Oregon; Correction of Federal Authorization of the State's Hazardous Waste Management Program, 76633-76636 [2010-31012]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: November 30, 2010.
Eric A. Washburn,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010–30928 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[EPA–R10–RCRA–2010–0947; FRL–9236–8]
Oregon; Correction of Federal
Authorization of the State’s Hazardous
Waste Management Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
On January 7, 2010, EPA
published a final rule under docket
EPA–R10–RCRA 2009–0766 granting
final authorization for changes the State
of Oregon made to its federally
authorized RCRA Hazardous Waste
Management Program. These authorized
changes included, among others, the
federal Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Clarification rule,
promulgated on July 30, 2003. During a
post-authorization review of the State of
Oregon’s regulations, EPA identified
that the Oregon Administrative Rules
(OAR), related to the federal used oil
management requirements (OAR 340–
100–0002), had not been updated to
include the adoption of the federal
Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Clarification rule. Therefore,
the State did not have an effective state
rule and EPA inaccurately referenced
this rule in the State’s Final
Authorization Action published and
effective on January 7, 2010. This action
will correct the State of Oregon’s
federally authorized program, by
removing the inaccurate authorization
reference to the Federal Recycled Used
Oil Management Standards;
Clarification rule.
DATES: This rule is effective February 7,
2011, unless the EPA receives adverse
comment on this revision by the close
of business January 10, 2011. If the EPA
receives such comments, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final rule in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
RCRA–2010–0947, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulation.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
• E-mail: Kocourek.Nina@epa.gov.
• Mail: Nina Kocourek, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 10, Office of Air, Waste &
Toxics, Mail Stop AWT–122, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R10–RCRA–2010–
0947. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
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 https://
www.regulations.gov, or e-mail. The
https://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 https://
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 or 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 https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
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 https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
during normal business hours at the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 10, Office of Air, Waste &
Toxics, Mailstop AWT–122, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, Washington
98101, contact: Nina Kocourek, phone
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76633
number: (206) 553–6502; or the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality,
811 SW. Sixth Avenue, Portland,
Oregon, 97204, contact: Scott Latham,
phone number: (503) 229–5953.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nina Kocourek, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of
Air, Waste & Toxics (AWT–122), 1200
Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle,
Washington 98101, phone number:
(206) 553–6502, e-mail:
kocourek.nina@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Why are revisions to state programs
necessary?
States which have received final
authorization from EPA under RCRA
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must
maintain a hazardous waste program
that is equivalent to, consistent with,
and no less stringent than the Federal
program. As the Federal program
changes, States must change their
programs and ask EPA to authorize the
changes. Changes to State programs may
be necessary when Federal or State
statutory or regulatory authority is
modified or when certain other changes
occur. Most commonly, States must
change their programs because of
changes to EPA’s regulations codified in
Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Parts 124, 260
through 268, 270, 273, and 279.
B. What decisions have we made in this
rule?
This action will correct the State of
Oregon’s federally authorized program
by removing the inaccurate
authorization reference to the Federal
Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Clarification rule
promulgated on July 30, 2003 (68 FR
44659) pursuant to the Final
Authorization Rule promulgated and
effective on January 7, 2010 (75 FR 918)
under docket EPA–R10–RCRA–2009–
0766. During a post-authorization
review of the State of Oregon’s
regulations, EPA identified that the
Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR),
related to the federal used oil
management requirements (OAR 340–
100–0002), had not been updated to
include the adoption of the Federal
Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Clarification rule. Therefore,
the State did not have an effective state
rule and EPA inaccurately referenced
this rule in the State’s Final
Authorization Action published and
effective on January 7, 2010.
