Anda di halaman 1dari 4

Federal Register / Vol. 71, No.

217 / Thursday, November 9, 2006 / Proposed Rules 65765

planned. For further information, please comment directly to EPA without going occur. Most commonly, States must
see the direct final action. through www.regulations.gov your e- change their programs because of
Dated: October 12, 2006. mail address will be automatically changes to EPA’s regulations in 40 Code
Alexis Strauss,
captured and included as part of the of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 124,
comment that is placed in the public 260 through 268, 270, 273, and 279.
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
docket and made available on the
[FR Doc. E6–18875 Filed 11–8–06; 8:45 am] B. What Decisions Have We Made in
Internet. If you submit an electronic
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P This Rule?
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact EPA has preliminarily determined
information in the body of your that Idaho’s application to revise its
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION authorized program meets all of the
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
AGENCY statutory and regulatory requirements
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
40 CFR Part 271 comment due to technical difficulties established by RCRA. Therefore, we are
and cannot contact you for clarification, proposing to grant Idaho final
[FRL–8237–8] EPA may not be able to consider your authorization to operate its hazardous
comment. Electronic files should avoid waste program with the changes
Idaho: Proposed Authorization of State the use of special characters or any form described in the authorization
Hazardous Waste Management of encryption, and be free of any defects application. Idaho will have
Program Revision or viruses. For additional information responsibility for permitting Treatment,
AGENCY: Environmental Protection about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs)
Agency (EPA). Docket Center homepage at http:// within its borders (except in Indian
ACTION: Proposed rule. www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. country) and for carrying out the aspects
Docket: All documents in the docket of the RCRA program described in its
SUMMARY: Idaho has applied to EPA for are listed in the www.regulations.gov revised program application, subject to
final authorization of certain changes to index. Although listed in the index, the limitations of the Hazardous and
its hazardous waste program under the some information is not publicly Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
Resource Conservation and Recovery available, e.g., CBI or other information (HSWA). New Federal requirements and
Act (RCRA). EPA has reviewed Idaho’s whose disclosure is restricted by statute. prohibitions imposed by Federal
application, has preliminarily Certain other material, such as regulations that EPA promulgates under
determined that these changes satisfy all copyrighted material, will be publicly the authority of HSWA take effect in
requirements needed to qualify for final available only in hard copy. Publicly authorized States before the States are
authorization, and is proposing to available docket materials are available authorized for the requirements. Thus,
authorize the State’s changes. either electronically in http:// EPA will implement those requirements
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule www.regulations.gov or in hard copy and prohibitions in Idaho, including
must be received by December 11, 2006. during normal business hours at the issuing permits, until the State is
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency granted authorization to do so.
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– Region 10, Office of Air, Waste &
Toxics, 1200 Sixth Ave, Seattle, C. What Will Be the Effect if Idaho Is
RCRA–2006–0830 by one of the Authorized for These Changes?
following methods: Washington, contact: Jeff Hunt, phone
• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow number: (206) 553–0256; or Idaho If Idaho is authorized for these
the on-line instructions for submitting Department of Environmental Quality, changes, a facility in Idaho subject to
comments. 1410 N. Hilton, Boise, Idaho, contact: RCRA will have to comply with the
• E-mail: hunt.jeff@epa.gov. John Brueck, phone number: (208) 373– authorized State requirements in lieu of
• Mail: Jeff Hunt, U.S. Environmental 0458. the corresponding Federal requirements
Protection Agency Region 10, Office of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff in order to comply with RCRA.
Air, Waste & Toxics (AWT–122) 1200 Hunt, U.S. Environmental Protection Additionally, such persons will have to
Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101. Agency Region 10, Office of Air, Waste comply with any applicable Federal
Instructions: Direct your comments to & Toxics (AWT–122), 1200 Sixth Ave, requirements, such as, for example,
Docket ID No. EPA–R10–RCRA–2006– Seattle, Washington 98101, phone HSWA regulations issued by EPA for
0830. EPA’s policy is that all comments number: (206) 553–0256, e-mail: which the State has not received
received will be included in the public hunt.jeff@epa.gov. authorization, and RCRA requirements
docket without change and may be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
that are not supplanted by authorized
made available online at http:// State-issued requirements. Idaho
www.regulations.gov, including any A. Why Are Revisions to State continues to have enforcement
personal information provided, unless Programs Necessary? responsibilities under its State
the comment includes information States which have received final hazardous waste management program
claimed to be Confidential Business authorization from EPA under RCRA for violations of this program, but EPA
Information (CBI) or other information section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must retains its authority under RCRA
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. maintain a hazardous waste program sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003,
Do not submit information that you that is equivalent to, consistent with, which include, among others, the
consider to be CBI or otherwise and no less stringent than the Federal authority to:
protected through www.regulations.gov program. As the Federal program • Conduct inspections; require
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1

