[Federal Register: January 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 10)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 2461-2465]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15ja09-64]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 112
[EPA-HQ-OPA-2008-0821; FRL-8762-6]
RIN 2050-AG650
Oil Pollution Prevention; Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure Rule Requirements--Amendments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is
proposing to amend the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure
(SPCC) rule to tailor and streamline the requirements for the dairy
industry. Specifically, EPA proposes to exempt milk containers and
associated piping and appurtenances from the SPCC requirements provided
they are constructed according to the current applicable 3-A Sanitary
Standards, and are subject to the current applicable Grade ``A''
Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO) or a State dairy regulatory
requirement equivalent to the current applicable PMO. This proposal
addresses concerns raised specifically by the dairy sector on the
applicability of the SPCC requirements to milk containers.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 17, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OPA-2008-0821, by one of the following methods:
http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: EPA Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
code: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Hand Delivery: EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPA-
2008-0821. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket, EPA/
DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC.
The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the
EPA Docket is (202) 566-0276.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact the
Superfund, TRI, EPCRA, RMP, and Oil Information Center at 800-424-9346
or TDD at 800-553-7672 (hearing impaired). In the Washington, DC
metropolitan area, contact the Superfund, TRI, EPCRA, RMP, and Oil
Information Center at 703-412-9810 or TDD 703-412-3323. For more
detailed information on specific aspects of this proposed rule, contact
either Vanessa E.
[[Page 2462]]
Rodriguez at 202-564-7913 (rodriguez.vanessa@epa.gov), or Mark W.
Howard at 202-564-1964 (howard.markw@epa.gov), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC,
20460-0002, Mail Code 5104A.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The contents of this preamble are:
I. General Information
II. Entities Potentially Affected by This Proposed Rule
III. Statutory Authority and Delegation of Authority
IV. Background
V. This Action
A. 3-A Sanitary Standards and PMO Requirements
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. General Information
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is
proposing an amendment to the Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure (SPCC) rule to exempt storage containers (both bulk and
processing vessels) containing milk, as well as associated piping and
appurtenances from the SPCC requirements, if they are constructed
according to the current applicable 3-A Sanitary Standards, and are
subject to the current applicable Grade ``A'' Pasteurized Milk
Ordinance (PMO) or a State dairy regulatory requirement equivalent to
the current applicable PMO.
II. Entities Potentially Affected by This Proposed Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry sector NAICS code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farms................................................ 111, 112
Food Manufacturing................................... 311, 312
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Agency's goal is to provide a guide for readers to consider
regarding entities that potentially could be affected by this action.
However, this action may affect other entities not listed in this
table. The list of potentially affected entities in the above table may
not be exhaustive. If you have questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding section entitled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
III. Statutory Authority and Delegation of Authority
Section 311(j)(1)(C) of the Clean Water Act (CWA or the Act), 33
U.S.C. 1321(j)(1)(C), requires the President to issue regulations
establishing procedures, methods, equipment, and other requirements to
prevent discharges of oil to navigable waters or adjoining shorelines
from vessels and facilities and to contain such discharges. The
President delegated the authority to regulate non-transportation-
related onshore facilities to EPA in Executive Order 11548 (35 FR
11677, July 22, 1970), which was replaced by Executive Order 12777 (56
FR 54757, October 22, 1991). A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
between the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and EPA (36 FR
24080, November 24, 1971) established the definitions of
transportation-related and non-transportation-related facilities. An
MOU between EPA, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), and DOT (59
FR 34102, July 1, 1994) re-delegated the responsibility to regulate
certain offshore facilities from DOI to EPA.
Then in 1995, Congress enacted the Edible Oil Regulatory Reform Act
(EORRA), 33 U.S.C. 2720, which mandates that Federal agencies \1\ in
issuing or enforcing any regulation or establishing any interpretation
or guideline relating to the transportation, storage, discharge,
release, emission or disposal of oil differentiate between and
establish separate classes for various types of oils, specifically:
animal fats and oils and greases, and fish and marine mammal oils; oils
of vegetable origin; petroleum oils, and other non-petroleum oils and
greases. In differentiating between these classes of oils, Federal
agencies are directed to consider differences in the physical,
chemical, biological, and other properties, and in the environmental
effects of the classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The requirements of the Edible Oil Regulatory Reform Act do
not apply to the Food and Drug Administration and the Food Safety
and Inspection Service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Background
EPA has promulgated a series of amendments to the SPCC rule.
