OPPE Regulatory

Information Division; U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency

(2137); 401 M St., SW; Washington, DC

20460, by email at

farmer.sandy@epamail.epa.gov, or by

calling (202) 260–2740. A copy may also

be downloaded off the internet at http:/

/www.epa.gov/icr. The additional

information requirements in these

amendments are not effective until OMB

approves them.

The information collection under this

rule is authorized under sections 603(b)

and 114 of the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990 (CAA). This

information collection is conducted to

meet U.S. obligations under Article 7,

Reporting Requirements, of the

Montreal Protocol on Substances that

Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol); and

to carry out the requirements of Title VI

of the CAA, including sections 603 and

614.

The reporting requirements included

in the amendments to the current rule

are designed to:

(1) Ensure compliance with the

restrictions on production, import and

export of controlled ozone-depleting

substances after the phaseout of class I

substances (except methyl bromide)

after January 1, 1996;

(2) Allow exempted production and

import for certain essential uses and the

consequent tracking of that production

and import;

(3) Address industry and Federal

concerns regarding the illegal import of

mislabelled used controlled substances

that are claimed to be undercutting U.S.

markets;

(4) Respond to industry comments on

the functioning of the program to

streamline reporting and eliminate

administrative inefficiencies;

(5) Satisfy U.S. obligations under the

international treaty, the Montreal

Protocol on Substances that Deplete the

Ozone Layer (Protocol), to report data

under Article 7;

(6) Fulfill statutory obligations under

Section 603(b) of Title VI of the Clean

Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA) for

reporting and monitoring;

(7) Provide information to report to

Congress on the production, use and

consumption of class I and class II

controlled substances as statutorily

required in Section 603(d) of Title VI of

the CAA.

EPA informs respondents that they

may assert claims of business

confidentiality for any of the

information they submit. Information

claimed confidential will be treated in

accordance with the procedures for

handling information claimed as

confidential under 40 CFR Part 2,

Subpart B, and will be disclosed only if

EPA determines that the information is

not entitled to confidential treatment. If

no claim of confidentiality is asserted

when the information is received by

EPA, it may be made available to the

public without further notice to the

respondents (40 CFR 2.203).

The information collection

requirements for this action have an

estimated reporting burden averaging

23.3 hours per response. This estimate

includes time for reviewing

instructions, searching existing data

sources, gathering and maintaining the

data needed and completing the

collection of information.

The estimate includes the time

needed to comply with EPA’s reporting

requirements, as well as that used for

the completion of the reports under the

amended regulations.

Collection activity Number of

respondents

Responses/

respondent

Total responsesHours per

response Total hours

Producer’s Report ..................................................................................... 8 4 32 16 512

Importer’s Report ...................................................................................... 12 4 48 16 768

Notification of Trade ................................................................................. 2 1 2 2 4

Export Report ............................................................................................ 10 1 10 80 800

Lab Certification ........................................................................................ 1000 1 1000 1 1000

Class II Report .......................................................................................... 14 4 56 16 896

Transformation & Destruction ................................................................... 15 1 15 80 1200

Essential Use Allowance Holders ............................................................. 12 4 48 32 1536

Lab Suppliers ............................................................................................ 4 4 16 24 384

Lab Suppliers—Reference Standards ...................................................... 10 1 10 16 160

Total burden hours ......................................................................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 7260

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.

Send comments on the Agency’s need

for this information, the accuracy of the

provided burden estimates, and any

suggested methods for minimizing

respondent burden, including through

the use of automated collection

techniques to the Director, OPPE

Regulatory Information Division; U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency

(2137); 401 M St., SW; Washington, DC

20460; and to the Office of Information

and Regulatory Affairs, Office of

Management and Budget, 725 17th St.,

NW, Washington, DC 20503, marked
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 149 /Tuesday, August 4, 1998 / Proposed Rules 41655

‘‘Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.’’

Include the ICR number in any

correspondence.

F. Executive Order 12875

Today’s action does not impose any

unfunded mandate upon any State,

local, or tribal government; therefore,

Executive Order 12875 does not apply

to this rulemaking.

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 17, 1998.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 98–20151 Filed 8–3–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P