[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 129 (Monday, July 7, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36428-36433]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-17594]
[[Page 36427]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part V
Environmental Protection Agency
_______________________________________________________________________
40 CFR Part 82
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Sale of Halon Blends, Intentional
Release of Halon, Technician Training and Disposal of Halon and Halon-
Containing Equipment; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 129 / Monday, July 7, 1997 / Proposed
Rules
[[Page 36428]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[FRL-5852-6]
RIN-2060-AH44
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Sale of Halon Blends,
Intentional Release of Halon, Technician Training and Disposal of Halon
and Halon-Containing Equipment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In response to a lawsuit filed against EPA by the Sierra Club
on March 31, 1995, and the subsequent consent decree, of which notice
was published in the Federal Register on September 17, 1996 (61 FR
48950), EPA is proposing the following regulations pursuant to section
608 (a)(2) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (the Act). Through
this action, EPA is proposing to ban the sale of halon blends; to
prohibit the intentional release of halons during training of
technicians and during testing, repair, and disposal of halon-
containing equipment; to require appropriate training of technicians
regarding emissions reduction; and to require proper disposal of halon
and of halon-containing equipment at the end of its useful life.
DATES: Comments on this proposal must be received by August 6, 1997. If
a hearing is requested, it will be held on July 22, 1997, and the
comment period will then be extended to August 21, 1997. Anyone who
wishes to request a hearing should call Mavis Sanders at 202/233-9737
by July 14, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposal must be submitted to the Air
Docket Office, Public Docket No. A-92-01 VIIIG, Waterside Mall (Ground
Floor), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington,
DC 20460 in room M-1500. Additional comments and materials supporting
this rulemaking are contained in Public Docket No. A-92-01. Dockets may
be inspected from 8 a.m. until 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. A
reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket materials.
A public hearing, if requested, will be held in Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mavis Sanders, Program Implementation
Branch, Stratospheric Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric
Programs, Office of Air and Radiation (6205-J), 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20460, (202) 233-9737. The Stratospheric Ozone
Information Hotline at 1-800-296-1996 can also be contacted for further
information.
Persons may contact the Stratospheric Protection Hotline at 1-800-
296-1996 to learn if a hearing will be held and to obtain the date and
location of any hearing. Any hearing will be strictly limited to the
subject matter of this proposal, the scope of which is discussed below.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The contents of this preamble are listed in
the following outline:
I. Regulated Entities
II. Background
a. Stratospheric Protection
b. Section 608(a) of the Clean Air Act
c. Sierra Club Suit
d. Halons
III. Today's Proposal
a. Banning the Sale of Halon Blends
b. Intentional Release, Halon Technician Training and Disposal of
Halons and Halon-Containing Equipment
1. Intentional Release of Halons and Technician Training
2. Exemption From Intentional Release Requirements for Aircraft
3. Disposal of Halons and Halon-Containing Equipment
IV. Administrative Requirements
a. Executive Order 12866
b. Regulatory Flexibility
c. Unfunded Mandates Act
d. Paperwork Reduction Act
I. Regulated Entities
Entities potentially regulated by this action are those that
manufacture, sell, or distribute halon blends and persons who test,
repair, or dispose of total flooding systems, hand-held fire
extinguishers or aerosol containers or who employ technicians to
service such equipment. Other entities potentially impacted by the
prohibition of the intentional release of halons during technician
training and during testing, repair, and disposal of equipment are U.S.
military institutions. Regulated categories and entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Examples of regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry............................... Manufacturers, distributors,
retailers and recyclers of
halon blends. Persons who
test, repair, or dispose of
halon containing equipment
they have purchased, or who
employ technicians to perform
such services.
Military............................... Military entities that dispose
of halon containing equipment,
that employ technicians who
service halon containing
equipment, or that release
halons during technician
training or during testing,
repair, or disposal of
equipment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 affected by this action. Other types of entities
not listed in the table could also be affected. To determine whether
your company is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine
the applicability criteria discussed below. 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.
