Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Listing of Substitutes for Ozone-Depleting Substances-Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection, 56422-56425 [E6-15842]
Download as PDF
56422
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
the Department of the Interior and the
Department of Agriculture
(Departments) assumed, on July 1, 1990,
responsibility for implementation of
Title VIII of ANILCA on public lands.
On June 29, 1990, the Temporary
Subsistence Management Regulations
for Public Lands in Alaska were
published in the Federal Register (55
FR 27114).
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory
Councils
Pursuant to the Subsistence
Management Regulations for Federal
Public Lands in Alaska, April 6, 1992,
and the Subsistence Management
Regulations for Federal Public Lands in
Alaska, 36 CFR 242.11 (2002) and 50
CFR 100.11 (2002), and for the purposes
identified therein, we divided Alaska
into 10 subsistence resource regions,
each of which is represented by a
Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory
Council (Regional Council). The
Regional Councils provide a forum for
residents of the regions, who have
personal knowledge of local conditions
and resource requirements, to have a
meaningful role in the subsistence
management of fish and wildlife on
Alaska public lands. The Regional
Council members represent varied
geographical, cultural, and user
diversity within each region.
Comments and Extension of Comment
Period on the Proposed Rule
The Kenai Peninsula has unique fish
and wildlife management challenges
due to intense use of the Peninsula’s
fish and wildlife by local and nonlocal
residents and by nonresidents, and due
to the recent Board actions to begin to
provide a meaningful subsistence
priority for fisheries in Federally
managed fresh waters on the Kenai
Peninsula. Kenai Peninsula lands
primarily under Federal management
include the Chugach National Forest
and the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge.
On August 14, 2006, the Board
published a proposed rule (71 FR
46427) related to the establishment of a
new Kenai Peninsula Subsistence
Resource Region. During a Southcentral
Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory
Council meeting held in Anchorage,
Alaska on August 24, 2006, we heard
significant testimony regarding the
creation of a new Kenai Peninsula
Subsistence Resource Region.
Additionally, the Southcentral Regional
Council unanimously recommended
against the formation of such a region
without providing more opportunity for
public input. Letters from the public
also strongly recommended providing
more opportunity for public input.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:43 Sep 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
Therefore, the comment period on that
proposed rule is extended through
November 9, 2006. Prior to that date, the
Board will hold public meetings on the
Kenai Peninsula to receive testimony
and discuss the proposed Kenai
Peninsula Subsistence Resource Region.
The specific time and place will be
noticed in local and regional
newspapers and by press release. You
may submit electronic comments
(preferred method) as a PDF or MS
Word file, avoiding the use of any
special characters and any form of
encryption.
Dated: September 19, 2006.
Peter J. Probasco,
Acting Chair, Federal Subsistence Board.
Dated: September 19, 2006.
Steve Kessler,
Subsistence Program Leader, USDA-Forest
Service.
[FR Doc. 06–8280 Filed 9–26–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P; 4310–55–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2005–0087; FRL–8223–5]
RIN–2060–AM24
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone:
Listing of Substitutes for OzoneDepleting Substances—Fire
Suppression and Explosion Protection
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to list four
substitutes for ozone-depleting
substances (ODSs) in the fire
suppression and explosion protection
sector as acceptable subject to use
conditions under the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency’s
(EPA) Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) program. SNAP
implements section 612 of the Clean Air
Act, as amended in 1990, which
requires EPA to evaluate substitutes for
ODSs and find them acceptable where
they do not pose a greater overall risk
to human health and the environment
than other acceptable substitutes.
DATES: Comments must be received in
writing by October 27, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2005–0087 by one of the following
methods:
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Mail: OAR Docket and Information
Center, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Mailcode 6102T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460. To expedite review, a second
copy of the comments should be sent to
Bella Maranion at the address listed
below under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
• Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation
Docket, EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC,
EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20004. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket’s normal
hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2005–
0087. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov your email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
E:\FR\FM\27SEP1.SGM
27SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC,
EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the Air
and Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bella Maranion, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of
Atmospheric Programs (6205J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460; telephone number: (202)
343–9749; fax number: (202) 343–2363;
e-mail address:
maranion.bella@epa.gov. The published
versions of notices and rulemakings
under the SNAP program are available
on EPA’s Stratospheric Ozone Web site
at https://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/regs.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Elsewhere
in today’s Federal Register, EPA is
taking this action as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because EPA
views this as a non-controversial
revision and anticipates no adverse
comments. A rationale for this action is
set forth in the preamble to the direct
final rule.
