[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 4, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57813-57822]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19872]
[[Page 57813]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 302 and 355
[SFUND-2003-0022; FRL-7980-2]
RIN 2050-AF02
Administrative Reporting Exemption for Certain Air Releases of
NOX (NO and NO2)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice of proposed rulemaking provides notice of, and
requests comments, including any relevant data, on a proposed new
administrative exemption from certain notification requirements under
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980, as amended, and the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act, also known as Title III of the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act. The Agency also seeks public comment on human
health risk assessment data or other relevant data that relates to this
proposal. The proposed administrative reporting exemption pertains to
releases of less than 1,000 pounds of nitrogen oxide and nitrogen
dioxide (or collectively ``NOX'') to the air in 24 hours
that is the result of combustion activities, unless such release is the
result of an accident or malfunction. Notifications must still be made
for accidents or malfunctions that result in the releases of
NOX at the final RQ of 10 pounds or more per 24 hours. The
administrative reporting exemption is protective of human health and
the environment and consistent with the Agency's goal to reduce
unnecessary reports considering that levels for which the Clean Air Act
regulates NOX are considerably higher than 10 pounds. In
addition, the Agency believes that the submission of these reports for
the proposed exempted releases would not contribute significantly to
the data that is already available through the permitting process to
the government and the public. The Agency is also considering and
seeking comment on two other options to address the high frequency of
release notifications. Those options would involve more efficient use
of Continuous Release reporting and a complete exemption from the
notification requirements under CERCLA and EPCRA.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 5, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. SFUND-
2003-0022, 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.
E-mail: [email protected].
Fax: (202) 566-0224.
Mail: Superfund Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 5202T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. In
addition, please mail a copy of your comments on the information
collection provisions to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for
EPA, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC 20503.
Hand Delivery: Superfund Docket in the EPA Docket Center,
(EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. 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. SFUND-2003-
0022. 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). For additional
instructions on submitting comments, go to Unit I.B. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
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 Superfund 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 Superfund Docket is (202)
566-0276.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn Beasley, Regulation and Policy
Development Division, Office of Emergency Management, Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response (5104A), Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:
(202) 564-1965; fax number: (202) 564-2625; e-mail address:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
[[Page 57814]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type of entity Examples of affected entitites
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry............................... Because this proposed rule is
an administrative reporting
exemption for releases of NOX
to the air, application of
this rule should result in a
reduction to your reporting
burden. This proposed rule may
affect the following entities:
persons in charge of vessels
or facilities that may release
nitrogen oxide (NO) or
nitrogen dioxide (NO2) or both
(NOX) to the air.
State, Local, or Tribal Governments.... State and Tribal Emergency
Response Commissions, and
Local Emergency Planning
Committees.
Federal Government..................... National Response Center and
any Federal agency that may
release NOX.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the table could also be regulated. To determine whether
your facility is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine
the criteria in Section III.A of this proposed rule and the
applicability criteria in Sec. 302.6 of title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. If you have questions regarding the applicability
of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
In order to implement CERCLA and EPCRA more efficiently, while not
presenting a threat to human health, welfare and the environment, EPA
is considering granting an administrative exemption from the release
notification requirements of CERCLA and EPCRA for certain releases of
NOX under certain circumstances and which are less than
1,000 pounds per 24 hours. Based on historical information, it is in
the Agency's best judgment that a federal response to such releases,
other than those from an accident or malfunction, is unlikely. Through
CAA permitting programs, the government and the public have information
regarding releases of NOX at comparatively higher amounts
than what is required by CERCLA and EPCRA reporting; however exempting
releases that are not permitted from CERCLA and EPCRA notification
requirements would create a gap in that information. EPA seeks data and
other supporting information in order to determine whether requiring
reports of NOX releases that are a result of combustion and
below 1,000 pounds per 24 hours, serve a useful purpose.
In the alternative, and based on data and other information
received pursuant to this proposed rule, the Agency may decide that it
is more efficient and appropriate to pursue other options to address
the high frequency of NOX release notifications mentioned in
the Summary section of this proposed rule and further explained in
section D. below. The Agency seeks to effectively target those
notifications to best achieve Federal and public information needs.
When submitting comments, remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
2. 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.
3. Keep your comments relevant--Comments outside the specific
parameters or scope of this rulemaking (see Section III.A., below) will
be considered non-responsive to this request for comments and will not
receive a response by the Agency in the final rulemaking package or the
Response to Comments Document.
4. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
5. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
6. If you estimate potential costs, burdens or savings, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
7. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
8. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
9. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
C. What Is the Statutory Authority for This Rulemaking?
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., as amended by
the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, gives the
Federal Government broad authority to respond to releases or threats of
releases of hazardous substances from vessels and facilities. The term
``hazardous substance'' is defined in section 101(14) of CERCLA
primarily by reference to other Federal environmental statutes. Section
102 of CERCLA gives the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
authority to designate additional hazardous substances. Currently there
are 764 CERCLA hazardous substances,\1\ exclusive of Radionuclides, F-,
K-, and Unlisted Characteristic Hazardous Wastes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This total includes P- and U- wastes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under CERCLA section 103(a), the person in charge of a vessel or
facility from which a CERCLA hazardous substance has been released in a
quantity that equals or exceeds its reportable quantity (RQ) must
immediately notify the National Response Center (NRC) of the release. A
release is reportable if an RQ or more is released within a 24-hour
period (see 40 CFR 302.6). This reporting requirement, among other
things, serves as a trigger for informing the government of a release
so that Federal personnel can evaluate the need for a Federal removal
or remedial action and undertake any necessary action in a timely
fashion.
On March 19, 1998, the Agency issued a final rule (63 FR 13459)
that broadened existing reporting exemptions for releases of naturally
occurring radionuclides. The Agency relied on CERCLA sections 102(a),
103, and 115 (the general rulemaking authority under CERCLA) as
authority to issue regulations governing section 103 reporting
requirements, as well as administrative reporting exemptions. These
exemptions were granted for releases of hazardous substances which pose
little or no risk or to which a Federal response is infeasible or
inappropriate (63 FR 13461).
In addition to the reporting requirements established pursuant to
CERCLA section 103, section 304 of the Emergency Planning and Community
[[Page 57815]]
Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA), 42 U.S.C. 11001 et seq., requires
the owner or operator of certain facilities to immediately report
releases of CERCLA hazardous substances or any extremely hazardous
substances to State and local authorities (see 40 CFR 355.40). Any
proposed burden reduction measure that applies to CERCLA section 103
notification requirements would also apply to EPCRA section 304
notification requirements. In part, EPCRA's reporting requirement is
designed to effectuate a statutory purpose of informing communities and
the public generally about releases from nearby facilities.
Notification is to be given to the community emergency coordinator for
each local emergency planning committee (LEPC) for any area likely to
be affected by the release, and the State emergency response commission
(SERC) of any State likely to be affected by the release. Through this
notification, State and local officials can assess whether a response
to the release is appropriate, regardless of whether the Federal
Government intends to respond. EPCRA section 304 notification
requirements apply only to releases that have the potential for off-
site exposure and that are from facilities that produce, use, or store
a ``hazardous chemical,'' as defined by regulations promulgated under
the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 CFR 1910.1200(c))
and by section 311 of EPCRA.
D. Which NOX Releases Are Proposed for Administrative
Exemption From the Reporting Requirements?
EPA proposes to administratively exempt certain releases of NO and
NO2 to air from the reporting requirements of CERCLA and
EPCRA, established in 40 CFR 302.6 and 40 CFR 355.40, respectively,
that are the result of combustion activities, of less than 1,000 pounds
per 24 hours and not the result of an accident or other malfunction.
Notifications must still be made for accidents or malfunctions that
result in the releases of NOX at the final RQ of 10 pounds
or more per 24 hours.
Currently, the reportable quantity (RQ) for both NO and
NO2 is 10 pounds in any 24 hour period. This RQ is easily
met by those facilities that release NOX \2\ to the air.
This is especially true when the facility processes include combustion
activities. For example, an 80 million BTU/hr natural gas boiler will
exceed the RQ for NOX after 2.5 hours of operation. A 120
million BTU/hr coal boiler will exceed the RQ for NO2 in
less than 3 hours of operation and the RQ for NO in less than 2 hours
of operation. Small engines also trigger the 10 pound threshold--an 18
horsepower engine running 24 hours will exceed the RQ for
NOX and a 100 horsepower engine will exceed the RQ for
NOX in five hours. Even turning on bakery ovens could
trigger the RQ for NOX when turned on for daily
operations.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ For this proposed rule, we use the shorthand convention
NOX to refer to both NO and NO2 either
collectively or as individual hazardous substances.
\3\ These examples were submitted to the Agency during the
comment period for the Guidance on the CERCLA Section 101A(10)(H)
Federally Permitted Release Definition for Certain Air Emissions (67
FR 18899, April 17, 2002) discussed furhter in the Background
section of this preamble. A sample of the letters received related
to NOX and its 10 pound RQ are provided in the Docket
(SFUND-2003-0022) for this rule. All of the letters received
pursuant tot he Guidance can be found in that Docket (GE-G-1999-
029).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The notification data provided in the two tables below is from the
National Response Center. Summary Table 1 contains data from the
Emergency Release Notification System (ERNS) \4\ for the notification
of episodic releases of oil and hazardous substances. Summary Table 2
contains data from the Continuous Release--Emergency Release
Notification System (CR-ERNS) \5\ for the continuous release reporting
requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This data collection activity is approved under OMB No.