II. Background
a. Stratospheric Protection
The stratospheric ozone layer protects the Earth from penetration
of harmful ultraviolet (UV-B) radiation. National and international
consensus exists that releases of certain man-made halocarbons,
including chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, carbon tetrachloride, and
methyl chloroform, contribute to the depletion of the stratospheric
ozone layer and should be controlled. Ozone depletion harms human
health and the environment through increased incidence of certain skin
cancers and cataracts, suppression of the immune system, damage to
plants including crops and aquatic organisms, increased formation of
ground-level ozone and increased weathering of outdoor plastics. Ozone-
depleting substances have been designated as either class I or class II
substances (see 40 CFR part 82, appendices A and B to subpart A). Class
I substances include chlorofluorocarbons, halons, carbon tetrachloride,
methyl chloroform, methyl bromide and hydrobromofluorocarbons; class II
substances include hydrochlorofluorocarbons. Halon is commonly used in
fire suppression. Halon blends consisting of halon 1211 and halon 1301
were once widely manufactured for use in hand-held portable
extinguishers and aerosol containers. However, since January 1, 1994,
in accordance with the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the
Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol), halon production in, and importation
into the
[[Page 36429]]
U.S. has been prohibited (40 CFR 82.4(b), 82.7; 58 FR 65018). There are
limited exceptions to this ban for production for export to countries
covered under Article V of the Montreal Protocol (Sec. 82.9(a)(1));
production/import for essential uses (Sec. 82.4(r)); and production
using destruction/transformation credits under Sec. 82.9(f) (for
persons nominated for essential use exemptions only.)
b. Section 608(a) of the Clean Air Act
Section 608 of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (the Act)
requires EPA to establish a comprehensive program to limit emissions of
ozone-depleting substances during their use and disposal.
Subsection (a) of section 608 requires EPA to promulgate
regulations ``establishing standards and requirements regarding the use
and disposal'' of both class I and class II substances. The regulations
are to ``reduce the use and emission of such substances to the lowest
achievable level'' and to ``maximize the recapture and recycling of
such substances.''
On May 14, 1993, EPA promulgated regulations under section 608(a)
of the Act, establishing standards and requirements for the use and
disposal of class I and II substances during the servicing, repair and
disposal of air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment (58 FR 28660.)
Statutory authority for today's proposal is found in section 608(a)(2)
of the Act, which directs EPA to establish standards and requirements
regarding use and disposal of class I and II substances other than
refrigerants. Section 608 (a) (2) requires EPA to promulgate additional
regulations that establish standards and requirements regarding the use
and disposal of both class I and class II substances not covered by the
initial set of regulations, i.e., all non-refrigerant uses of class I
and class II substances.
The goal of subsection 608(a) is to reduce the use and emission of
ozone-depleting substances to the lowest achievable level and maximize
the recapture and recycling of such substances. Today's proposed
requirements regarding disposal of halon-containing equipment and
technician training, together with the proposed bans on the sale of
halon blends and the intentional release of halon during repair,
testing, and disposal of equipment, and during technician training, are
designed to meet the intent of section 608(a) by reducing potential
emissions of halon, a significant ozone depleter.
c. Sierra Club Suit
On March 31, 1995, the Sierra Club filed a complaint against EPA,
claiming that EPA had not met the requirements of section 608(a)(2) of
the Act by taking regulatory steps to minimize use and emissions of
ozone-depleting substances other than refrigerants. This action
resulted in negotiations between EPA and the Sierra Club that led to a
consent decree of which notice was published on September 17, 1996, in
the Federal Register (61 FR 48950). In the consent decree, EPA agreed
to take the following actions with regard to halons: (1) To issue a
proposed rule regarding a ban of the sale of all halon blends and to
take final action on the proposal; (2) to issue a proposed rule or
rules regarding the intentional release of halons during repair and
testing of equipment containing halons, training concerning the use of
such equipment, disposal of halons, and removal or disposal of
equipment containing halons at the end of the life of such equipment;
and to take final action on the proposal; and (3) to issue either a
proposed rule requiring the certification of recycling and recovery
equipment for halons and allowing the removal of halons only through
use of certified equipment or a direct final determination that no such
rule is necessary or appropriate; and to take final action if a
proposal is issued or if adverse comment is received on the direct
final determination. EPA will address the third of these commitments in
a separate action from today's.
d. Halons
Halons are gaseous or easily vaporized halocarbons used primarily
for putting out fires, but also for explosion protection. The two
halons most widely used in the United States are Halon 1211 and Halon
1301. Halon 1211 is used primarily in streaming applications and Halon
1301 is typically used in total flooding applications. Some limited use
of Halon 2402 also exists in the United States, but only as an
extinguishant in engine nacelles (the streamlined enclosure surrounding
the engine) on older aircraft and in the guidance system of Minuteman
missiles. Today's proposed action is not expected to affect the supply
of unblended halons for these important uses.
