Federal Register, Volume 69 Issue 116 (Thursday, June 17, 2004)

[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 116 (Thursday, June 17, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34024-34033]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-13680]

[[Page 34023]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part IV

Environmental Protection Agency

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

40 CFR Part 82

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Allowance System for Controlling
HCFC Production, Import and Export; Direct Final Rule and Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2004 / Rules
and Regulations

[[Page 34024]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[OAR-2003-0130; FRL-7774-1]

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Allowance System for
Controlling HCFC Production, Import and Export

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to conform its regulations
governing the trade of certain ozone depleting substances with the
Montreal Protocol and to correct a drafting error. We are approving
these minor adjustments to domestic regulations to ensure that those
complying with the U.S. regulations are also complying with the terms
of the Montreal Protocol.

DATES: This direct rule is effective on August 16, 2004 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by July 19, 2004. If we
receive adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take
effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by EDocket ID No. OAR-2003-
0130 (Legacy Docket A-98-33) by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDocket,
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred
method for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Fax comments to (202) 566-1741.
Mail/Hand delivery: Submit comments to Air and Radiation
Docket at EPA West, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Room B108, Mail Code
6102T, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: (202) 566-1742.
Instructions: Direct your comments to EDocket ID No. OAR-2003-0130.
The historical docket for this rulemaking is A-98-33. EPA's policy is
that all comments received will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, 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 EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-mail. The
EPA EDOCKET and the Federal regulations.gov Web sites are ``anonymous
access'' systems, 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
EDOCKET or 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
EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal Register of May 31, 2002 (67 FR
38102).
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index
at http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET 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 Docket is (202) 566-
1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Newberg, EPA, Global Programs
Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Office of Air and Radiation
(6205J), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, (202)
343-9729.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (1) Under the Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol), as amended, the
U.S. and other industrialized countries that are Parties to the
Protocol have agreed to limit production and consumption of
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and to phase out consumption in a
step-wise fashion over time, culminating in a complete phaseout in
2030. The Parties to the Montreal Protocol met November 10-14, 2003 in
Nairobi, Kenya where they discussed and agreed to Decision XV/3. As a
Party to the Protocol, the United States was represented at that
meeting, participated in the discussions, and agreed with the resulting
Decision XV/3. Upon review of the current domestic regulations in
relation to Decision XV/3, EPA identified discrepancies between the
Decision and EPA's regulations. Therefore, Decision XV/3 led to this
action aimed at promulgating minor adjustments to the regulations
issued January 21, 2003 (68 FR 2820) to ensure that those complying
with the U.S. regulations are also complying with the terms of the
Montreal Protocol.
EPA is publishing this amendment without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse
comment. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal
Register, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the
proposal to revise the trade restrictions provisions if adverse
comments are filed. This direct final rule will be effective on August
16, 2004 without further notice unless we receive adverse comment by
July 19, 2004. If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect. We would consider and address all public
comments in any subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time.
(2) Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in This Document:
Act--Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
ANPRM--Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Article 2 countries--industrialized countries who are not parties
operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Montreal Protocol
Article 5 countries--developing countries who satisfy certain
conditions laid out in paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Montreal
Protocol
CAA--Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
cap--limitation in level of production or consumption
CFC--chlorofluorocarbon
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
EPA--Environmental Protection Agency
FDA--Food and Drug Administration
FR--Federal Register

[[Page 34025]]

HCFC--hydrochlorofluorocarbon
NASA--National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NODA--Notice of Data Availability
NPRM--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
ODP--ozone depletion potential (CFR 40, part 82)
ODS--ozone-depleting substance
Party--States and regional economic integration organizations that
have consented to be bound by the Montreal Protocol on Substances that
Deplete the Ozone Layer
Protocol--Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
Layer
SBREFA--Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
SNAP--Significant New Alternatives Policy
UNEP--United Nations Environment Programme
U.S.--United States
(3) Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

Table of Contents

I. Regulated Entities
II. Background
III. Today's Action
A. Incorporation of Decision XV/3: Obligations of Parties to the
Beijing Amendments under Article 4 of the Montreal Protocol with
respect to hydrochlorofluorcarbons
1. Trade with States that have ratified the Copenhagen and
Beijing Amendments or have shown their intention to ratify, accede,
accept, or approve
2. Article 5 Parties
B. Correction to References to Appendices
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health & Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act