2050-0046. EPA Form Number 1049.10.
\5\ This data collection activity is approved under OMB No.
2050-0086. EPA Form Number 1445.06.
Summary Table 1.--NOX (reported as NOX, NO, NO2) Release Notifications (to Air)--ERNS Notifications
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total number Percent of
Year NOX Reported Less than 10-99 100-999 1000-5000 Above 5000 total
notifications unknown amt 10 pounds pounds pounds pounds pounds reports
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1994.......................................... 99 36 6 33 20 4 ........... .3
1995.......................................... 214 139 8 48 16 3 ........... .6
1996.......................................... 209 119 3 66 15 6 ........... .7
1997.......................................... 245 131 2 86 22 4 ........... .8
1998.......................................... 370 164 17 131 48 7 3 1.2
1999.......................................... 661 285 18 235 76 44 3 2.2
2000.......................................... 1103 252 11 518 254 43 25 3.4
2001.......................................... 1905 513 42 1034 257 53 6 5.5
2002.......................................... 2425 466 29 1379 462 73 16 7.5
2003.......................................... 2774 488 144 1562 504 63 13 8.6
2004.......................................... 3064 576 95 1708 568 103 14 9.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the recent years, 2001-2004, a significant number of
NOX release reports to ERNS occur below 1,000 pounds. See
Summary Table 1, above. However, this data may not accurately reflect
actual NOX releases based on several factors, including the
apparent misunderstanding by industry in general of the requirement to
report NOX releases and the Agency's exercise of enforcement
discretion for the release of NOX that has been in effect
since 2000.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The enforcement discretion memorandum that reaches this
conclusion, as well as those memoranda that extend the enforcement
discretion, is provided in the Docket for this rule.
[[Page 57816]]
Summary Table 2.--NOX (reported as NOX, NO, NO2) Release Notifications (to Air)--CR-ERNS Initial Reports
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total number Percent of
Year NOX Reported as Less than 10-99 100-999 1000-5000 Above 5000 total
notifications unknown amt 10 pounds pounds pounds pounds reports
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1994......................................... 29 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... .09
1995......................................... 42 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... .1
1196......................................... 31 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... .1
1997......................................... 47 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... .2
1998......................................... 248 ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... ........... .8
1999......................................... 264 ........... ........... ........... 1 1 ........... .9
2000......................................... 770 401 5 170 125 34 35 2.4
2001......................................... 120 14 3 32 40 16 15 .3
2002......................................... 209 82 1 22 27 28 49 .6
2003......................................... 68 24 2 15 10 10 7 .2
2004......................................... 16 1 0 3 8 2 2 .04
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prior to December 1999, the National Response Center did not record
the amount of hazardous substance released for the initial continuous
release reports. That information would be captured later in written
reports to the EPA Regional offices and the State and local planning
committees. The data in Summary Table 2 is also subject to the caveat
described above, regarding industry's misunderstanding to notify and
the Agency's exercise of enforcement discretion.
CERCLA 101(10)(H) defines a ``federally permitted release,'' to
include, ``any emission into the air subject to a permit or control
regulation under section 111 [42 U.S.C.A. 7411], section 112 [42
U.S.C.A. 7412], Title I part C [42 U.S.C.A. 7470 et seq.], Title I part
D [42 U.S.C.A. 7501 et seq.], or State implementation plans submitted
in accordance with section 110 of the Clean Air Act [42 U.S.C.A. 7410]
(and not disapproved by the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency), including any schedule or waiver granted,
promulgated, or approved under these sections, * * *'' The following
table is a summary of the CAA provisions identified in CERCLA
101(10)(H) that briefly describes how NOX emissions are
controlled through the CAA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional
What it does Control NOX? information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAA Sec. 111
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Source Performance NSPS controlling NOX NSPS include
Standards--EPA to evaluate promulgated for:. exemptions based on
and control emissions from --municipal waste source size or
new stationary sources in combustors. capacity. NSPS are
areas that meet and do meet --hospital, medical, developed based on
National Ambient Air infectious waste the degree of
Quality Standards for incinerators. emission limitation
criteria pollutants (incl. --fossil fuel-fired achievable through
NOX). Developed and steam generators. application of the
promulgated separately for --electric utility best technological
various categories of steam generating system, taking into
sources. units. consideration cost,
--industrial, health impacts, and
commercial, energy
institutional steam requirements.
generating units. Waivers may be
--stationary gas granted to extend
turbines. compliance
schedules or allow
the use of
alternative control
technologies.
