Jump to main content.


Vol. 58 No. 249 Thursday, December 30, 1993  p 69568 (Proposed Rule
    1/2029  
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 82 

[FRL-4818-4] 

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone; Labeling Supplemental Proposal 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
SUMMARY: This document proposes to amend EPA's existing labeling 
regulations by adding an exemption from the regulations where 
destruction of controlled substances takes place, adding an 
exemption for spare parts that are used in repair, making revisions

to clarify the labeling of waste, and making several other minor 
clarifying revisions. EPA is proposing these revisions in response 
to numerous comments, in order to recognize and alleviate the 
burden placed on specific parties whose activities contribute 
no additional emissions of ozone-depleting substances. 

DATES: Written comments on this proposed rule must be received 
on or before January 31, 1994, unless a public hearing is
requested. 
In the case where a public hearing is requested, the public 
hearing will be scheduled at 9 a.m. on January 14, 1994. Comments 
must then be received on or before 30 days following the public 
hearing. Any party requesting a public hearing must notify EPA 
by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on January 7, 1994. All requests 
for and inquiries regarding a public hearing should be directed 
to Sue Stendebach at 202/233-9117. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed rulemaking should be submitted

(in duplicate if possible) to: Public Docket No. A-91-60, room 
M-1500 (LE-131), Waterside Mall, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. The docket 
may be inspected from 8:30 a.m. until 12 noon, and from 1:30 
p.m. to 3 p.m., Monday through Friday. A reasonable fee may 
be charged for copying docket materials. A hearing, if requested, 
will be held at the EPA auditorium, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, 
DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sue Stendebach, Regulatory 
Development and Operations Section, Program Implementation Branch, 
Stratospheric Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, 
Office of Air and Radiation, 6205-J, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,

DC 20460. 202/233-9117. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The contents of today's preamble 
are listed in the following outline: 

I. Introduction 
II. Destruction Exemption from the Labeling Requirements 

  A. Background on Destruction Policies 

  1. Background on Montreal Protocol's Destruction Policy 

  2. Fourth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol 

  B. Phaseout Regulations 

  C. Proposed Accelerated Phaseout Destruction Provisions 

  D. Proposed Destruction Provision in the Final Labeling Rule 

  E. Requirements of RCRA and the Proposed Hazardous Organic 
    Neshaps (HON) 

  1. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Standards 

  2. Proposed Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON) Regulations 

  F. Proposed Amendments to the Final Labeling Regulations-Products

    Exempt from Labeling Requirements Where Manufacturers Use 
    Protocol-approved Destruction Technologies 
III. Labeling Requirements of Containers of Waste 

  A. Current Requirements for Containers of Controlled Substance 
    Waste and Wastes Containing Trace Amounts of Controlled 
    Substances 

  B. Today's Proposal Regarding Labeling Requirements of Containers

    of Regulated Waste 
IV. Labeling Requirements for Spare Parts to be Used Solely 
    for Repair 
V. Clarification of the Meaning of Products ``Manufactured With'' 
VI. Exemption for Trace Quantities 
VII. Labeling Requirements of Containers of 55 Gallons and Smaller 
    Containing Controlled Substances 
VIII. Definition of Importer 
IX. Certification Requirements for Reduced Use Exemption 
X. Imports and Products Introduced In Bond at the U.S./Mexico 
    Border 
XI. Incidental Uses of Controlled Substances 
XII. Request for Comments Regarding Plasma Etching 
XIII. Additional Information 

  A. Executive Order 12866 

  B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

  C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

I. Introduction 

   In a final rule published on February 11, 1993 (58 FR 8136), 
EPA promulgated regulations to implement section 611 of the 
Clean Air Act, as amended by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 
1990 (CAA). The regulations mandate that, effective May 15, 
1993, labels are required on containers of class I and class 
II substances and products containing or manufactured with class 
I substances. The rule also calls for labels on all products 
containing or manufactured with class I or class II substances, 
beginning on January 1, 2015. 
   The regulations provide an exemption for manufacturers that 
have achieved a reduction in the total use of CFC-113 and/or 
methyl chloroform (MCF) for products manufactured using those 
substances as solvents by 95 percent as compared to their 1990 
use levels. This provision is based on a 1991 United Nations 
Environment Programme report, Solvents, Coatings and Adhesives. 
EPA provided the exemption in order to compensate for the lack 
of technically and economically viable substitutes for an estimated

5 percent of the uses of CFC-113 and MCF in the solvent sector. 
In addition, this provision recognizes the early efforts by 
those companies to attain a near elimination of such substances, 
and to provide an incentive for other companies to strive towards 
the same goal. 
   The final regulations exempt products manufactured using 
class I substances on an intermittent basis, and not as a direct 
part of the manufacturing process of the product, such as that 
employed in spot cleaning textiles during the manufacturing 
process. The rule explains that such intermittent contact use 
of controlled substances was found to be incidental ``contact.'' 
The final rule also explains that intermittent ``contact'' uses, 
though they may involve a brief initial physical contact between 
the ozone-depleting ``controlled substance'' and the product, 
occur infrequently, typically as part of an upkeep process, 
and that the controlled substance does not come into contact 
with every product. In other situations, where the controlled 
substance has contact on an intermittent basis only with the 
surface area of manufacturing equipment, and although there 
may be an initial contact with the first few products themselves, 
the controlled substance will not contact every product
manufactured 
thereafter. Labeling is therefore not required in either of 
the above cases. 
   The placement of the warning statement is explained in terms 
of its conspicuousness and legibility, as well as ready
availability 
to the actual person responsible for the purchase at the time 
of purchase, or at the time of product delivery. The provision 
for product delivery was added to the rule for products purchased 
through the mail, by telephone, and where the consumer does 
not view the product at the time of purchase. Other options 
for placement discussed are the display panel area of a product, 
alternative labeling such as hang tags, and supplemental printed 
materials, all to be available to the consumer at the time of 
purchase. 
   Products made for export are exempt from the final regulations 
because such products primarily affect foreign commerce and 
because the label on such a product will not be viewed by any 
consumer until after it has left the jurisdiction of the Agency. 
Moreover, such products would be put at a competitive disadvantage 
in the world marketplace with the same products manufactured 
in countries where there are no similar labeling requirements. 
   In contrast, imports are covered under the labeling
requirements. 
The regulations require importers to ensure that a product is 
properly labeled at the site of U.S. Customs clearance. The 
importer must have a ``reasonable belief'' that the imports 
are properly labeled or are not subject to the labeling
requirements. 
Two options discussed in the preamble to the final rule for 
demonstrating reasonable belief are to investigate at least 
one step back into the manufacturing process of the import, 
or to draft a contractual agreement with the importer's supplier 
abroad, indicating that the import is/is not manufactured with, 
or containing, controlled substances. 
   The final regulations exempt research and development (R&D) 
activities from the labeling requirements, since the products 
being developed are not being introduced into interstate commerce. 
However, products that have completed the R&D process and are 
then manufactured must be labeled when they are introduced into 
interstate commerce. 
   Manufacturers were required to label their products containing 
or manufactured with class I substances, and containers containing 
class I or class II substances, beginning on May 15, 1993. 

II. Destruction Exemption From the Labeling Requirements 


A. Background on Destruction Policies 


1. Background on Montreal Protocol's Destruction Policy 

   The Montreal Protocol, to which over 125 nations are now 
Parties, requires that each nation that is a Party to it control 
the production and consumption of substances that deplete the 
ozone layer. Under the existing Protocol, ``production'' of 
controlled substances is defined as ``the amount of controlled 
substances produced, minus the amount destroyed by technologies 
to be approved by the Parties.'' At the second meeting of the 
Parties to the Protocol (the Parties) in London, a technical 
advisory committee was established to examine the existing
destruction 
technologies, devise criteria by which to approve technologies, 
and evaluate environmental concerns associated with the
technologies. 
Until the Fourth Meeting of the Parties, no destruction technology 
had been approved by the Parties. 

2. Fourth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol 

   At the Fourth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol, 
which took place from November 23-25, 1992, in Copenhagen, the 
Parties approved five destruction technologies to be used for 
destroying controlled substances. The technologies are: liquid 
injection incineration, reactor cracking, gaseous/fume oxidation, 
rotary kiln incinerators, and cement kilns. The Parties also 
agreed that additional acceleration of the phaseout of controlled 
substances would result in the need for a greater global
destruction 
program for these substances. With the approval of the five 
technologies, the Parties noted that the technologies could 
attain a destruction efficiency of 99.99 percent with proper 
controls and operating techniques; however, they did not require 
a specific efficiency. The Parties encouraged a ``Code of Good 
Housekeeping Procedures,'' set forth in the United Nations
Environmental 
Programme (UNEP) Report entitled Ad-Hoc Technical Advisory
Committee 
on ODS Destruction Technologies, to minimize losses to the
environment 
through control systems and standards for operating such systems. 
Finally, the Parties agreed to report the quantities of ozone-
depleting substances destroyed annually to the Protocol. 
   Liquid injection incinerators are typically single-chamber 
units with waste burners. They may also include liquid injection 
stages of a multiple-chamber incinerator. These incinerators 
are used to destroy wastes with a low ash content and can be 
used to destroy sludge, slurry, vapor, or combustible liquid. 
Liquid wastes are burned in suspension after being injected 
through burners and atomized to fine droplets. 
   A reactor cracking process uses a cylindrical graphite, water-
cooled reactor and an oxygen-hydrogen burner system. Since 1983, 
this process has treated waste gases resulting from the production 
of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). The gases are converted to
hydrofluoric 
acid, hydrochloric acid, carbon dioxide, chlorine, and water. 
The two acids are usable in-house and/or marketable, and the 
chlorine is scrubbed, leaving only water vapor, oxygen, and 
carbon dioxide as waste gases. 
   Gaseous/fume oxidation destroys waste vapor streams, most 
often volatile organic compounds. A combustion temperature of 
around 1100 degrees centigrade is needed to destroy most ozone-
depleting compounds. Acid gas scrubbers are required for
incineration 
of halogenated waste vapors, such as those from controlled
substances. 
Fume incinerators can be direct flame incinerators, consisting 
of the combustion chamber and a burner, or recuperative fume 
incinerators that use heat exchangers to preheat the waste vapor 
feed stream or the combustion air. Fume incinerators are usually 
found in chemical process or manufacturing plants. 
   Rotary kiln incinerators can handle a wide variety of both 
solid and liquid wastes. Rotary kiln incinerators typically 
have at least two combustion chambers, the afterburner ensuring 
that complete combustion of exhaust gases takes place. Liquid 
wastes can be fed either into the rotary kiln area or directly 
into the afterburner chamber. If fed into the afterburner chamber, 
the liquid is atomized in the burner or combustion zone. 
   Cement kilns, under proper operation, can destroy most organic 
chemical wastes. Tests have been conducted using CFC-113, with 
a destruction efficiency of greater than 99.99 percent
demonstrated. 
Destruction of ozone-depleting substances in cement kilns appears 
beneficial; however, each unit must be reviewed on a case-by-
case basis to determine its appropriateness for this use. 
   With the approval of these five destruction technologies, 
Parties to the Protocol can subtract from the definition of 
production that amount of controlled substance(s) that is destroyed

by these means, under certain conditions discussed in the proposed 
accelerated phaseout rule that was published on March 18, 1993 
(57 FR 33754). 