The Federal Recycled Used Oil
Management Standards; Clarification
rule addresses three aspects of the used
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
76634
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
oil management standards: (1) It
clarifies when used oil contaminated
with PCBs is regulated under RCRA
used oil management standards and
when it is not; (2) It explains that used
oil mixed with Conditionally Exempt
Small Quality Generators (CESQG)
waste is subject to RCRA used oil
management standards irrespective of
how this mixture is to be recycled;
(3) It explains that the initial marketer
of on-specification used oil must keep a
record of the shipment of used oil to the
facility to which the initial marketer
delivers the used oil. The Federal Used
Oil Management Standards;
Clarification rule (68 FR 44659, July 30,
2003) is promulgated pursuant to nonHSWA authority and is no more
stringent than the current Federal
requirements. This federal rule is
considered to be an optional rule which
States are not required to adopt and seek
authorization for this rule, although the
State of Oregon intends to revise its
OAR to adopt the Federal Recycled
Used Oil Management Standards;
Clarification rule (68 FR 44665) at a
later date.
With this correction to Oregon’s
federally authorized RCRA Hazardous
Waste Management Program, the State
will continue to have responsibility for
permitting Treatment, Storage, and
Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) within its
borders, except in Indian country (18
U.S.C. 1151), and for carrying out the
aspects of the RCRA program, subject to
the limitations of the Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
(HSWA). New Federal requirements and
prohibitions imposed by Federal
regulations that EPA promulgates under
the authority of HSWA, and which are
not less stringent than existing
requirements, take effect in authorized
States before the States are authorized
for the requirements. Thus, EPA will
implement those requirements and
prohibitions in Oregon, including
issuing permits, until the State is
granted authorization to do so.
C. What is the effect of this
authorization decision?
This action will correct the State of
Oregon’s federally authorized program
by removing the inaccurate
authorization reference to the Federal
Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Clarification rule
promulgated on July 30, 2003 (68 FR
44659), from the State of Oregon’s
Federally Authorized Program
Authorization Revision Final Rule,
promulgated and effective on January 7,
2010 (75 FR 918). The effect of this
action is a facility in Oregon subject to
RCRA will have to comply with the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
accurately identified authorized State
requirements in order to comply with
RCRA. Such persons will have to
comply with any applicable Federal
requirements, such as, for example,
HSWA regulations issued by EPA for
which the State has not received
authorization, and RCRA requirements
that are not supplanted by authorized
State-issued requirements. Oregon
continues to have enforcement
responsibilities under its State
hazardous waste management program
for violations of this program, but EPA
retains its authority under RCRA
sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003,
which includes, among others, the
authority to:
• Conduct inspections; require
monitoring, tests, analyses, or reports;
• Enforce RCRA requirements;
suspend, terminate, modify or revoke
permits; and
• Take enforcement actions regardless
of whether the State has taken its own
actions.
This revision will not impose
additional requirements on the
regulated community.
D. Why wasn’t there a proposed rule
before this rule?
The EPA did not publish a proposal
before today’s rule because we view this
as a correction to the existing federally
authorized program and do not expect
comments that oppose this approval.
We are providing an opportunity for
public comment now. In addition to this
rule, in the Proposed Rules section of
today’s Federal Register, we are
publishing a separate document that
proposes to correct Oregon’s federally
authorized program. If we receive
comments, which oppose this
authorization, that document will serve
as a proposal to authorize these changes.
E. What happens if EPA receives
comments on this action?
If EPA receives comments that oppose
this action, EPA will publish a
document in the Federal Register
withdrawing this rule before it takes
effect. EPA will then address public
comments in a later final rule based on
the proposed rule in this Federal
Register. You may not have another
opportunity to comment. If you want to
comment on this authorization, you
must do so at this time.
F. What has Oregon previously been
authorized for?
Oregon initially received final
authorization on January 30, 1986,
effective January 31, 1986 (51 FR 3779),
to implement the RCRA hazardous
waste management program. EPA
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
granted authorization for changes to
Oregon’s program on March 30, 1990,
effective on May 29, 1990 (55 FR
11909); August 5, 1994, effective
October 4, 1994 (59 FR 39967); June 16,
1995, effective August 15, 1995 (60 FR
31642); October 10, 1995, effective
December 7, 1995 (60 FR 52629);
September 10, 2002, effective September
10, 2002 (67 FR 57337); June 26, 2006,
effective June 26, 2006 (71 FR 36216);
and January 7, 2010, effective January 7,
2010 (75 FR 918).
