Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Proposed Rules 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

§ 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final rule will be withdrawn and all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 § 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.
14612 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 52 / Friday, March 17, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Dated: March 14, 1995.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–6751 Filed 3–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P