Request for Delegation of the Accidental Release Prevention Requirements: Risk Management Programs Under Clean Air Act Section 112(r)(7): State of Florida

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 68

[FRL-6177-5]

Request for Delegation of the Accidental Release Prevention

Requirements: Risk Management Programs Under Clean Air Act Section

112(r)(7): State of Florida

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The purpose of this proposal is to announce that on June 19,

1998, the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs (DCA),

Division of Emergency Management (DEM), requested section 112(r)

program delegation for all applicable Florida sources, except those

with propane as their only regulated substance. Because no adverse

comments are expected, EPA is concurrently issuing a direct final rule

in the rules section of this Federal Register. If no adverse comments

are received by November 19, 1998, the direct final rule will serve as

formal delegation of the section 112(r) program for all applicable

sources, except those with propane as their only regulated substance.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 19, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this action should be addressed concurrently to:

Michelle P. Thornton, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4,

61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104,

[email protected]

Eve Rainey, Florida Division of Emergency Management, 2555 Shumard

Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2140,

[email protected]

Copies of Florida's section 112(r) delegation request letter and

accompanying documentation are available for public review during the

hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the

addresses listed above. If you would like to review these documents,

please make an appointment with the appropriate office at least 24

hours before visiting day.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle P. Thornton, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Air, Pesticides and Toxics

Management Division, Air and Radiation Technology Branch, 30303-3104

(telephone 404 562-9121), [email protected] or Eve

Rainey, Florida Division of Emergency Management, 2555 Shumard Oak

Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2140, (telephone 850 413-9914)

[email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If no adverse comments are received by

November 19, 1998, no further activity in relation to this proposed

rule is necessary and the direct final rule in the final rules section

of this Federal Register will automatically go into effect on December

21, 1998. Should the Agency receive such comments, it will review and

publish the comments in a subsequent document. If no relevant adverse

comments on any provision of this rule are timely filed, then the

entire direct final rule will become effective on

[[Page 55984]]

December 21, 1998, and the State of Florida DCA/DEM will receive full

delegation of authority to implement and enforce the requirements of

the section 112(r) program for all applicable sources in its

jurisdiction, except sources with propane as their only regulated

substance.

On June 20, 1996, EPA published risk management program

regulations, mandated under the accidental release prevention

provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA). These regulations require owners

and operators of stationary sources subject to the regulations to

submit risk management plans (RMPs) by June 21, 1999, to a central

location specified by EPA. The plans will be available to State and

local governments and the public. These regulations will encourage

sources to reduce the probability of accidentally releasing substances

that have the potential to cause harm to public health and the

environment and will stimulate dialogue between industry and the public

to improve accident prevention and emergency response practices.

After a thorough review of Florida's delegation request and its

pertinent laws, rules, and regulations, the Region proposes to find

that such a delegation is appropriate in that Florida has satisfied the

criteria of 40 CFR sections 63.91 and 63.95, and has adequate and

effective authorities, resources, and procedures in place for

implementation and enforcement of non-major and major sources subject

to the section 112(r) RMP Federal standards. If, approved, the State

has the primary authority and responsibility to carry out all elements

of the section 112(r) program for all sources, except propane, covered

in the State, including on-site inspections, recordkeeping reviews,

audits and enforcement. For a detailed explanation of the delegation

authority as well as Florida's implementation plan, see the information

provided in the direct final rule in the rules section of this Federal

Register.

Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from review under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866,

entitled Regulatory Planning and Review.

B. Executive Order 12875

Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or

tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those

governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office

of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior

consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and tribal

governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of written

communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the

need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875 requires EPA to

develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other

representatives of state, local, and tribal governments ``to provide

meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals

containing significant unfunded mandates.'' Today's rule does not

create a mandate on state, local or tribal governments. The rule does

not impose any enforceable duties on these entities. The State of

Florida has voluntarily requested delegation of this program. The state

will be relying on its own resources to implement the Florida

Accidental Prevention and Risk Management Planning Act as described in

the summary section of this notice. Accordingly, the requirements of

section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 do not apply to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13084

Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the

communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal

government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded,

EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a

separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a

description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with

representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature

of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the

regulation. In addition, representatives of Indian tribal governments

``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of

regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect

their communities.'' Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely

affect the communities of Indian tribal governments. The State of

Florida has voluntarily requested delegation of this program. The state

will be implementing and enforcing its own requirements, which have

been reviewed and approved by EPA. Accordingly, the requirements of

section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., the EPA

must consider the paperwork burden imposed by any information

collection request in a proposed or final rule. This rule will not

impose any new information collection requirements.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA, Public Law 96-354, September

19, 1980) requires Federal agencies to give special consideration to

the impact of regulation on small businesses. The RFA specifies that a

regulatory flexibility analysis must be prepared if a screening

analysis indicates a regulation will have significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities. This rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

F. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

requires that the Agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before

promulgating a rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in

estimated costs of $100 million or more in one year to either State,

local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private

sector.

Under section 205, EPA must select the most cost effective and

least burdensome alternative that achieves the objective of the rule

and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA

to establish a plan for informing, educating and advising any small

governments that may be significantly impacted by the rule. EPA has

estimated that this rule does not include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State,

local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private

sector. This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under

State or local law, and imposes no new requirements.

G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C.

272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its

regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with

applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards

are technical

[[Page 55985]]

standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling

procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by

voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide

Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use

available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This proposed

rulemaking does not involved technical standards. Therefore, EPA is not

considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

H. 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.

This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it is not an

economically significant rule as defined by E.O. 12866, and because it

does not involve decisions based on environmental health or safety

risks.

Dated: September 9, 1998.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

[FR Doc. 98-27927 Filed 10-19-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P