G. What changes are we authorizing
with this action?
On January 7, 2010, EPA published a
final rule under docket EPA–R10–RCRA
2009–0766 granting final authorization
for changes the State of Oregon made to
its federally authorized RCRA
Hazardous Waste Management Program.
These authorized changes included,
among others, the Federal Recycled
Used Oil Management Standards;
Clarification rule, promulgated on July
30, 2003. This action will remove the
inaccurate authorization reference to the
Federal Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Clarification rule,
promulgation on July 30, 2003 (68 FR
44659) from the State of Oregon’s
federally authorized RCRA Hazardous
Waste Management Program.
H. Who handles permits after the
authorization takes effect?
This authorization does not affect the
status of State permits and those permits
issued by the EPA because no
substantive requirements are a part of
this correction. Oregon will continue to
issue permits for all the provisions for
which it is authorized and administer
the permits it issues. If EPA issued
permits prior to authorizing Oregon for
these revisions, these permits would
continue in force until the effective date
of the State’s issuance or denial of a
State hazardous waste permit, at which
time EPA would modify the existing
EPA permit to expire at an earlier date,
terminate the existing EPA permit for
cause, or allow the existing EPA permit
to otherwise expire by its terms, except
for those facilities located in Indian
Country. EPA will not issue new
permits or new portions of permits for
provisions for which Oregon is
authorized after the effective date of this
authorization. EPA will continue to
implement and issue permits for HSWA
requirements for which Oregon is not
yet authorized.
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
I. What is codification and is EPA
codifying Oregon’s hazardous waste
program as authorized in this proposed
rule?
Codification is the process of placing
the State’s statutes and regulations that
comprise the State’s authorized
hazardous waste program into the Code
of Federal Regulations. This is done by
referencing the authorized State rules in
40 CFR part 272. EPA is reserving the
amendment of 40 CFR part 272, subpart
MM for codification to a later date.
J. How would authorizing Oregon for
this correction affect Indian country (18
U.S.C. 1151) in Oregon?
Oregon is not authorized to carry out
its hazardous waste program in Indian
country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151.
Indian country includes: (1) All lands
within the exterior boundaries of Indian
reservations within or abutting the State
of Oregon; (2) any land held in trust by
the U.S. for an Indian tribe; and (3) any
other land, whether on or off an Indian
reservation, that qualifies as Indian
country. Therefore, this action has no
effect on Indian country. EPA will
continue to implement and administer
the RCRA program on these lands.
K. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action corrects the State of
Oregon’s federally authorized hazardous
waste program pursuant to section 3006
of RCRA and imposes no requirements
other than those currently imposed by
State law. This action complies with
applicable executive orders and
statutory provisions as follows:
1. Executive Order 12866
This action is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore
not subject to review under the EO.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This action
does not establish or modify any
information or recordkeeping
requirements for the regulated
community. EPA has determined that 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
76635
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
direct final 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 action will not
have a significant impact on small
entities because the action will only
have the effect of correcting pre-existing
authorized requirements under State
law. After considering the economic
impacts of this action, I certify that this
action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Oregon, Department of Environmental
Quality in developing this action.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This 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. This
action imposes no new enforceable duty
on any State, local or tribal governments
or the private sector. This action
contains no regulatory requirements that
might significantly or uniquely affect
small government entities. Thus, EPA
has determined that the requirements of
section 203 of the UMRA do not apply
to this action.
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22,
2001), because it is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as defined under EO
12866.
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action 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 the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action authorizes
preexisting State rules. Therefore, EO
13132 does not apply to this action.
Although section 6 of EO 13132 does
not apply to this action, because EPA
did consult with officials of the State of
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175. This action revises an
existing authorized State hazardous
waste program in Oregon. This action
does not have tribal implications, as
specified in EO 13175 because EPA
retains its authority over Indian County.
Thus, EPA has determined that EO
13175 does not apply to this action.