B. Phaseout Regulations 

   On July 30, 1992, the EPA published final regulations
implementing 
section 604 of the Clean Air Act (57 FR 33753), which established 
the phaseout schedule for class I and class II substances set 
forth in the Clean Air Act. Destruction was also addressed in 
the regulations in terms of those class I substances that are 
coincidental and unavoidable by-products (CUBPs) of a manufacturing

process. Associated with this exemption is a set of reporting 
requirements. Companies are required to document the amount 
of ``CUBPs'' produced and destroyed in a manner consistent with 
the requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
(RCRA) or other applicable rules. These destruction technologies 
are also required to meet the Maximum Available Control Technology 
(MACT) standards for efficiency. For purposes of Title VI of 
the Act, EPA stated that companies that destroy CUBPs of carbon 
tetrachloride using technologies that achieve a 99.99 percent 
destruction efficiency may obtain an exemption from production 
allowances. Based on a report submitted by a company destroying 
CUBPs, the Administrator would evaluate the merits of the document 
and decide whether to grant an exemption for that company's 
annual production and consumption allowances. 
   The phaseout regulations reported that further data was
necessary 
on destruction technologies in order to exempt more than CUBPs 
from the phaseout allowance system. Since the Parties approved 
the five destruction technologies in November 1992, EPA has 
proposed regulations accelerating the phaseout of controlled 
substances (58 FR 15013, March 18, 1993). That proposal also 
contained proposed regulations concerning destruction. 

C. Proposed Accelerated Phaseout Destruction Provisions 

   The proposed accelerated phaseout regulations, published 
on March 18, 1993, would implement the United States' acceleration 
of the phaseout of class I substances, consistent with the recent 
adjustments to the Protocol agreed upon last November by the 
Parties in Copenhagen; accelerate the phaseout of certain class 
II substances; list and phase out hydrobromofluorocarbons (HBFCs); 
list and phase out methyl bromide; and responded to petitions 
received by the Agency from environmental and industry groups. 
   In addition, in that NPRM EPA proposed revising the definition 
of production such that controlled substances that are to be 
destroyed are eliminated from the definition of production and 
credit is allowed for destruction of controlled substances similar 
to credit received for the transformation of such chemicals. 
The destruction of such substances must employ any one of the 
five technologies identified above that are approved by the 
Parties. Due to the proposed credit for destruction, EPA proposed 
eliminating the now unnecessary CUBP provision, since all such 
destruction would be credited. 
   The proposal defines ``destruction'' in terms of technologies 
approved for destruction by the Parties that result in expiration 
of the chemical without any commercially useful end product 
being produced. The Agency proposed this definition in order 
to distinguish destruction from transformation, which requires 
that the resulting end product serve a commercial purpose. The 
proposal indicated that to be eligible for the destruction
exemption, 
the controlled substances must be destroyed by one of the five 
destruction technologies approved by the Parties. 
   As explained more fully in the March 18, 1993 proposal, EPA 
believes that, while it is not required to follow the approach 
of the Protocol Parties regarding destruction, it has the authority

to do so. 

D. Proposed Destruction Provision in the Final Labeling Rule 

   The preamble to the final labeling regulations (58 FR 8136, 
February 11, 1993) requested comment on a destruction exemption 
from the labeling requirements based on the proposed accelerated 
phaseout rule, which was being drafted at the time. The Agency 
requested comment on whether it could and should provide an 
exemption from the labeling requirements for the use of controlled 
substances that are subsequently destroyed using one of the 
above-mentioned approved technologies with procedures that are 
consistent with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 
and the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) Report 
entitled Ad-Hoc Technical Advisory Committee on ODS Destruction 
Technologies. The Agency received and has reviewed several comments

on the possibility of a destruction exemption provision for 
the labeling rule. Those comments supported the inclusion of 
a destruction exemption, similar to that given for transformation. 
The commenters reasoned that the destruction exemption was
justified 
because destruction of ozone-depleting substances prevents
emissions 
of those substances into the atmosphere. 

E. Related Requirements of RCRA and the Proposed Hazardous Organic 
Neshaps (HON) 

   In addition to the requirements of Title VI of the Clean 
Air Act as amended, certain controlled substances are also
regulated, 
under certain circumstances, by the Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act (RCRA, 42 USC 6901 et seq.) and would be regulated 
under the proposed Hazardous Organic NESHAPs (HON, 57 FR 62608 
). The RCRA regulations would cover those controlled substances 
that are considered to be hazardous constituents in the waste 
stream (eg., carbon tetrachloride bound for incineration). The 
proposed HON addresses air emissions of hazardous air pollutants, 
a category into which carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, 
and methyl bromide fall. The following discussion outlines the 
coordination among the RCRA and proposed HON regulations and 
the proposed destruction exemption provision of the labeling 
regulations. 

1. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Standards 

   The RCRA regulations currently require that industries that 
incinerate waste covered by the regulations must meet ``at stacks''

destruction efficiency (DE) standards of 99.99 percent. The 
proposed accelerated phaseout regulations would grant full credit 
for the destruction of controlled substances when they are
destroyed 
in compliance with RCRA regulations 40 CFR 343(a) and 40 CFR 
266.104. The proposed accelerated phaseout rule indicated that 
the Agency will grant 100 percent production allowances for 
companies that achieve 99.99 percent efficiency in the destruction 
of class I substances instead of only 99.99 percent in allowances, 
because, otherwise, a company would never be able to obtain 
credit for the full amount of the chemical used, and would
eventually 
be unable to obtain sufficient volumes to operate. 
   The only substances that are covered under both RCRA as
``hazardous 
constituents'' and under Title VI of the Clean Air Act as
controlled 
substances are methyl chloroform (MCF) and carbon tetrachloride 
(CTC). The remaining controlled substances are regulated under 
RCRA only when they are blended with hazardous wastes, such 
as when used solvents are incinerated. The incineration
technologies 
approved by the Parties have been shown to be capable of achieving 
the 99.99 percent DE required by RCRA; however, the Parties 
do not specifically require that each of the technologies achieve 
such an efficiency. The Parties supported the recommendations 
of the Ad-Hoc Technical Committee on Destruction Technologies 
to require Code of Good Housekeeping procedures to be applied 
throughout a destruction facility. 

2. Proposed Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON) Regulations 

   Under some situations controlled substances are not covered 
by RCRA regulations, but may be covered by the HON regulations 
to be promulgated under section 112 of the Clean Air Act. The 
Agency published a proposed HON rule on December 31, 1992 (57 
FR 62608), proposing that companies be required to control air 
emissions occurring in chemical manufacturing processes. The 
HON regulates approximately 400 manufacturing processes associated 
with the Synthetic Organic Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI), as 
well as 7 non-SOCMI source categories. Section 112 of the Clean 
Air Act contains lists of 189 hazardous air pollutants (HAPS) 
of which a portion are known to be emitted by the above-mentioned 
industries. Of those listed under section 112, the only substances 
controlled under Title VI of the CAA are methyl chloroform (MCF), 
carbon tetrachloride (CCL4) and methyl bromide (proposed to 
be listed as a class I substance in the accelerated phaseout 
rule). The HON covers five kinds of emission points within such 
facilities where these substances are emitted, including process 
vents, wastewater streams, transfer operations, storage tanks, 
and equipment leaks. The Agency proposed that each emissions 
source would require a ``reference control technology'' with 
specific applicability criteria, such as a 98 percent control 
efficiency for incinerators on process vents. The HON would 
establish performance standards for operating the control
technologies, 
as well as criteria for the design of the control equipment. 
The Agency proposed that when organic HAPS are released through 
process vent sources, companies may route these emissions to 
a gaseous/fume oxidation incinerator for destruction. The Agency 
has proposed that such incinerators may operate with a destruction 
efficiency of 98 percent. 
   In the proposal for the accelerated phaseout, the Agency 
proposed that when regulations promulgated under section 112 
of the Clean Air Act apply to the destruction of a controlled 
substance, and RCRA regulations do not apply, and the 98 percent 
destruction efficiency is achieved by incinerators to which 
emissions of controlled substances are routed, the Agency would 
grant the full allotment of allowances to replace chemicals 
that are destroyed under the conditions of the HON. In situations 
where section 112 regulations apply, but an achieved destruction 
efficiency is less than what the HON proposes, the Agency proposed 
to issue allowances only for the portion actually destroyed. 

F. Proposed Amendments to the Final Labeling Regulations-Products 
Exempt from Labeling Requirements Where Manufacturers Use Protocol 
approved Destruction Technologies 

   The ultimate goal of Title VI of the CAA is to minimize
depletion 
of stratospheric ozone. A destruction exemption, which would 
recognize, and provide an incentive for, the elimination of 
emissions of controlled substances through the use of approved 
destruction technologies, is therefore consistent with the goals 
of Title VI. This exemption is one method of reducing risks 
of ozone depletion. The current labeling regulations provide 
an exemption from the labeling requirements if a controlled 
substance used to manufacture a product is transformed, such 
that the controlled substance no longer poses a threat to the 
ozone layer; similarly, the same result comes about if a controlled

substance used in the manufacture of a product is destroyed. 
The controlled substance is not emitted in either case and no 
environmental harm occurs through exempting such products from 
labeling. 
   EPA today is proposing that for any products manufactured 
with a class I or class II substance, if that substance is
destroyed 
according to any applicable legal or regulatory requirements, 
using one of the five technologies approved by the Parties to 
the Protocol, the product would be exempt from the labeling 
requirements. The intent of today's proposal is to provide a 
destruction exemption parallel to the destruction provision 
in the accelerated phaseout proposal. If the destruction provision 
in the final accelerated phaseout differs substantially from 
that which is proposed, EPA will need to revisit the destruction 
exemption proposed today in order to maintain consistency between 
the rules. 
   For purposes of today's proposed destruction exemption from 
the labeling requirements, the Agency proposes that only where 
a substance is destroyed to a DE of 98 percent or greater, using 
one of the five approved destruction technologies, will the 
labeling exemption apply. This differs from the approach used 
in the accelerated phaseout proposal, under which producers 
of controlled substances are granted credit for that percentage 
of the controlled substance actually destroyed (if destroyed 
at a DE of less than 98 percent). This approach is not being 
used in the labeling context because, while under the proposed 
accelerated phaseout it is possible to grant credit for that 
portion actually destroyed, under the labeling rule a label 
is either placed on a product or it is not. Therefore, the Agency 
needs to determine a threshold at which labeling is exempted. 
It is consistent then, for EPA to provide a labeling exemption 
only for those products manufactured with controlled substances 
that are ``completely'' destroyed. A new definition of ``completely

destroy,'' which means to destroy to 98 percent or greater
destruction 
efficiency, will be included in the labeling rule through today's 
proposed amendment. 
   Furthermore, where the destruction of a controlled substance 
is regulated under RCRA, the regulated party must achieve a 
destruction efficiency of 99.99 percent, destroying any controlled 
substances using one of the five approved technologies and
complying 
with applicable RCRA regulations as they relate to destruction 
of ozone-depleting substances, in order to qualify for the
exemption 
from labeling. If the destruction of a controlled substance 
not regulated under RCRA but is regulated under the HON, the 
regulated party must achieve a destruction efficiency of 98 
percent, as well as meet any other applicable standards imposed 
by the HON that relate to destruction of ozone-depleting
substances, 
destroying any controlled substances using one of the five approved

