[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18259-18262]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-3462]
[[Page 18259]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0131; FRL-8157-4]
RIN 2060-AM46
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements for the Import of Halon-1301 Aircraft Fire Extinguishing
Vessels
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
exempt entities that import aircraft fire extinguishing spherical
pressure vessels containing halon-1301 (``aircraft halon bottles'') for
hydrostatic testing from the import petitioning requirements for used
controlled substances. The petitioning requirements compel importers to
submit detailed information to the Administrator concerning the origin
of the substance at least forty working days before a shipment is to
leave a foreign port of export. This action proposes to reduce the
administrative burden on entities that are importing aircraft halon-
1301 bottles for the purpose of maintaining these bottles to commercial
safety specifications and standards set forth in Federal Aviation
Authority airworthiness directives. This action does not propose to
exempt entities importing bulk quantities of halon-1301 in containers
that are not being imported for purposes of hydrostatic testing.
In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of today's Federal
Register, we are creating this exemption as a direct final rule without
prior proposal because we view this as a noncontroversial action and
anticipate no adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this
exemption in the preamble to the direct final rule. If we receive no
adverse comment, we will not take further action on this proposed rule.
If we receive adverse comment, we will withdraw the direct final rule
and it will not take effect. We will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. We will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any persons
interested in commenting must do so at this time.
DATES: Written comments on the companion direct final rule must be
received on or before May 11, 2006 or by May 26, 2006 if a hearing is
requested. Any party requesting a public hearing must notify the
contact person listed below by 5 p.m. eastern standard time on April
21, 2006. If a hearing is requested it will be held April 25, 2006. If
a hearing is held, commenters will have 30 days to submit follow up
comments before the close of the comment period. Persons interested in
attending a public hearing should consult with the contact person below
regarding the location and time of the hearing.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2005-
0131, by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected]
Fax: 202-343-2337, attn: Hodayah Finman
Mail: Air Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: EPA
Air Docket, EPA West, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B108, Mail
Code 6102T, Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2005-0131. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. This
Docket Facility 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: Hodayah Finman, EPA, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Office of Air and
Radiation (6205J), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460,
(202) 343-9246.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA believes that the revision to the
import petition process for the import of halon aircraft bottles
described in the direct final rule published in today's Federal
Register is noncontroversial; however, should the Agency receive
adverse comment on the companion direct final rule, EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal informing the public that the rule will not take
effect. All adverse comments received will be addressed in a subsequent
final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second
comment period on this document. For additional information, see the
direct final rule published in the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register.
Table of Contents
I. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
[[Page 18260]]
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
Summary of Supporting Analysis
I. 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 Office of Management and Budget (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.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been
determined that this is a ``significant regulatory action'' within the
meaning of the Executive Order. EPA has submitted this action to OMB
for review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or
recommendations will be documented in the public record.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
Current recordkeeping and reporting requirements under 40 CFR 82.13
allow EPA to implement the provisions of today's action. Today's action
will reduce the reporting burden that would otherwise be required under
40 CFR 82.13(g) by removing the requirement to submit information to
EPA prior to each import of aircraft halon bottles. OMB has previously
approved the information collection requirements contained in the
existing regulations under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2060-
0170, EPA ICR number 1432.25. A copy of the OMB approved Information
Collection Request (ICR) may be obtained from Susan Auby, 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 OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR
are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
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 that is primarily engaged in
the hydrostatic testing of halon aircraft bottles as defined in NAIC
code 541380 with annual receipts less than $10,000,000 (based on Small
Business Administration size standards); (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, EPA has concluded 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 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 all of the small entities subject to the rule.
This proposed rule will reduce the administrative burden on all
entities who import aircraft halon bottles. We have therefore concluded
that today's proposed rule will relieve regulatory burden for all
affected small entities.
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
[[Page 18261]]
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.
Section 203 of 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 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.
Today's rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provision of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. This rule imposes no enforceable
duty on any State, local or tribal government or the private sector.
Thus, today's rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202
and 205 of UMRA. EPA has also determined that this rule contains no
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments; therefore, EPA is not required to develop a plan
with regard to small governments under section 203. Finally, because
this rule does not contain a significant intergovernmental mandate, the
Agency is not required to develop a process to obtain input from
elected state, local, and tribal officials under section 204.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
This 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 halons. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It
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.
While this proposed rule is not subject to the Executive Order
because it is not economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866 and
this rule does not pose an adverse health effect to children, we
nonetheless have reason to believe that the environmental, health, or
safety risk addressed by the underlying Ozone Protection Program
regulations may have a disproportionate effect on children. Depletion
of stratospheric ozone results in greater transmission of the sun's
ultraviolet (UV) radiation to the earth's surface. The following
studies describe the effects on children of excessive exposure to UV
radiation: (1) Westerdahl J, Olsson H, Ingvar C. ``At what age do
sunburn episodes play a crucial role for the development of malignant
melanoma,'' Eur J Cancer 1994; 30A: 1647-54; (2) Elwood JM, Jopson J.
``Melanoma and sun exposure: an overview of published studies,'' Int J
Cancer 1997; 73:198-203; (3) Armstrong BK. ``Melanoma: childhood or
lifelong sun exposure'' In: Grobb JJ, Stern RS, Mackie RM, Weinstock
WA, eds. ``Epidemiology, causes and prevention of skin diseases,'' 1st
ed. London, England: Blackwell Science, 1997: 63-6; (4) Whiteman D.,
Green A. ``Melanoma and Sunburn,'' Cancer Causes Control, 1994: 5:564-
72; (5) Kricker A, Armstrong, BK, English, DR, Heenan, PJ. ``Does
intermittent sun exposure cause basal cell carcinoma? A case control
study in Western Australia,'' Int J Cancer 1995; 60: 489-94; (6)
Gallagher, RP, Hill, GB, Bajdik, CD, et. al. ``Sunlight exposure,
pigmentary factors, and risk of nonmelanocytic skin cancer I, Basal
cell carcinoma,'' Arch Dermatol 1995; 131: 157-63; (7) Armstrong, BK.
``How sun exposure causes skin cancer: an epidemiological
perspective,'' Prevention of Skin Cancer. 2004. 89-116.
EPA anticipates that this rule will have a positive impact on the
environment and human health by removing a disincentive to preventive
maintenance of aircraft halon bottles and reducing the likelihood of
accidental emissions. Thus, this proposed rule is not expected to
increase the impacts on children's health from stratospheric ozone
depletion.
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 likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Further, we have
concluded that this rule is not likely to have any adverse energy
effects.
I. The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, Section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in
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
[[Page 18262]]
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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Chemicals, Exports, Halon, Imports, Ozone Layer, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: April 5, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 06-3462 Filed 4-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P