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required
under section 5–501 of the EO has the
potential to influence the regulation.
This action is not subject to EO 13045
because it corrects an approved state
program.
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
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, section 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 bodies.
EPA has determined that this action
does not involve ‘‘technical standards’’
as defined by the NTTAA. Therefore,
EPA is not considering the use of any
voluntary consensus standards.
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
76636
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
10. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Dated: December 1, 2010.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
Executive Order 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 action
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. This action addresses a
revision of the authorized hazardous
waste program in the State of Oregon.
EPA has determined that the action is
not subject to EO 12898.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
[FR Doc. 2010–31012 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am]
11. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this document and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication in the Federal Register. A
major rule cannot take effect until 60
days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This
action will be effective February 7,
2011.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information,
Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indians—lands,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: This action is issued under the
authority of sections 2002(a), 3006 and
7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 572
[Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0147]
RIN 2127–AK34
Anthropomorphic Test Devices; Hybrid
III 6-Year-Old Child Test Dummy,
Hybrid III 6-Year-Old Weighted Child
Test Dummy
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, Department of
Transportation.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule makes two
changes to the agency’s specifications
for the Hybrid III six-year-old child
dummy, and the Hybrid III six-year-old
weighted child test dummy. First, to
improve the durability of the dummies’
femurs we are changing the design of
and material used for the femur
assembly. Second, we correct the
drawings for the abdomen insert so that
the abdominal insert dimensions on the
drawings reflect actual parts in the field.
The correction responds to a petition for
rulemaking submitted by Denton ATD
and First Technology Safety Systems.
DATES: The effective date of this final
rule is June 7, 2011. The incorporation
by reference of certain publications
listed in the regulations is approved by
the Director of the Federal Register as of
June 7, 2011.
Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions
for reconsideration of this final rule
must be received not later than January
24, 2011.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all submissions
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78).
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration
of this final rule must refer to the docket
and notice number set forth above and
be submitted to the Administrator,
National Highway Traffic Safety
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. (A
copy of the petition will be placed in
the docket.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
non-legal issues, you may call Peter
Martin, NHTSA Office of
Crashworthiness Standards (telephone
202–366–5668) (fax 202–493–2990). For
legal issues, you may call Deirdre Fujita,
NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel
(telephone 202–366–2992) (fax 202–
366–3820). The mailing address for
these officials is the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Overview
II. Femur Improvements
a. Femur Design Changes
b. Analysis of the New Femur Design
1. Stress Analysis of the Fillet Effect
2. Dynamic Evaluation
i. Comparing Test Results of the Modified
HIII–6C Test in the Marathon, Boulevard,
and Decathlon Child Restraint Systems
ii. Comparing the Results of the Britax
Marathon Test of the Modified HIII–6C
(test H06337) to Those of a Test of an
Original HIII–6C Where Femur Failure
Occurred (test H06120)
iii. Effect on FMVSS No. 213 Injury Metrics
iv. Effect on Dummy Kinematics
v. Dummy Response Biofidelity
vi. Hip Lock
III. Abdominal Insert
IV. Effective Date
V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
I. Overview
This final rule makes two changes to
the agency’s specifications for the
Hybrid III six-year-old child dummy
(HIII–6C) set forth in 49 CFR part 572,
Subpart N, and for the Hybrid III sixyear-old weighted child test dummy
(HIII–6CW) in 49 CFR part 572, Subpart
S. The notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) upon which this final rule is
based was published October 21, 2009,
74 FR 53987, Docket No. NHTSA–09–
0166.