-----------------------------
CAA Sec. 112
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requires the evaluation and NOX is not a HAP, NESHAPs set emission
control of emissions of but NOX emissions limits, equipment
hazardous air pollutants may be incidentally standards, and/or
(HAPs). Control of HAP reduced through co- work practice
emissions is achieved control of some HAP standards for
through National Emission source categories categories of
Standards for HAPs or (MACT--maximum stationary sources
NESHAPs. achievable control
technology).
-----------------------------
CAA Title I Part C
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PSD--Prevention of PSD requirements NOX PSD requirements
Significant Deterioration affect construction apply everywhere
requirements may apply to a or modification of since NO2 NAAQS has
single source or multiple large NOX sources been attained
sources within a facility, in NAAQS attainment everywhere.
if the source:. areas. Affected
--belongs to one of 28 sources must use
listed source categories the best available
and has the potential to control technology.
emit 100TPY or more of NOX
(or other listed
pollutants).
--is any new major source Emissions subject to ....................
(>250TPY) of NOX PSD requirements
--is subject of a planned must be controlled
modification that would with best available
increase NOX emissions by control technology.
at least 40TPY.
-----------------------------
[[Page 57817]]
CAA Title I Part D
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nonattainment NSR Emission control Because Part D
requirements for new major requirements are applies to sources
sources and major based on the lowest in nonattainment
modifications. achievable emission areas, compliance
--applies primarily to new reduction--more and reporting
sources in ozone stringent than requirements are
nonattainment areas. BACT. more stringent than
--based on 10-100TPY of NOX .................... those for PSD
for major sources. Must also offset sources. Also
emission increases.. applies in the
Ozone Transport
Region; may apply
in some PM
nonattainment areas
where NOX is a PM
precursor. Waivers
may be granted in
certain ozone
nonattainment
areas.
-----------------------------
CAA Sec. 110
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requires each state to SIPs must be at SIPs must be updated
submit to EPA a SIP that least as stringent to incorporate
provides for attainment, as federal newly promulgated
maintenance, and requirements. Vary state or federal
enforcement of the NAAQS widely because rules. SIP
within the state. ambient air quality requirements must
issues vary from be incorporated
state to state, and into Title V
from region to permits, including
region within a PSD/NSR. NOXRACT is
state. For example, required in certain
NOX-emitting ozone nonattainment
sources in areas and in the
metropolitan or Ozone Transport
heavily Region. SIPs must
industrialized prevent significant
areas generally contribution to
face more stringent nonattainment in
requirements than downwind states.
in rural areas that
are not classified
as sensitive air
quality regions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are several CAA programs that affect NOX emissions that have been
developed since Congress defined federally permitted releases under
CERCLA. The new programs include direct control of NOX emissions from
stationary and mobile sources, and co-control of NOX emissions by
requirements for sulfur dioxide, ozone, and particulate matter
emissions. Congress did not amend CERCLA 101(10)(H) to include the new
programs.
II. Background
On December 21, 1999, EPA published interim guidance on the
federally permitted release exemption to section 103 of CERCLA and
section 304 of EPCRA (64 FR 71614). The interim guidance discussed
EPA's interpretation of the federally permitted release exemption as it
applies to some air emissions and solicited public comment. The public
comment period closed after several extensions on April 10, 2000. The
Agency received many comments on the interim guidance, including
specific questions regarding EPA's interpretation of the federally
permitted release exemption as it applies to NOX
releases.\7\ NOX releases to air are somewhat unique in
that, in most cases, federally enforceable permits (including State
issued through delegated programs) are not issued to facilities that
release NOX below a certain threshold. NOX
emissions from these sources are minimal and may not pose a hazard to
health or the environment. In its final Guidance on the CERCLA Section
101(10)(H) Federally Permitted Release Definition for Certain Air
Emissions (67 FR 18899, April 17, 2002), EPA responded to the concern
that many small facilities do not have federally enforceable permits by
stating in that Federal Register notice that it recognized, ``that
certain uncontrolled air emissions of nitrogen oxide (NO) and nitrogen
dioxide (NO2) equal to or greater than the ten pound RQ may
rarely require a government response.'' (67 FR 18904). When the Agency
published that final Guidance, it also extended and expanded an on-
going enforcement discretion (Appendix B to that Notice) with regard to
owners, operators or persons in charge to include, for failure to
report air releases of NO and NO2 that would otherwise
trigger a reporting obligation under CERCLA section 103 and EPCRA
section 304, unless such releases are the result of an accident or
malfunction. (67 FR 18904). The Agency intends to continue to exercise
its enforcement discretion until EPA completes action on this
rulemaking.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Some of those comment letters received are available in the
Docket (SFUND-2003-0022) for this rule. All comments are available
in the Docket for the Interim Guidance (EG-G-1999-029).