technologies, in order to qualify for the exemption from labeling. 
If the final HON requires a destruction efficiency of greater 
than 98 percent, EPA will need to revisit the minimum destruction 
efficiency of 98 percent in today's proposed rule, in order 
to provide consistency with the regulation of hazardous air 
pollutants. 
   The Agency is aware that state air quality permit laws may 
establish efficiency standards for emissions of controlled
substances 
where no Federal regulations exist to cover them. In addition, 
state laws may be more stringent than comparable Federal
regulations. 
In either case, the Agency expects companies that are regulated 
under such state laws governing the control of emissions of 
controlled substances in industrial processes, to be in full 
compliance in order to qualify for the destruction exemption. 
   Those companies that are not covered by either RCRA regulations 
or the HON, and are not otherwise covered by state or local 
laws more stringent than the comparable Federal regulations, 
must follow the Code of Good Housekeeping Practices, as described 
in the UNEP Ad-Hoc Technical Advisory Committee on ODS Destruction 
Technologies, as well as the whole of Chapter 5 of that report, 
in addition to meeting the 98 percent DE, using one of the five 
approved destruction technologies. 
   The Agency requests comment on its proposal to require companies

that are neither regulated by RCRA nor the HON to adhere to 
the performance standards of the UNEP report of the Ad-Hoc
Technical 
Advisory Committee on ODS Destruction Technologies, while meeting 
a destruction efficiency of 98 percent or greater, in order 
to obtain an exemption from the labeling requirements. 
   The regulatory language of this rulemaking requires that 
parties taking advantage of this destruction exemption must 
be in compliance with regulations and requirements applicable 
to such destruction. 
   The UNEP Ad-Hoc Technical Advisory Committee on ODS Destruction 
Technologies recommends that atmospheric releases of controlled 
substances shall be monitored at all facilities with air emission 
discharges. For controlled substances, this report recommends 
that flow meters or continuously recording weighing equipment 
for individual containers should be used. At a minimum, containers 
should be weighed ``full'' and ``empty'' to establish quantities 
destroyed. 
   While there are no recordkeeping requirements specifically 
associated with the destruction exemption from labeling, EPA 
proposed in the accelerated phaseout regulations (58 FR 15013), 
companies relying on the destruction provisions of that rule 
must maintain records of destruction. For those companies, these 
same records will be consulted in inspecting eligibility for 
the destruction exemption from labeling. For manufacturers that 
do not receive production or consumption allowances, records 
required under other relevant regulations that determine the 
amount destroyed, the destruction efficiency, and the performance 
standards of operation must be made available to EPA upon request. 
EPA requests comment on its requirement that records maintained 
under the phaseout regulations, as well as those maintained 
under other applicable regulations be made available to the 
Agency in determining eligibility for the labeling exemption. 
The Agency also requests comment as to the adequacy of these 
recordkeeping requirements for purposes of this proposal. Comments 
on the possibility that a facility taking advantage of this 
destruction exemption may not be covered by RCRA regulations, 
the HON, or the accelerated phaseout of ozone-depleting substances 
rule are also requested. 
   EPA also requests comment generally on the destruction exemption

from the labeling requirements. EPA will reopen the comment 
period if the final accelerated phaseout rule changes materially 
from the proposal relative to destruction. 

III. Labeling Requirements of Containers of Waste 


A. Current Requirements for Containers of Controlled Substance 
Waste and Wastes Containing Trace Amounts of Controlled Substances 

   EPA indicated in the final labeling regulations that a person 
handling containers of waste that contain class I or class II 
substances destined for incineration would benefit from the 
specific chemical information in the warning statement when 
handling. Though the label does not specifically address handling 
practices of such substances, it would inform technicians handling 
the containers of chemicals and would encourage them to dispose 
of them or recycle them correctly. In addition, containers of 
waste can be introduced into interstate commerce and must then 
be labeled as ``containing'' a controlled substance. 
   Under its current rule, EPA also requires that containers 
of such waste materials destined to be recycled or reclaimed 
bear the warning statement to ensure that the technician of 
a reclamation facility is aware of the substances contained 
in order to exercise proper caution. Reclaimed substances are 
also resold by the reclaimer, and thus are to be labeled upon 
their introduction into interstate commerce. 
   The Agency did not require that empty containers that once 
contained a controlled substance and are subsequently recycled 
and incorporated into another product bear a label. EPA also 
permits the removal of a label on a container that no longer 
contains a controlled substance. If such a container is
subsequently 
charged with a class I or class II substance, a label would 
be required. Also, the final rule excluded containers, such 
as trucks, railroad cars, or crates, used to transport a ``product 
containing'' or ``container containing'' from the labeling
requirements, 
because only the immediate container holding the controlled 
substance must be labeled. 

B. Today's Proposal Regarding Labeling Requirements of Containers 
of Regulated Waste 

   Since the publication of the final regulations, EPA has received

new information from the regulated community regarding the labeling

requirements for containers of waste. The Agency required labeling 
of waste in the final rule because it believed that the labeling 
information is important to waste handlers and recycling and 
reclamation facilities. In addition, by requiring waste to be 
labeled, EPA attempted to encourage industry to minimize the 
amount of controlled substances in the waste stream and ultimately 
in the upper stratosphere. For this reason, the preamble to 
the current rule states that all amounts, including trace
quantities 
of controlled substances in waste, trigger the labeling
requirements. 
The regulated community has commented to EPA, addressing both 
the final rule and applicability determinations prepared by 
EPA on labeling of waste. 
   After reviewing many of the comments urging EPA to reconsider 
its policy on the labeling of waste, EPA agrees that a revision 
is necessary to its current position on labeling waste containing 
controlled substances, in order to better facilitate industry's 
compliance with the regulations. Written comments on the Agency's 
treatment of waste and the relevant applicability determinations 
are available in the Air Docket A-91-60. These comments are 
summarized below. 
   Numerous commenters stated that waste clearly does not fall 
under the definition of ``product containing,'' as promulgated 
in the final labeling rule; therefore, commenters concluded 
that waste cannot be required to be labeled as such. EPA agrees. 
Containers of waste cannot be defined as products, because they 
are not manufactured from raw or recycled materials in order 
to perform a specific task, nor does waste encounter a point 
of sale to an ultimate consumer. 
   Others commented that a container of waste does not fit the 
definition of ``container containing'' in the regulations. For 
example, commenters expressed concern that in the current rule, 
a container, such as a bulk waste receptacle that holds a used 
``product containing'' (i.e., an aerosol or scrap material), 
might require labeling. However, EPA believes that the controlled 
substance remaining in the product contained in the receptacle 
no longer serves a function, nor is it required to be transferred 
to another container in order to realize its intended use, as 
would normally be the case for ``containers containing.'' EPA 
agrees that a container carrying a ``product containing'' which 
is ultimately disposed of or incinerated, such as a can of adhesive

or foam scrap, does not fall within the definition of ``container 
containing.'' 
   EPA also believes that containers of class I or class II 
waste do not fall under the definition of ``container containing,''

in that the waste is not ``intended to be transferred to another 
container, vessel or piece of equipment in order to realize 
its intended use.'' EPA's intention in including ``intended 
use'' in its definition was to target items to be consumed, 
thus giving consumers information on which to base a purchase 
decision. Waste is neither purchased nor ``used'' and thus, 
does not fall into the category of items to be consumed. In 
order to make this clear, EPA is proposing a definition of
``waste,'' 
for purposes of this rule, that includes items or substances 
discarded with the intent that they will serve no further useful 
purpose. The term discarded can include being deposited in a 
landfill, being destroyed in an incinerator or chemical process, 
or undergoing some other type of final waste handling.
Consequently, 
waste that is going to be discarded would not be required to 
be labeled under this proposal. 
   EPA does believe, however, that containers of used or
contaminated 
controlled substances, such as some refrigerants, methyl
chloroform, 
carbon tetrachloride, other CFCs and HCFCs, and blends of
controlled 
substances that are bound for recycling or reclamation do fall 
under the definition of ``container containing.'' These substances 
will be transferred to realize their ``intended use'' and will 
later be used by consumers. Consequently, these containers trigger 
labeling and are not proposed to be exempt from such requirements 
under this amendment. Such quantities are easily identifiable 
and are often recycled or reclaimed for manufacture or use in 
new products which would in turn require the mandated warning 
statement. Therefore, EPA believes that the mandated warning 
statement is warranted on containers of contaminated (or used) 
controlled substances and blends of controlled substances when 
they are introduced into interstate commerce for purposes of 
recycling or reclamation. 
   Furthermore, the Agency believes that there is not a significant

environmental benefit associated with labeling wastes of controlled

substances. The final labeling rule lays out requirements that 
will affect consumers' decisions, and thus, manufacturers'
production 
decisions upstream. A label applied to the product(s) manufactured 
with or containing a controlled substance will provide such 
information to the consumer. Duplicating efforts by labeling 
the waste from a product that no longer serves its useful purpose 
has no influence on purchasing or consumer decisions, since 
waste is neither purchased nor used. Since waste is not a consumer 
item, a waste handler, whose business it is to handle all types 
of unwanted materials, would not be dissuaded from accepting 
a certain waste because of its effect on the ozone layer. 
   Because of the demand for and the high cost of controlled 
substances, EPA further believes that those using controlled 
substances will recycle or reclaim rather than to discard them. 
Regulations promulgated pursuant to sections 608 and 609 of 
the Clean Air Act require recovery and recycling of refrigerants; 
efficient management of other uses of controlled substances 
would preclude discarding as a prudent option. In cases where 
these substances cannot be reused, recycled, or reclaimed, they 
are most often destroyed rather than deposited in a landfill 
or disposed in some other manner that would allow emissions 
of the substance. As hazardous wastes, carbon tetrachloride, 
methyl chloroform, and methyl bromide cannot be placed in a 
landfill. Additionally, no non-containerized liquid wastes can 
be placed in landfills. 
   The section 608 regulation mentioned above specifically
addresses 
disposal of appliances containing refrigerants; compliance will 
be monitored via a variety of provisions in section 608. The 
proposed accelerated phaseout rule refers to the use of destruction

technologies approved by the Parties to the Montreal Protocol 
in granting an exemption to the allowance program for production 
and consumption. Today's proposed amendment specifies that those 
persons using a controlled substance in their manufacturing 
process, but then destroying that substance using one of the 
five approved technologies, are exempt from labeling the product 
manufactured with the destroyed controlled substance. In both 
proposed rules, the actual disposal or destruction would not 
be regulated. 
   While it could be argued that requiring the labeling of waste 
provides valuable information about the contents of a waste 
to the handler, other regulations provide for similar information 
to be conveyed. For example, any waste considered to be hazardous 
(which includes carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and 
methyl bromide) must have its contents reported on the manifest 
required to accompany the waste under the Resource Conservation 
and Recovery Act (RCRA). Furthermore, EPA believes that the 
intent of the section 611 labeling provisions is to provide 
consumers with information upon which to make purchasing decisions,

rather than to inform persons of contents for purposes of handling 
a substance, product or waste. 
   In summary, the Agency recognizes that waste should not be 
defined as a product under these regulations, nor should containers

of waste be regarded as containers containing controlled
substances. 
Consequently, EPA proposes to add a new  82.106(b)(3), which 
provides exemptions from the labeling requirements, to include, 
``Waste containing controlled substances bound for discard.'' 
EPA emphasizes, however, that containers of used or contaminated 
controlled substances or of blends of these controlled substances 
that enter into interstate commerce and that are bound for
recycling 
or reclamation are not proposed to be exempted, and thus would 
continue to require labeling. In order to provide clarity, EPA 
also proposes a definition of ``waste'' for purposes of this 
rulemaking, which would mean, ``items or substances that are 
discarded with the intent that such items or substances will 
serve no further useful purpose.'' EPA requests comment on its 
proposal to exempt waste from the labeling requirements. 