Facilities handling animal fats and vegetable oils (AFVOs), including
dairy farms that are subject to the SPCC rule because of their oil
storage capacity, may benefit from a number of these amendments,
including: streamlined requirements promulgated for qualified
facilities (``Tier II''), a basic set of requirements for a subset of
qualified facilities (``Tier I''); amendments to the security,
integrity testing, and facility diagram requirements; an exemption from
the loading/unloading rack requirements; an exemption for pesticide
application equipment and related mix containers, and for single-family
residential heating oil containers; and clarification for fuel nurse
tanks and for the definition of ``facility.''
Additionally, the SPCC rule amendments differentiate integrity
testing requirements at Sec. 112.12(c)(6) for an owner or operator of
a facility that handles certain types of AFVOs. EPA provides the
Professional Engineer (PE) or an owner or operator self-certifying an
SPCC Plan with an alternative option for integrity testing for
containers that store AFVOs, based on compliance with certain U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations and other criteria.
Milk typically contains a percentage of animal fat, which is a non-
petroleum oil. Thus, containers storing milk are subject to the SPCC
rule when they meet the applicability criteria set forth in Sec.
112.1. In the SPCC rule, the term ``bulk storage container'' is defined
at Sec. 112.2 as ``any container used to store oil.'' Therefore, bulk
storage containers storing milk are subject to the applicable
provisions under Sec. 112.12. Additionally, milk is processed in
vessels during the pasteurization process. These vessels, while not
bulk storage containers, are considered oil-filled manufacturing
equipment and are subject to the general provisions of the SPCC rule
under Sec. 112.7.
In response to EPA's October 2007 proposal for amendments to the
SPCC rule (72 FR 58378, October 15, 2007), several commenters requested
that EPA exempt containers used to store milk from the SPCC
requirements. Specifically, these commenters suggested that milk
storage containers be exempted from the SPCC requirements because the
Grade ``A'' Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO) addresses milk storage and
tank integrity. These commenters identified the PMO, which specifically
addresses milk intended for human consumption,
[[Page 2463]]
as a model ordinance maintained through a cooperative agreement between
the States, the FDA, and the regulated community. States typically
adopt it either by reference, or by directly incorporating similar
requirements into their statutes or regulations.
V. This Action
EPA is proposing to exempt from SPCC requirements containers and
associated piping and appurtenances that store milk provided they are
constructed according to current applicable 3-A Sanitary Standards, and
are subject to the current applicable PMO or a State dairy regulatory
requirement equivalent to the current applicable PMO. In addition, the
capacity of these milk containers would not be included in a facility's
total oil storage capacity calculation (see 112.1(d)(2)(ii).
A. 3-A Sanitary Standards and PMO Requirements
Milk containers and their associated piping and appurtenances are
generally constructed according to an industry standard established by
the 3-A Sanitary Standards (McLean, VA), which satisfy the PMO
construction requirements for milk containers and associated piping and
appurtenances. These standards include American Iron and Steel
Institute 300 Series stainless steel (i.e., austenitic stainless steel)
or a metal that is at least as corrosion resistant and that meet
specific design criteria, including, but not limited to, requirements
for contact with milk (e.g., polished contact surfaces). Milk
containers and associated piping and appurtenances must have smooth and
impervious surfaces that are free of breaks and corrosion, including at
joints and seams. These standards further specify the requirements for
easy access to inspect the container's internal surfaces. The U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) also recognizes the 3-A Sanitary
Standards-compliant containers under 7 CFR part 58 for purposes of USDA
milk grading and inspection programs.
All milk handling operations subject to the PMO are required to
have an operating permit, and are subject to inspection by the state
dairy regulatory agencies. That is, PMO establishes criteria for the
permitting, inspection and enforcement of milk handling equipment and
operations that govern all processes for milk intended for human
consumption. These include, but are not limited to, specifications for
the design and construction of milk handling equipment, equipment
sanitation and maintenance procedures, temperature controls, and
pasteurization standards. In addition, because many kinds of harmful
bacteria can grow rapidly in milk, and thus the PMO requires that milk
containers be frequently emptied, cleaned, and sanitized (for example,
every 72 hours). Such frequent cleaning of the containers suggests that
any leaks or deterioration of container integrity would be quickly
identified. PMO also requires an inspection of the dairy farms or milk
processing plants by the state-designated regulatory agency prior to
issuing a permit, and routine inspections thereafter (for example, at
dairy farms at least once every six months) by a state designated
regulatory agency. Inspections at these facilities encompass those
elements associated with the milk operation, including the milk
containers, and associated piping and appurtenances. Should the
inspection result in two consecutive violations of the same criterion,
PMO enforcement provisions may result in the suspension or revocation
of the facility's operating permit.