I. Regulated Entities

The HCFC allowance allocation system will affect the following
categories:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category NAICS code SIC code Examples of regulated entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chlorofluorocarbon gas manufacturing...... 325120 2869 Chlorodifluoromethane
manufacturers;
Dichlorofluoroethane
manufacturers;
Chlorodifluoroethane
manufacturers.
-------------------------------------------
Chlorofluorocarbon gas importers 325120 2869 Chlorodifluoromethane importers;
Dichlorofluoroethane importers;
Chlorodifluoroethane importers.
-------------------------------------------
Chlorofluorocarbon gas exporters.......... 325120 2869 Chlorodifluoromethane exporters;
Dichlorofluoroethane exporters;
Chlorodifluoroethane exporters.
-------------------------------------------
Polystyrene Foam Product Manufacturing.... 326140 3086 Plastics Foam Products
(Polystyrene Foam Products).
-------------------------------------------
Urethane and Other Foam Products (Except 326150 3086 Insulation and cushioning, foam
Polystyrene) Manufacturing. plastics (except polystyrene)
manufacturing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities
not listed in this table could also be affected. To determine whether
your facility, company, business organization, or other entity is
regulated by this action, you should carefully examine these
regulations. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

II. Background

In 1990, as part of a resolution on ozone-depleting substances, the
Parties to the Protocol identified HCFCs as transitional substitutes
for CFCs and other more destructive ozone-depleting substances (ODSs).
In 1992, the Parties negotiated amendments to the Protocol (the
``Copenhagen Amendment'') that created a detailed phaseout schedule for
HCFCs, with a cap on consumption for Article 2 (industrialized)
countries like the U.S. The Protocol defines consumption as production
plus imports minus exports. The consumption cap is derived from the
formula of 2.8 percent of the Party's CFC consumption in 1989, plus the
Party's consumption of HCFCs in 1989. Based on this formula, the
consumption cap for the U.S. is 15,240 ODP-weighted metric tonnes,
effective January 1, 1996.
In the Copenhagen Amendments, the Parties created a schedule with
graduated reductions and the eventual phaseout of the consumption of
HCFCs. The schedule calls for a 35 percent reduction of the cap in
2004, followed by a 65 percent reduction in 2010, a 90 percent
reduction in 2015, a 99.5 percent reduction in 2020, and a total
phaseout in 2030. As a Party to the Copenhagen Amendment (the U.S.
deposited its instrument of ratification

[[Page 34026]]

on March 2, 1994), the U.S. must comply with this phaseout schedule
under the Protocol.
In 1999, the Parties negotiated another amendment to the Protocol
(the ``Beijing Amendment''), where they agreed to a cap on HCFC
production for industrialized countries, effective January 1, 2004.
This cap was derived from the average of the Party's consumption cap
(2.8 percent of the Party's CFC consumption in 1989, plus the Party's
HCFC consumption 1989) and the result of the same formula for
production (2.8 percent of the Party's CFC production in 1989, plus the
Party's HCFC production in 1989). This formula results in a U.S.
production cap of 15,537 ODP-weighted metric tonnes. Since the U.S.
subsequently joined the Beijing Amendment (the U.S. deposited its
instrument of ratification on October 1, 2003) EPA promulgated
regulations that are consistent with that production cap as authorized
by section 606 of the CAA.
In addition, Parties to the Beijing Amendment agree that under the
Beijing amendment, beginning in January 1, 2004, they will ban HCFC
imports from and exports to ``any State not party to this Protocol.''
These amendments are reflected in Article 4 of the Protocol in
paragraphs 1 quin. and 2 quin. As a Party to the Beijing Amendment, the
U.S. therefore, has an obligation from January 1, 2004, to ban trade in
HCFCs with respect to ``any State not party to this Protocol.'' The
Protocol defines this phrase (Article 4(9)) to include any state or
regional economic integration organization (of which the European
Community is the only present example) that has not agreed to be bound
by the control measures in effect for HCFCs.
To implement the Protocol, as amended by the Copenhagen and Beijing
Amendments, EPA established an allowance system to control the U.S.
consumption of HCFCs and published the implementing regulations in the
Federal Register on January 21, 2003 (68 FR 2820). The HCFC allowance
system is part of EPA's program to reduce the emissions of ODSs to
protect the stratospheric ozone layer. These regulations also included
a provision, Sec. 82.15(e), to implement the ban on trade with states
not a Party to the Protocol. EPA interpreted Article 4 of the Protocol
to ban imports from and exports to countries that had not ratified the
amendments to the Protocol containing control measure for HCFCs
relevant to that country (e.g. for countries that produce HCFCs they
needed to be a Party to Beijing, but for countries that only consume,
but do not produce HCFCs, they needed to be a Party to Copenhagen).