IV. Labeling Requirements for Spare Parts To Be Used Solely 
for Repair 

   Section 82.116 of the current labeling regulations exempts 
manufacturers who incorporate another product, manufactured 
with a class I substance and purchased from another manufacturer 
or supplier, from having to pass through the label from the 
incorporated product to the final product. Section 82.118 goes 
on to state, however, that distributors, wholesalers, and retailers

of labeled products are required to pass through the labeling 
information. The current labeling requirements provide an exemption

from labeling when repairs are made using components manufactured 
with a controlled substance or using a controlled substance 
in the repair itself. In an applicability determination made 
following the promulgation of the final rule, EPA clarified 
that the repair provision of the rule allows the repair of a 
product using a component manufactured with an ODS or using 
an ODS in the repair of the product without triggering labeling. 
   Subsequent to promulgation, the Agency has received new
information 
regarding spare parts that are intended for repair purposes 
only. Evidently, many companies have up to several million spare 
parts in inventory that are purchased from vendors, and then 
sold piecemeal to persons who repair the original product. Due 
to the pass-through exemption for persons incorporating a product 
manufactured with a controlled substance that was purchased 
from a supplier, and due to the applicability determination 
regarding repairs, the repair person would not be required to 
label the repaired product. To require companies that order 
spare parts in bulk from suppliers to pass through labeling 
information with each order-perhaps containing several hundred 
individual spare parts from numerous bulk shipments-is exceedingly 
burdensome to those companies purchasing and selling the spare 
parts. Typically, the bulk shipment will be labeled on a shipping 
crate or an invoice to indicate that the parts within that shipment

were manufactured with a controlled substance. The company ordering

the spare parts breaks down the shipment into bins, currently 
necessitating a label or labeling information to be generated 
for each individual part contained in that shipment. In most 
cases, a repair person purchases hundreds of various individual 
spare parts at a time from the company, making the pass-through 
of any labeling information extremely cumbersome and
time-consuming. 
   Many of the original manufacturers of these spare parts are 
foreign manufacturers, exacerbating the burden of tracking the 
use of controlled substances in the manufacture of each spare 
part in inventory. Developing and maintaining inventories of 
these spare parts is extremely costly, often many times more 
costly than the sale price of the spare parts themselves. 
   EPA's decision not to require manufacturers incorporating 
products manufactured with controlled substances to comply with 
the labeling pass-through requirement was based in part on the 
overwhelming tracking burden imposed in determining which
components 
were actually made using a controlled substance. A similar
situation 
exists for those purchasing spare parts for repair purposes. 
Many distributors stock hundreds of thousands of spare parts 
to be sold to repair persons. The burden of tracking each part 
that is to then be sold to a person using that part for repair-
which is exempted from the labeling requirements-becomes
overwhelming 
and is without environmental benefit. 
   Furthermore, the repair person has specific requirements 
for a spare part that will work with the existing product to 
be repaired; consumer discretion on his or her part based on 
the use of an ODS is unlikely. Because the repair person is 
not required to pass through any labeling information in the 
repair of the product, requiring the labeling of spare parts 
themselves serves no environmental benefit. Additionally, numerous 
companies that stock spare parts for the repair of their products 
have themselves totally stopped using controlled substances 
and are currently encouraging suppliers to use safe alternatives 
in manufacturing spare parts that they purchase. 
   In light of the information above, EPA is today proposing 
that purchasers of spare parts manufactured with a controlled 
substance and purchased from a vendor for the sole purpose of 
repair, or distributed for purposes of repair only, not be required

to pass through the labeling information. EPA wishes to emphasize 
that this exemption to the pass-through requirement does not 
apply to products containing a controlled substance or containers 
of controlled substances, nor does it apply to spare parts used 
to manufacture products. Manufacturers of spare parts made with 
controlled substances are still required to apply the appropriate 
labels. Moreover, importers and distributors moving the labeled 
shipments as packaged by the manufacturer must still pass through 
the labeling information. 
   EPA requests comments on its proposal to exempt from the 
label pass-through requirement those spare parts that are to 
be used for repair purposes. 

V. Clarification of the Meaning of Products ``Manufactured With'' 

   The final rule discusses the applicability of the labeling 
requirements for products manufactured with controlled substances. 
Some confusion over when labeling is required for such products 
has emerged since the publication of the final rule. The following 
discussion should clarify such labeling questions. 
   In reviewing whether a product must be labeled, one must 
examine from two perspectives. Is labeling required because 
it is a product ``containing'' a controlled substance? If not, 
is labeling then required because it is a product ``manufactured 
with'' a controlled substance? 
   The final rule states that a controlled substance that is 
inadvertently produced or remaining as a residue from a chemical 
reaction, leaving trace quantities of that substance in the 
final product, does not trigger the labeling requirements. However,

there may be cases where a product is exempt from being labeled 
a product ``containing'' (in this case as a result of trace 
quantities), but where a product may still require labeling 
because it is considered to be ``manufactured with'' that
controlled 
substance. 
   The introduction of carbon tetrachloride as an explosion 
suppressant in the manufacture of certain chemicals serves as 
an example. The carbon tetrachloride is introduced, then withdrawn 
from the chemical product. Trace quantities of the carbon
tetrachloride 
remain in the chemical; however, such quantities serve no useful 
purpose in the final product. As a result, the product is exempt 
from being labeled as a product containing carbon tetrachloride. 
However, because the carbon tetrachloride is introduced into 
the chemical product directly in the manufacturing process, 
actually having physical contact with the product, the product 
would need to be labeled as ``manufactured with'' carbon
tetrachloride, 
unless other exemptions apply. 
   In order to be consistent with this view, EPA is proposing 
to revise the definition of ``manufactured with''. The final 
regulations currently state that a product is manufactured with 
a controlled substance if the manufacturer used a controlled 
substance directly in the product's manufacture, ``but the product 
itself does not contain a controlled substance at the point 
of introduction into interstate commerce.'' To further clarify 
that trace quantities may actually be contained in a product 
manufactured with a controlled substance, EPA proposes to revise 
the definition of ``manufactured with,'' to state that a product 
``does not contain more than trace quantities of the controlled 
substance * * *.'' Comment on this proposed revision is requested. 

VI. Exemption for Trace Quantities 

   While the final labeling rule discussed the applicability 
of the labeling requirements for products containing trace
quantities 
of controlled substances, some confusion over when labeling 
is required for such products has also arisen since the publication

of the final rule. 
   The regulatory text in  82.106, referring to the warning 
statement requirements, lists certain exemptions from these 
requirements. The first of these addresses ``Products in which 
trace quantities of a controlled substance remain as a residue 
or impurity * * *.'' A trace quantity remaining in a product 
can only be contained within a chemical product; therefore, 
it is logical that this exemption specifically applies to products 
``containing'' rather than products ``manufactured with.'' Products

that are manufactured using a controlled substance, but that 
contain only trace quantities of the substance, are not required 
to be labeled as a ``product containing''; however, they are 
required to be labeled as a ``product manufactured with.'' To 
clarify this point, EPA proposes to amend  82.106(b)(1), which 
provides exemptions from the labeling requirements, to read: 
``Products containing trace quantities of a controlled substance 
remaining as a residue or impurity due to a chemical reaction, 
and where the controlled substance serves no useful purpose 
in or for the product itself.'' However, if such a product was 
manufactured using the controlled substance, such product is 
required to be labeled as a ``product manufactured with'' the 
controlled substances. 
   There has also been some confusion as to whether a container 
containing a trace amount of a controlled substance must be 
labeled. EPA understands that to determine whether a container 
contains a trace amount of a controlled substance, where such 
a determination falls outside of normal procedures, may be
difficult 
and costly. For example, a container of a non-controlled substance 
that may hold a trace amount of a controlled substance as an 
impurity of the manufacturing process would be subject to labeling 
under current labeling requirements. As a product, however, 
that same container would be exempt from the labeling requirements.

In many cases, expensive testing must be conducted to determine 
if a trace quantity of the controlled substance is in fact
contained 
in the container. Requiring the labeling of containers containing 
trace quantities of a controlled substance is inconsistent with 
the trace quantities exemption of the current labeling rule 
and with the intent of the Agency to require labeling of
``containers 
of'' controlled substances. 
   Consequently, EPA is today proposing to revise its regulations 
to make clear that containers containing trace quantities of 
controlled substances do not have to be labeled. EPA proposes 
to add a new  82.106(b)(2) stating that containers containing 
trace quantities of a controlled substance, which remain as 
a residue or impurity, are exempt from the labeling requirements, 
and requests relevant comment. 

VII. Labeling Requirements of Containers of 55 Gallons and Smaller 
Containing Controlled Substances 
   The final labeling regulations indicate that the use of
supplemental 
printed material may be used to label containers of controlled 
substances that are larger than 55 gallon drums, as long as 
the information is viewed at the time of purchase or time of 
delivery, provided the purchase is not considered complete until 
delivery is accepted. EPA reasoned that such information, rather 
than the containers themselves, is usually viewed by the recipient 
of such containers. The regulations also indicated that the 
warning statement must be placed directly on containers of
controlled 
substances that are smaller than 55 gallon drums. 
   Today, EPA proposes that supplemental printed material may 
also be used to convey the warning statement for containers 
that are 55 gallons and smaller. Since the publication of the 
regulations, numerous commenters have indicated that bulk shipments

of 55 gallon drum containers are often documented in various 
printed materials, such as the RCRA Manifest or a Land Disposal 
Restriction Form which companies are required to develop under 
the RCRA Land Disposal Restrictions Program. Such a form tracks 
waste codes that EPA developed specifically for that program. 
EPA agrees that shipments of containers of 55 gallons or smaller 
containing bulk quantities of controlled substances or waste 
containers of controlled substances may be labeled on supplemental 
printed material as an alternative to the direct labeling of 
individual containers, as long as the warning statement is clearly 
legible and conspicuous in such materials and the materials 
accompany the containers or are available to the consumer/waste 
recipient at the time of purchase. Consequently, EPA is revising 
 82.108(c) of its labeling regulation to strike ``larger than 
a 55 gallon drum'' from the provision allowing alternative
placement 
of the warning statement on containers of controlled substances. 
EPA requests comment on its proposal to allow alternative placement

of warning statements on 55 gallon or smaller containers. 