or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web changes, States must change their monitoring, tests, analyses, or reports;
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, programs and ask EPA to authorize the • Enforce RCRA requirements;
which means EPA will not know your changes. Changes to State programs may suspend or revoke permits; and
identity or contact information unless be necessary when Federal or State • Take enforcement actions regardless
you provide it in the body of your statutory or regulatory authority is of whether the State has taken its own
comment. If you send an e-mail modified or when certain other changes actions.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:28 Nov 08, 2006 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09NOP1.SGM 09NOP1
65766 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 217 / Thursday, November 9, 2006 / Proposed Rules

The action to approve these revisions authorization for these non-delegable 2. Any land held in trust by the U.S.
would not impose additional provisions and intends to amend its for an Indian tribe; and
requirements on the regulated regulations to remove these provisions. 3. Any other land, whether on or off
community because the regulations for EPA will retain direct authority for an Indian reservation, that qualifies as
which Idaho will be authorized are implementation of all non-delegable Indian country.
already effective under State law and provisions, and Idaho has agreed to refer Therefore, this action has no effect on
are not changed by the act of all applicants seeking approval of Indian country. EPA will continue to
authorization. manifest forms to the EPA Office of implement and administer the RCRA
Solid Waste as described in the rule. program on these lands.
D. What Happens If EPA Receives
Comments on This Action? G. Who Handles Permits After the J. Statutory and Executive Order
If EPA receives comments on this Authorization Takes Effect? Reviews
action, we will address those comments Idaho will continue to issue permits This proposed rule seeks to revise the
in a later final rule. You may not have for all the provisions for which it is State of Idaho’s authorized hazardous
another opportunity to comment. If you authorized and administer the permits it waste program pursuant to section 3006
want to comment on this authorization, issues. If EPA issued permits prior to of RCRA and imposes no requirements
you must do so at this time. authorizing Idaho for these revisions, other than those currently imposed by
these permits would continue in force State law. This rule complies with
E. What Has Idaho Previously Been
until the effective date of the State’s applicable executive orders and
Authorized for?
issuance or denial of a State hazardous statutory provisions as follows:
Idaho initially received final
waste permit, at which time EPA would 1. Executive Order 12866
authorization on March 26, 1990,
modify the existing EPA permit to Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
effective April 9, 1990 (55 FR 11015) to
expire at an earlier date, terminate the 51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency
implement the RCRA hazardous waste
existing EPA permit for cause, or allow must determine whether the regulatory
management program. EPA granted
the existing EPA permit to otherwise action is ‘‘significant,’’ and therefore
authorization for changes to Idaho’s
expire by its terms, except for those subject to OMB review and the
authorized program on April 6, 1992,
facilities located in Indian Country. EPA requirements of the Executive Order.
effective June 5, 1992 (57 FR 11580);
will not issue new permits or new The Order defines ‘‘significant