III. Today's Action

A. Incorporation of Decision XV/3: Obligations of Parties to the
Beijing Amendments Under Article 4 of the Montreal Protocol With
Respect to Hydrochlorofuorcarbons

The Parties to the Montreal Protocol met November 10-14, 2003 in
Nairobi, Kenya where they discussed and agreed to Decision XV/3. The
Decision was necessary because different Parties to the Beijing
Amendment, including the U.S., were adopting differing and conflicting
interpretations of the term ``State not a party to the Protocol''
domestically in ways that would have created great uncertainty and
confusion within the regulated community with respect to which States
trade was allowed under Article 4. As a Party to the Protocol,
including both the Copenhagen and Beijing amendments, the United States
was represented at that meeting, participated in the discussions, and
agreed with the resulting Decision XV/3. Upon review of the current
domestic regulations in relation to Decision XV/3, EPA identified
discrepancies between the Decision and EPA's regulations. Therefore,
Decision XV/3 led to this action aimed at promulgating minor
adjustments to the regulations issued January 21, 2003 (68 FR 2820) to
ensure that those complying with the U.S. regulations are also
complying with the terms of the Montreal Protocol. What follows is a
review of Decision XV/3 and a discussion of what changes are being made
to the current regulations through this action.
Decision XV/3 reads as follows:
Affirming that it is operating by consensus,
Reaffirming the obligation to control consumption of
hydrochlorofluorocarbons by the Parties to the amendment adopted by the
Fourth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol at Copenhagen on
25 November 1992 (the ``Copenhagen Amendment''),
Reaffirming the obligation to control production of
hydrochlorofluorocarbons by the Parties to the amendment adopted by the
Eleventh Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol at Beijing on
3 December 1999 (the ``Beijing Amendment''),
Strongly urging all States not yet party to the Copenhagen or
Beijing Amendments to ratify, accede to or accept them as soon as
possible,
Recalling that, as of 1 January 2004, the Parties to the Beijing
Amendment have accepted obligations under Article 4, paragraph 1 quin.,
and paragraph 2 quin., of the Protocol to ban the import and export of
the controlled substances in group 1 of Annex C
(hydrochlorofluorocarbons) from any ``State not a party to this
Protocol,''
Noting that Article 4, paragraph 9 of the Protocol provides that
``for the purposes of this Article, the term ``State not party to this
Protocol'' shall include, with respect to a particular controlled
substance, a State or regional economic integration organization that
has not agreed to be bound the control measures in effect for that
substance,''
Acknowledging that the meaning of the term ``State not party to
this Protocol'' may be subject to differing interpretation with respect
to hydrochlorofluorocarbons by Parties to the Beijing Amendment, given
that control measures for the consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons
were introduced in the Copenhagen Amendment while control measures for
the production of hydrochlorofluorocarbons were introduced in the
Beijing Amendment,
Acknowledging also that, for those Parties operating under Article
5, paragraph 1, of the Protocol no control measures for the consumption
of production of hydrochlorofluorocarbons will be in effect under
either the Copenhagen or Beijing Amendments until 2016,
Desiring to decide in that context on a practice in the application
of Article 4, paragraph 9 of the Protocol by establishing by consensus
a single interpretation of the term ``State not party to this
Protocol,'' to be applied by Parties to the Beijing Amendment for the
purpose of trade in hydrochlorofluorocarbons under Article 4 of the
Protocol,
Expecting Parties to the Beijing Amendment to import or export
hydrochlorofluorocarbons in ways that do not result in the importation
of exportation of hydrochlorofluorocarbons to any ``State not party to
this Protocol'' as that term is interpreted herein, recognizing the
need to assess the fulfillment of that expectation,
1. That the Parties to the Beijing Amendment will determine their
obligations to ban the import and export of controlled substances in
group I of Annex C (hydrochlorofluorocarbons) with respect to States
and regional economic organizations that are not parties to the Beijing
Amendment by January 1, 2004 in accordance with the following:
(a) The term ``State not party to this Protocol'' in Article 4,
paragraph 9 does

[[Page 34027]]

not apply to those States operating under Article 5, paragraph 1, of
the Protocol until January 1, 2016 when, in accordance with the
Copenhagen and Beijing Amendments, hydrochlorofluorocarbon production
and consumption control measures will be in effect for States that
operate under Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Protocol;
(b) The term ``State not party to this Protocol'' includes all
other States and regional economic integration organizations that have
not agreed to be bound by the Copenhagen and Beijing Amendments;
(c) Recognizing, however, the practical difficulties imposed by the
timing associated with the adoption of the foregoing interpretation of
the term ``State not party to this Protocol,'' paragraph 1 (b) shall
apply unless such a State has by 31 March 2004:

(i) Notified the Secretariat that it intends to ratify, accede
or accept the Beijing Amendment as soon as possible;
(ii) Certified that it is in full compliance with Articles 2, 2A
to 2G and Article 4 of the Protocol, as amended by the Copenhagen
Amendment;
(iii) Submitted data on (i) and (ii) above to the Secretariat,
to be updated on 31 March 2005,

in which case that State shall fall outside the definition of ``State
not party to this Protocol'' until the conclusion of the Seventeenth
Meeting of the Parties;
2. That the Secretariat shall transmit data received under
paragraph 1 (c) above to the Implementation Committee and the Parties;
3. That the Parties shall consider the implementation and operation
of the foregoing decision at the Sixteenth Meeting of the Parties, in
particular taking into account any comments on the data submitted by
States by 31 March 2004 under paragraph 1 (c) above that the
Implementation Committee may make.
This Decision differs from the corresponding U.S. requirements
promulgated at 40 CFR part 82, subpart A. The Parties' recent agreement
to Decision XV/3 permits trade in HCFCs when the criteria stated in the
Decision have been met. The current regulations also provide for trade
in HCFCs; however, the criteria in Decision XV/3 are different from the
current criteria at 40 CFR part 82, subpart A.
Sec. 82.15(e) reads:

(e) Trade with Parties. Effective January 1, 2004, no person may
import or export any quantity of a class II controlled substance
listed in Appendix A to this subpart, from or to any foreign state
that is not listed as a Party either:
(1) In Appendix L of this subpart and also listed in Appendix C,
Annex 1 of the Protocol as having ratified the Beijing Amendments,
or
(2) In Appendix C, Annex 1 of the Protocol as having ratified
Copenhagen Amendments but not listed in Appendix L of this subpart,
or
(3) In Appendix C, Annex 2 of the Protocol, as being a foreign
state complying with the Beijing Amendments if the foreign state is
listed in Appendix L of this subpart, or as being a foreign state
complying with Copenhagen Amendments if the foreign state is not
listed in Appendix L of this subpart.

This action today modifies the current regulations to eliminate the
inconsistencies with Decision XV/3. In addition, as set forth below,
this action corrects drafting errors discovered after the Final Rule
was published in the Federal Register in January 21, 2003. As a result,
the revised regulations will permit trades consistent with the
requirements decided by the Parties and in accordance with the terms of
Decision XV/3.
Under section 614(b) of the Clean Air Act, Title VI of the Act
``shall be construed, interpreted, and applied as a supplement to the
terms and conditions of the Montreal Protocol, as provided in Article
2, paragraph 11 thereof and shall not be construed, interpreted, or
applied to abrogate the responsibilities or obligations of the United
States to implement fully the provisions of the Montreal Protocol.'' 42
U.S.C. 7671m(b). Furthermore, with respect to trade restrictions, this
provision specifically states that ``[n]othing in this subchapter shall
be construed, interpreted, or applied to affect the authority or
responsibility of the Administrator to implement Article 4 of the
Montreal Protocol with other appropriate agencies.'' Finally, section
614(b) of the Act provides that ``[i]n case of a conflict between any
provision of this subchapter [Title VI] and any provision of the
Montreal Protocol, the more stringent provision shall govern.''
Accordingly, EPA may not promulgate regulations under the Clean Air Act
that authorize trade of HCFCs with nations not authorized under Article
4 and Decision XV/3 of the Montreal Protocol. In addition, EPA does not
wish to impose trade restrictions more stringent than those required
under the Protocol.
EPA considers Decisions of the Parties, as well as the text of the
Protocol itself, when applying section 614(b). Under customary
international law, as codified in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law
of Treaties (8 International Legal Materials 679 (1969)) both the
treaty text and the practice of the parties in interpreting that text
form the basis for its interpretation. Although the United States is
not a party to the 1969 Convention, it has regarded it since 1971 as
``the authoritative guide to current treaty law and practice.'' See
Secretary of State William D. Rodgers to President Richard Nixon,
October 18, 1971, 92nd Cong., 1st Sess., Exec. L (November 22, 1971).
Specifically, Article 31(1) of the Vienna Convention provides that
``[a] treaty shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the
ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their
context and in light of its object and purpose.'' Article 31(3) goes on
to provide that ``[t]here shall be taken into account, together with
the context: (a) Any subsequent agreement between the parties regarding
the interpretation of the treaty or the application of its provisions;
(b) any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which
establishes the agreement of the parties regarding its
interpretation.'' Decision XV/3 constitutes a subsequent consensus
agreement among the Parties to the Montreal Protocol, including the
United States, regarding the interpretation and application of the
trade restriction provision in Article 4 of the Protocol. Decision XV/3
also constitutes subsequent practice in the application of the Montreal
Protocol by the Parties to it, including the United States. Thus, EPA
intends to conform its regulations on trade restrictions with Decision
XV/3.
1. Trade With States That Have Ratified the Copenhagen and Beijing
Amendments or Have Shown Their Intention To Ratify, Accede, Accept, or
Approve
Section 82.15(e)(2) permits trade with non-producing countries that
have ratified the Copenhagen Amendments. However, Decision XV/3 is more
restrictive than the current EPA promulgated regulations. According to
Decision XV/3 starting on January 1, 2004, notwithstanding the ability
to trade with States operating under Article 5(1) of the Protocol, U.S.
companies cannot trade HCFCs with any State not operating under Article
5(1) of the Protocol that has not agreed to be bound by (ratified) the
Copenhagen and Beijing Amendments, unless that State has fulfilled the
requirements under paragraphs 1(c)(i) through (iii) of Decision XV/3
and submitted the information to the Ozone Secretariat by March 31,
2004. In accordance with this Decision, it would be a violation of the
Protocol to trade HCFCs with a non-Article 5(1) Party that has not
ratified both the Copenhagen and Beijing Amendments, unless the State
has provided the relevant information listed in paragraphs (c)(i)
through (iii) of Decision XV/3 to the