\8\ A copy of the Federal Register notice and Memoranda from the
AA OECA to Regional Counsels which addresses the on-going
enforcement discretion is included in the Docket (SFUND-2003-0022)
to today's proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Summary of Today's Action
A. What Is the Scope of Today's Proposed Rule?
Today's proposed rule is limited to addressing the level of
reporting associated with NOX. Specifically, the Agency is
considering, either an administrative exemption from CERCLA and EPCRA
reporting requirements found in 40 CFR 302.6 and 40 CFR 355.40,
respectively, for the release of less than 1,000 pounds per 24 hours of
NOX to air that is the result of combustion activities, or
other alternatives described in section D. below. The Agency will
consider comments from the public as to whether such releases of
NOX to air resulting from combustion activities are
appropriate for this limited administrative reporting exemption or
alternative resolution. Any exemption or alternative resolution would
not apply to releases of NOX that are the result of an
accident or malfunction \9\ of equipment. In addition the Agency is not
considering an exemption for the release of any other hazardous
substance in this proposed rule. Comments regarding other hazardous
substances will not be considered relevant to this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 40 CFR 60.2 Definitions and 40 CFR 63.2 Definitions for
Clean Air Act regulatory definition of malfunction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. What Is EPA's Rationale for This Administrative Reporting Exemption?
As described in the background section of this proposed rule, the
Agency published final federally permitted release guidance on April
17, 2002. During the period for public comment on the Agency's interim
guidance (December 21, 1999 through April 10, 2000), EPA received
numerous comments \10\ that the ten pound NOX RQ could
result in a large number of notifications triggered by very small
releases which could overburden the CERCLA notification system and
impede the government's ability to
[[Page 57818]]
focus its resources on more serious releases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Docket EG-G-1999-029 for complete record of comment
letters or SFUND-2003-0022 for a sample of comment letters relevant
to this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When evaluated solely in conjunction with Clean Air Act (CAA)
permitting programs that include sources that have the potential to
emit up to 250 tons per year (CAA Title I, Part C, see table above) of
NOX, the Agency believes it is appropriate to promulgate an
administrative reporting exemption for NOX releases to air
that are the result of combustion, and result in releases less than
1,000 pounds per 24 hours, considering that the likelihood of a Federal
response to the release of NOX below this level is highly
unlikely \11\ and that these releases are sources for which reporting
may serve no useful purpose under either CERCLA or EPCRA. In fact, in
selecting an exemption level of 1,000 pounds per 24 hour period, the
Agency notes that this level is below the level at which permits are
required under the CAA for NOX, such that it appears
``infeasible'' that any response would be undertaken. However, the
Agency requests comment on whether a higher level, 5,000 pounds per 24
hour period or lower level, 100 pounds, is appropriate. In submitting
comments on a different level, we request that commenters provide what
an appropriate level might be, as well as the justification for that
level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ An RQ merely establishes a trigger for informing the
government of a release so that, among other things, the appropriate
government personnel can evaluate the need for a response action and
can undertake any necessary response action in a timely fashion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some commenters have suggested \12\ raising the RQ to 100 pounds,
1000 pounds or 5000 pounds. Under this approach, the Agency would need
to revise the methodology for establishing the RQ for NOX,
which would likely take a number of years to develop and promulgate
through rulemaking. We believe that an administrative reporting
exemption would likely provide the same outcome in less time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Available in the Docket (SFUND-2003-0022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is interested in data that may relate to the usefulness of the
notifications under CERCLA that would result from maintaining the 10
pound reportable quantity without any exemption. In addition, the
Agency also requests comment as to whether reporting under EPCRA should
be maintained. If those commenting believe that such reporting should
be maintained, they should describe why and particularly what purposes
this reporting would serve.
Today's proposed exemptions are from CERCLA section 103 and EPCRA
section 304 reporting requirements only; they will have no bearing on
CERCLA liability or any other applicable reporting requirements under
other laws.
C. How Is This Proposed Administrative Reporting Exemption Consistent
With EPA's Mission To Protect Human Health and the Environment?
