Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 18361

§ 30:2014(A) provides, in part, that the

Secretary shall act as the primary public

trustee of the environment, and shall

consider and follow the will and intent

of the Louisiana Constitution and

Louisiana statutory law in making any

determination relative to the granting or

denying of permits. This matter is also

clarified in LDEQ’s revised Program

Description, which refers to the review

as a ‘de novo review of the record. ’’

In the tenth paragraph under

Response to Public Comments, the third

sentence is corrected to read ‘‘The

commentor alleged LDEQ argued that

the courts have jurisdiction to review its

decisions only when the decision

resulted from an LDEQ mandatory

adjudicatory hearing.’’

In the tenth paragraph under

Response to Public Comments, the fifth

sentence is corrected to read ‘‘Thus,

none of LDEQ’s hazardous waste

permitting decisions, with the possible

exception of commercial treatment,

storage, or disposal facility permits,

would be subject to judicial review.’’

In the tenth paragraph under

Response to Public Comments, the sixth

sentence is corrected to read ‘‘However,

EPA considered this issue resolved by

the Louisiana Supreme Court in Matter

of American Waste and Pollution

Control Co., 642 So.2d 1258 (La 1994),

where the Court ruled that LDEQ

decisions are appealable whether or not

they result from a mandatory

adjudicatory hearing.

On page 4382, in the twelfth

paragraph under Response to Public

Comments, the third sentence is

corrected to read ‘‘In addition, EPA

retains Federal enforcement authority

under RCRA §§ 3008(h) and 7003.’’

In the fourteenth paragraph under

Response to Public Comments, the

second sentence is corrected to read

‘‘Even then, EPA will retain the

authority to enforce against violators,

even in an authorized State, under

RCRA §§ 3008(h) and 7003.’’

In the fifteenth paragraph under

Response to Public Comments, the first

sentence is corrected to read ‘‘EPA has

reevaluated its decision to approve this

final authorization for revision to the

State’s hazardous waste program, and

revisited all pertinent documentation,

including the authorization application

with revised Program Description, and

several EPA mid-year and end-of-year

evaluation reports on LDEQ.’’

Finally, in the fifteenth paragraph

under Response to Public Comments,

the third sentence is corrected to read

‘‘EPA hereby affirms its decision to

approve this final authorization, which

was effective January 23, 1995.’’

Dated: March 29, 1995.

Jane N. Saginaw,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–8876 Filed 4–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 372

[OPPTS–400085A; FRL–4929–3]

RIN 2070–AC00

Copper Phthalocyanine Compounds;

Toxic Chemical Release Reporting;

Community Right-To-Know

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is deleting copper

phthalocyanine compounds that are

substituted with only hydrogen and/or

bromine and/or chlorine from the

‘‘copper compounds’’ category on the

list of toxic chemicals subject to

reporting under section 313 of the

Emergency Planning and Community

Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA).

This action is based on EPA’s

conclusion that copper phthalocyanine

compounds that are substituted with

only hydrogen and/or bromine and/or

chlorine meet the deletion criteria of

EPCRA section 313(d)(3). By

promulgating this rule, EPA is relieving

facilities of their obligation to report

releases of copper phthalocyanine

compounds that are substituted with

only hydrogen and/or bromine and/or

chlorine that occurred during the 1994

reporting year, and releases that will

occur in the future.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective

April 11, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Maria J. Doa, Petitions Coordinator,

202–260–9592, for specific information

on this final rule, or for more

information on EPCRA section 313, the

Emergency Planning and Community

Right-to-Know Hotline, Environmental

Protection Agency, Mail Code 5101, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460, Toll

free: 1–800–535–0202, in Virginia and

Alaska: 703–412–9877 or Toll free TDD:

1–800–553–7672.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

A. Statutory Authority

This action is issued under section

313(d) and (e)(1) of the Emergency

Planning and Community Right-toKnow Act of 1986 (EPCRA), 42 U.S.C.