[[Page 34028]]

Ozone Secretariat by March 31, 2004. Therefore, as a Party to the
Protocol and a participant in the discussions that resulted in Decision
XV/3, EPA believes it is necessary to amend the regulations to be
consistent with the Decision.
In addition, under EPA's current interpretation of Sec.
82.15(e)(3) (correcting for the absence of the referenced Appendix C to
the Protocol as set forth below), this regulation permitted trade with
any party determined by EPA to be in compliance with relevant amendment
to the Protocol and listed by EPA in Appendix C of 40 CFR part 82,
subpart A. However, before trade with such nations is permitted,
Decision XV/3 requires such parties to submit notification,
certification, and data to the Ozone Secretariat in accordance with
paragraphs (1)(c)(i)-(iii) of the Decision. As a Party to the Protocol
and a participant in the discussions that resulted in Decision XV/3,
EPA must amend its regulations to reflect these additional requirements
of the Decision.
EPA recognizes that the process to ratify amendments to the
Protocol can be lengthy and cumbersome. Further, often countries make
their intention to ratify amendments and begin to comply with the terms
of the amendments in advance of actual ratification. The criteria
established by Decision XV/3 (c)(i) through (iii) provide an
appropriate mechanism for the Ozone Secretariat and EPA to ensure
compliance with the terms of the amendments in advance of ratification
of the amendments by those States.
Through this action, EPA is amending Sec. 82.15(e) to permit trade
with non-Article 5(1) Parties that have not ratified both the
Copenhagen and Beijing Amendments, if the States have provided the
relevant information listed in paragraphs (c)(i) through (iii) of
Decision XV/3 to the Ozone Secretariat by March 31, 2004.
The Ozone Secretariat has agreed to collect the necessary
documentation required by Decision XV/3(c) and will publish the list of
countries that met the March 31, 2004 deadline. At this time, the Ozone
Secretariat is maintaining a list of countries that have submitted the
required data on its Web site: http://www.unep.org/ozone/index.asp,
Obligations of Parties to the Beijing Amendment under Article 4 of the
Montreal Protocol with Respect to Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). To
ensure that the regulated community, the Agency and all interested
parties are referencing the most accurate and complete list of Parties
complying with Decision XV/3(c), EPA recommends referring to Ozone
Secretariat's list. However, to further simplify implementation,
through this action, EPA is adding to Appendix C of subpart A of 40 CFR
part 82, Annex 3, titled Nations that are Parties to the Montreal
Protocol that have not yet ratified all applicable Amendments to the
Protocol but have Notified the Ozone Secretariat and Properly Submitted
Supporting Documentation in Accordance with the Requirements of
Decision XV/3. This list of Parties that will appear in Annex 3 to
Appendix C is consistent with the most recent information provided to
the EPA by the Ozone Secretariat. It is intended to mirror the Ozone
Secretariat's document. The reader is informed that the list maintained
by the Ozone Secretariat may be used to supplement the Annex since the
Ozone Secretariat's list may include additional States that complied
with the Decision and met the deadline. EPA consults with the Ozone
Secretariat regularly and therefore believes that only a select number
of additional States may be added to the Ozone Secretariat's list, but
noting this potential, EPA believes its own Annex may need to be
supplemented from time to time. EPA plans to use other non-regulatory
outreach means to alert the regulated entities of any States that have
been included on the Ozone Secretariat's list but do not appear in
Annex 3. Further, the Agency plans to appropriately revise Annex 3 to
Appendix C through a subsequent notice.
As a result of these changes to subpart A to incorporate Decision
XV/3, EPA is also eliminating Appendix L to Subpart A. The Ozone
Secretariat's list and Annex 3 to Appendix C of this subpart provides
the reader with sufficient guidance to ensure that Parties have
submitted data in accordance with Decision XV/3(c); therefore, Appendix
L to Part 82, Subpart A--Parties to the Montreal Protocol that Have
Reported Production of HCFCs Since 1996 in Accordance With Article 7,
paragraph 3 of the Montreal Protocol is no longer needed. Eliminating
Appendix L will limit the potential for misinterpretation. Thus,
through today's action, EPA is removing Appendix L from subpart A.
2. Article 5 Parties
Parties to the Montreal Protocol that are operating under Article
5(1) have been given a different schedule for phasing out their
production and consumption of ozone-depleting substances, than those
that are not listed under Article 5(1). EPA would like to clarify that
in accordance with the Protocol, Parties to the Protocol that operate
under Article 5(1) may continue to trade in HCFCs with other Parties as
long as they continue to meet the appropriate obligations under the
Protocol and its amendments, until the date for phasing out HCFC
consumption and production by Article 5(1) countries has been reached.
Under Article 5(1) of the Protocol no control measures for the
consumption or production of HCFCs will be in effect under either the
Copenhagen or Beijing Amendments until 2016. Therefore, through this
action, EPA is amending Sec. 82.15(e) appropriately.
EPA is also adding to Appendix C of this subpart Annex 4: Nations
that are Parties to the Montreal Protocol and are operating under
Article 5(1) as of June 17, 2004. Annex 4 is a list of nations that are
operating under Article 5(1) of the Montreal Protocol. Including this
annex in the subpart will assist regulated entities complying with the
regulations by providing a list of nations operating under Article 5(1)
in the regulatory text. While this information will be valuable, the
Agency notes that the list is dated June 17, 2004. Additional nations
may agree to the terms of the Montreal Protocol, become a Party to the
treaty, and qualify to operate under these provisions after this list
appears in the Federal Register, and thus will not be included in Annex
4. Therefore, while including Annex 4 in this subpart is useful and
will benefit the regulated entities, Annex 4 to Appendix C of subpart A
is not intended to be the sole and complete catalogue of Article (5)(1)
nations.
Through this action, EPA is adding Annex 4: Nations that are
Parties to the Montreal Protocol and are operating under Article 5(1)
as of June 17, 2004 to Appendix C of subpart A.