As a result, EPA believes that these requirements may provide a
basis for an exemption of milk containers and their associated piping
and appurtenances from the SPCC rule provided they are constructed in
accordance with the current applicable 3-A Sanitary Standards, and are
subject to the current applicable PMO sanitation requirements or a
State dairy regulatory equivalent to current applicable PMO.
EPA is requesting comment on this proposal. An owner or operator of
a facility that is subject to SPCC, that has milk storage containers,
and associated piping and appurtenances constructed in accordance with
the current applicable 3-A Sanitary Standards, and that is effectively
implementing the current applicable PMO sanitation requirements, is
implementing substantial measures to prevent milk spoilage and
contamination. While these measures are not specifically intended for
oil spill prevention, control and countermeasure purposes, we believe
they may prevent discharges of oil in quantities that are harmful and
seek comment on this. We also seek comment on an exemption for milk
product containers and their associated piping and appurtenances from
the SPCC rule provided they are also constructed in accordance with the
current applicable 3-A Sanitary Standards, and are subject to the
current applicable PMO sanitation requirements or a State dairy
regulatory equivalent to current applicable PMO. EPA is also requesting
comment on how to address milk storage containers (including totes)
that may not be constructed to 3-A Sanitary Standards under the SPCC
rule and whether they should also be exempted from the SPCC
requirements, provided they are subject to the current applicable PMO
or a State dairy regulatory requirement equivalent to the current
applicable PMO. Those commenters who support expanding the proposal to
include those containers that are not constructed to 3-A Sanitary
Standards should provide supporting data and information in order for
the Agency to consider such an approach.
EPA requests comment on any other alternative approaches to address
milk, and milk product containers and associated piping and
appurtenances under the SPCC rule. The Agency requests comments on
whether any action to address milk, and milk product containers, and
associated piping and appurtenances under the SPCC requirements is
warranted. Any alternative approaches offered, including no action,
must include an appropriate rationale and supporting data in order for
the Agency to be able to consider them for final action.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993), this action is an ``economically significant
regulatory action'' because it is likely to have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more. Accordingly, EPA submitted this
action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under EO
12866, and any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have
been documented in the docket for this action.
In addition, EPA prepared an analysis of the potential costs and
benefits associated with this action. This analysis is contained in
``Regulatory Impact Analysis'' for the Proposed Amendment to the Oil
Pollution Prevention Regulations to Exempt Certain Milk Containers and
Associated Piping and Appurtenances (40 CFR PART 112)''. A copy of the
analysis is available in the docket for this action, and the analysis
is briefly summarized in section C.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed action does not impose any new information collection
burden. The proposed rule amendment would exempt certain milk
containers and associated piping and appurtenances
[[Page 2464]]
from the rule. However, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
previously approved the information collection requirements contained
in the existing regulations, 40 CFR part 112, under the provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned
OMB control number 2050-0021. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice
and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure
Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations,
and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of this proposed rule on
small entities, a small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as
defined in the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA)'s regulations
at 13 CFR 121.201--SBA defines small businesses by category of business
using North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, and
in the case of farms and oil production facilities, which constitute a
large percentage of the facilities affected by this proposed rule,
generally defines small businesses as having less than $0.5 million to
$27.5 million per year in sales receipts, depending on the industry, or
500 or fewer employees, respectively; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school
district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and
(3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise that is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of this proposed rule on
small entities, the Agency certifies that this action would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant, adverse economic impact on small entities, since the
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant
economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities'' (5 U.S.C. 603
and 604). Thus, an agency may certify that a rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive
economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
Under this proposal, EPA would exempt milk storage containers and
associated piping and appurtenances that are constructed according to
3-A Sanitary Standards and are subject to the current applicable Grade
``A'' Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO), or an equivalent state dairy
requirement to the current applicable PMO from SPCC rule requirements.
