Notice of Availability of Class Deviation; Disputes Resolution Procedures Related to Enforcement Actions Associated With Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Cooperative Agreements Distributing Funds Under the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (ARRA), 35799-35800 [2010-15222]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Notices
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–9166–1]
Notice of Availability of Class
Deviation; Disputes Resolution
Procedures Related to Enforcement
Actions Associated With Leaking
Underground Storage Tank (LUST)
Cooperative Agreements Distributing
Funds Under the American
Reinvestment and Recovery Act of
2009 (ARRA)
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of availability.
SUMMARY: This document provides
notice of availability of a Class
Deviation from EPA’s assistance
agreement dispute procedures and also
sets forth the procedures that will apply
to the resolution of disputes that may
arise in connection with certain
enforcement actions taken by EPA on
State cooperative agreements awarded
under section 9003(h) of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act with LUST funds
appropriated by the ARRA. Enforcement
actions affected by this alternative
dispute resolution procedure are those
actions, including suspension of
performance and potential partial or
complete cooperative agreement
termination, associated with the
obligation and expenditure of funds
under the following term and condition:
‘‘The recipient shall obligate funds for
contracts, subgrants or similar
transactions for at least 35 percent of
funds, and expend at least 15 percent of
funds within nine months of this award.
EPA will consider the recipient’s failure
to comply with this requirement as a
material failure to perform, which may
warrant appropriate enforcement action
under 40 CFR 31.43’’ (hereafter referred
to as the 35/15 term and condition).
Currently, with respect to States and
local governments, assistance agreement
disputes and disagreements are resolved
in accordance with EPA assistance
agreement disputes procedures at 40
CFR 31.70. EPA has determined,
however, through a Class Deviation, that
these procedures are not practicable to
use for LUST disputes and that it is
appropriate to replace those procedures
with the procedures contained in this
document. EPA’s preferred course of
action would be for the Agency and the
State to resolve issues associated with
the 35/15 term and condition by mutual
consent and should the need arise to
partially or completely terminate the
cooperative agreement by mutual
agreement. If appropriate, EPA will take
additional enforcement actions due to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
the State’s noncompliance with the 35/
15 term and condition.
DATES: These procedures are effective as
of June 23, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steven McNeely, (703) 603–7164.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB
guidance issued under section 1512 of
the Recovery Act of the interim final
regulations for implementing the
Recovery Act, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) in 2 CFR 176.20(c)
provides that EPA ‘‘shall’’ take
‘‘appropriate’’ enforcement or
termination action under 40 CFR 31.43
if recipients of Recovery Act Funds fail
to comply with reporting requirements
or other terms and conditions. EPA’s
Office of Underground Storage Tanks
(OUST) issued the ‘‘Guidance to Regions
for Implementing the LUST Provisions
of The American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009’’ on June 11,
2009. Terms and conditions outlined in
that guidance specify that ‘‘the recipient
shall obligate funds for contracts,
subgrants, or similar transactions for at
least 35 percent of funds, and expend at
least 15 percent of the funds within nine
months of their award.’’ EPA must
obligate LUST Recovery Act resources
by awarding assistance agreements,
contracts or interagency agreements by
September 30, 2010 if not sooner.
EPA’s Office of Grants and Debarment
has authority under 40 CFR 31.6(d) to
approve class deviations from EPA
program specific regulations. EPA’s
dispute resolution procedures at 40 CFR
31.70 are not prescribed by OMB
Circular A–102 and are therefore
specific to EPA programs.
As described in 40 CFR 31.70, the
dispute resolution process can involve
up to four levels of review and take
several months to complete.
Specifically, an entity disputing a
decision can attempt to resolve the issue
at the lowest level possible, request a
final Agency decision, and request a
reconsideration of the final decision. A
possible fourth step is an EPA
headquarters discretionary review of a
final Regional decision. This timeframe
is too long to permit the Agency to meet
ARRA requirements for timely
enforcement action and reallocation of
potentially de-obligated ARRA funds.
EPA’s Office of Grants and Debarment
has therefore issued a Class Deviation
under 40 CFR 31.6(d) to streamline the
40 CFR 31.70 procedures. The Class
Deviation will allow the Agency to
comply with ARRA requirements and at
the same time provide States with a
meaningful disputes resolution process
in the event a State disagrees with
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35799
enforcement action decisions associated
with the 35/15 term and condition.
Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews: Under Executive Order 12866
(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ and is therefore not subject to
OMB review. Because this grant action
is not subject to notice and comment
requirements under the Administrative
Procedures Act or any other statute, it
is not subject to the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) or
sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1999 (UMRA)
(Pub. L. 104–4). In addition, this action
does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action does not
have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (63 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000). This action will not
have federalism implications, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action
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 under Executive Order
12866. This action does not involve
technical standards; thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. This action does
not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Congressional
Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.
generally provides that before certain
actions may take affect, the agency
promulgating the action must submit a
report, which includes a copy of the
action, to each House of the Congress
and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. Since this final grant
action contains legally binding
requirements, it is subject to the
Congressional Review Act, and EPA will
submit this action in its report to
Congress under the Act.
LUST ARRA Assistance Agreement
Enforcement Decision Dispute
Resolution Procedures
EPA establishes LUST ARRA
Assistance Agreement dispute
resolution procedures as follows:
1. The authority citation for the LUST
ARRA assistance agreement disputes
resolution procedures in this document
is the Federal Grant and Cooperative
Agreement Act, 31 U.S.C. 6301(3) , 40
CFR 31.6(d) and 40 CFR 31.70.
2. The disputes resolution procedures
that will apply to LUST ARRA
assistance agreement disputes
E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM
23JNN1
35800
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Notices
for good cause. This decision shall be
the final decision of the Agency.
Dispute Resolution Procedures
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
associated with the 35/15 term and
condition are as follows:
Howard F. Corcoran,
Director, Office of Grants and Debarment.
1. After receiving updated State
obligations, expenditure, draw down
data and State plans associated with the
future spending of unobligated and
unspent ARRA funds within the
cooperative agreement’s existing period
of performance, EPA will identify
appropriate enforcement actions if a
State materially fails to comply with the
35/15 term and condition. Enforcement
actions could include the partial or
complete termination of a State’s LUST
ARRA cooperative agreement and an
associated amount of funding intended
for de-obligation. Should the Agency
suspend performance and seek to
terminate a LUST ARRA cooperative
agreement and de-obligate funding, it
will notify the relevant State as soon as
possible and no later than July 9, 2010,
unless EPA waives this deadline.
2. If a State disagrees with EPA’s
decision to suspend performance and to
terminate the cooperative agreement
and de-obligate funds or disagrees with
the amount of funds that the Agency
determined is appropriate for
termination and de-obligation, then the
State must file a written request for
reconsideration within three (3)
business days of receiving this
notification of suspension of
performance and intent to terminate the
cooperative agreement and to deobligate funding. EPA may grant a State
a brief extension of time to submit its
arguments, if the State demonstrates
that there are compelling reasons for
such an extension. Any detail or
arguments regarding why the State
disagrees with these decisions shall be
provided with the request for
reconsideration.
3. The written request for
reconsideration shall be sent via E–Mail
(PDF) or Facsimile to Carolyn
Hoskinson at
hoskinson.carolyn@epa.gov with copies
sent to Adam Klinger
(klinger.adam@epa.gov) and Steven
McNeely(McNeely.Steven@epa.gov) If
such material is to be sent by fax, please
direct to Mr. Steven McNeely and use
703–603–9163.
4. The Assistant Administrator for the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER) or his designee shall
review all reconsideration submissions,
and shall issue a decision in writing
within three (3) business days of
receiving the reconsideration request.
This deadline may be extended briefly
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
[FR Doc. 2010–15222 Filed 6–22–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–9167–1; Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–ORD–
2010–0395]
Draft EPA’s Reanalysis of Key Issues
Related to Dioxin Toxicity and
Response to NAS Comments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Extension of public comment
period.
SUMMARY: On May 21, 2010, EPA
released the draft report entitled, ‘‘EPA’s
Reanalysis of Key Issues Related to
Dioxin Toxicity and Response to NAS
Comments’’ (EPA/600/R–10/038A) for
independent external review, and
public review and comment (75 FR
28610). Written comments on the draft
report were to be submitted to EPA by
August 19, 2010 (a 90-day public
comment period). Since release, the
Agency has received several requests for
additional time to submit comments. In
response to these requests, the EPA is
extending the public comment period
another 30 days until September 20,
2010 (a 120-day public comment
period).
This draft report responds to the key
recommendations and comments
included in the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) 2006 report. In addition,
it includes new analyses on potential
human effects that may result from
exposure to 2,3,7,8–tetrachlorodibenzop-dioxin (TCDD). These analyses have
not been in previous versions of draft
reports related to EPA’s dioxin
reassessment activity. This draft report
is now considered to be under EPA’s
Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS) program, and thus, the new IRIS
process announced in May 2009 (http:
//www.epa.gov/iris/process/) is being
followed. Per the May 2009 process, this
draft report is beginning Step 4—
independent external peer review and
public review and comment. This draft
dioxin report was prepared by the
National Center for Environmental
Assessment (NCEA) within the EPA
Office of Research and Development
(ORD).
