Ocean Dumping; De-designation of Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Sites and Designation of New Sites; Correction, 12632-12634 [05-5049]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 15, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12632-12634]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-5049]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 228

[FRL-7883-7]


Ocean Dumping; De-designation of Ocean Dredged Material Disposal 
Sites and Designation of New Sites; Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
correct a final rule that appeared in the Federal Register of March 2, 
2005 (70 FR 10041). The document de-designated certain ocean dredged 
material disposal sites and designated new sites located off the mouth 
of the Columbia River near the states of Oregon and Washington. The 
coordinates for one of those sites, the Shallow Water site, contained a 
typographical error in the Overall Site Coordinates as published

[[Page 12633]]

on page 10055 in Federal Register. This rule proposes to correct the 
typographical error.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 30, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this proposed rule should be sent on or 
before 5 p.m. of the 15th day from the date of this publication in the 
Federal Register to: John Malek, Dredging and Ocean Dumping 
Coordinator, EPA Region 10, MS: ETPA-083, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, 
WA 98101-1128.
    Electronic comments may be sent to: malek.john@epa.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Malek, Ocean Dumping Coordinator, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 (EPTA-083), 1200 Sixth 
Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101-1128, telephone (206) 553-1286, e-mail: 
malek.john@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. General Information

    In the Federal Register of Wednesday, March 2, 2005 (70 FR 10041), 
EPA published a final rule to de-designate and to designate ocean 
dredged material disposal sites off the mouth of the Columbia River 
near the states of Oregon and Washington. The final rule published on 
that date contained a typographical error in the coordinates for one of 
those sites, the Shallow Water site. The typographical error was 
printed in the Overall Site Coordinates for the Shallow Water site as 
published on page 10055 in Federal Register. EPA proposes to correct 
the typographical error by making the following correction to that 
final rule:

Section 228.15 Dumping Sites Designated on a Final Basis [Corrected]

    1. On page 10055, Sec.  228.15(n)(8)(i) is corrected to read as 
follows:
    (i) Location: Overall Site Coordinates for the third N and third W 
coordinates of the Shallow Water site are as follows: 46 [deg] 15'02.87 
N, 124 [deg] 08'11.47 W.

II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

1. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), 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 result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
or adversely affect in a material way, the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of 
recipients thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    It has been determined that this proposed action, which is a 
technical correction, is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is, therefore, not subject to 
OMB review.

2. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., is intended 
to minimize the reporting and record-keeping burden on the regulated 
community, as well as to minimize the cost of Federal information 
collection and dissemination. In general, the Act requires that 
information requests and record-keeping requirements affecting ten or 
more non-Federal respondents be approved by OPM. Since the proposed 
Rule does not establish or modify any information or record-keeping 
requirements, it is not subject to the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act.

3. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq., generally requires Federal agencies 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 
today's rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small 
business, as codified in the Small Business Size Regulations at 13 CFR 
part 121; (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 which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field. EPA has determined that this proposed 
action, a technical correction, will not have a significant impact on 
small entities. After considering the economic impacts of today's 
proposed rule on small entities, I certify that this action will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.

4. Unfunded Mandates

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Public 
Law 104-4) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is 
needed, Section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and 
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the 
least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that 
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do 
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why the 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA, a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling 
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements. This proposed rule contains no Federal mandates (under 
the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local or 
tribal governments or the private sector. It imposes no new enforceable 
duty on any State, local or tribal government or the private sector.

[[Page 12634]]

EPA has also determined that this proposed rule contains no regulatory 
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 
government entities. Thus, the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA 
do not apply to this rule.

5. 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 various levels of government.'' This proposed 
rule, a technical correction, does not have federalism implications. It 
will 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 various levels of 
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, Executive 
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not 
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The 
proposed rule is a technical correction and does not establish any 
regulatory policy with tribal implications. Thus, Executive Order 13175 
does not apply to this proposed rule.

7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined 
to be ``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA 
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. 
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate 
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on 
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other 
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered 
by the Agency. This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 
13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in 
Executive Order 12866 and because the Agency does not have reason to 
believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this 
proposed action, a technical correction, present a disproportionate 
risk to children.

8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution or Use

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' as defined under Executive Order 
12866.

9. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272) 
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 bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, 
through the OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use 
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This proposed 
rulemaking is a technical correction and does not involve technical 
standards.

10. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations

    To the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, and 
consistent with the principles set forth in the report on the National 
Performance Review, each Federal agency must make achieving 
environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and 
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human 
health and environmental effects of its programs, policies, and 
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the 
United States and its territories and possessions, the District of 
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the 
Mariana Islands. Because this proposed rule is a technical correction 
with no anticipated significant adverse human health or environmental 
effects, the rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228

    Environmental protection, Water pollution control.

    Dated: March 4, 2005.
Ronald A. Kreizenbeck,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, chapter I of title 40 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as set forth 
below:

PART 228--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 228 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.

    2. Section 228.15 is amended by revising paragraph (n)(8)(i) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  228.15  Dumping sites designated on a final basis.

* * * * *
    (n) * * *
    (8) * * *
    (i) Location: Overall Site Coordinates: 46 [deg] 15'31.64'' N, 124 
[deg] 05'09.72'' W; 46 [deg] 14'17.66'' N, 124 [deg] 07' 14.54'' W; 
46[deg] 15' 02.87'' N, 124 [deg] 08' 11.47'' W; 46 [deg] 15'52.77'' N, 
124[deg] 05' 42.92'' W. Drop Zone: 46 [deg] 15' 35.36'' N, 124 [deg] 
05' 15.55'' W; 46 [deg] 14' 31.07'' N, 124[deg] 07' 03.25'' W; 46 [deg] 
14' 58.83'' N, 124[deg] 07' 36.89'' W; 46 [deg] 15' 42.38'' N, 124 
[deg] 05' 26.65' W (All NAD 83)
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-5049 Filed 3-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P