11023. EPCRA is also referred to as Title

III of the Superfund Amendments and

Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)

(Pub. L. 99–499).

B. Background

Section 313 of EPCRA requires certain

facilities manufacturing, processing, or

otherwise using listed toxic chemicals

to report their environmental releases of

such chemicals annually. Beginning

with the 1991 reporting year, such

facilities must also report pollution

prevention and recycling data for such

chemicals, pursuant to section 6607 of

the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) 42

U.S.C. 13106. When enacted, section

313 established an initial list of toxic

chemicals that was comprised of more

than 300 chemicals and 20 chemical

categories. Section 313(d) authorizes

EPA to add or delete chemicals from the

list, and sets forth criteria for these

actions. Under section 313(e)(1), any

person may petition EPA to add

chemicals to or delete chemicals from

the list. EPA has, from time to time,

added and deleted chemicals from the

original statutory list.

EPA issued a statement of petition

policy and guidance in the Federal

Register of February 4, 1987 (52 FR

3479), to provide guidance regarding the

recommended content and format for

petitions. On May 23, 1991 (56 FR

23703), EPA issued a statement of

policy and guidance regarding the

recommended content of petitions to

delete individual members of the

section 313 compound categories. EPA

has also published a statement

clarifying its interpretation of the

section 313(d)(2) criteria for adding and

deleting chemicals from the section 313

list (59 FR 61439; November 30, 1994).

II. Description of Petition and Proposed

Action

On March 5, 1993, the Agency

received a petition from the Color

Pigments Manufacturers Association

(CPMA) to delete Color Index (C.I.)

Pigment Blue 15:1 from the chemical

category ‘‘copper compounds’’ subject

to EPCRA reporting requirements. C.I.

Pigment Blue 15:1 is a mixture of C.I.

Pigment Blue 15 (copper

phthalocyanine) and copper

monochlorophthalocyanine. Because

C.I. Pigment Blue 15 had already been

deleted from the chemical category

‘‘copper compounds’’ (56 FR 23650;

May 23, 1991), the Agency treated this

petition as a request to remove copper

monochlorophthalocyanine from the

chemical category ‘‘copper

compounds.’’

Following a review of the petition,

EPA issued a proposed rule in the

Federal Register of June 6, 1994 (59 FR

29252), proposing to delete copper
18362 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

monochlorophthalocyanine from the

category ‘‘copper compounds’’ on the

list of toxic chemicals under EPCRA

section 313. EPA’s proposal was based

on its conclusion that copper

monochlorophthalocyanine meets the

EPCRA section 313(d)(3) criteria for

deletion from the list. With respect to

deletions, EPCRA provides at section

313(d)(3) that ‘‘[a] chemical may be

deleted if the Administrator determines

there is not sufficient evidence to

establish any of the criteria described in

paragraph [(d)(2)(A)-(C)].’’ Specifically,

in the proposed rule EPA concluded

preliminarily that there is not sufficient

evidence to establish that copper

monochlorophthalocyanine causes

adverse acute human health effects,

chronic human health effects, or

environmental toxicity. This

preliminary conclusion, which is

detailed in the proposed rule, was based

on the Agency’s review of the petition,

as well as other relevant materials

included in the docket.

In the proposed rule, EPA requested

comment on the alternative of

exempting all copper phthalocyanine

compounds that are substituted with

only hydrogen and/or bromine and/or

chlorine from the reporting

requirements under the ‘‘copper

compounds’’ category on the EPCRA

section 313 list. As stated in the

preamble of the proposed rule, EPA has

previously reviewed brominated/

chlorinated copper phthalocyanine

compounds as well as the parent

compound, copper phthalocyanine, and

believes that its conclusions regarding

the toxicity of the intact compound and

the availability of soluble copper from

these substituted compounds apply to

all copper phthalocyanine compounds

that are substituted with only hydrogen

and/or bromine and/or chlorine.