The draft document, ‘‘EPA’s
Reanalysis of Key Issues Related to
Dioxin Toxicity and Response to NAS
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Comments,’’ was also being provided to
EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB), a
body established under the Federal
Advisory Committee Act, for
independent external peer review. The
SAB will convene an expert panel
composed of scientists knowledgeable
about technical issues related to dioxins
and risk assessment. The SAB is holding
a public teleconference on June 24,
2010, and a public panel meeting on
July 13–15, 2010. The SAB peer review
meetings were announced by the SAB
staff office in a separate May 24, 2010,
Federal Register Notice (75 FR 28805).
EPA intends to forward all public
comments submitted before July 7,
2010, in response to this notice to the
SAB peer review panel for their
consideration. Members of the public
who wish to ensure that their technical
comments are provided to the SAB
expert panel before each meeting should
also e-mail their comments separately to
Thomas Armitage, the SAB Designated
Federal Officer at
armitage.thomas@epa.gov, following the
procedures in the Federal Register
Notice announcing the SAB public
meetings. When completing this draft
dioxin report, EPA will consider any
written public comments that EPA
receives in accordance with the detailed
instructions provided under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION in Federal
Register notice (75 FR 28610). The
public comment period and SAB
external peer review are independent
processes that provide separate
opportunities for all interested parties to
comment on the draft report.
EPA is releasing this draft report
solely for the purpose of predissemination peer review under
applicable information quality
guidelines. This draft report has not
been formally disseminated by EPA. It
does not represent and should not be
construed to represent any Agency
policy or determination.
DATES: The public comment period
began on May 21, 2010, and ends on
September 20, 2010. Comments should
be in writing and must be received by
EPA by September 20, 2010.
Due to the timing of the SAB’s peer
review meeting, EPA can only guarantee
that those comments received by July 7,
2010, in response to this Federal
Register notice will be provided to the
SAB panel prior to the SAB meeting.
Comments received after July 7, 2010,
will still be provided to the SAB panel
and will also inform the Agency’s
revision of the draft report.
ADDRESSES: The external review draft
titled, ‘‘EPA’s Reanalysis of Key Issues
Related to Dioxin Toxicity and
E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM
23JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 23, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35799-35800]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-15222]
[[Page 35799]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-9166-1]
Notice of Availability of Class Deviation; Disputes Resolution
Procedures Related to Enforcement Actions Associated With Leaking
Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Cooperative Agreements Distributing
Funds Under the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (ARRA)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document provides notice of availability of a Class
Deviation from EPA's assistance agreement dispute procedures and also
sets forth the procedures that will apply to the resolution of disputes
that may arise in connection with certain enforcement actions taken by
EPA on State cooperative agreements awarded under section 9003(h) of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act with LUST funds appropriated by the ARRA.
Enforcement actions affected by this alternative dispute resolution
procedure are those actions, including suspension of performance and
potential partial or complete cooperative agreement termination,
associated with the obligation and expenditure of funds under the
following term and condition: ``The recipient shall obligate funds for
contracts, subgrants or similar transactions for at least 35 percent of
funds, and expend at least 15 percent of funds within nine months of
this award. EPA will consider the recipient's failure to comply with
this requirement as a material failure to perform, which may warrant
appropriate enforcement action under 40 CFR 31.43'' (hereafter referred
to as the 35/15 term and condition).
Currently, with respect to States and local governments, assistance
agreement disputes and disagreements are resolved in accordance with
EPA assistance agreement disputes procedures at 40 CFR 31.70. EPA has
determined, however, through a Class Deviation, that these procedures
are not practicable to use for LUST disputes and that it is appropriate
to replace those procedures with the procedures contained in this
document. EPA's preferred course of action would be for the Agency and
the State to resolve issues associated with the 35/15 term and
condition by mutual consent and should the need arise to partially or
completely terminate the cooperative agreement by mutual agreement. If
appropriate, EPA will take additional enforcement actions due to the
State's noncompliance with the 35/15 term and condition.
DATES: These procedures are effective as of June 23, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven McNeely, (703) 603-7164.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB guidance issued under section 1512 of
the Recovery Act of the interim final regulations for implementing the
Recovery Act, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in 2 CFR 176.20(c)
provides that EPA ``shall'' take ``appropriate'' enforcement or
termination action under 40 CFR 31.43 if recipients of Recovery Act
Funds fail to comply with reporting requirements or other terms and
conditions. EPA's Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) issued the
``Guidance to Regions for Implementing the LUST Provisions of The
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009'' on June 11, 2009.
