[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