If we receive no adverse comments
and no requests for public hearings in
response to this action, we will take no
further activity in relation to this rule.
If EPA receives adverse comments or a
request for public hearing, we will
withdraw this direct final action as it
applies to the substitute or substitutes
on which the Agency has received
adverse comment and will consider and
respond to any comments prior to taking
any new, final action for the substitute
or substitutes. If a public hearing is
requested, EPA will provide notice in
the Federal Register as to the location,
date, and time. Any parties interested in
commenting on this action should do so
at that this time.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
I. EPA Proposal
EPA would add four fire suppression
agents to the list of acceptable
substitutes subject to use conditions.
The regulations implementing the SNAP
program are codified at 40 CFR Part 82,
Subpart G. The appendices to Subpart G
list substitutes for ODSs that are
unacceptable or that have restrictions
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:43 Sep 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
imposed on their use. Today’s action
will add the four halon substitutes
acceptable subject to use conditions to
the appendices to Subpart G.
The direct final rule will be effective
on November 27, 2006 without further
notice unless we receive adverse
comment (or a request for a public
hearing) by October 27, 2006. If EPA
receives adverse comment, we will
publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public
that all or part of this rule will not take
effect. EPA will address all public
comments in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. We will not
institute a second public comment
period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at
this time.
You may claim that information in
your comments is confidential business
information, as allowed by 40 CFR Part
2. If you submit comments and include
information that you claim as
confidential business information, we
request that you submit them directly to
Bella Maranion in two versions: one
clearly marked ‘‘Public’’ to be filed in
the public docket, and the other marked
‘‘Confidential’’ to be reviewed by
authorized government personnel only.
II. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
This action is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore
not subject to review under the EO.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
EPA has determined that this
proposed rule contains no information
requirements subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
that are not already approved by the
OMB. OMB has reviewed and approved
two Information Collection Requests
(ICRs) by EPA which are described in
the March 18, 1994 rulemaking (59 FR
13044, at 13121, 13146–13147) and in
the October 16, 1996 rulemaking (61 FR
54030, at 54038–54039). These ICRs
included five types of respondent
reporting and record-keeping activities
pursuant to SNAP regulations:
submission of a SNAP petition, filing a
SNAP/TSCA Addendum, notification
for test marketing activity, recordkeeping for substitutes acceptable
subject to narrowed use limits, and
record-keeping for small volume uses.
The OMB Control Numbers are 2060–
0226 and 2060–0350. The EPA ICR
Numbers are 1596.06 and 1774.03.
Copies of the ICR document(s) may be
obtained from Susan Auby, by mail at
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
56423
the Office of Environmental
Information, Collection Strategies
Division; U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (2822T); 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, by email at auby.susan@epa.gov, or by
calling (202) 566–1672. Include the ICR
and/or OMB number in any
correspondence.
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.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statutes 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 impact
of today’s rule on small entities, small
entities are defined as (1) a small
business as defined by the Small
Business Administration’s (SBA)
regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (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-forprofit enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic
impacts of today’s proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action
E:\FR\FM\27SEP1.SGM
27SEP1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
56424
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposed rule will not
impose any requirements on small
entities. Today’s action effectively
supports the introduction of four new
alternatives to the fire protection
extinguishing systems market thus
providing additional options for users
making the transition away from ozonedepleting halons.
Use of halon 1301 total flooding
systems have historically been in
specialty fire protection applications
including essential electronics, civil
aviation, military mobile weapon
systems, oil and gas and other process
industries, and merchant shipping with
smaller segments of use including
libraries, museums, and laboratories.