June 11, 1992, effective August 10, 1992
portions of permits for provisions for regulatory action’’ as one that is likely
(57 FR 24757); April 12, 1995, effective
which Idaho is authorized after the to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an
June 11, 1995 (60 FR 18549);
effective date of this authorization. EPA annual effect on the economy of $100
October 21, 1998, effective January 19,
will continue to implement and issue million or more, or adversely affect in
1999 (63 FR 56086); July 1, 2001,
permits for HSWA requirements for a material way, the economy, a sector of
effective July 1, 2001 (67 FR 44069);
which Idaho is not yet authorized. the economy, productivity, competition,
March 10, 2004, effective March 10,
2004 (69 FR 11322); and July 22, 2005, H. What Is Codification and Is EPA jobs, the environment, public health or
effective July 22, 2005 (70 FR 42273). Codifying Idaho’s Hazardous Waste safety, or State, local, or tribal
Program as Authorized in This Rule governments or communities; (2) create
F. What Changes Are We Proposing?
a serious inconsistency or otherwise
On June 16, 2006, Idaho submitted a Codification is the process of placing interfere with an action taken or
program revision application seeking the State’s statutes and regulations that planned by another agency; (3)
authorization for all delegable Federal comprise the State’s authorized materially alter the budgetary impact of
hazardous waste regulations codified as hazardous waste program into the Code entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
of July 1, 2005, incorporated by of Federal Regulations. This is done by programs, or the rights and obligations
reference in IDAPA 58.01.05.(002)– referencing the authorized State rules in of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel
(016). With the exception of the non- 40 CFR Part 272. Through codification legal or policy issues arising out of legal
delegable provisions described below, actions dated December 6, 1990 (55 FR mandates, the President’s priorities, or
we have preliminarily determined that 50327); June 11, 1992 (57 FR 24757); the principles set forth in the Executive
Idaho’s hazardous waste program June 25, 1999 (64 FR 34180); March 8, Order. It has been determined that this
revision satisfies all of the requirements 2005 (70 FR 11132); and April 20, 2006 proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant
necessary to qualify for final (71 FR 20341), EPA codified at 40 CFR regulatory action’’ under the terms of
authorization. Part 272, Subpart N all previous Executive Order 12866 and is therefore
In reviewing the authorization authorization actions for the State of not subject to OMB review.
package, EPA discovered that Idaho Idaho program. EPA is reserving the
inadvertently incorporated by reference amendment of 40 CFR Part 272, Subpart 2. Paperwork Reduction Act
sections of the Federal rule ‘‘Hazardous N for codification of this current This action does not impose an
Waste Management System; revision to Idaho’s program to a later information collection burden under the
Modification of the Hazardous Waste date. provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Manifest System; Final Rule’’ (March 4, I. How Would Authorizing Idaho for Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., because this
2005, 70 FR 10776) related to the These Revisions Affect Indian Country proposed rule does not establish or
national registry for printing and (18 U.S.C. 1151) in Idaho? modify any information or
distribution of hazardous waste recordkeeping requirements for the
manifest forms as described in 40 CFR Idaho is not authorized to carry out its
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1