Terms and conditions outlined in that guidance specify that ``the
recipient shall obligate funds for contracts, subgrants, or similar
transactions for at least 35 percent of funds, and expend at least 15
percent of the funds within nine months of their award.'' EPA must
obligate LUST Recovery Act resources by awarding assistance agreements,
contracts or interagency agreements by September 30, 2010 if not
sooner.
EPA's Office of Grants and Debarment has authority under 40 CFR
31.6(d) to approve class deviations from EPA program specific
regulations. EPA's dispute resolution procedures at 40 CFR 31.70 are
not prescribed by OMB Circular A-102 and are therefore specific to EPA
programs.
As described in 40 CFR 31.70, the dispute resolution process can
involve up to four levels of review and take several months to
complete. Specifically, an entity disputing a decision can attempt to
resolve the issue at the lowest level possible, request a final Agency
decision, and request a reconsideration of the final decision. A
possible fourth step is an EPA headquarters discretionary review of a
final Regional decision. This timeframe is too long to permit the
Agency to meet ARRA requirements for timely enforcement action and
reallocation of potentially de-obligated ARRA funds.
EPA's Office of Grants and Debarment has therefore issued a Class
Deviation under 40 CFR 31.6(d) to streamline the 40 CFR 31.70
procedures. The Class Deviation will allow the Agency to comply with
ARRA requirements and at the same time provide States with a meaningful
disputes resolution process in the event a State disagrees with
enforcement action decisions associated with the 35/15 term and
condition.
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews: Under Executive Order 12866
(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' and is therefore not subject to OMB review. Because
this grant action is not subject to notice and comment requirements
under the Administrative Procedures Act or any other statute, it is not
subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) or
sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1999 (UMRA)
(Pub. L. 104-4). In addition, this action does not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 (63 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000). This action will not have federalism implications,
as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This action 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 under Executive Order 12866. This action
does not involve technical standards; thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Congressional
Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. generally provides that before certain
actions may take affect, the agency promulgating the action must submit
a report, which includes a copy of the action, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. Since
this final grant action contains legally binding requirements, it is
subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA will submit this
action in its report to Congress under the Act.
LUST ARRA Assistance Agreement Enforcement Decision Dispute Resolution
Procedures
EPA establishes LUST ARRA Assistance Agreement dispute resolution
procedures as follows:
1. The authority citation for the LUST ARRA assistance agreement
disputes resolution procedures in this document is the Federal Grant
and Cooperative Agreement Act, 31 U.S.C. 6301(3) , 40 CFR 31.6(d) and
40 CFR 31.70.
2. The disputes resolution procedures that will apply to LUST ARRA
assistance agreement disputes
[[Page 35800]]
associated with the 35/15 term and condition are as follows:
Dispute Resolution Procedures
1. After receiving updated State obligations, expenditure, draw
down data and State plans associated with the future spending of
unobligated and unspent ARRA funds within the cooperative agreement's
existing period of performance, EPA will identify appropriate
enforcement actions if a State materially fails to comply with the 35/
15 term and condition. Enforcement actions could include the partial or
complete termination of a State's LUST ARRA cooperative agreement and
an associated amount of funding intended for de-obligation. Should the
Agency suspend performance and seek to terminate a LUST ARRA
cooperative agreement and de-obligate funding, it will notify the
relevant State as soon as possible and no later than July 9, 2010,
unless EPA waives this deadline.
2. If a State disagrees with EPA's decision to suspend performance
and to terminate the cooperative agreement and de-obligate funds or
disagrees with the amount of funds that the Agency determined is
appropriate for termination and de-obligation, then the State must file
a written request for reconsideration within three (3) business days of
receiving this notification of suspension of performance and intent to
terminate the cooperative agreement and to de-obligate funding. EPA may
grant a State a brief extension of time to submit its arguments, if the
State demonstrates that there are compelling reasons for such an
extension. Any detail or arguments regarding why the State disagrees
with these decisions shall be provided with the request for
reconsideration.
3. The written request for reconsideration shall be sent via E-Mail
(PDF) or Facsimile to Carolyn Hoskinson at hoskinson.carolyn@epa.gov
with copies sent to Adam Klinger (klinger.adam@epa.gov) and Steven
McNeely(McNeely.Steven@epa.gov) If such material is to be sent by fax,
please direct to Mr. Steven McNeely and use 703-603-9163.
4. The Assistant Administrator for the Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response (OSWER) or his designee shall review all
reconsideration submissions, and shall issue a decision in writing
within three (3) business days of receiving the reconsideration
request. This deadline may be extended briefly for good cause. This
decision shall be the final decision of the Agency.
Howard F. Corcoran,
Director, Office of Grants and Debarment.
[FR Doc. 2010-15222 Filed 6-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P