B. Corrections to the References to Appendices

Appendix C of 40 CFR part 82, subpart A provides information on
ratification, accession, acceptance, and approval of the Montreal
Protocol, London amendment, Copenhagen Amendment, Montreal Amendment
and the Beijing Amendment. Section 82.15(e) was intended to cite this
Appendix. However, the language at Sec. 82.15(e) contains drafting
errors and refers instead to Appendix C of the Montreal Protocol. There
is no Appendix C to the Montreal Protocol. In the absence of an
Appendix C to the Protocol, EPA interprets Sec. 82.15(e) to refer to
Appendix C of subpart A. While the Agency has made this interpretation
known through letters to regulated entities, a change to the
regulations is necessary to ensure that all interested parties are able
to correctly interpret the regulations. Therefore, through today's
action, EPA will amend Sec. 82.15(e) to

[[Page 34029]]

ensure that all references are to Appendix C of subpart A of 40 CFR
part 82.
With the promulgation of this action, Appendix C of subpart A will
have four separate sections (annexes). Currently, the CFR includes the
2 sections: Appendix C to Subpart A:--Parties to the Montreal Protocol
(As of June 14, 2002) and Annex 2: Annex 2 to Subpart A--Nations
Complying with, But Not Parties to, the Protocol. This action is adding
the following sections: Annex 3: Nations that are Parties to the
Montreal Protocol that have not yet ratified all applicable Amendments
to the Protocol but have Notified the Ozone Secretariat and Properly
Submitted Supporting Documentation in Accordance with the Requirements
of Decision XV/3 and Annex 4: Nations that are Parties to the Montreal
Protocol and are operating under Article 5(1) as of June 17, 2004. To
further clarify that Appendix C has four distinct sections, through
this action, EPA is amending the titles of each section to include
``Appendix C'' in each and to label the sections as ``Annex 1,''
``Annex 2,'' and ``Annex 3'' respectively. Thus the revised titles will
be:

--Appendix C to Subpart A, Annex 1--Parties to the Montreal Protocol,
as amended by the Beijing Amendment (As of June 14, 2002)
--Appendix C to Subpart A, Annex 2--Nations Complying with, But Not
Parties to, the Protocol
--Appendix C to Subpart A, Annex 3--Nations that are Parties to the
Montreal Protocol that have not yet ratified all applicable Amendments
to the Protocol but have Notified the Ozone Secretariat and Properly
Submitted Supporting Documentation in Accordance with the Requirements
of Decision XV/3.
--Appendix C to Subpart A, Annex 4--Nations that are Parties to the
Montreal Protocol and are operating under Article 5(1) as of June 17,
2004.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