The administrative reporting exemption proposed in today's
rulemaking would not prevent EPA from carrying out its mission to
protect human health and the environment. First, we are not aware that
any of the NOX release notifications that were previously
submitted has resulted in a response action being taken, unless it was
a result of an accident or malfunction. Thus, such submissions
particularly those at levels below 1,000 pounds per 24 hours, have not
furthered the protection of human health and the environment. As a
result of today's proposal industry and the Federal Government would be
better able to focus their resources. As an example, in the Summary
Tables which provide data on the number of NOX release
notifications submitted between 1994 and 2004, we estimate that the
private sector and Federal Government spent about 3.7 man-months \13\
to prepare and process these notifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ This estimate was calculated using the burden hours
described in the Information Collection Requests 1049.10 and 1445.06
and the total notifications received by the NRC for ERNS and CR-
ERNS. Summary calculations are available in the Docket (SFUND-2003-
0022) for further review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal would also result in no longer requiring the
submission of such notifications below 1,000 pounds per 24 hours to the
State Emergency Response Commissions and Local Emergency Planning
Committees as required by EPCRA. EPCRA serves the purposes of community
information and emergency planning and prevention, as well as emergency
response. Release notification can assist in emergency response
planning and preparedness regardless of whether there is any Federal,
State or local emergency response to the release. By removing this
reporting exemption under EPCRA, it would also allow the state and
local planning committees to better focus their resources. See also
discussion under, III.B. What is EPA's Rationale for this
Administrative Reporting Exemption.
Nevertheless, the Agency seeks information related to the level of
risk associated with such releases, the appropriateness and feasibility
of a Federal response, and the usefulness of the reports to Federal,
State and local governments, as well as the public at large and
communities near facilities that emit NOX.
D. What Alternative Options Is EPA Considering To Address the CERCLA
Section 103 and EPCRA Section 304 Reporting Requirements of Certain
Unpermitted Releases of NOX to Air?
EPA is also seeking data or additional information to help us
consider the appropriateness of alternative options to address the
CERCLA section 103 and EPCRA section 304 Reporting Requirements of
Certain Unpermitted Releases of NOX to the air. Those
options include; (a) more efficient use of Continuous Release
reporting, and (b) extending the administrative reporting exemption to
include all releases of NOX from combustion sources that are
not the result of an accident or malfunction.
(a) Continuous Release reporting refers to the provisions under
CERCLA section 103(f)(2) which allows the qualified exemption of
notification requirements under CERCLA section 103 (a) and (b) for any
release of a hazardous substance which is a continuous release, stable
in quantity and rate.\14\ The Agency published a final rule on July 24,
1990 (55 FR 30165) that amended 40 CFR by adding Sec. 302.8 and part
355. Section 302.8 sets forth the notification requirements for
continuous release reporting under CERCLA. Part 355 identifies the
State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) and Local Emergency Planning
Committee (LEPC) as the recipients of the continuous release reports as
set forth under EPCRA and indicates that continuous releases are
otherwise exempt from SARA Title III section 304 emergency response
notification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ CERCLA section 103(f)(2)--No notification shall be required
under subsection (a) or (b) of this section for any release of a
hazardous substance, * * * (2) which is a continuous release, stable
in quantity and rate, and is (A) from a facility for which
notification has been given under subsection (c) of this section, or
(B) a release of which notification has been given under subsections
(a) and (b) of this section for a period sufficient to establish the
continuity, quantity, and regularity of such release: Provided, That
notification in accordance with subsections (a) and (b) of this
paragraph shall be given for releases subject to this paragraph
annually, or at such time as there is any statistically significant
increase in the quantity of any hazardous substance or constituent
thereof released, above that previously reported or occurring.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A continuous release is a release that occurs without interruption
or abatement or that is routine, anticipated, and intermittent and
incidental to normal operations or treatment processes. There are four
steps in the continuous release notification process: (1) Initial
telephone notification (to the
[[Page 57819]]
NRC, SERC, and LEPC); (2) initial written notifications to the
appropriate EPA Regional Office (within 30 days of the initial
telephone notification); (3) follow-up written reports; and (4) change
notifications. Details on the information required are found in 40 CFR
302.8. A general description of the information required follows. For
more detailed information concerning continuous release reporting
requirements, see U.S. EPA, Reporting Requirements for Continuous
Releases of Hazardous Substances: A Guide for Facilities and Vessels on
Compliance,'' Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, OSWER
Directive 9360.7-01, October 1990. This publication is available at:
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/release/faciliti.htm a copy is
also available in the Docket.
The person in charge is required to provide the following
information in the initial telephone notification:
Statement that this is an initial telephone notification
of a continuous release;
Name and location of the facility or vessel responsible
for the release; and
Name and identity of each hazardous substance released.
The initial written notification must include the following types
of information:
General information on the facility or vessel, and the
area surrounding the facility or vessel; and
Source information, including the identity of each release
source, the names and quantities of the hazardous substances released
from each source, the basis for stating that the release qualifies as
continuous and stable in quantity and rate, the environmental medium
affected by the release, the normal range of the release from the
source, and the frequency of the release from each source.