Halons are used in a wide range of fire protection applications
because they combine four characteristics. First, they are highly
effective against solid, liquid/gaseous, and electrical fires (referred
to as Class A, B, and C fires, respectively). Second, they are clean
agents: That is, they dissipate rapidly, leaving no residue and thereby
avoiding secondary damage to the property they are protecting. Third,
halons do not conduct electricity and can be used in areas containing
live electrical equipment where they can penetrate to and around
physical objects to extinguish fires in otherwise inaccessible areas.
Finally, halons are generally safe for limited human exposure when used
with proper exposure controls.
Despite these advantages, halons are among the most ozone-depleting
chemicals in use today. With 0.2 representing the threshold for
classification as a class I substance, Halon 1301 has an estimated
ozone-depleting potential (ODP) of 10; Halon 1211 has an estimated ODP
of 3. Thus, while total halon production (measured in metric tons)
comprised just 2 percent of the total production of class I substances
in 1986, halons represented 23 percent of the total estimated ozone
depletion attributable to class I substances produced during that year.
Prior to the early 1990's, the greatest releases of halon into the
atmosphere occurred not in extinguishing fires, but during testing and
training, service and repair, and accidental discharges. Data generated
as part of the Montreal Protocol's technology assessment indicated that
only 15 percent of annual Halon 1211 emissions and 18 percent of annual
Halon 1301 emissions occur as a result of use to extinguish actual
fires. These figures indicated that significant gains could be made in
protecting the ozone layer by revising testing and training procedures
and by limiting unnecessary discharges through better detection and
dispensing systems for halon and halon alternatives. The fire
protection community began to conserve halon reserves in response to
the impending ban of the production and import of halons 1211, 1301 and
2402 that occurred January 1, 1994. Through standards, research, and
field practice the fire protection community eliminated discharge
testing with halons and minimized use of halon for testing and
training. Additionally, fire equipment distributors began to service
and maintain fire suppression equipment regularly to avoid leaks, false
discharges, and other unnecessary emissions.
III. Today's Proposal
Today, EPA is proposing several actions relative to the sale and
emission of halon as mandated by the Sierra Club consent decree. First,
EPA is proposing to ban the sale of all halon blends, including blends
of Halon 1211, Halon 1301 and Halon 2402. Today's proposal does not
affect the sale of unblended halons.
[[Page 36430]]
Second, EPA is proposing to ban the intentional release of halons
during repair, testing, and disposal of equipment that contains halon
and during technician training. For safety reasons, EPA is proposing to
grant an exemption from this ban for halon release used as part of the
test of fire extinguishing systems in class C and class D compartments
aboard aircraft when such a test is required by the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) under its Airworthiness Standards.
Third, EPA is requiring halon equipment service companies, halon
recyclers, halon equipment manufacturers, and other organizations that
employ technicians who service halon-containing equipment to provide
training regarding halon emission reduction during the servicing of
halon containing equipment.
Finally, EPA is requiring owners of equipment containing halon to
dispose of this equipment by returning the halon containing equipment
to the manufacturer, a fire equipment distributor or halon recycler for
halon recovery. EPA is also requiring persons disposing of halon to
send it to a halon recycler.
This proposed action is consistent with the provisions in the
consent decree agreed to by EPA and the Sierra Club, which obligate EPA
to take certain actions in regard to the requirements contained in
section 608 (a)(2) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (the
``Act''). EPA has developed the provisions of this proposal with input
from representatives of the halon industry, fire protection community,
environmental groups and affected trade associations. Since the halon
industry has successfully been making significant strides towards
reducing halon emission through the use of technician training and
efficient halon removal and disposal practices for halon-containing
equipment, EPA believes that today's proposal generally reflects
existing industry standards and practices. As a result, EPA also
believes that today's proposal will not significantly impact members of
the fire protection community.
a. Banning the Sale of Halon Blends
EPA is proposing to ban the sale of all halon blends. This ban is
expected to reduce the use of such blends in accordance with section
608(a)(3) of the Act by preventing newly manufactured blends from being
introduced into the marketplace.