VIII. Definition of Importer 

   For purposes of section 611, EPA today clarifies that importers 
of ``products manufactured with controlled substances'' are 
included in the definition of ``importer.'' While the intent 
of the section 611 regulations was to cover imports of products 
manufactured with class I substances, the current definition 
does not explicitly include such a phrase. This came about as 
an oversight in transferring the definition from the phaseout 
regulations, where imports of containers and products containing 
controlled substances are regulated. Section 611 clearly mandates 
that ``products manufactured with controlled substances'' be 
labeled before they are introduced into interstate commerce. 
Therefore, for purposes of the labeling requirements and
consistency 
with the statute, the definition of ``importer'' under section 
611 is amended to include the phrase ``products manufactured 
with.'' 

IX. Certification Requirements for Reduced Use Exemption 

   In  82.122, EPA stated that companies that reduced their 
use of CFC-113 and/or methyl chloroform (MCF) by 95 percent 
or greater over their 1990 usage level could certify the reduction 
in writing to EPA and be exempt from the labeling requirements. 
In addition to other requirements for inclusion in the written 
certification, the regulations require that persons certifying 
to EPA must state that they will not exceed 5 percent of their 
1990 use following the certification; however, the statement 
conveyed was numerically and grammatically incorrect. It reads: 
``Persons certifying must also include a statement that indicates 
that their future annual use will not at no time exceed 95 percent 
of their 1990 usage'' (p.8169). 
   EPA proposes to correct this section of the regulations to 
state that a company must certify to EPA that its future use 
will not exceed 5 percent of its 1990 usage without notifying 
the Agency. Such notification would immediately result in labeling 
of the company's products. This subpart ( 82.122 (a)(4)) would 
thus read: ``Persons certifying must also include a statement 
that indicates their future annual use will at no time exceed 
5 percent of their 1990 usage.'' 

X. Imports and Products Introduced In Bond at the U.S./Mexico 
Border 

   The final labeling regulations state that products or containers

introduced ``in bond'' at the Mexico border are not considered 
to be ``imports.'' However, the preamble states that such products 
or containers are being introduced into U.S. interstate commerce 
and are therefore subject to the labeling requirements. 
   Today, EPA proposes that all products and containers subject 
to the labeling requirements that are made or charged in Mexico 
and subsequently brought into the U.S. must be labeled at the 
border where they are being introduced into U.S. interstate 
commerce. In order to facilitate enforcement of this rule, the 
Agency only requires that warning labels be placed on regulated 
products and containers at the border by persons introducing 
them into U.S. interstate commerce, rather than at the
manufacturing 
facility in Mexico. However, the importer may contract with 
the Mexican manufacturer to provide the applicable warning
statement 
prior to shipping. 
   This change supersedes EPA's reference to products or containers

admitted in bond in the final labeling rule, since for purposes 
of the labeling requirements, the regulated products and containers

are in fact being treated as ``imports.'' This change makes 
the definition of import in today's proposal somewhat different 
from that in the current phaseout regulations. For purposes 
of the phaseout regulations, it is appropriate to exempt such 
products of U.S. origin that are brought back into the U.S. 
from Mexico in bond from the definition of import because
allowances 
have already been expended and additional consumption allowances 
should not be required to bring these products back into the 
U.S. 
   However, it is appropriate and consistent with the intent 
of section 611 to require labeling of these imported goods, 
since labeling is to occur regardless of whether the product 
is distributed domestically or imported. The Agency therefore 
proposes to strike from the definition of ``import'' in  82.104(j) 
of the labeling regulation the exemption for bringing controlled 
substances, containers of, or products manufactured with,
controlled 
substances into the U.S. from Mexico where such substance,
container 
or product was admitted into Mexico in bond and is of U.S. origin. 
   In addition, EPA notes that the preamble to the final labeling 
rule contained an inaccuracy in describing an arrangement regarding

products brought from Mexico into the United States inbond. 
The preamble stated that, ``Under the Maquiladora Agreement, 
the United States and Mexico established a free-trade zone along 
a segment of the U.S./Mexico border.'' There is no formal agreement

as such between the two countries in this regard; rather, an 
arrangement exists, primarily under Mexican law, whereby controlled

substances crossing the border from the U.S. into Mexico ``inbond''

(under a bond ensuring that the substance will remain in Mexico 
only temporarily) will be returned to the U.S., without being 
subject to Mexican import tariffs. Similarly, the preamble to 
the final rule states that ``products are permitted to be
transported 
across [the Maquiladora] zone without any U.S. Customs restrictions

being imposed.'' This statement is misleading in that U.S. Customs 
does assist EPA in monitoring compliance with and enforcing 
U.S. environmental laws that generally apply without distinction 
to Maquiladora products. The preamble to the final rule should 
therefore be read to reflect these corrections. EPA requests 
comments on these corrections. 

XI. Incidental Uses of Controlled Substances 

   In the final regulations, the definition of ``manufactured 
with'' excludes the use of a controlled substance ``[W]here 
the manufacturing equipment has had physical contact with a 
controlled substance in an intermittent manner, not as a routine 
part of the direct manufacturing process* * *'' (See p.8165). 
The preamble gave as an example the occasional cleaning of an 
ink plate, where direct contact occurs only between the controlled 
substance and the manufacturing equipment, not between the
controlled 
substance and the product itself (other than the first one or 
two products going through the equipment following equipment 
maintenance). However, the preamble, in addressing this point, 
specifically noted that this exclusion should also apply in 
the case of a controlled substance having intermittent contact 
with the product itself, such as a textile where direct contact 
occurs through spot cleaning of some individual textiles, but 
where direct contact is not a normal or usual occurrence in 
the manufacture of the product. 
   The Agency intended for the regulatory text to reflect the 
full discussion in the preamble to the final rule. Therefore, 
EPA today also proposes to except in the regulatory text
intermittent 
uses of controlled substances which may involve an initial contact 
with the product itself, as well as with the equipment. Thus 
the exception shall read: ``[W]here the manufacturing equipment 
or product has had physical contact with a controlled substance 
in an intermittent manner, not as a routine part of the direct 
manufacturing process* * *'' EPA requests any comments in this 
regard. 

XII. Request for Comments Regarding Plasma Etching 

   In the preamble of the final labeling rule, EPA states that 
``plasma etching is considered a process that entails
transformation, 
and thus products manufactured using plasma etching need not 
be labeled, unless they are otherwise subject to the regulations.''

Since publication of the final rule, EPA has heard from one 
plasma etcher who has discovered that the plasma etching process 
may not necessarily transform all but trace quantities of
controlled 
substances used in the process. At times, it is estimated that 
as much as 40 percent may not be transformed. Therefore, plasma 
etching in general may not fall under the definition of
``transformation'' 
in the final labeling rule. 
   Consequently, EPA requests comments on the whether plasma 
etching can be considered generally to constitute transformation 
under the final labeling rule definition, which states, ``to 
use and entirely consume a class I or class II substance, except 
for trace quantities, by changing it into one or more substances 
not subject to this subpart in the manufacturing process of 
a product or chemical.'' 

XIII. Additional Information 


A. Executive Order 12866 

   Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1994), 
the Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is
``significant'' 
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of 
the Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant'' regulatory 
action as one that is likely to lead to a rule that may: 
   (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million 
or more, or adversely and materially affect 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. 
   EPA has determined that this rule is not ``significant'' 
under the terms of Executive Order 12866; however, OMB requested 
the opportunity to review the proposal. The Agency prepared 
an analysis to assess the impact of the final labeling regulations 
promulgated on February 11, 1993 (see Regulatory Impact Analysis 
of the Rule Requiring Labeling of Products Containing or
Manufactured 
With Ozone Depleting Substances, January 1993) which is available 
for review in the docket for the final labeling rule. This
supplemental 
proposal does not impose any additional burdens as defined by 
E.O. 12866. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

   The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, requires 
that Federal agencies examine the impacts of their regulations 
on small entities. Under 5 U.S.C. 604(a), whenever an agency 
is required to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking, 
it must prepare and make available for public comment an initial 
regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA). Such an analysis is not 
required if the head of an agency certifies that a rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b). 
   The Agency prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis, as 
part of the overall regulatory impact analysis (see p.40 of 
Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Rule Requiring Labeling of 
Products Containing or Manufactured With Ozone Depleting
Substances, 
January 1993) for the February 11, 1993, regulations that these 
proposed regulations supplement. No additional RFA need be prepared

for this proposal because the details of this amendment did 
not alter the original analysis. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

   An information collection request was prepared by EPA (ICR 
No. 2060-0259) for the February 11, 1993, final rule. The contents 
of this amendment do not alter that analysis. A copy of the 
ICR may be obtained by writing to the Information Policy Branch 
(PM-223), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460 
or by calling (202) 260-2740. 

List of Subjects for 40 CFR Part 82 

   Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, 
Chlorofluorocarbons, Destruction, Exports, Imports, Interstate 
commerce, Pass-through requirement, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Stratospheric ozone layer. 

   Dated: December 17, 1993.

Carol Browner, 
Administrator. 
   Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, part 82, is proposed 
to be amended to read 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. 7601; 42 U.S.C. 7671-7671(q).

   2. Subpart E, 40 CFR 82.100-82.124, is revised to read as 
follows: 

Subpart E-The Labeling of Products Using Ozone-Depleting Substances

Sec. 
82.100 Purpose. 
82.102 Applicability. 
82.104 Definitions. 
82.106 Warning statement requirements. 
82.108 Placement of warning statement. 
82.110 Form of label bearing warning statement. 
82.112 Removal of label bearing warning statement. 
82.114 Compliance by manufacturers and importers with requirements 
    for labeling of containers of controlled substances, or 
    products containing controlled substances. 
82.116 Compliance by manufacturers or importers incorporating 
    products manufactured with controlled substances. 
82.118 Compliance by wholesalers, distributors and retailers. 
82.120 Petitions.
82.122 Certification, recordkeeping, and notice requirements. 
82.124 Prohibitions. 

 82.100  Purpose. 

   The purpose of this subpart is to require warning statements 
on containers of, and products containing or manufactured with, 
certain ozone-depleting substances, pursuant to section 611 
of the Clean Air Act, as amended. 

 82.102   Applicability. 

   (a) In the case of substances designated as class I or class 
II substances as of February 11, 1993, the effective date of 
the requirements in this paragraph is May 15, 1993. In the case 
of any substance designated as a class I or class II substance 
after February 11, 1993, the effective date of the requirements 
in this paragraph of this section is either one year after the 
effective date of such designation or the date provided in the 
rulemaking designating such substance as a class I or class 
II substance, whichever comes first. On the effective date
indicated 
in this paragraph, the requirements of this subpart shall apply 
to the following containers and products except as exempted 
under paragraph (c) of this section: 
   (1) All containers in which a class I or class II substance 
is stored or transported. 
   (2) All products containing a class I substance. 
   (3) All products directly manufactured with a process that 
uses a class I substance, unless otherwise exempted by this 
subpart or, unless the Administrator determines for a particular 
product that there are no substitute products or manufacturing 
processes for such product that do not rely on the use of a 
class I substance, that reduce overall risk to human health 
and the environment, and that are currently or potentially
available. 
If the Administrator makes such a determination for a particular 
product, then the requirements of this subpart are effective 
for such product no later than January 1, 2015. 
   (b) Effective January 1, 2015 in any case, or one year after 
any determination between May 15, 1993 and January 1, 2015, 
by the Administrator for a particular product that there are 
substitute products or manufacturing processes for such product 
that do not rely on the use of a class I or class II substance, 
that reduce the overall risk to human health and the environment, 
and that are currently or potentially available, the requirements 
of this subpart shall apply to the following: 
   (1) All products containing a class II substance. 
   (2) All products manufactured with a process that uses a 
class II substance. 
   (c) The requirements of this subpart shall not apply to products

manufactured prior to May 15, 1993, provided that the manufacturer 
submits documentation to EPA upon request showing that the product 
was manufactured prior to that date. 