The information required in the written follow-up report is
identical to that required in the initial written notification, but it
is based on release data gathered over the year (i.e., during the
period since the submission of the initial written report). If there
are any changes in a continuous release, the EPA Regional Office must
be notified. If there is a change in the source or composition of a
continuous release, the release is considered a ``new'' release.
The Agency believes the definition of ``continuous'' may be
sufficiently broad so as to cover many of the NOX situations
in a manner that would be consistent with the fundamental purpose of
CERCLA section 103(a) reporting requirements, which is to alert
government response officials to releases that require immediate
evaluation to determine whether a field response may be necessary. See
also, 55 FR 30169, July 24, 1990. However, as described above, we
question whether such notifications for releases of NOX
below 1,000 pounds per 24 hours need to be submitted. Nevertheless, the
Agency solicits comment on whether this approach--require that
NOX release notifications be covered under the continuous
release reporting scheme--is appropriate and should be adopted. In
submitting such comments, please describe any changes you believe
should be made to the existing procedures, if any, and if so, why.
(b) The option of extending the administrative reporting exemption
to include NOX releases from all combustion sources,
excluding accidents and malfunctions. The Agency will review any data
submitted during the public comment to determine if extending the
administrative reporting exemption for NOX under certain
conditions is appropriate. Commenters wishing to support an extension
of the administrative reporting exemption beyond the proposed amount of
less than 1,000 pounds per 24 hours will need to submit a human health
and ecological risk assessment to support extending the administrative
reporting exemption to include all NOX releases from all
combustion sources. Guidance on conducting a human health and
ecological risk assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/superfund_toxicity.htm. The risk assessment should
include all current complete site-specific exposure pathways for all
affected media, future land use potential, potential exposure pathways,
and toxicity information. The Agency is particularly interested in data
on reasonably maximum exposed individual for NOX and the
level of interest in the release notifications by the state and local
planning commissions.
IV. Statutory and Regulatory Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)) the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``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 governments 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.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been
determined that this rule is a ``significant regulatory action''
because it raises novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order. As such, this action was submitted to OMB for
review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or recommendations
will be documented in the public record.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The
Information Collection Request (ICR) documents prepared by EPA have
been assigned EPA ICR numbers 1049.10 and 1445.06.
EPA ICR number 1049.10 covers collection requirements for the
notification of episodic release of oil and hazardous substances. EPA
ICR number 1445.06 covers collection requirements for the continuous
release reporting requirement. Both of these information collections
are affected by this proposed rule. However, this proposed rule
represents a reduction in the burden for both industry and the
government.
The information collected for the episodic release of oil and
hazardous substances is required by section 103(a) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA), as amended, and section 311 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as
amended. The hazardous substance and oil release information collected
pursuant to CERCLA section 103(a) and CWA section 311 has a variety of
different uses. Federal response authorities, such as EPA and the
United States Coast Guard On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs), use the
information to evaluate the environmental and human health risks
attributable to a reported release and to determine if a Federal
response action is necessary to mitigate or prevent any
[[Page 57820]]
adverse effects associated with the release. The information provided
is public information; however, the name of the person who makes the
notification is not available to the public.
The information collected for the continuous release reporting
requirement is required by section 103(f)(2) of CERCLA. CERCLA section
103(f)(2) provides relief from the notification requirements of CERCLA
section 103(a) for hazardous substances releases that are
``continuous,'' ``stable in quantity and rate,'' and for which
notification has been given under CERCLA section 103(a) ``for a period
sufficient to establish the continuity, quantity, and regularity'' of
the release. The information collection and management requirements of
the continuous release reporting regulations are necessary to determine
if a response action is needed to control or mitigate any potential
adverse effects associated with a reported hazardous substance release.
The information provided is public information.
The estimated projected cost and hour burden represents those
attributable to NO and NO2 releases to air that are less
than 1,000 pounds per 24 hours. The Adjusted Information Collection
Requests for 1049.10 and 1445.06 are available in the Docket for this
rule. In order to specifically highlight the impact of the proposed
administrative reporting exemption, the current Information Collection
Requests were adjusted rather than completely revised. The adjusted
Information Collection Requests include tables that show projected cost
and burden as if the releases were not required to be reported. Within
the documents, the new tables immediately follow the original tables
and are clearly identified.
With respect to the information collected for the episodic release
of oil and all hazardous substances (1049.10), the Agency estimates for
industry an annual overall reduction of cost from $6,279,539 to
$5,932,993 a reduction of $346,546 with a corresponding reduction in
the hour burden from 98,736 to 93,287 a reduction of 5,449 hours. This
represents a reduction in the likely number of respondents from 24,082
to 22,753 a reduction of 1,329 reportable releases. For the purpose of
this burden analysis, each reportable release equals one respondent.