Halon blends are extremely effective fire suppression agents
primarily used in portable fire extinguishers. Although the market for
these blends is small, inability to recycle and reuse halon blends
economically represents a significant environmental risk. Recycled
halon is necessary to bridge the gap between the end of halon
production in 1994 and the commercial availability of replacements and
to provide for critical uses for which satisfactory substitutes or
alternative fire protection measures cannot be found. Prior to the 1994
ban on the production of halons, the Halon Alternatives Research
Corporation (HARC) helped to sponsor a study on issues related to halon
recycling and the establishment of a national recycling program. This
program included the creation of a national halon bank. Currently, this
halon bank brokers transfers of halon between users and may eventually
arrange for storage facilities to accommodate fluctuations in supply
and demand of halon. Halon blends can be recycled adequately, but only
at significant cost. Therefore halon blends are not commonly recycled
and forwarded to a halon bank for critical uses.
Portable halon fire extinguishers are sold, distributed, installed,
and maintained by fire equipment dealers and distributors; accidental
release and leakage can be reduced through regular maintenance by the
distributor. Fire extinguishers that contain halon blends can be
returned to equipment dealers or recyclers for halon recovery but not
for halon recycling. Recyclers and equipment dealers within the US do
not yet have the technology necessary to separate and reclaim halon
blends, although new technology is beginning to become available on a
very limited basis internationally. Recyclers have not invested in this
new technology because the halon blend market is so small that
recycling halon blends is deemed unprofitable. Furthermore, EPA
believes that there is only one U.S. manufacturer currently producing
halon blends. EPA has contacted this manufacturer to determine the
impact, if any, a ban of the sale of all halon blends may have on this
manufacturer. This manufacturer claimed that halon blends represent
less than 2% of its business and that a ban on the sale of halon blends
would minimally impact this organization's profitability. Furthermore,
this manufacturer stated that because the fire protection community has
made considerable progress in identifying and using alternatives or
unblended halons that use nitrogen as a propellant, consumer demand for
halon blend extinguishers and aerosol containers has already been
significantly reduced.
EPA believes that a ban on the sale of halon blends will have
minimal impact on manufacturers, distributors or consumers. EPA is
seeking comment on the impact that banning the sale of halon blends may
have on consumers or industry.
b. Intentional Release, Halon Technician Training and Disposal of
Halons and Halon-Containing Equipment
1. Intentional Release of Halons and Technician Training
EPA is proposing to ban the intentional release of halons
(including halon blends) during technician training and during testing,
repair and disposal of halon-containing equipment, and to require
technician training regarding halon emission reduction. Historically,
the greatest release of halon into the atmosphere used to occur during
testing and training, service and repair, and accidental discharges.
However, emissions from Halon 1211 and Halon 1301 applications have
decreased substantially over the last five years due to a change in
industry practices concerning the release of halon as outlined in the
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Technical Standards (NFPA
12-A) and Underwriters Laboratories (UL) 1058. These standards require
proper leak testing and prohibit the release of halon during system
testing.
In an effort to reduce unnecessary emissions, distributors and
service companies sponsor technician training programs that are
primarily administered by representatives of equipment manufacturers.
Additionally, distributors and service companies augment this training
through the use of videos and in-house training about the reduction of
emissions through the use of standards and codes. These standards and
codes are developed by organizations such as the NFPA and UL, which
provide minimum requirements for the design, selection, installation,
inspection, and maintenance of halon-containing equipment. This
additional training may also include information regarding applicable
state and local codes and standards.
EPA believes that the fire protection community has responded
responsibly to the following tangible incentives to reduce emissions
and provide adequate training. First, the value of halon has increased
dramatically as it has become less available since the ban on halon
production in 1994. Second, in an effort to be responsive to
environmental concerns, the fire protection community has developed
self-imposed service standards and practices to reduce emissions and
increase recycling. Because these incentives directly impact
[[Page 36431]]
industry profitability, EPA believes that more stringent requirements
for minimizing halon emissions or for technician training are not
necessary and would produce very little environmental benefit. Today's
proposal therefore is based on the practices the industry has already
developed and implemented. EPA is seeking comments on the impact of
banning intentional release of halons and requiring emissions reduction
training.
2. Exemption From Intentional Release Requirements for Aircraft
EPA is proposing to grant an exemption from the intentional release
ban for halon used to test fire suppression systems in class C and
class D compartments aboard airplanes.