III. Final Rule and Rationale for

Delisting

In response to the petition from

CPMA, EPA has decided to delete

copper monochlorophthalocyanine from

the list of chemicals for which reporting

is required under section 313 of EPCRA

and section 6607 of PPA. Further, the

Agency has decided to expand this

delisting action to include all copper

phthalocyanine compounds that are

substituted with only hydrogen and/or

bromine and/or chlorine. EPA is

delisting these chemicals because the

Agency has determined that they satisfy

the delisting criteria of EPCRA section

313(d)(3).

A. Response to Comments

EPA received two comments on the

proposed rule, both in support of the

deletion of copper

monochlorophthalocyanine. In addition,

one of the commenters, CPMA strongly

supports EPA’s alternative proposal

exempting all copper phthalocyanine

compounds that are substituted with

only hydrogen and/or bromine and/or

chlorine from the reporting

requirements under the ‘‘copper

compounds’’ category on the EPCRA

section 313 list. The commenter

requests that EPA delete all of the

possible compounds using the

definition of substituted

phthalocyanines provided in the

proposed rule because these chemicals

are abiotically and biotically stable

chemicals that will not liberate soluble

forms of copper and are not toxic in the

intact form.

EPA agrees with the commenters. EPA

believes that copper phthalocyanine

compounds that are substituted with

only hydrogen and/or bromine and/or

chlorine cannot reasonably be

anticipated to cause adverse acute

human health effects, chronic human

health effects, or environmental toxicity.

Thus, EPA is exempting these chemicals

from the reporting requirements under

the ‘‘copper compounds’’ category on

the EPCRA section 313 list. Specifically,

EPA is deleting all the chemicals that

meet the following molecular structure

definition:

where R= H and/or Br and/or Cl only.

A guidance document, entitled

‘‘Copper Phthalocyanine Compounds

Excluded from the Reporting

Requirements under the ‘Copper

Compounds’ Category on the EPCRA

Section 313 List,’’ that lists all known

chemicals that meet this definition and

that have Chemical Abstract Service

(CAS) numbers, is available from the

Emergency Planning and Community

Right-to-Know Hotline. See the unit of

this preamble entitled FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT for the

address and telephone number. This

guidance document is not intended to

be all inclusive and there may be

compounds not included in the

guidance document which meet the

above formula. Such compounds are

also delisted by today’s action.

B. Rationale for Delisting and

Conclusions

After reviewing comments received

and other relevant information, EPA has

concluded that the assessment set out in
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 18363

the proposed rule should be affirmed. A

more detailed discussion of the

rationale for delisting is given in the

proposed rule (June 6, 1994; 59 FR

29252). Therefore, this final rule is

based on EPA’s conclusion that copper

phthalocyanine compounds that are

substituted with only hydrogen and/or

bromine and/or chlorine cannot

reasonably be anticipated to cause

adverse acute human health effects,

chronic human health effects, or

environmental toxicity, because (1) The

intact species do not meet the EPCRA

section 313(d) criteria and (2) the

copper ion from these copper

phthalocyanine compounds will not

become available. Thus, these chemicals

meet the EPCRA section 313(d)(3)

criterion for delisting (i.e., they do not

meet any of the EPCRA section 313(d)(2)

listing criteria). In reaching this

conclusion, EPA considered the toxicity

of intact copper phthalocyanine

compounds and the copper ion as a

potential source of toxicity from copper

phthalocyanine compounds that are

substituted with only hydrogen and/or

bromine and/or chlorine. Initially, EPA

analyzed the availability of copper ion.

If the ion is not available, these

compounds cannot cause toxicity due to

copper ion. EPA has concluded that

copper ion cannot reasonably be

anticipated to become available from

copper phthalocyanine compounds that

are substituted with only hydrogen and/

or bromine and/or chlorine.