With respect to the information collected for the continuous
release reporting regulation (1445.06) for all hazardous substances,
the Agency estimates for industry an annual overall reduction of cost
from $10,101,032 to $10,070,423 a reduction of $30,609 with a
corresponding reduction in the hour burden from 284,154 to 283,285 a
reduction of 869 hours. This represents a reduction in the likely
number of respondents from 3,145 to 3,009 a reduction of 136
respondents.
Together, the Agency estimates for industry an annual overall
reduction of cost from $16,380,571 to $16,003,416 an overall reduction
of $377,155 with a corresponding reduction in the hour burden from
382,890 to 376,572 a reduction of 6,318 hours. This represents an
overall reduction in the likely number of respondents from 27,227 to
25,762 a reduction of 1,465 respondents.
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 in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy
of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection
techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this rule, which
includes these ICRs, under Docket ID number SFUND-2003-0022. Submit any
comments related to the ICRs for this proposed rule to EPA and OMB. See
ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice for where to submit
comments to EPA. Send comments to OMB at the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street,
NW. Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Since OMB is
required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days
after October 4, 2005, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its
full effect if OMB receives it by November 3, 2005. The final rule will
respond to any OMB or public comments on the information collection
requirements contained in this proposal.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (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 governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is 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 hereby certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant
economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603
and 604. Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive
economic effect on small entities subject to the rule.
This rulemaking will relieve regulatory burden because we propose
to eliminate the reporting requirement for certain releases of
NOX to the air. We expect the net reporting and record
keeping burden associated with reporting releases of NOX
under CERCLA section 103 and EPCRA section 304 to decrease. This
reduction in burden will be realized mostly by small businesses because
larger businesses usually operate under federal permits and therefore
qualify for the ``federally
[[Page 57821]]
permitted release'' exemption for reporting under CERCLA. 40 CFR 302.6.
We have therefore concluded that today's proposed rule will relieve
regulatory burden for all affected small entities. 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 to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to 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.
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 or the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. The rule imposes no enforceable duty
on any State, local or tribal governments or the private sector;
promulgation of this rule will result in a burden reduction in the
receipt of notifications of the release of NOX. EPA has
determined that this rule does not include a Federal mandate that may
result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, or
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one
year. This is because this proposed rule imposes no enforceable duty on
any State, local, or tribal governments. EPA also has determined that
this rule contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly
or uniquely affect small governments. In addition, as discussed above,
the private sector is not expected to incur costs exceeding $100
million. Thus, today's proposed rule is not subject to the requirements
of Sections 202 and 205 of UMRA.
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. There are no State and local
government bodies that incur direct compliance costs by this
rulemaking. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule
from State and local officials.
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.
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities
of Indian tribal governments, nor would it impose substantial direct
compliance costs on them. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Risks and Safety Risks
The Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined ``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 proposed rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an
environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use
This proposed rule is not subject to 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.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, 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.,
[[Page 57822]]
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 proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus
standards.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 302
Air pollution control, Chemicals, Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act, Extremely hazardous substances, Hazardous chemicals,
Hazardous materials, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous
substances, Hazardous wastes, Intergovernmental relations, Natural
resources, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Waste
treatment and disposal.
40 CFR Part 355
Air pollution control, Chemical accident prevention, Chemical
emergency preparedness, Chemicals, Community emergency response plan,
Community right-to-know, Contingency planning, Disaster assistance,
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, Extremely hazardous
substances, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Natural
resources, Penalties, Reportable quantity, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, Threshold
planning quantity.
Dated: September 27, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, it is proposed to amend
title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 302--DESIGNATION, REPORTABLE QUANTITIES, AND NOTIFICATION
1. The authority citation for part 302 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9602, 9603, 9604; 33 U.S.C. 1321 and 1361.
2. Section 302.6 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 302.6 Notification requirements.
* * * * *
(e) The following releases are exempt from the notification
requirements of this section:
(1) Releases in amounts less than 1,000 pounds per 24 hours of
nitrogen oxide to the air which are the result of combustion and not
the result of an accident or malfunction of equipment.
(2) Releases in amounts less than 1,000 pounds per 24 hours of
nitrogen dioxide to the air which are the result of combustion and not
the result of an accident or malfunction of equipment.
PART 355--EMERGENCY PLANNING AND NOTIFICATION
1. The authority citation for part 355 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11002, 11004, and 11048.
2. Section 355.40 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(2)(vii) to
read as follows:
Sec. 355.40 Emergency release notification.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(vii) Any release in amounts less than 1,000 pounds per 24 hours of
nitrogen oxide or nitrogen dioxide to the air that is the result of
combustion and not the result of an accident or malfunction of
equipment.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-19872 Filed 10-3-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P