This exemption is based on FAA requirements relating to aircraft
safety. Current Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airworthiness
Standards for transport category airplanes include a number of
classifications for cargo or baggage compartments. Class C cargo or
baggage compartments must contain approved built-in fire-extinguishing
systems. 14 CFR 25.857(c)(2). The compartments must be designed so that
hazardous quantities of extinguishing agent (as well as smoke or
flames) can be excluded from areas occupied by the crew or passengers
(14 CFR 25.857(c)(3).) In addition, ventilation and drafts must not
interfere with the ability of the fire extinguishing agent to control
any fire that starts within the compartment (14 CFR 25.857(c)(4).)
Flight tests of the fire-extinguishing systems must be conducted to
show compliance with these requirements (14 CFR 25.855(h)(2),(3).)
These systems typically contain halons as the fire-extinguishing agent.
Thus, a ban on intentional release of halons would conflict with these
vital safety requirements if no exemption were permitted.
Class D compartments are defined in part as aircraft cargo or
baggage compartments not exceeding 1,000 cubic feet that use
restriction of available oxygen, as opposed to a fire-extinguishing
agent, to control fires (14 CFR 25.857(d)). In light of recent
tragedies involving fires that originated in the cargo or baggage
compartments of aircraft, EPA believes that class D compartments in
addition to class C compartments should be exempted from the ban on
intentional release of halon during testing of halon-containing
systems. As alternative fire suppression systems for class D
compartments are considered to improve aircraft safety, FAA is
considering halon systems as an interim viable option.
EPA believes that fires aboard aircraft pose such a great risk to
human safety that an exemption from the ban on the intentional release
of halons in accordance with FAA's Airworthiness Standards is necessary
and appropriate. EPA seeks comment on this proposed exemption.
3. Disposal of Halons and Halon-Containing Equipment
Today's proposal requires owners of equipment containing halon
(including a halon blend) to dispose of the equipment by sending the
equipment for halon recovery to a fire equipment distributor, a
manufacturer, or a halon recycler operating in accordance with NFPA 10
and 12 A standards. The proposal also requires halon (including a halon
blend) to be disposed of by sending it to a halon recycler for
recycling.
Due to industry outreach efforts, owners of halon-containing
equipment and those disposing of halon are already aware of the
importance of halon recycling and banking. Industry trade organizations
have already been encouraging owners of halon-containing equipment and
those disposing of halon to contact manufacturers, halon fire equipment
distributors or halon recyclers to ensure that halon is safely removed
and recovered for future use. Therefore, today's proposed action is
consistent with current industry practices and would not create an
additional burden for equipment owners. Most halon systems and
extinguishers in use today are purchased, installed, and serviced by
fire equipment distributors. Because of the efficiency of these
established distribution channels, industry representatives indicate
that the simplest way to assure proper recycling of halon is simply to
require equipment owners to return halon-containing equipment to
distributors. In many cases owners may receive a payment for the halon
contained in the equipment because of the current market value of
halon. The market value of halon has provided an incentive to industry
to consistently recover and recycle halons.
EPA is seeking comments on today's proposal relative to the
disposal of halons and halon-containing equipment.
IV. Administrative Requirements
a. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether this proposed 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.
It has been determined by OMB and EPA that this proposal is not a
''significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order
12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB review under the Executive
Order.
b. Regulatory Flexibility
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements 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 not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions. This proposed rule would not have a significant impact
on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons.
The proposal would not have a significant impact in the area of
intentional release because it closely models current industry
standards for prevention of intentional release of halon during repair,
testing, and disposal of halon-containing equipment, and during
technician training. The proposal also would not have a significant
impact in the areas of technician training and disposal of halons and
halon-containing equipment because it closely models current industry
standards, including the practice of recovering halons for reuse or
recycling. Because the use of halon blends has already declined
substantially and because reuse of blends without recycling remains an
option, there would not be a substantial number of entities affected by
the requirement to dispose of halon blends through recycling. Because
the market
[[Page 36432]]
for halon blends is so small the ban on the sale of halon blends would
not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Businesses that manufacture, distribute, or sell halon blends
would be subject to the ban: however, there would not be a significant
impact on these businesses and these businesses are not substantial in
number. The one U.S. manufacturer of halon blends of which EPA is aware
has stated that the ban on halon blends would minimally impact the
business' profitability. Additionally, alternatives to halon blends are
available for distribution and sale. Therefore, I certify that this
action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
c. Unfunded Mandates Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (''Unfunded
Mandates Act'') (signed into law on March 22, 1995) requires that the
Agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule
that includes a Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Section 203 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.