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 government 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 that this rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' within the meaning of the Executive Order.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) previously approved the
information collection requirements that can be used to implement
today's direct final rule. The previously approved ICR is assigned OMB
control number 2060-0170 (EPA ICR No. 1432.21). A copy of the OMB
approved Information Collection Request (ICR) may be obtained from The
Collection Strategies Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(2822T); 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 or by
calling (202) 566-1672.
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 OMBcontrol numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR
are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
There is no additional paperwork burden as a result of this rule.
Current record keeping will allow EPA to implement the provisions of
today's action.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.

The RFA 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 statute 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
government jurisdictions.
EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with this direct final rule. EPA has
also determined that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. For purposes of
assessing the impact of today's rule on small entities, small entities
are defined as: (1) A small business that is identified by the North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code in the Table
below; (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.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS small
business size
standard (in
Category NAICS Code SIC Code number of
employees or
millions of
dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Chemical and Allied Products, NEC............................ 424690 5169 100
2. Chlorofluorocarbon gas exporters............................. 325120 2869 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 34030]]

After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on
small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This final rule will not impose any requirements on small entities.
None of the entities affected by this rule are considered small as
defined by the NAICS Code listed above.

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
government 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. 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 set forth by Congress in the Clean Air Act.
Viewed as a whole, all of 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 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.''
Under Section 6 of Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications and that preempts State law, unless the Agency
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the regulation.
This 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. Today's rule is expected to
primarily affect importers and exporters of HCFCs. Thus, the
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do 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 final rule does not have
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Today's
final rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of
Indian tribal governments. It does not impose any enforceable duties on
communities of Indian tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175
does not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health & 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.
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the
potential to influence the regulation. This is not such a rule, and
therefore Executive Order 13045 does not apply. This rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it implements specific trade
measures adopted under the Montreal Protocol and required by section
614 of the CAA.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

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 a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.

[[Page 34031]]

I. The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C.
272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
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. Therefore, EPA did not
consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective August 16, 2004.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Chemicals, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: June 10, 2004.
Michael O. Leavitt,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is amended as
follows:

PART 82--PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE

0
1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671-7671q.

Subpart A--Production and Consumption Controls

0
2. Revise Sec. 82.15 (e) to read as follows:

Sec. 82.15 Prohibitions for Class II Controlled Substances.

* * * * *
(e) Trade with Parties. No person may import or export any quantity
of a class II controlled substance listed in Appendix A to this
subpart, from or to any foreign state that is not either:
(1) A Party to the Montreal Protocol that has ratified the Beijing
Amendments. Parties that have ratified the Beijing Amendments as of
June 17, 2004 are listed in Annex 1 to Appendix C of this subpart. Or,
(2) A Party to the Montreal Protocol that has provided notice,
certification, and data in accordance with Decision XV/3(c)(i), (ii),
and (iii) respectively, to the Ozone Secretariat. A list of Parties
that have provided notice, certification and data in accordance with
Decision XV/3(c)(i), (ii), and (iii) respectively, by June 17, 2004 can
be found in Annex 3 to Appendix C of this subpart and on a list
maintained by the Ozone Secretariat. Or,
(3) A Party to the Montreal Protocol operating under Article 5(1)
to the Montreal Protocol. A list of Parties operating under Article
5(1) to the Montreal Protocol as of June 17, 2004 can be found in Annex
4 to Appendix C of this subpart.
* * * * *

0
3. Appendix C to subpart A is amended by adding Annexes 3 and 4 as
follows:

Appendix C to Subpart A of Part 82--Parties to the Montreal Protocol,
and Nations Complying With, but Not Parties to, the Protocol

* * * * *
Annex 3 to Appendix C of Subpart A: Nations that are Parties to the
Montreal Protocol that have not yet Ratified all applicable Amendments
to the Protocol but have Notified the Ozone Secretariat and Properly
Submitted Supporting Documentation in Accordance with the Requirements
of Decision XV/3.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parties that have submitted data in accordance with Dec. XV/3, para
1 (c)(iii)
Non-article 5 parties Party to the Party to the Beijing --------------------------------------------------------------------
Copenhagen amendment Amendment 1(c)(ii), Article 2,
1(c)(ii) 2A-2G 1(c)(ii), Article 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Australia.......................... Yes................... No.................... Yes.................. Yes.................. Yes
Austria............................ Yes................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Azerbaijan......................... Yes................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Belarus............................ No.................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Belgium............................ Yes................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Bulgaria........................... Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Canada............................. Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Czech Republic..................... Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Denmark............................ Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Estonia............................ Yes................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
European Community................. Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Finland............................ Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
France............................. Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Germany............................ Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Greece............................. Yes................... No.................... Yes.................. Yes.................. Yes
Hungary............................ Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Iceland............................ Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Ireland............................ Yes................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Israel............................. Yes................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Italy.............................. Yes................... No.................... Yes.................. Yes.................. Yes
Japan.............................. Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Kazakhstan......................... No.................... No.................... Yes.................. Yes.................. Yes
Latvia............................. Yes................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................