The intact copper phthalocyanine

compounds that are substituted with

only hydrogen and/or bromine and/or

chlorine can reasonably be anticipated

to be acutely toxic only at levels that

greatly exceed estimated releases and

resultant exposures. Therefore, these

copper phthalocyanine compounds

cannot reasonably be anticipated to

cause ‘‘. . . significant adverse acute

human health effects at concentration

levels that are reasonably likely to exist

beyond facility site boundaries as a

result of continuous, or frequently

recurring releases.’’ Thus, EPA has

concluded that copper phthalocyanine

compounds that are substituted with

only hydrogen and/or bromine and/or

chlorine do not meet the toxicity criteria

for listing under EPCRA section

313(d)(2)(A).

EPA has also concluded that copper

phthalocyanine compounds that are

substituted with only hydrogen and/or

bromine and/or chlorine do not meet

the toxicity criteria of EPCRA section

313(d)(2)(B) because these copper

phthalocyanine compounds cannot

reasonably be anticipated to cause

cancer, developmental toxicity,

reproductive toxicity, neurotoxicity,

gene mutations, or chronic toxicity.

These intact copper phthalocyanine

compounds cannot reasonably be

anticipated to cause such effects, and

copper ion will not be available to cause

chronic human toxicity.

Finally, EPA has concluded that

copper phthalocyanine compounds that

are substituted with only hydrogen and/

or bromine and/or chlorine do not meet

the toxicity criteria of EPCRA section

313(d)(2)(C) because these copper

phthalocyanine compounds cannot

reasonably be anticipated to cause

adverse environmental effects. In

addition, copper ion will not become

available from these copper

phthalocyanine compounds and,

therefore, will not be available to cause

adverse environmental effects.

IV. Effective Date

This action becomes effective April

11, 1995. Thus, the last year in which

facilities had to file a Toxic Release

Inventory (TRI) report for these copper

phthalocyanine compounds was 1994,

covering releases and other activities

that occurred in 1993.

Section 313(d)(4) provides that ‘‘[a]ny

revision’’ to the section 313 list of toxic

chemicals shall take effect on a delayed

basis. EPA interprets this delayed

effective date provision to apply only to

actions that add chemicals to the section

313 list. For deletions, EPA may, in its

discretion, make such actions

immediately effective. An immediate

effective date is authorized, in these

circumstances, under 5 U.S.C. section

553(d)(1) because a deletion from the

section 313 list relieves a regulatory

restriction.

EPA believes that where the Agency

has determined, as it has with these

copper phthalocyanine compounds, that

a chemical does not satisfy any of the

criteria of section 313(d)(2)(A)-(C), no

purpose is served by requiring facilities

to collect data or file TRI reports for that

chemical, or, therefore, by leaving that

chemical on the section 313 list for any

additional period of time. This

construction of section 313(d)(4) is

consistent with previous rules deleting

chemicals from the section 313 list. For

further discussion of the rationale for

immediate effective dates for EPCRA

section 313 delistings, see 59 FR 33205.

V. Rulemaking Record

The record supporting this final rule

is contained in docket number OPPTS–

400085A. All documents, including an

index of the docket, are available in the

TSCA Nonconfidential Information

Center (NCIC), also known as, TSCA

Public Docket Office from noon to 4

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding

legal holidays. TSCA NCIC is located at

EPA Headquarters, Rm. NE–B607, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.

VI. Regulatory Assessment

Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency

must determine whether the regulatory

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to review by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) and the

requirements of the Executive Order.

Under section 3(f), the order defines a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as an

action likely to lead to a rule (1) Having

an annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more, or adversely and

materially affecting a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition,

jobs, the environment, public health or

safety, or State, local, or tribal

governments or communities (also

referred to as ‘‘economically

significant’’); (2) creating serious

inconsistency or otherwise interfering

with an action taken or planned by

another agency; (3) materially altering

the budgetary impacts of entitlements,

grants, user fees, or loan programs; or (4)

raising novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in this Executive Order.