regulated community and only seeks to


262.21 and associated references in 40 hazardous waste program in Indian authorize the pre-existing requirements
CFR 262.54(e), 262.60, 264.71(a)(3), and country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. under State law and imposes no
265.71(a)(3). In an Addendum to the Indian country includes: additional requirements beyond those
Revised Attorney General’s Statement 1. All lands within the exterior imposed by State law.
dated September 29, 2006, Idaho boundaries of Indian reservations Burden means the total time, effort, or
clarified that it is not seeking within or abutting the State of Idaho; financial resources expended by persons

VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:28 Nov 08, 2006 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09NOP1.SGM 09NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 217 / Thursday, November 9, 2006 / Proposed Rules 65767

to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose 4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act ‘‘meaningful and timely input by State
or provide information to or for a Title II of the Unfunded Mandates and local officials in the development of
Federal agency. This includes the time Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Pub. L. regulatory policies that have federalism
needed to review instructions; develop, 104–4) establishes requirements for implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have
acquire, install, and utilize technology Federal agencies to assess the effects of federalism implications’’ is defined in
and systems for the purposes of their regulatory actions on State, local, the Executive Order to include
collecting, validating, and verifying and tribal governments and the private regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct
information, processing, and sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, effects on the States, on the relationship
maintaining information, and disclosing EPA generally must prepare a written between the national government and
and providing information; adjust the statement, including a cost-benefit the States, or on the distribution of
existing ways to comply with any analysis, for proposed and final rules power and responsibilities among
previously applicable instructions and various levels of government.’’ This rule
with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
requirements; train personnel to be able
result in expenditures to State, local, does not have federalism implications.
to respond to a collection of
and tribal governments, in the aggregate, It will not have substantial direct effects
information; search data sources;
or to the private sector, of $100 million on the States, on the relationship
complete and review the collection of
or more in any one year. Before between the national government and
information; and transmit or otherwise
promulgating an EPA rule for which a the States, or on the distribution of
disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or written statement is needed, section 205 power and responsibilities among
sponsor, and a person is not required to of the UMRA generally requires EPA to various levels of government, as
respond to, a collection of information identify and consider a reasonable specified in Executive Order 13132.
unless it displays a currently valid OMB number of regulatory alternatives and This rule seeks authorization of pre-
control number. The OMB control adopt the least costly, most cost- existing State rules. Thus, Executive
numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 effective or least burdensome alternative Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
CFR are listed in 40 CFR Part 9. that achieves the objectives of the rule.
The provisions of section 205 do not 6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
3. Regulatory Flexibility apply when they are inconsistent with and Coordination With Indian Tribal
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), applicable law. Moreover, section 205 Governments
as amended by the Small Business allows EPA to adopt an alternative other
than the least costly, most cost-effective, Executive Order 13175, entitled
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., or least burdensome alternative if the ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
generally requires Federal agencies to Administrator publishes with the rule Indian Tribal Governments’’ (59 FR
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis an explanation why the alternative was 22951, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
of any rule subject to notice and not adopted. Before EPA establishes any to develop an accountable process to
comment rulemaking requirements regulatory requirements that may ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
under the Administrative Procedure Act significantly or uniquely affect small tribal officials in the development of
or any other statute unless the agency governments, including tribal regulatory policies that have tribal
certifies that the rule will not have a governments, it must have developed implications.’’ This rule does not have
significant economic impact on a under section 203 of the UMRA a small tribal implications, as specified in
substantial number of small entities. government agency plan. The plan must Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive
Small entities include small businesses, provide for notifying potentially Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.
small organizations, and small affected small governments, enabling
governmental jurisdictions. For officials of affected small governments 7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
purposes of assessing the impacts of to have meaningful and timely input in Children From Environmental Health
today’s rule on small entities, small the development of EPA regulatory and Safety Risks
entity is defined as: (1) A small business proposals with significant Federal Executive Order 13045 applies to any
defined by the Small Business intergovernmental mandates, and rule that: (1) Is determined to be
Administration’s size regulations at 13 informing, educating, and advising ‘‘economically significant’’ as defined
CFR Part 121.201; (2) a small small governments on compliance with under Executive Order 12866, and (2)
governmental jurisdiction that is a the regulatory requirements. Today’s
government of a city, county, town, concerns an environmental health or
rule contains no Federal mandates
school district, or special district with a safety risk that EPA has reason to
(under the regulatory provisions of Title
population of less than 50,000; and (3) believe may have a disproportionate
II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal
a small organization that is any not-for- effect on children. If the regulatory
governments or the private sector. It
profit enterprise which is independently imposes no new enforceable duty on action meets both criteria, the Agency
owned and operated and is not any State, local, or tribal governments or must evaluate the environmental health
dominant in its field. EPA has the private sector. Similarly, EPA has or safety effects of the planned rule on
determined that this action will not also determined that this rule contains children, and explain why the planned
have a significant economic impact on no regulatory requirements that might regulation is preferable to other
small entities because the proposed rule significantly or uniquely affect small potentially effective and reasonably
will only have the effect of authorizing government entities. Thus, today’s rule feasible alternatives considered by the
pre-existing requirements under State is not subject to the requirements of Agency. This rule is not subject to
law and imposes no additional Executive Order 13045 because it is not
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1

sections 202 and 203 of the UMRA.


requirements beyond those imposed by economically significant as defined in
State law. After considering the 5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Executive Order 12866 and because the
economic impacts of today’s rule, I Executive Order 13132, entitled Agency does not have reason to believe
certify that this action will not have a ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, the environmental health or safety risks
significant economic impact on a 1999), requires EPA to develop an addressed by this action present a
substantial number of small entities. accountable process to ensure disproportionate risk to children.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:28 Nov 08, 2006 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09NOP1.SGM 09NOP1
65768 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 217 / Thursday, November 9, 2006 / Proposed Rules