First, to improve the durability of the
dummies’ femurs, we are changing the
design of and material used for the
femur assembly. The primary
modifications include the addition of a
@-inch (6.35 millimeter (mm)) fillet
between the femur clamp and the
connecting segment (these components
are described in detail in section II.b of
the NPRM preamble) of the machined
femur, removal of material from the
connecting segment, and a material
change from aluminum bronze to 4340
steel. These changes are made by
replacing the drawings of the femur in
E:\FR\FM\09DER1.SGM
09DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 236 (Thursday, December 9, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76633-76636]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31012]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[EPA-R10-RCRA-2010-0947; FRL-9236-8]
Oregon; Correction of Federal Authorization of the State's
Hazardous Waste Management Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On January 7, 2010, EPA published a final rule under docket
EPA-R10-RCRA 2009-0766 granting final authorization for changes the
State of Oregon made to its federally authorized RCRA Hazardous Waste
Management Program. These authorized changes included, among others,
the federal Recycled Used Oil Management Standards; Clarification rule,
promulgated on July 30, 2003. During a post-authorization review of the
State of Oregon's regulations, EPA identified that the Oregon
Administrative Rules (OAR), related to the federal used oil management
requirements (OAR 340-100-0002), had not been updated to include the
adoption of the federal Recycled Used Oil Management Standards;
Clarification rule. Therefore, the State did not have an effective
state rule and EPA inaccurately referenced this rule in the State's
Final Authorization Action published and effective on January 7, 2010.
This action will correct the State of Oregon's federally authorized
program, by removing the inaccurate authorization reference to the
Federal Recycled Used Oil Management Standards; Clarification rule.
DATES: This rule is effective February 7, 2011, unless the EPA receives
adverse comment on this revision by the close of business January 10,
2011. If the EPA receives such comments, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of this direct final rule in the Federal Register informing
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
RCRA-2010-0947, by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulation.gov: Follow the on-line instructions
for submitting comments.
E-mail: Kocourek.Nina@epa.gov.
Mail: Nina Kocourek, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 10, Office of Air, Waste & Toxics, Mail Stop AWT-122, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-RCRA-
2010-0947. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://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 https://www.regulations.gov, or e-mail. The https://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 https://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 or 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 https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://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 https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business
hours at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of
Air, Waste & Toxics, Mailstop AWT-122, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900,
Seattle, Washington 98101, contact: Nina Kocourek, phone number: (206)
553-6502; or the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 811 SW.
Sixth Avenue, Portland, Oregon, 97204, contact: Scott Latham, phone
number: (503) 229-5953.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nina Kocourek, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of Air, Waste & Toxics (AWT-122),
1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, Washington 98101, phone number:
(206) 553-6502, e-mail: kocourek.nina@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Why are revisions to state programs necessary?
States which have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent
than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes, States must
change their programs and ask EPA to authorize the changes. Changes to
State programs may be necessary when Federal or State statutory or
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur.
Most commonly, States must change their programs because of changes to
EPA's regulations codified in Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Parts 124, 260 through 268, 270, 273, and 279.
B. What decisions have we made in this rule?
This action will correct the State of Oregon's federally authorized
program by removing the inaccurate authorization reference to the
Federal Recycled Used Oil Management Standards; Clarification rule
promulgated on July 30, 2003 (68 FR 44659) pursuant to the Final
Authorization Rule promulgated and effective on January 7, 2010 (75 FR
918) under docket EPA-R10-RCRA-2009-0766. During a post-authorization
review of the State of Oregon's regulations, EPA identified that the
Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR), related to the federal used oil
management requirements (OAR 340-100-0002), had not been updated to
include the adoption of the Federal Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Clarification rule. Therefore, the State did not have an
effective state rule and EPA inaccurately referenced this rule in the
State's Final Authorization Action published and effective on January
7, 2010.
The Federal Recycled Used Oil Management Standards; Clarification
rule addresses three aspects of the used
[[Page 76634]]
oil management standards: (1) It clarifies when used oil contaminated
with PCBs is regulated under RCRA used oil management standards and
when it is not; (2) It explains that used oil mixed with Conditionally
Exempt Small Quality Generators (CESQG) waste is subject to RCRA used
oil management standards irrespective of how this mixture is to be
recycled; (3) It explains that the initial marketer of on-specification
used oil must keep a record of the shipment of used oil to the facility
to which the initial marketer delivers the used oil. The Federal Used
Oil Management Standards; Clarification rule (68 FR 44659, July 30,
2003) is promulgated pursuant to non-HSWA authority and is no more
stringent than the current Federal requirements. This federal rule is
considered to be an optional rule which States are not required to
adopt and seek authorization for this rule, although the State of
Oregon intends to revise its OAR to adopt the Federal Recycled Used Oil
Management Standards; Clarification rule (68 FR 44665) at a later date.
