[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 52 (Friday, March 17, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14611-14612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6751]




Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / 
Proposed Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
[[Page 14611]] 


40 CFR Part 82

[FRL-5174-6]


Protection of Stratospheric Ozone; Refrigerant Recycling

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 at Sec. 82.154(g) 
and (h), which are currently scheduled to expire on May 15, 1995, only 
until one year after publication of any final rule based on this 
proposal or until EPA can complete rulemaking to adopt new refrigerant 
purity requirements based on industry guidelines, whichever comes 
first. In the final rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is 
promulgating this amendment as a direct final rule without prior 
proposal because EPA views this as a noncontroversial action and 
anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the amendment 
is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are 
received in response to that direct final rule, no further activity is 
contemplated in relation to this proposed rule. If EPA receives adverse 
comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public 
comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on 
the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on 
this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this document 
should do so at this time. EPA has found that there is good cause for 
denying the opportunity for a public hearing pursuant to CAA section 
307(d)(1) and 5 U.S.C. section 553(b)(3)(B).

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received on or before 
April 17, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this proposed action should be addressed 
to Public Docket No. A-92-01 VIII.F, Waterside Mall (Ground Floor) 
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20460 in room M-1500. All supporting materials are contained in Docket 
A-92-01. Dockets may be inspected from 8 a.m. until 5:30 p.m., Monday 
through Friday. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket 
materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Section 608 Recycling Program Manager, 
Program Implementation Branch, Stratospheric Protection Division, 
Office of Atmospheric Programs, Office of Air and Radiation (6205-J), 
401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. The Stratospheric Ozone 
Information Hotline at 1-800-296-1996 can also be contacted for further 
information.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

    EPA is providing an opportunity for interested parties to submit 
written comments on this proposal. However, EPA is not providing an 
opportunity for a public hearing in addition to the opportunity to 
submit written comments. This is necessary to ensure that EPA has 
sufficient time to take final action on the proposed extension of the 
reclamation requirements before those requirements expire on May 15, 
1995. Even without an opportunity for a public hearing, the public 
comment period will close in mid-April at the earliest. Thus, a public 
hearing would be impracticable if EPA is to be able to act on the 
proposed extension of the reclamation requirements before their 
expiration.
    Moreover, it would be contrary to the public interest to 
effectively eliminate EPA's option to extend the reclamation 
requirements before expiration by providing an opportunity for a public 
hearing. As discussed in the direct final rule published in the final 
rules section of this Federal Register, a lapse in the reclamation 
requirements could result in widespread contamination of the stock of 
CFC and HCFC refrigerants. Such contamination would cause extensive 
damage to air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment, release of 
refrigerants, and refrigerant shortages. Release of refrigerants has 
been found to deplete stratospheric ozone. Refrigerant shortages would 
result in economic harms from refrigerant price increases and from the 
premature retrofit of CFC and HCFC equipment.
    Moreover, the lack of opportunity for a public hearing should place 
little burden on the public. First, commenters still have the 
opportunity to submit written comments on this proposal. EPA believes 
that such an opportunity to comment will be fully sufficient here to 
comply with the interest in ensuring public participation in agency 
actions, particularly as EPA expects very few, if any, adverse 
comments. Indeed, an important impetus for proposing this rule has been 
a request by significant portions of the affected industry that EPA 
extend the current standard. Second, if promulgated, the proposed rule 
would simply extend existing requirements, so EPA does not expect to 
receive significant new information regarding the costs and benefits of 
these requirements during the comment period. Third, the extension is 
for a limited time period, one year. Well before that time, EPA expects 
to propose a substitute standard, with full opportunity for written 
comment and a public hearing. Fourth, if the proposed rule is 
promulgated, continued compliance with the existing standard should 
impose no new burden on affected parties.
    Providing for a public hearing here would be impracticable and 
contrary to the public interest, as EPA is providing sufficient 
opportunity for submission of written comment, the burden imposed on 
affected parties is minimal, and EPA expects it will need to extend the 
reclamation requirements before the May 15, 1995, expiration date. 
Thus, the Agency finds good cause for denying the opportunity for a 
public hearing pursuant to CAA Sec. 307(d)(1) and 5 U.S.C. section 
553(b)(3)(B).
    If adverse comments are received on the direct final rule, EPA is 
proposing to make the final rule that responds to those comments 
effective upon publication. This expedited effective date is necessary 
to extend the reclamation requirements before those requirements expire 
on May 15, 1995. Providing for a 30 day delay in effectiveness after 
publication would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest. 
As discussed above, EPA would not have sufficient time to extend the 
reclamation requirements prior to their expiration if EPA must allow 
for an additional 30 days after publication. Also, for the reasons 
discussed above, EPA believes that a lapse of those requirements would 
be contrary to the public interest. Finally, because the proposed rule 
merely extends the existing requirements, making the rule effective 
immediately upon publication places little burden on the affected 
parties. Given the lack of burden upon affected parties and the need to 
extend the reclamation requirements prior to their expiration, the 
Agency proposes to find good cause for expediting the effective date of 
the rule, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. section 553(d)(3).

II. Additional Information

    For additional information, see the direct final rule published in 
the rules section of this Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Chemicals, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    [[Page 14612]] Dated: March 14, 1995.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-6751 Filed 3-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P