Under section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, the Agency must
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact statement must
be prepared. The Agency must select from those alternatives 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.
Because this proposed rule is estimated to result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments or private sector
of less than $100 million in any one year, the Agency has not prepared
a budgetary impact statement or specifically addressed the selection of
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative.
Because small governments will not be significantly or uniquely
affected by this proposed rule, the Agency is not required to develop a
plan with regard to small governments. Finally, because this proposal
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.
d. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action requires no information collection subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and therefore no
information collection request will be submitted to OMB for review.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control.
Dated: June 26, 1997.
Carol Browner,
Administrator.
40 CFR part 82 is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 82--PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE
1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671-7671q.
2. Part 82 is amended by adding subpart H consisting of
Secs. 82.250, 82.260 and 82.270 to read as follows:
Subpart H--Halon Emissions Reduction
Sec.
82.250 Purpose and scope.
82.260 Definitions.
82.270 Prohibitions.
Subpart H--Halon Emissions Reduction
Sec. 82.250 Purpose and scope.
(a) The purpose of this subpart is to reduce the emissions of halon
in accordance with section 608 of the Clean Air Act by banning the sale
of all halon blends; banning the intentional release of halons during
repair, testing, and disposal of equipment containing halons and during
technician training; requiring organizations that employ technicians to
provide emissions reduction training; and requiring proper disposal of
halons and equipment containing halons.
(b) This subpart applies to any person testing, servicing,
maintaining, repairing or disposing of equipment that contains halons
or using such equipment during technician training. This subpart also
applies to any person disposing of halons; to manufacturers,
distributors, and retailers of halon blends; and to organizations that
employ technicians who service halon containing equipment.
Sec. 82.260 Definitions.
Disposal of halon means the discarding of halon recovered from
halon-containing equipment.
Disposal of halon-containing equipment means the process leading to
and including:
(1) The discharge, deposit, dumping or placing of any discarded
halon containing equipment into or on any land or water;
(2) The disassembly of any halon-containing equipment for
discharge, deposit, or dumping or placing of its discarded component
parts into or on any land or water; or
(3) The disassembly of any halon containing equipment for reuse of
its component parts.
Manufacturer means any person engaged in the direct manufacture of
halon, halon blends or halon-containing equipment.
Person means any individual or legal entity, including an
individual, corporation, partnership, association, state, municipality,
political subdivision of a state, Indian tribe, and any agency,
department, or instrumentality of the United States, and any officer,
agent, or employee thereof.
Technician means any person who performs testing, maintenance,
service, or repair that could reasonably be expected to release halons
from equipment into the atmosphere. Technician also means any person
who performs disposal of equipment that could reasonably be expected to
release halons from the equipment into the atmosphere. Technician
includes but is not limited to installers, contractor employees, in-
house service personnel, and in some cases, owners.
Sec. 82.270 Prohibitions.
(a) Effective 30 days following promulgation no person may sell or
distribute, or offer for sale or distribution, any substance that is a
blend of two or more halon products.
(b) Effective 30 days following promulgation, no person testing,
maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of halon-containing
equipment or using such equipment for technician training may knowingly
vent or otherwise release into the environment any halons used in such
equipment. De minimis releases associated with good faith attempts to
recycle or recover halon are not subject to this prohibition. Release
of halons during testing of fire extinguishing systems for aircraft
class C and class D compartments in accordance with the
[[Page 36433]]
Federal Aviation Administration's Airworthiness Standards is not
subject to this prohibition.
(c) Effective 30 days following promulgation, organizations that
employ technicians who test, maintain, service, repair, or dispose of
halon containing equipment shall provide training for these technicians
regarding halon emission reduction.
(d) Effective 30 days following promulgation, owners of halon
containing equipment shall dispose of that equipment by forwarding it
for halon recovery to a manufacturer operating in accordance with NFPA
10 and NFPA 12A standards, a fire equipment dealer operating in
accordance with NFPA 10 and NFPA 12A standards or a recycler operating
in accordance with NFPA 10 and NFPA 12A standards. Effective 30 days
following promulgation, no person shall dispose of halon except by
sending it for recycling to a recycler operating in accordance with
NFPA 10 and NFPA 12A standards.
[FR Doc. 97-17594 Filed 7-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P