 82.104   Definitions. 

   (a) Class I substance means any substance designated as class 
I in 40 CFR part 82, appendix A to subpart A, including
chlorofluorocarbons, 
halons, carbon tetrachloride and methyl chloroform and any other 
substance so designated by the Agency at a later date. 
   (b) Class II substance means any substance designated as 
class II in 40 CFR part 82, appendix A to subpart A, including 
hydrochlorofluorocarbons and any other substance so designated 
by the Agency at a later date. 
   (c) Completely destroy means to cause the expiration of a 
controlled substance by one of the five destruction processes 
approved by the Parties at a demonstrable destruction efficiency 
of 98 percent or more or a greater destruction efficiency if 
required under other applicable state and federal regulations. 
   (d) Consumer means a commercial or non-commercial purchaser 
of a product or container that has been introduced into interstate 
commerce. 
   (e) Container means the immediate vessel in which a controlled 
substance is stored or transported. 
   (f) Container containing means a container that physically 
holds a controlled substance within its structure that is intended 
to be transferred to another container, vessel or piece of
equipment 
in order to realize its intended use. 
   (g) Controlled substance means a class I or class II ozone-
depleting substance. 
   (h) Destruction means the expiration of a controlled substance 
that does not result in a commercially useful end product using 
one of the following controlled processes: 
   (1) Liquid injection incineration; 
   (2) Reactor cracking; 
   (3) Gaseous/fume oxidation; 
   (4) Rotary kiln incineration; or 
   (5) Cement kiln. 

in a manner that complies at a minimum with the ``Code of Good 
Housekeeping'' of Chapter 5.5 of the UNEP report entitled, Ad-
Hoc Technical Advisory Committee on ODS Destruction Technologies, 
as well as the whole of Chapter 5 from that report, or with 
more stringent requirements as applicable.

   (i) Distributor means a person to whom a product is delivered 
or sold for purposes of subsequent resale, delivery or export. 
   (j) Export means the transport of virgin, used, or recycled 
class I or class II substances or products manufactured with 
or containing class I or class II substances from inside the 
United States or its territories to persons outside the United 
States or its territories, excluding United States military 
bases and ships for on-board use. 
   (k) Exporter means the person who contracts to sell class 
I or class II substances or products manufactured with or
containing 
class I or class II substances for export or transfers such 
substances or products to his affiliate in another country. 
   (l) Import means to land on, bring into, or introduce into, 
or attempt to land on, bring into, or introduce into any place 
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States whether or 
not such landing, bringing, or introduction constitutes an
importation 
within the meaning of the customs laws of the United States, 
with the exception of temporary off-loading of products
manufactured 
with or containers containing class I or class II substances 
from a ship are used for servicing of that ship. 
   (m) Importer means any person who imports a controlled
substance, 
a product containing a controlled substance, a product manufactured

with a controlled substance, or any other chemical substance 
(including a chemical substance shipped as part of a mixture 
or article), into the United States. ``Importer'' includes the 
person primarily liable for the payment of any duties on the 
merchandise or an authorized agent acting on his or her behalf. 
The term also includes, as appropriate: 
   (1) The consignee; 
   (2) The importer of record listed on U.S. Customs Service 
forms for the import; 
   (3) The actual owner if an actual owner's declaration and 
superseding bond has been filed; or 
   (4) The transferee, if the right to draw merchandise in a 
bonded warehouse has been transferred. 
   (n) Interstate commerce means the distribution or transportation

of any product between one state, territory, possession or the 
District of Columbia, and another state, territory, possession 
or the District of Columbia, or the sale, use or manufacture 
of any product in more than one state, territory, possession 
or District of Columbia. The entry points for which a product 
is introduced into interstate commerce are the release of a 
product from the facility in which the product was manufactured, 
the entry into a warehouse from which the domestic manufacturer 
releases the product for sale or distribution, and at the site 
of United States Customs clearance. 
   (o) Manufactured with a controlled substance means that the 
manufacturer of the product itself used a controlled substance 
directly in the product's manufacturing, but the product itself 
does not contain more than trace quantities of the controlled 
substance at the point of introduction into interstate commerce. 
The following situations are excluded from the meaning of the 
phrase ``manufactured with'' a controlled substance: 
   (1) Where a product has not had physical contact with the 
controlled substance; or 
   (2) Where the manufacturing equipment or the product has 
had physical contact with a controlled substance in an intermittent

manner, not as a routine part of the direct manufacturing process; 
   (3) Where the controlled substance has been transformed, 
except for trace quantities; or 
   (4) Where the controlled substance has been completely
destroyed. 
   (p) Potentially available means that adequate information 
exists to make a determination that the substitute is
technologically 
feasible, environmentally acceptable and economically viable. 
   (q) Principal display panel (PDP) means the entire portion 
of the surface of a product, container or its outer packaging 
that is most likely to be displayed, shown, presented, or examined 
under customary conditions of retail sale. The area of the PDP 
is not limited to the portion of the surface covered with existing 
labeling; rather it includes the entire surface, excluding flanges,

shoulders, handles, or necks. 
   (r) Product means an item or category of items manufactured 
from raw or recycled materials, or other products, which is 
used to perform a function or task. 
   (s) Product containing means a product including, but not 
limited to, containers, vessels, or pieces of equipment, that 
physically holds a controlled substance at the point of sale 
to the ultimate consumer which remains within the product. 
   (t) Promotional printed material means any informational 
or advertising material (including, but not limited to, written 
advertisements, brochures, circulars, desk references and fact 
sheets) that is prepared by the manufacturer for display or 
promotion concerning a product or container, and that does not 
accompany the product to the consumer. 
   (u) Retailer means a person to whom a product is delivered 
or sold, if such delivery or sale is for purposes of sale or 
distribution in commerce to consumers who buy such product for 
purposes other than resale. 
   (v) Spare parts means those parts that are supplied by a 
manufacturer to another manufacturer, distributor, or retailer, 
for purposes of replacing similar parts with such parts in the 
repair of a product. 
   (w) Supplemental printed material means any informational 
material (including, but not limited to, package inserts, fact 
sheets, invoices, material safety data sheets, procurement and 
specification sheets, or other material) which accompanies a 
product or container to the consumer at the time of purchase. 
   (x) Transform means to use and entirely consume a class I 
or class II substance, except for trace quantities, by changing 
it into one or more substances not subject to this subpart in 
the manufacturing process of a product or chemical. 
   (y) Type size means the actual height of the printed image 
of each capital letter as it appears on a label. 
   (z) Ultimate consumer means the first commercial or
non-commercial 
purchaser of a container or product that is not intended for 
re-introduction into interstate commerce as a final product 
or as part of another product. 
   (aa) Warning label means the warning statement required by 
section 611 of the Act. The term warning statement shall be 
synonymous with warning label for purposes of this subpart. 
   (bb) Waste means, for purposes of this subpart, items or 
substances that are discarded with the intent that such items 
or substances will serve no further useful purpose. 
   (cc) Wholesaler means a person to whom a product is delivered 
or sold, if such delivery or sale is for purposes of sale or 
distribution to retailers who buy such product for purposes 
of resale. 

 82.106   Warning statement requirements. 

   (a) Required warning statements. Unless otherwise exempted 
by this subpart, each container or product identified in  82.102(a)

or (b) shall bear the following warning statement, meeting the 
requirements of this subpart for placement and form:

   WARNING: Contains [or Manufactured with, if applicable] [insert 
name of substance], a substance which harms public health and 
environment by destroying ozone in the upper atmosphere.

   (b) Exemptions from warning label requirement. The following 
products need not bear a warning label: 
   (1) Products containing trace quantities of a controlled 
substance remaining as a residue or impurity due to a chemical 
reaction, and where the controlled substance serves no useful 
purpose in or for the product itself. However, if such product 
was manufactured using the controlled substance, the product 
is required to be labeled as a ``product manufactured with'' 
the controlled substance, unless otherwise exempted. 
   (2) Containers containing a controlled substance in which 
trace quantities of that controlled substance remain as a residue 
or impurity. 
   (3) Waste containing controlled substances or blends of
controlled 
substances bound for discard. 
   (4) Products manufactured using methyl chloroform or CFC-
113 by persons who can demonstrate and certify a 95% reduction 
in overall usage from their 1990 calendar year usage of methyl 
chloroform or CFC-113 as solvents during a twelve (12) month 
period ending within sixty (60) days of such certification or 
during the most recently completed calendar year. In calculating 
such reduction, persons may subtract from quantities used those 
quantities for which they possess accessible data that establishes 
the amount of methyl chloroform or CFC-113 transformed. Such 
subtraction must be performed for both the applicable twelve 
month period and the 1990 calendar year. If at any time future 
usage exceeds the 95% reduction, all products manufactured with 
methyl chloroform or CFC-113 as solvents by that person must 
be labeled immediately. No person may qualify for this exemption 
after May 15, 1994. 
   (5) Products intended only for export outside of the United 
States shall not be considered ``products introduced into
interstate 
commerce'' provided such products are clearly designated as 
intended for export only. 
   (6) Products that are otherwise not subject to the requirements 
of this subpart that are being repaired, using a process that 
uses a controlled substance. 
   (7) Products, processes, or substitute chemicals undergoing 
research and development, by which a controlled substance is 
used. Such products must be labeled when they are introduced 
into interstate commerce. 
   (c) Interference with other required labeling information. 
The warning statement shall not interfere with, detract from, 
or mar any labeling information required on the labeling by 
federal or state law. 