The majority of halon 1301 system
owners continue to maintain and
refurbish existing systems since halon
1301 supplies continue to be available
in the U.S. Owners of new facilities
make up the market for the new
alternative agent systems and may also
consider employing other available fire
protection options including new,
improved technology for early warning
and smoke detection. Thus, EPA is
providing more options to any entity,
including small entities, by finding
these substitutes acceptable for use. The
use restrictions imposed on the
substitutes in today’s rule are consistent
with the applications suggested by the
submitters. Thus far, these alternatives
have not been sold or used in the end
uses not found acceptable under today’s
rule. Until a manufacturer or other party
requests a SNAP review for such end
uses, these products may not be sold for
such end uses. Therefore, we conclude
that the rule does not impose a new cost
on businesses.
Although this proposed rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities,
EPA nonetheless has tried to reduce the
impact of this rule on small entities. By
introducing new substitutes, today’s
rule gives additional flexibility to small
entities that are concerned with fire
suppression. EPA also has worked
closely together with the National Fire
Protection Association, which conducts
regular outreach with, and involves
small state, local, and tribal
governments in developing and
implementing relevant fire protection
standards and codes. We continue to be
interested in the potential impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities and
welcome comments on issues related to
such impacts.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:43 Sep 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
D. 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 by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by 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 costeffective 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. 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.
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 Title II of the UMRA) for
State, local, or tribal governments or the
private sector. Because this rule imposes
no enforceable duty on any State, local
or tribal government it 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
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
governments; therefore, EPA is 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.
E. 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 proposed 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 proposed
rule will provide additional options for
fire protection subject to safety
guidelines in industry standards. These
standards are typically already required
by state or local fire codes, and this rule
does not require state, local, or tribal
governments to change their regulations.
Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not
apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 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.’’ This proposed rule does
not have tribal implications, as specified
in Executive Order 13175. It will not
have substantial 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 proposed rule will provide
additional options for fire protection
E:\FR\FM\27SEP1.SGM
27SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
subject to safety guidelines in industry
standards. These standards are typically
already required by state or local fire
codes, and this rule does not require
tribal governments to change their
regulations. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
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.
This proposed rule is not
economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and the Agency
does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. The
acceptability listings in this proposed
rule primarily apply to the workplace,
and thus, do not put children at risk
disproportionately. This rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because it is not economically
significant as defined in Executive
Order 12866 and because the Agency
does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
H. Executive Order 13211 (Energy
Effects)
This 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 rule allows wider use of substitutes,
providing greater flexibility for industry
related to choices of alternative fire
suppression systems to support the
transition away from ozone-depleting
substances, but little if any impact
related to energy. Thus, we have
concluded that this rule is not likely to
have any adverse energy effects.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:43 Sep 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
56425
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
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 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. EPA is not
requiring that specific technical
standards be met in these regulations.
EPA defers to existing National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA)
voluntary consensus standards and
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) regulations that
relate to the safe use of halon substitutes
reviewed under SNAP. EPA refers users
to the latest edition of NFPA 2001
Standard on Clean Agent Fire
Extinguishing Systems which provides
for exposure guidelines and safe use of
halocarbon and inert gas agents used to
extinguish fires. EPA also refers to the
latest edition of NFPA 2010 Standard on
Aerosol Extinguishing Systems, 2005
edition, which provides for safe use of
aerosol extinguishing agents and
technologies. Copies of these standards
may be obtained by calling the NFPA’s
telephone number for ordering
publications at 1–800–344–3555. The
NFPA 2001 and 2010 standards meet
the objectives of the rule by setting
scientifically-based guidelines for safe
exposure to halocarbon and inert gas
agents and aerosol extinguishing agents,
respectively. In addition, EPA has
worked in consultation with OSHA to
encourage development of technical
standards to be adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies.
40 CFR Part 180
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 21, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6–15842 Filed 9–26–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0586; FRL–8089–5]
Propanil, Phenmedipham, Triallate,
and MCPA; Proposed Tolerance
Actions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to revoke
certain tolerances for herbicides
propanil, triallate, and MCPA. Also,
EPA is proposing to modify certain
tolerances for the herbicides propanil,
phenmedipham, triallate, and MCPA. In
addition, EPA is proposing to establish
tolerances for the herbicides propanil,
phenmedipham, triallate, and MCPA.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before November 27, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0586, by
one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001.
• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S.
Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket’s
normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to
4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket telephone number is (703) 305–
5805.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–
0586. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the docket
without change and may be made
available on-line at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through regulations.gov or email. The Federal regulations.gov
website is an ‘‘anonymous access’’
system, which means EPA will not
E:\FR\FM\27SEP1.SGM
27SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 27, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56422-56425]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-15842]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0087; FRL-8223-5]
RIN-2060-AM24
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Listing of Substitutes for
Ozone-Depleting Substances--Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to list
four substitutes for ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) in the fire
suppression and explosion protection sector as acceptable subject to
use conditions under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. SNAP implements
section 612 of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, which requires
EPA to evaluate substitutes for ODSs and find them acceptable where
they do not pose a greater overall risk to human health and the
environment than other acceptable substitutes.
DATES: Comments must be received in writing by October 27, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2005-0087 by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Mail: OAR Docket and Information Center, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. To expedite review, a second copy of
the comments should be sent to Bella Maranion at the address listed
below under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation Docket, EPA Docket
Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2005-0087. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
[[Page 56423]]
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket,
EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the
Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bella Maranion, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs (6205J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 343-9749; fax number:
(202) 343-2363; e-mail address: maranion.bella@epa.gov. The published
versions of notices and rulemakings under the SNAP program are
available on EPA's Stratospheric Ozone Web site at https://www.epa.gov/
ozone/snap/regs.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, EPA
is taking this action as a direct final rule without prior proposal
because EPA views this as a non-controversial revision and anticipates
no adverse comments. A rationale for this action is set forth in the
preamble to the direct final rule.
If we receive no adverse comments and no requests for public
hearings in response to this action, we will take no further activity
in relation to this rule. If EPA receives adverse comments or a request
for public hearing, we will withdraw this direct final action as it
applies to the substitute or substitutes on which the Agency has
received adverse comment and will consider and respond to any comments
prior to taking any new, final action for the substitute or
substitutes. If a public hearing is requested, EPA will provide notice
in the Federal Register as to the location, date, and time. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at that this time.
I. EPA Proposal
EPA would add four fire suppression agents to the list of
acceptable substitutes subject to use conditions. The regulations
implementing the SNAP program are codified at 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart
G. The appendices to Subpart G list substitutes for ODSs that are
unacceptable or that have restrictions imposed on their use. Today's
action will add the four halon substitutes acceptable subject to use
conditions to the appendices to Subpart G.
The direct final rule will be effective on November 27, 2006
without further notice unless we receive adverse comment (or a request
for a public hearing) by October 27, 2006. If EPA receives adverse
comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that all or part of this rule will not take
effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. We will not institute a second public
comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time.
You may claim that information in your comments is confidential
business information, as allowed by 40 CFR Part 2. If you submit
comments and include information that you claim as confidential
business information, we request that you submit them directly to Bella
Maranion in two versions: one clearly marked ``Public'' to be filed in
the public docket, and the other marked ``Confidential'' to be reviewed
by authorized government personnel only.
II. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is therefore not subject to review under the EO.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
EPA has determined that this proposed rule contains no information
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., that are not already approved by the OMB. OMB has reviewed and
approved two Information Collection Requests (ICRs) by EPA which are
described in the March 18, 1994 rulemaking (59 FR 13044, at 13121,
13146-13147) and in the October 16, 1996 rulemaking (61 FR 54030, at
54038-54039). These ICRs included five types of respondent reporting
and record-keeping activities pursuant to SNAP regulations: submission
of a SNAP petition, filing a SNAP/TSCA Addendum, notification for test
marketing activity, record-keeping for substitutes acceptable subject
to narrowed use limits, and record-keeping for small volume uses. The
OMB Control Numbers are 2060-0226 and 2060-0350. The EPA ICR Numbers
are 1596.06 and 1774.03.