With this correction to Oregon's federally authorized RCRA
Hazardous Waste Management Program, the State will continue to have
responsibility for permitting Treatment, Storage, and Disposal
Facilities (TSDFs) within its borders, except in Indian country (18
U.S.C. 1151), and for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA program,
subject to the limitations of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
of 1984 (HSWA). New Federal requirements and prohibitions imposed by
Federal regulations that EPA promulgates under the authority of HSWA,
and which are not less stringent than existing requirements, take
effect in authorized States before the States are authorized for the
requirements. Thus, EPA will implement those requirements and
prohibitions in Oregon, including issuing permits, until the State is
granted authorization to do so.
C. What is the effect of this authorization decision?
This action will correct the State of Oregon's federally authorized
program by removing the inaccurate authorization reference to the
Federal Recycled Used Oil Management Standards; Clarification rule
promulgated on July 30, 2003 (68 FR 44659), from the State of Oregon's
Federally Authorized Program Authorization Revision Final Rule,
promulgated and effective on January 7, 2010 (75 FR 918). The effect of
this action is a facility in Oregon subject to RCRA will have to comply
with the accurately identified authorized State requirements in order
to comply with RCRA. Such persons will have to comply with any
applicable Federal requirements, such as, for example, HSWA regulations
issued by EPA for which the State has not received authorization, and
RCRA requirements that are not supplanted by authorized State-issued
requirements. Oregon continues to have enforcement responsibilities
under its State hazardous waste management program for violations of
this program, but EPA retains its authority under RCRA sections 3007,
3008, 3013, and 7003, which includes, among others, the authority to:
Conduct inspections; require monitoring, tests, analyses,
or reports;
Enforce RCRA requirements; suspend, terminate, modify or
revoke permits; and
Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the State
has taken its own actions.
This revision will not impose additional requirements on the
regulated community.
D. Why wasn't there a proposed rule before this rule?
The EPA did not publish a proposal before today's rule because we
view this as a correction to the existing federally authorized program
and do not expect comments that oppose this approval. We are providing
an opportunity for public comment now. In addition to this rule, in the
Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, we are publishing a
separate document that proposes to correct Oregon's federally
authorized program. If we receive comments, which oppose this
authorization, that document will serve as a proposal to authorize
these changes.
E. What happens if EPA receives comments on this action?
If EPA receives comments that oppose this action, EPA will publish
a document in the Federal Register withdrawing this rule before it
takes effect. EPA will then address public comments in a later final
rule based on the proposed rule in this Federal Register. You may not
have another opportunity to comment. If you want to comment on this
authorization, you must do so at this time.
F. What has Oregon previously been authorized for?
Oregon initially received final authorization on January 30, 1986,
effective January 31, 1986 (51 FR 3779), to implement the RCRA
hazardous waste management program. EPA granted authorization for
changes to Oregon's program on March 30, 1990, effective on May 29,
1990 (55 FR 11909); August 5, 1994, effective October 4, 1994 (59 FR
39967); June 16, 1995, effective August 15, 1995 (60 FR 31642); October
10, 1995, effective December 7, 1995 (60 FR 52629); September 10, 2002,
effective September 10, 2002 (67 FR 57337); June 26, 2006, effective
June 26, 2006 (71 FR 36216); and January 7, 2010, effective January 7,
2010 (75 FR 918).