 82.108   Placement of warning statement. 

   The warning statement shall be placed so as to satisfy the 
requirement of the Act that the warning statement be ``clearly 
legible and conspicuous.'' The warning statement is clearly 
legible and conspicuous if it appears with such prominence and 
conspicuousness as to render it likely to be read and understood 
by consumers under normal conditions of purchase. Such placement 
includes, but is not limited to, the following: 
   (a) Display panel placement. For any affected product or 
container that has a display panel that is normally viewed by 
the purchaser at the time of the purchase, the warning statement 
described in  82.106 may appear on any such display panel of 
the affected product or container such that it is ``clearly 
legible and conspicuous'' at the time of the purchase. If the 
warning statement appears on the principal display panel or 
outer packaging of any such affected product or container, the 
warning statement shall qualify as ``clearly legible and
conspicuous,'' 
as long as the label also fulfills all other requirements of 
this subpart and is not obscured by any outer packaging, as 
required by paragraph (b) of this section. The warning statement 
need not appear on such display panel if either: 
   (1) The warning statement appears on the outer packaging 
of the product or container, consistent with paragraph (b) of 
this section, and is clearly legible and conspicuous; or 
   (2) The warning statement is placed in a manner consistent 
with paragraph (c) of this section. 
   (b) Outer packaging. If the product or container is normally 
packaged, wrapped, or otherwise covered when viewed by the
purchaser 
at the time of the purchase the warning statement described 
in  82.106 shall appear on any outer packaging, wrapping or 
other covering used in the retail display of the product or 
container, such that the warning statement is clearly legible 
and conspicuous at the time of the purchase. If the outer packaging

has a display panel that is normally viewed by the purchaser 
at the time of the purchase, the warning statement shall appear 
on such display panel. If the warning statement so appears on 
such product's or container's outer packaging, it need not appear 
on the surface of the product or container, as long as the
statement 
also fulfills all other requirements of this subpart. The warning 
statement need not appear on such outer packaging if either: 
   (1) The warning statement appears on the surface of the product 
or container, consistent with paragraph (a) of this section, 
and is clearly legible and conspicuous through any outer packaging,

wrapping or other covering used in display; or 
   (2) The warning statement is placed in a manner consistent 
with paragraph (c) of this section. 
   (c) Alternative placement. The warning statement may be placed 
on a hang tag, tape, card, sticker, invoice, bill of lading, 
supplemental printed material, or similar overlabeling that 
is securely attached to the container, product, outer packaging 
or display case, or accompanies the product containing or
manufactured 
with a controlled substance or a container containing class 
I or class II substances through its sale to the consumer or 
ultimate consumer. For prescription medical products that have 
been found to be essential for patient health by the Food and 
Drug Administration, the warning statement may be placed in 
supplemental printed material intended to be read by the
prescribing 
physician, as long as the following statement is placed on the 
product, its packaging, or supplemental printed material intended 
to be read by the patient: ``This product contains [insert name 
of substance], a substance which harms the environment by depleting

ozone in the upper atmosphere.'' In any case, the warning statement

must be clearly legible and conspicuous at the time of the
purchase. 
   (d) Products not viewed by the purchaser at the time of
purchase. 
Where the purchaser of a product cannot view a product, its 
packaging or alternative labeling such that the warning statement 
is clearly legible and conspicuous at the time of purchase, 
as specified under paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section, 
the warning statement may be placed in the following manner: 
   (1) Where promotional printed material is prepared for display 
or distribution, the warning statement may be placed on such 
promotional printed material such that it is clearly legible 
and conspicuous at the time of purchase; or 
   (2) The warning statement may be placed on the product, on 
its outer packaging, or on alternative labeling, consistent 
with paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section, such that the 
warning statement is clearly legible and conspicuous at the 
time of product delivery, if the product may be returned by 
the purchaser at or after the time of delivery or if the purchase 
is not complete until the time of delivery (e.g., products
delivered 
C.O.D.). 

 82.110   Form of label bearing warning statement. 

   (a) Conspicuousness and contrast. (1) The warning statement 
shall appear in conspicuous and legible type by typography, 
layout, and color with other printed matter on the label.
   (2) The warning statement shall appear in sharp contrast 
to any background upon which it appears. Examples of combinations 
of colors which may not satisfy the proposed requirement for 
sharp contrast are: black letters on a dark blue or dark green 
background, dark red letters on a light red background, light 
red letters on a reflective silver background, and white letters 
on a light gray or tan background. 
   (b) Name of substance. The name of the class I or class II 
substance to be inserted into the warning statement shall be 
the standard chemical name of the substance as listed in 40 
CFR part 82, appendix A to subpart A, except that: 
   (1) The acronym ``CFC'' may be substituted for
``chlorofluorocarbon.'' 
   (2) The acronym ``HCFC'' may be substituted for
``hydrochlorofluorocarbon.'' 
   (3) The term ``1,1,1-trichloroethane'' may be substituted 
for ``methyl chloroform.'' 
   (c) Combined statement for multiple class I substances. If 
a container containing or a product contains or is manufactured 
with, more than one class I or class II substance, the warning 
statement may include the names of all of the substances in 
a single warning statement, provided that the combined statement 
clearly distinguishes which substances the container or product 
contains and which were used in the manufacturing process. 
   (d) Format. (1) The warning statement shall be blocked within 
a square or rectangular area, with or without a border. 
   (2) The warning statement shall appear in lines that are 
parallel to the surrounding text on the product's PDP, display 
panel, supplemental printed material or promotional printed 
material. 
   (e) Type style. The ratio of the height of a capital letter 
to its width shall be such that the height of the letter is 
no more than 3 times its width; the signal word ``WARNING'' 
shall appear in all capital letters. 
   (f) Type size. The warning statement shall appear at least 
as large as the type sizes prescribed by this paragraph. The 
type size refers to the height of the capital letters. A larger 
type size materially enhances the legibility of the statement 
and is desirable. 
   (1) Display panel or outer packaging. Minimum type size
requirements 
for the warning statement are given in Table 1 and are based 
upon the area of the display panel of the product or container. 
Where the statement is on the outer packaging, as well as the 
display panel area, the statement shall appear in the same minimum 
type size as on the display panel. 


                                     Table 1                       
             
                                                                   
             
컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컫컴컴컴컴컫컴컴컴컴컫컴컴컴컴컫컴컴컴컴컫컴컴컴컴컫컴컴컴컴컴
                                             
                             
컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컵컴컴컴컴컵컴컴컴컴컵컴컴컴컴컵컴컴컴컴컵컴컴컴컴컵컴컴컴컴컴
                                             
                             
Area of Display         0-2     >2-5   
>5-10   >10-15   >15-30      >30   
 Panel (sq. in.).                            
                             
Type size (in.)*                             
                             
  Signal word ....     3/64     1/16     3/32
    7/64      1/8     5/32   
  Statement ......     3/64     3/64     1/16
    3/32     3/32     7/64   
컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컨컴컴컴컴컨컴컴컴컴컨컴컴컴컴컨컴컴컴컴컨컴컴컴컴컨컴컴컴컴컴
  > Means greater than.                                         
                
  * Minimum height of printed image of letters.                    
             


   (2) Alternative placement. The minimum type size for the 
warning statement on any alternative placement which meets the 
requirements of  82.108(c) is 3/32 inches for the signal word 
and 1/16 of an inch for the statement. 
   (3) Promotional printed material. The minimum type size for 
the warning statement on promotional printed material is 3/32 
inches for the signal word and 1/16 of an inch for the statement, 
or the type size of any surrounding text, whichever is larger. 

 82.112   Removal of label bearing warning statement. 

   (a) Prohibition on removal. Except as described in paragraph 
(b) or (c) of this section, any warning statement that accompanies 
a product or container introduced into interstate commerce, 
as required by this subpart, must remain with the product or 
container and any product incorporating such product or container, 
up to and including the point of sale to the ultimate consumer. 
   (b) Incorporation of warning statement by subsequent
manufacturers. 
A manufacturer of a product that incorporates a product that 
is accompanied by a label bearing the warning statement may 
remove such label from the incorporated product if the information 
on such label is incorporated into a warning statement accompanying

the manufacturer's product, or if, pursuant to paragraph (c) 
of this section, the manufacturer of the product is not required 
to pass through the information contained on or incorporated 
in the product's label. 
   (c) Manufacturers that incorporate products manufactured 
with controlled substances. A manufacturer that incorporates 
into its own product a component product that: (1) Was purchased 
from another manufacturer, (2) was manufactured with a process 
that uses a controlled substance(s), but (3) does not contain 
such substance(s), may remove such label from the incorporated 
product and need not apply a warning statement to its own product, 
if the manufacturer does not use a controlled substance in its 
own manufacturing process. A manufacturer that uses controlled 
substances in its own manufacturing process, and is otherwise 
subject to the regulations of this subpart, must label pursuant 
to  82.106, but need not include information regarding the 
incorporated product on the required label. 
   (d) Manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, retailers that 
sell spare parts manufactured with controlled substances solely 
for repair. Manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, and retailers

that purchase spare parts manufactured with a class I substance 
from another manufacturer or supplier, and sell such spare parts 
for the sole purpose of repair, are not required to pass through 
an applicable warning label if such products are removed from 
the original packaging provided by the manufacturer from whom 
the products are purchased. Manufacturers of the spare parts 
manufactured with controlled substances must still label their 
products; furthermore, manufacturers, importers, and distributors 
of such products must pass through the labeling information 
as long as products remain assembled and packaged in the manner 
assembled and packaged by the original manufacturer. This exemption

shall not apply if a spare part is later used for manufacture 
and/or for purposes other than repair. 

 82.114   Compliance by manufacturers and importers with
requirements 
for labeling of containers of controlled substances, or products 
containing controlled substances. 

   (a) Compliance by manufacturers and importers with requirements 
for labeling of containers of controlled substances, or products 
containing controlled substances. Each manufacturer of a product 
incorporating another product or container containing a controlled 
substance, to which  82.102 (a)(1), or, (a)(2) or (b)(1) applies, 
that is purchased or obtained from another manufacturer or
supplier, 
is required to pass through and incorporate the labeling
information 
that accompanies such incorporated product in a warning statement 
accompanying the manufacturer's finished product. Each importer 
of a product, or container containing a controlled substance, 
to which  82.102 (a)(1), (a)(2), or (b)(1) applies, including 
a component product or container incorporated into the product, 
that is purchased from a foreign manufacturer or supplier, is 
required to apply a label, or to ensure that a label has been 
properly applied, at the site of U.S. Customs clearance. 
   (b) Reliance on reasonable belief. The manufacturer or importer 
of a product that incorporates another product containing from 
another manufacturer or supplier may rely on the labeling
information 
(or lack thereof) that it receives with the product, and is 
not required to independently investigate whether the requirements 
of this subpart are applicable to such purchased product or 
container, as long as the manufacturer reasonably believes that 
the supplier or foreign manufacturer is reliably and accurately 
complying with the requirements of this subpart. 
   (c) Contractual obligations. A manufacturer's or importer's 
contractual relationship with its supplier under which the supplier

is required to accurately label, consistent with the requirements 
of this subpart, any products containing a controlled substance 
or containers of a controlled substance that are supplied to 
the manufacturer or importer, is evidence of reasonable belief.

 82.116   Compliance by manufacturers or importers incorporating 
products manufactured with controlled substances.

   (a) Compliance by manufacturers or importers incorporating 
products manufactured with controlled substances, or importing 
products manufactured with controlled substances. Each manufacturer

or importer of a product incorporating another product to which 
 82.102 (a)(3), or, (b)(2) applies, that is purchased from 
another manufacturer or supplier, is not required to pass through 
and incorporate the labeling information that accompanies such 
incorporated product in a warning statement accompanying the 
manufacturer's or importer's finished product. Importers of 
products to which  82.102 (a)(3) or (b)(2) applies are required 
to apply a label, or to ensure that a label has been properly 
applied at the site of U.S. Customs clearance. 
   (b) Reliance on reasonable belief. The importer of a product 
purchased or obtained from a foreign manufacturer or supplier, 
which product may have been manufactured with a controlled
substance, 
may rely on the information that it receives with the purchased 
product, and is not required to independently investigate whether 
the requirements of this subpart are applicable to the purchased 
or obtained product, as long as the importer reasonably believes 
that there was no use of controlled substances by the final 
manufacturer of the product being imported. 
   (c) Contractual obligations. An importer's contractual
relationship 
with its supplier under which the supplier is required to
accurately 
label, consistent with the requirements of this subpart, any 
products manufactured with a controlled substance that are supplied

to the importer, or to certify to the importer whether a product 
was or was not manufactured with a controlled substance is evidence

of reasonable belief. 