Copies of the ICR document(s) may be obtained from Susan Auby, by
mail at the Office of Environmental Information, Collection Strategies
Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822T); 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail at
auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 566-1672. Include the ICR and/
or OMB number in any correspondence.
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.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice
and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure
Act or any other statutes 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 impact of today's rule on small
entities, small entities are defined as (1) a small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (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 proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action
[[Page 56424]]
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This proposed rule will not impose any requirements on
small entities. Today's action effectively supports the introduction of
four new alternatives to the fire protection extinguishing systems
market thus providing additional options for users making the
transition away from ozone-depleting halons.
Use of halon 1301 total flooding systems have historically been in
specialty fire protection applications including essential electronics,
civil aviation, military mobile weapon systems, oil and gas and other
process industries, and merchant shipping with smaller segments of use
including libraries, museums, and laboratories. The majority of halon
1301 system owners continue to maintain and refurbish existing systems
since halon 1301 supplies continue to be available in the U.S. Owners
of new facilities make up the market for the new alternative agent
systems and may also consider employing other available fire protection
options including new, improved technology for early warning and smoke
detection. Thus, EPA is providing more options to any entity, including
small entities, by finding these substitutes acceptable for use. The
use restrictions imposed on the substitutes in today's rule are
consistent with the applications suggested by the submitters. Thus far,
these alternatives have not been sold or used in the end uses not found
acceptable under today's rule. Until a manufacturer or other party
requests a SNAP review for such end uses, these products may not be
sold for such end uses. Therefore, we conclude that the rule does not
impose a new cost on businesses.
Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has
tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities. By
introducing new substitutes, today's rule gives additional flexibility
to small entities that are concerned with fire suppression. EPA also
has worked closely together with the National Fire Protection
Association, which conducts regular outreach with, and involves small
state, local, and tribal governments in developing and implementing
relevant fire protection standards and codes. We continue to be
interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small
entities and welcome comments on issues related to such impacts.
D. 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 by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by 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. 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.
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 Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. Because this rule imposes no
enforceable duty on any State, local or tribal government it 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 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.
E. 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 proposed 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 proposed rule will provide
additional options for fire protection subject to safety guidelines in
industry standards. These standards are typically already required by
state or local fire codes, and this rule does not require state, local,
or tribal governments to change their regulations. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 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.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It
will not have substantial 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 proposed rule will provide additional options for fire protection
[[Page 56425]]
subject to safety guidelines in industry standards. These standards are
typically already required by state or local fire codes, and this rule
does not require tribal governments to change their regulations. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
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.
This proposed rule is not economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and the Agency does not have reason to believe
the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action
present a disproportionate risk to children. The acceptability listings
in this proposed rule primarily apply to the workplace, and thus, do
not put children at risk disproportionately. This rule is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as
defined in Executive Order 12866 and because the Agency does not have
reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by
this action present a disproportionate risk to children.
H. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
This 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 rule allows
wider use of substitutes, providing greater flexibility for industry
related to choices of alternative fire suppression systems to support
the transition away from ozone-depleting substances, but little if any
impact related to energy. Thus, we have concluded that this rule is not
likely to have any adverse energy effects.
I. 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
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. EPA is not
requiring that specific technical standards be met in these
regulations. EPA defers to existing National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) voluntary consensus standards and Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations that relate to the
safe use of halon substitutes reviewed under SNAP. EPA refers users to
the latest edition of NFPA 2001 Standard on Clean Agent Fire
Extinguishing Systems which provides for exposure guidelines and safe
use of halocarbon and inert gas agents used to extinguish fires. EPA
also refers to the latest edition of NFPA 2010 Standard on Aerosol
Extinguishing Systems, 2005 edition, which provides for safe use of
aerosol extinguishing agents and technologies. Copies of these
standards may be obtained by calling the NFPA's telephone number for
ordering publications at 1-800-344-3555. The NFPA 2001 and 2010
standards meet the objectives of the rule by setting scientifically-
based guidelines for safe exposure to halocarbon and inert gas agents
and aerosol extinguishing agents, respectively. In addition, EPA has
worked in consultation with OSHA to encourage development of technical
standards to be adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 21, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6-15842 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P