G. What changes are we authorizing with this action?
On January 7, 2010, EPA published a final rule under docket EPA-
R10-RCRA 2009-0766 granting final authorization for changes the State
of Oregon made to its federally authorized RCRA Hazardous Waste
Management Program. These authorized changes included, among others,
the Federal Recycled Used Oil Management Standards; Clarification rule,
promulgated on July 30, 2003. This action will remove the inaccurate
authorization reference to the Federal Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Clarification rule, promulgation on July 30, 2003 (68 FR
44659) from the State of Oregon's federally authorized RCRA Hazardous
Waste Management Program.
H. Who handles permits after the authorization takes effect?
This authorization does not affect the status of State permits and
those permits issued by the EPA because no substantive requirements are
a part of this correction. Oregon will continue to issue permits for
all the provisions for which it is authorized and administer the
permits it issues. If EPA issued permits prior to authorizing Oregon
for these revisions, these permits would continue in force until the
effective date of the State's issuance or denial of a State hazardous
waste permit, at which time EPA would modify the existing EPA permit to
expire at an earlier date, terminate the existing EPA permit for cause,
or allow the existing EPA permit to otherwise expire by its terms,
except for those facilities located in Indian Country. EPA will not
issue new permits or new portions of permits for provisions for which
Oregon is authorized after the effective date of this authorization.
EPA will continue to implement and issue permits for HSWA requirements
for which Oregon is not yet authorized.
[[Page 76635]]
I. What is codification and is EPA codifying Oregon's hazardous waste
program as authorized in this proposed rule?
Codification is the process of placing the State's statutes and
regulations that comprise the State's authorized hazardous waste
program into the Code of Federal Regulations. This is done by
referencing the authorized State rules in 40 CFR part 272. EPA is
reserving the amendment of 40 CFR part 272, subpart MM for codification
to a later date.
J. How would authorizing Oregon for this correction affect Indian
country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in Oregon?
Oregon is not authorized to carry out its hazardous waste program
in Indian country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. Indian country
includes: (1) All lands within the exterior boundaries of Indian
reservations within or abutting the State of Oregon; (2) any land held
in trust by the U.S. for an Indian tribe; and (3) any other land,
whether on or off an Indian reservation, that qualifies as Indian
country. Therefore, this action has no effect on Indian country. EPA
will continue to implement and administer the RCRA program on these
lands.
K. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action corrects the State of Oregon's federally authorized
hazardous waste program pursuant to section 3006 of RCRA and imposes no
requirements other than those currently imposed by State law. This
action complies with applicable executive orders and statutory
provisions as follows:
1. Executive Order 12866
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is therefore not subject to review under the EO.
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This action does not establish or
modify any information or recordkeeping requirements for the regulated
community. EPA has determined that 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
this direct final 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 action will not have a significant impact on
small entities because the action will only have the effect of
correcting pre-existing authorized requirements under State law. After
considering the economic impacts of this action, I certify that this
action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This 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. This action imposes no new enforceable duty on any State, local
or tribal governments or the private sector. This action contains no
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect
small government entities. Thus, EPA has determined that the
requirements of section 203 of the UMRA do not apply to this action.
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action 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 the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This
action authorizes preexisting State rules. Therefore, EO 13132 does not
apply to this action. Although section 6 of EO 13132 does not apply to
this action, because EPA did consult with officials of the State of
Oregon, Department of Environmental Quality in developing this action.
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This action revises an existing authorized State
hazardous waste program in Oregon. This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in EO 13175 because EPA retains its
authority over Indian County. Thus, EPA has determined that EO 13175
does not apply to this action.
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the EO has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is
not subject to EO 13045 because it corrects an approved state program.
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001), because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' as
defined under EO 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, section 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 bodies. EPA has
determined that this action does not involve ``technical standards'' as
defined by the NTTAA. Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any
voluntary consensus standards.
[[Page 76636]]
10. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 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 action 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. This action addresses a revision of the authorized
hazardous waste program in the State of Oregon. EPA has determined that
the action is not subject to EO 12898.
11. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this
document and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S.
House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication in the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This action will be effective February 7, 2011.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indians--lands, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: This action is issued under the authority of
sections 2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).
Dated: December 1, 2010.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2010-31012 Filed 12-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P