 82.118   Compliance by wholesalers, distributors and retailers. 

   (a) Requirement of compliance by wholesalers, distributors 
and retailers. All wholesalers, distributors and retailers of 
products or containers to which this subpart applies are required 
to pass through the labeling information that accompanies the 
product, except those purchasing from other manufacturers or 
suppliers spare parts manufactured with controlled substances 
and selling those parts for the demonstrable sole purpose of 
repair. 
   (b) Reliance on reasonable belief. The wholesaler, distributor 
or retailer of a product may rely on the labeling information 
that it receives with the product or container, and is not required

to independently investigate whether the requirements of this 
subpart are applicable to the product or container, as long 
as the wholesaler, distributor or retailer reasonably believes 
that the supplier of the product or container is reliably and 
accurately complying with the requirements of this subpart. 
   (c) Contractual obligations. A wholesaler, distributor or 
retailer's contractual relationship with its supplier under 
which the supplier is required to accurately label, consistent 
with the requirements of this subpart, any products manufactured 
with a controlled substance that are supplied to the wholesaler, 
distributor or retailer is evidence of reasonable belief. 

 82.120   Petitions. 

   (a) Requirements for procedure and timing. Persons seeking 
to apply the requirements of this regulation to a product
containing 
a class II substance or a product manufactured with a class 
I or a class II substance which is not otherwise subject to 
the requirements, or to temporarily exempt a product manufactured 
with a class I substance, based on a showing of a lack of currently

or potentially available alternatives, from the requirements 
of this regulation may submit petitions to: Labeling Program 
Manager, Stratospheric Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric 
Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 6202-J, 401 
M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. Such persons must label 
their products while such petitions are under review by the 
Agency. 
   (b) Requirement for adequate data. Any petition submitted 
under paragraph (a) of this section shall be accompanied by 
adequate data, as defined in  82.120(c). If adequate data are 
not included by the petitioner, the Agency may return the petition 
and request specific additional information. 
   (c) Adequate data. A petition shall be considered by the 
Agency to be supported by adequate data if it includes all of 
the following: 
   (1) A part clearly labeled ``Section I.A.'' which contains 
the petitioner's full name, company or organization name, address 
and telephone number, the product that is the subject of the 
petition, and, in the case of a petition to temporarily exempt 
a product manufactured with a class I substance from the labeling 
requirement, the manufacturer or manufacturers of that product. 
   (2) For petitions to temporarily exempt a product manufactured 
with a class I substance only, a part clearly labeled ``Section 
I.A.T.'' which states the length of time for which an exemption 
is requested. 
   (3) A part clearly labeled ``Section I.B.'' which includes 
the following statement, signed by the petitioner or an authorized 
representative: 

   I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined 
and am familiar with the information submitted in this petition 
and all attached documents, and that, based on my inquiry of 
those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the 
information, I believe that the submitted information is true, 
accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant 
penalties for submitting false information.

   (4) A part clearly labeled ``Section I.C.'' which fully explains

the basis for the petitioner's request that EPA add the labeling 
requirements to or remove them from the product which is the 
subject of the petition, based specifically upon the technical 
facility or laboratory tests, literature, or economic analysis 
described in paragraphs C(5), (6) and (7). 
   (5) A part clearly labeled ``Section II.A.'' which fully 
describes any technical facility or laboratory tests used to 
support the petitioner's claim. 
   (6) A part clearly labeled ``Section II.B.'' which fully 
explains any values taken from literature or estimated on the 
basis of known information that are used to support the
petitioner's 
claim. 
   (7) A part clearly labeled ``Section II.C.'' which fully 
explains any economic analysis used to support the petitioner's 
claim.
   (d) Criteria for evaluating petitions. Adequate data in support 
of any petition to the Agency to add a product to the labeling 
requirement or temporarily remove a product from the labeling 
requirement will be evaluated based upon a showing of sufficient 
quality and scope by the petitioner of whether there are or 
are not substitute products or manufacturing processes for such 
product: 
   (1) That do not rely on the use of such class I or class 
II substance; 
   (2) That reduce the overall risk to human health and the 
environment; and
   (3) That are currently or potentially available. 
   (e) Procedure for acceptance or denial of petition. (1) If 
a petition submitted under this section contains adequate data, 
as defined under paragraph (c) of this section, the Agency shall 
within 180 days after receiving the complete petition either 
accept the petition or deny the petition. 
   (2) If the Agency makes a decision to accept a petition to 
apply the requirements of this regulation to a product containing 
or manufactured with a class II substance, the Agency will notify 
the petitioner and publish a proposed rule in the Federal Register 
to apply the labeling requirements to the product. 
   (3) If the Agency makes a decision to deny a petition to 
apply the requirements of this regulation to a product containing 
or manufactured with a class II substance, the Agency will notify 
the petitioner and publish an explanation of the petition denial 
in the Federal Register. 
   (4) If the Agency makes a decision to accept a petition to 
temporarily exempt a product manufactured with a class I substance 
from the requirements of this regulation, the Agency will notify 
the petitioner and publish a proposed rule in the Federal Register 
to temporarily exempt the product from the labeling requirements. 
Upon notification by the Agency, such manufacturer may immediately 
cease its labeling process for such exempted products. 
   (5) If the Agency makes a decision to deny a petition to 
temporarily exempt a product manufactured with a class I substance 
from the requirements of this regulation, the Agency will notify 
the petitioner and may, in appropriate circumstances, publish 
an explanation of the petition denial in the Federal Register. 

 82.122   Certification, recordkeeping, and notice requirements.

   (a) Certification. (1) Persons claiming the exemption provided 
in  82.106(b)(2) must submit a written certification to the 
following address: Labeling Program Manager, Stratospheric
Protection 
Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, 6202-J, 401 M Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20460. 
   (2) The certification must contain the following information: 
   (i) The exact location of documents verifying calendar year 
1990 usage and the 95% reduced usage during a twelve month period; 
   (ii) A description of the records maintained at that location; 
   (iii) A description of the type of system used to track usage; 
   (iv) An indication of which 12 month period reflects the 
95% reduced usage, and; 
   (v) Name, address, and telephone number of a contact person. 
   (3) Persons who submit certifications postmarked on or before 
May 15, 1993, need not place warning labels on their products 
manufactured using CFC-113 or methyl chloroform as a solvent. 
Persons who submit certifications postmarked after May 15, 1993, 
must label their products manufactured using CFC-113 or methyl 
chloroform as a solvent for 14 days following such submittal 
of the certification. 
   (4) Persons certifying must also include a statement that 
indicates that their future annual use will not at no time exceed 
95% of their 1990 usage. 
   (5) Certifications must be signed by the owner or a responsible 
corporate officer. 
   (6) If the Administrator determines that a person's
certification 
is incomplete or that information supporting the exemption is 
inadequate, then products manufactured using CFC-113 or methyl 
chloroform as a solvent by such person must be labeled pursuant 
to  82.106(a). 
   (b) Recordkeeping. Persons claiming the exemption under  
82.106(b)(2) must retain supporting documentation at one of 
their facilities. 
   (c) Notice Requirements. Persons who claim an exemption under 
 82.106(b)(2) must submit a notice to the address in paragraph 
(a)(1) of this section within 30 days of the end of any 12 month 
period in which their usage of CFC-113 or methyl chloroform 
used as a solvent exceeds the 95% reduction from calendar year 
1990. 

 82.124   Prohibitions. 

   (a) Warning statement-(1) Absence or presence of warning 
statement. (i) Effective May 15, 1993, except as indicated in 
paragraph (a)(5) of this section, no container or product
identified 
in  82.102(a) may be introduced into interstate commerce unless 
it bears a warning statement that complies with the requirements 
of  82.106(a) of this subpart, unless such labeling is not 
required under  82.102(c), 82.106(b), 82.112 (c) or (d), 82.116(a),

82.118(a), or temporarily exempted pursuant to  82.120. 
   (ii) On January 1, 2015, or any time between May 15, 1993 
and January 1, 2015 that the Administrator determines for a 
particular product manufactured with or containing a class II 
substance that there are substitute products or manufacturing 
processes for such product that do not rely on the use of a 
class I or class II substance, that reduce the overall risk 
to human health and the environment, and that are currently 
or potentially available, no product identified in  82.102(b) 
may be introduced into interstate commerce unless it bears a 
warning statement that complies with the requirements of  82.106 
of this subpart, unless such labeling is not required under 
 82.106(b), 82.112 (c) or (d), 82.116(a) or 82.118(a). 
   (2) Placement of warning statement. (i) On May 15, 1993, 
except as indicated in paragraph (a)(5) of this section, no 
container or product identified in  82.102(a) may be introduced 
into interstate commerce unless it bears a warning statement 
that complies with the requirements of  82.108 of this subpart, 
unless such labeling is not required under  82.102(c), 82.106(b), 
82.112 (c) or (d), 82.116(a), 82.118(a), or temporarily exempted 
pursuant to  82.120. 
   (ii) On January 1, 2015, or any time between May 15, 1993 
and January 1, 2015 that the Administrator determines for a 
particular product manufactured with or containing a class II 
substance that there are substitute products or manufacturing 
processes for such product that do not rely on the use of a 
class I or class II substance, that reduce the overall risk 
to human health and the environment, and that are currently 
or potentially available, no product identified in  82.102(b) 
may be introduced into interstate commerce unless it bears a 
warning statement that complies with the requirements of  82.108 
of this subpart, unless such labeling is not required under 
 82.106(b), 82.112 (c) or (d), 82.116(a) or 82.118(a). 
   (3) Form of label bearing warning statement. (i) Effective 
May 15, 1993, except as indicated in paragraph (a)(5) of this 
section, no container or product identified in  82.102(a) may 
be introduced into interstate commerce unless it bears a warning 
statement that complies with the requirements of  82.110 of 
this subpart, unless such labeling is not required pursuant 
to  82.102(c), 82.106(b), 82.112 (c) or (d), 82.116(a), 82.118(a), 
or temporarily exempted pursuant to  82.120. 
   (ii) On January 1, 2015, or any time between May 15, 1993 
and January 1, 2015 that the Agency determines for a particular 
product manufactured with or containing a class II substance, 
that there are substitute products or manufacturing processes 
that do not rely on the use of a class I or class II substance, 
that reduce the overall risk to human health and the environment, 
and that are currently or potentially available, no product 
identified in  82.102(b) may be introduced into interstate 
commerce unless it bears a warning statement that complies with 
the requirements of  82.110 of this subpart, unless such labeling 
is not required pursuant to  82.106(b), 82.112 (c) or (d), 
82.116(a), or 82.118(a). 
   (4) On or after May 15, 1993, no person may modify, remove 
or interfere with any warning statement required by this subpart, 
except as described in  82.112 of this subpart. 
   (5) In the case of any substance designated as a class I 
or class II substance after February 11, 1993, the prohibitions 
in paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(2)(i), and (a)(3)(i) of this section 
shall be effective one year after the effective date of designation

of such substance as a class I or class II substance or effective 
on the date provided in the rulemaking designating such substance 
as a class I or class II substance, whichever comes first. 

[FR Doc. 93-31859 Filed 12-29-93; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
The Contents entry for this article reads as follows:

Air programs:
  Stratospheric ozone protection-
    Labeling requirements, 69568

Top of page


Local Navigation




Jump to main content.