Pursuant to the terms of this Executive

Order, it has been determined that this

final rule is not ‘‘significant’’ and

therefore not subject to OMB review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

of 1980, the Agency must conduct a

small business analysis to determine

whether a substantial number of small

entities would be significantly affected

by the final rule. Because the final rule

eliminates an existing requirement, it

would result in cost savings to facilities,

including small entities.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

This final rule does not have any

information collection requirements

subject to the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372

Environmental protection, Chemicals,

Community right-to-know, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements, and

Toxic chemicals.
18364 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Dated: March 30, 1995.

Lynn Goldman,

Assistant Administrator for Prevention,

Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

Therefore, 40 CFR part 372 is

amended as follows:

1. The authority citation for part 372

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11023 and 11048.

§ 372.65 [Amended]

2. In § 372.65(c) by adding the

following language to the copper

compounds listing ‘‘except copper

phthalocyanine compounds that are

substituted with only hydrogen and/or

bromine and/or chlorine that meet the

following molecular structure

definition:

where R = H and/or Br and/or Cl only.’’

[FR Doc. 95–8874 Filed 4–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

40 CFR Part 763

[OPPTS–62121A; FRL–4914–6]

Asbestos-Containing Materials in

Schools; State Request for Waiver

From Requirements; Notice of Final

Decision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final decision on

requested waiver.

SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a final decision

which approves the request of Louisiana

for a waiver from the requirements of 40

CFR part 763, subpart E, AsbestosContaining Materials in Schools.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the complete

waiver application submitted by the

State is available from the TSCA Public

Docket Office. A copy is also on file and

may be reviewed at the EPA Region 6

office in Dallas, Texas.

TSCA Docket Receipt (7407), Office of

Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Rm.

NE–B607, Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington,

DC 20460.

EPA, Region 6 (6T–PT), 1445 Ross

Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202–2733.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James B. Willis, Acting Director,

Environmental Assistance Division

(7408), Office of Pollution Prevention

and Toxics, Rm. E–543B, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460, (202) 554–1404,

TDD: (202) 554–0551.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

notice is issued under the authority of

Title II of the Toxic Substances Control

Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2641, et seq.

TSCA Title II was enacted as part of the

Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response

Act 1986 (AHERA), Pub. L. 99519.

AHERA is the abbreviation commonly

used to refer to the statutory authority

for EPA’s rules affecting asbestos in

schools and will be used in this

document. EPA issued a final rule in the

Federal Register of October 30, 1987 (52

FR 41846), the Asbestos-Containing

Materials in Schools Rule (the Schools

Rule, 40 CFR part 763, subpart E),

which requires all Local Education

Agencies (LEAs) to identify asbestoscontaining building materials (ACBMs)

in their school buildings and to take

appropriate actions to control the

release of asbestos fibers.

Under section 203 of AHERA, EPA

may, upon request by a State Governor

and after notice and comment and

opportunity for a public hearing in the

State, waive in whole or part the

requirements of the Schools Rule, if the

State has established and is

implementing or intends to implement

an ongoing program of asbestos

inspection and management which is at

least as stringent as the requirements of

the rule. Section 763.98 (40 CFR 763.98)

sets forth the procedures to implement

this statutory provision. The Schools

Rule requires that specific information

be included in the waiver request

submitted to EPA, establishes a process

for reviewing waiver requests, and sets

forth procedures for oversight and

rescission of waivers granted to States.

The Agency encourages States to

establish and manage their own school

regulatory programs under the AHERA

waiver provisions.

EPA issued a notice in the Federal

Register of February 18, 1993 (58 FR

8926), which announced the receipt of

a waiver request from the State of

Louisiana, and solicited comments from

the public. The notice also discussed

the program elements of the State

program, listed differences between the

State program and the AHERA

requirements, and provided EPA’s

preliminary response to the State on the

differences identified.

No comments were received during

the 60–day comment period. No request

for a public hearing was received.

Consequently, no hearing was held.

EPA is required to issue a notice in

the Federal Register announcing its