8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Hazardous materials transportation, • Hand Delivery/Courier: Defense
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Hazardous waste, Indians-lands, Acquisition Regulations System, Crystal
Distribution, or Use Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Square 4, Suite 200A, 241 18th Street,
This rule is not subject to Executive Reporting and recordkeeping Arlington, VA 22202–3402.
Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning requirements. Comments received generally will be
Regulations that Significantly Affect Authority: This proposed action is issued posted without change to http://
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 under the authority of sections 2002(a), 3006 www.regulations.gov, including any
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act personal information provided.
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as as amended 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).
defined under Executive Order 12866. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Dated: October 18, 2006.
Mark Gomersall, (703) 602–0302.
9. National Technology Transfer and Ronald A. Kreizenbeck,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Advancement Act
10.
Section 12(d) of the National A. Background
[FR Doc. E6–18486 Filed 11–8–06; 8:45 am]
Technology Transfer and Advancement
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P This proposed rule amends DFARS
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Pub. L. 104–
235.006 to add an exception to the
113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272), directs EPA
requirement for a written determination
to use voluntary consensus standards in
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE before using a fixed-price type contract
its regulatory activities unless to do so
for a development program effort. The
would be inconsistent with applicable
Defense Acquisition Regulations exception would apply to contracts for
law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
System systems integration of commercial off-
consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, the-shelf information technology
test methods, sampling procedures, 48 CFR Part 235 products under the DoD Enterprise
business practices) that are developed or RIN 0750–AF45
Software Initiative. The Enterprise
adopted by voluntary consensus bodies. Software Initiative, addressed in DFARS
The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Defense Federal Acquisition Subpart 208.74, promotes the use of
Congress, through OMB, explanations Regulation Supplement; Contracting enterprise software agreements with
when the Agency decides not to use Methods and Contract Type (DFARS contractors that allow DoD to obtain
available and applicable voluntary Case 2006–D018) favorable terms and pricing for
consensus standards. This rule does not commercial software and related
AGENCY: Defense Acquisition services.
involve ‘‘technical standards’’ as Regulations System, Department of
defined by the NTTAA. Therefore, EPA This rule was not subject to Office of
Defense (DoD).
is not considering the use of any Management and Budget review under
ACTION: Proposed rule with request for
voluntary consensus standards. Executive Order 12866, dated
comments. September 30, 1993.
10. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Justice in Minority Populations and Low the Defense Federal Acquisition
Income Populations Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to add DoD does not expect this rule to have
an exception to the requirement for a a significant economic impact on a
To the greatest extent practicable and substantial number of small entities
written determination before using a
permitted by law, and consistent with within the meaning of the Regulatory
fixed-price type contract for a
the principles set forth in the report on Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.,
development program effort. The
the National Performance Review, each because the rule relates to requirements
exception would apply to contracts for
Federal agency must make achieving for a written determination that is
environmental justice part of its mission systems integration of commercial off-
the-shelf information technology prepared and executed by the
by identifying and addressing, as
products under the DoD Enterprise Government. The rule makes no
appropriate, disproportionately high
Software Initiative. significant change to DoD policy
and adverse human health and
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule regarding the use of fixed-price
environmental effects of its programs,
should be submitted in writing to the contracts for development effort.
policies, and activities on minority
address shown below on or before Therefore, DoD has not performed an
populations and low-income
January 8, 2007, to be considered in the initial regulatory flexibility analysis.
populations in the United States and its
formation of the final rule. DoD invites comments from small
territories and possessions, the District
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
businesses and other interested parties.
of Columbia, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of identified by DFARS Case 2006–D018, DoD also will consider comments from
the Mariana Islands. Because this rule using any of the following methods: small entities concerning the affected
proposes authorization of pre-existing • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// DFARS subpart in accordance with 5
State rules and imposes no additional www.regulations.gov. Follow the U.S.C. 610. Such comments should be
requirements beyond those imposed by instructions for submitting comments. submitted separately and should cite
State law and there are no anticipated • E-mail: dfars@osd.mil. Include DFARS Case 2006–D018.
significant adverse human health or DFARS Case 2006–D018 in the subject C. Paperwork Reduction Act
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1

environmental effects, the rule is not line of the message.


subject to Executive Order 12898. • Fax: (703) 602–0350. The Paperwork Reduction Act does
• Mail: Defense Acquisition not apply, because the rule does not
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271 Regulations System, Attn: Mr. Mark impose any information collection
Environmental protection, Gomersall, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP requirements that require the approval
Administrative practice and procedure, (DARS), IMD 3C132, 3062 Defense of the Office of Management and Budget
Confidential business information, Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–3062. under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:28 Nov 08, 2006 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09NOP1.SGM 09NOP1

Anda mungkin juga menyukai