Overall, EPA estimates that this proposed action would reduce annual
compliance costs by approximately $155 million for owners and operators
of affected facilities. Total costs were annualized over a 10-year
period using a 7-percent discount rate. To derive this savings
estimate, EPA first estimated the number of dairy farms and milk
processing facilities that would be affected each year (2010-2019) by
the proposed rule. EPA next analyzed the expected milk and fuel oil
storage capacity of dairy farms with varying numbers of cattle based on
daily production rate per cow, storage requirements for milk, and
conversations with industry representatives. EPA also estimated the
milk and fuel oil storage capacity of milk processing facilities, and
estimated the cost savings associated with the exemption for milk
storage containers at both dairy farms and milk processing facilities.
These savings include secondary containment costs, cost savings from
preparing and maintaining an SPCC Plan for a smaller facility, and, for
Qualified Facilities, preparing only a Plan Template and saving PE
certification costs. A certain number of dairy farms are expected to
become exempt as a result of the amendments.
EPA has therefore concluded that this proposed rule would relieve
regulatory burden for small entities and therefore, certify that this
proposed action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. EPA continues to be interested in
the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and
welcomes comments on issues related to such impacts.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This proposed action contains no Federal mandates under the
provisions of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538 for State, local, or tribal governments or
the private sector. The proposed action imposes no enforceable duty on
any State, local or tribal governments or the private sector;
therefore, this action is not subject to the requirements of sections
202 or 205 of the UMRA. This proposed action is also not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments; the proposed amendments impose no enforceable duty on any
small government.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It would
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. Under the Clean Water Act (CWA)
section 311(o), States may impose additional requirements, including
more stringent requirements, relating to the prevention of oil
discharges to navigable waters and adjoining shorelines. EPA recognizes
that some States have more stringent requirements (56 FR 54612, October
22, 1991). This proposed rule would not preempt State law or
regulations. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this
proposed rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This proposed
rule would not significantly or uniquely affect communities of Indian
tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
proposed rule. EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this
proposed action from tribal officials.
[[Page 2465]]
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the
potential to influence the regulation. This proposed rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an
environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 18355 (May 22, 2001)), because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. The overall effect of the proposed rule
is to decrease the regulatory burden on facility owners or operators
subject to its provisions.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. EPA proposes
to use the 3-A Sanitary Standards, ``Storage Tanks for Milk and Milk
Products'', 3A 01-08, November 2001, developed by 3-A Sanitary
Standards, Inc. A copy of these standards may be obtained from the 3-A
Sanitary Standards online store at http://www.techstreet.com/
3Agate.html; by contacting the organization at 6888 Elm Street, Suite
2D, McLean, Virginia 22101; by phone at (703) 790-0295; or by facsimile
at (703) 761-6284. EPA is proposing an exemption to the SPCC rule based
on the 3-A Sanitary Standards, because an owner and operator of a
facility that is subject to SPCC, that has milk storage containers and
associated piping and appurtenances constructed in accordance with 3-A
Sanitary Standards, and that is effectively implementing PMO sanitation
requirements, may already be providing measures to prevent, control and
provide countermeasures for discharges of oil in quantities that are
harmful.
EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking
and, specifically, invites the public to identify potentially-
applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why such
standards should be used in this regulation.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. The overall effect of the action is to decrease the
regulatory burden on facility owners or operators subject to its
provisions.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 112
Environmental protection, Animal fats and vegetable oils, Farms,
Milk, Oil pollution, Tanks, Water pollution control, Water resources.
Dated: January 9, 2009.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency proposes to amend 40 CFR part 112 as follows:
PART 112--OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION
1. The authority citation for part 112 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 33 U.S.C. 2720; and E.O.
12777 (October 18, 1991), 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351.
Subpart A--[Amended]
2. Amend Sec. 112.1 by adding paragraphs (d)(2)(ii)(G) and (d)(13)
to read as follows:
Sec. 112.1 General applicability.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) * * *
(G) The capacity of any milk container and associated piping and
appurtenances that are constructed according to current applicable 3-A
Sanitary Standards, and that are subject to current applicable Grade
``A'' Pasteurized Milk Ordinance or a State dairy regulatory
requirement equivalent to the current applicable Grade ``A''
Pasteurized Milk Ordinance.
* * * * *
(13) Any milk container and associated piping and appurtenances
that are constructed according to current applicable 3-A Sanitary
Standards, and that are subject to current applicable Grade ``A''
Pasteurized Milk Ordinance or a State dairy regulatory requirement
equivalent to the current applicable Grade ``A'' Pasteurized Milk
Ordinance.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-830 Filed 1-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P