[[Page 34032]]

Liechtenstein...................... Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Lithuania.......................... Yes................... No.................... Yes.................. ..................... .....................
Luxembourg......................... Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Monaco............................. Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Netherlands........................ Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
New Zealand........................ Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Norway............................. Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Poland............................. Yes................... No.................... Yes.................. Yes.................. Yes
Portugal........................... Yes................... No.................... Yes.................. Yes.................. Yes
Russian Federation................. No.................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Slovakia........................... Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Slovenia........................... Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Spain.............................. Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Sweden............................. Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Switzerland........................ Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Tajikistan......................... No.................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Turkmenistan....................... No.................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Ukraine............................ Yes................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
United Kingdom..................... Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
United States of America........... Yes................... Yes................... ..................... ..................... .....................
Uzbekistan......................... Yes................... No.................... ..................... ..................... .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

Annex 4 to Appendix C of Subpart A: Nations That Are Parties to the
Montreal Protocol and Are Operating Under Article 5(1)

List of Article 5 Parties

List of Parties Classified as Operating Under Article 5 of the Montreal
Protocol

1. Albania
2. Algeria
3. Angola
4. Antigua and Barbuda
5. Argentina
6. Armenia
7. Bahamas
8. Bahrain
9. Bangladesh
10. Barbados
11. Belize
12. Benin
13. Bolivia
14. Bosnia and Herzegovina
15. Botswana
16. Brazil
17. Brunei Darussalam
18. Burkina Faso
19. Burundi
20. Cambodia
21. Cameroon
22. Central African Republic
23. Chad
24. Chile
25. China
26. Colombia
27. Comoros
28. Congo
29. Congo, Democratic Republic of
30. Costa Rica
31. C[ocirc]te d'Ivoire
32. Croatia
33. Cuba
34. Cyprus
35. Djibouti
36. Dominica
37. Dominican Republic
38. Ecuador
39. Egypt
40. El Salvador
41. Ethiopia
42. Federated States of Micronesia
43. Fiji
44. Gabon
45. Gambia
47. Ghana
48. Grenada
49. Guatemala
50. Guinea
51. Guyana
52. Haiti
53. Honduras
54. India
55. Indonesia
56. Iran, Islamic Republic of
57. Jamaica
58. Jordan
59. Kenya
60. Kiribati
61. Korea, Democratic People's Republic of
63. Kuwait
64. Kyrgyzstan
65. Lao People's Democratic Republic
66. Lebanon
67. Lesotho
68. Liberia
69. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
70. Madagascar
71. Malawi
72. Malaysia
73. Maldives
74. Mali
75. Malta
76. Marshall Islands
77. Mauritania
78. Mauritius
79. Mexico
80. Moldova
81. Mongolia
82. Morocco
83. Mozambique
84. Myanmar
85. Namibia
86. Nauru
87. Nepal
88. Nicaragua
89. Niger
90. Nigeria
91. Oman
92. Pakistan
93. Palau
94. Panama
95. Papua New Guinea
96. Paraguay
97. Peru
98. Philippines
99. Qatar
100. Romania
101. Rwanda
102. Saint Kitts and Nevis
103. Saint Lucia
104. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
105. Samoa
106. Saudi Arabia
107. Senegal
108. Serbia and Montenegro
109. Seychelles
110. Sierra Leone
111. Singapore
112. Solomon Islands
113. Somalia
114. South Africa
115. Sri Lanka
116. Sudan
117. Suriname

[[Page 34033]]

118. Swaziland
119. Syrian Arab Republic
120. Tanzania, United Republic of
121. Thailand
122. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
123. Togo
124. Tonga
125. Trinidad and Tobago
126. Tunisia
127. Turkey
128. Tuvalu
129. Uganda
130. United Arab Emirates
131. Uruguay
132. Vanuatu
133. Venezuela
134. Viet Nam
135. Yemen
136. Zambia
137. Zimbabwe

List of Parties Temporarily Classified as Operating Under Article 5 of
the Montreal Protocol

1. Cape Verde
2. Cook Islands
3. Guinea Bissau
4. Niue
5. Sao Tome and Principe
* * * * *

0
4. Appendix L to Subpart A is removed.

[FR Doc. 04-13680 Filed 6-16-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P