Oil Pollution Prevention; Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Rule-Compliance Date Amendment for Farms, 72120-72124 [2011-29901]
Download as PDF
72120
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
57. Section 81.356 is amended by
adding a table entitled ‘‘Virgin Islands—
■
2008 Lead NAAQS’’ to the end of the
section to read as follows:
§ 81.356
*
Virgin Islands.
*
*
*
*
VIRGIN ISLANDS—2008 LEAD NAAQS
Designation for the 2008 NAAQS a
Designated area
Date 1
Whole State ........................................................................................................................................
........................
Type
Unclassifiable/Attainment.
a Includes
Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
1 December 31, 2011 unless otherwise noted.
[FR Doc. 2011–29460 Filed 11–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 112
[EPA–HQ–OPA–2011–0838; FRL–9494–8]
RIN 2050–AG69
Oil Pollution Prevention; Spill
Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure (SPCC) Rule—
Compliance Date Amendment for
Farms
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA (or the Agency) is taking
final action to amend the date by which
farms must prepare or amend, and
implement their Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasure Plans to
May 10, 2013. The date is being
amended because a large segment of the
continental U.S. was affected by
flooding during the spring and summer
of 2011, and other areas were impacted
by devastating fires and drought
conditions. In addition, despite the
targeted farm outreach efforts by EPA
over the past ten months, the sheer
number of farms throughout the U.S.
makes it a challenge to reach those
owners and operators of farms that may
be subject to the SPCC Plan regulations.
As a result, the Agency believes that
farms need additional time to come into
compliance with the requirements to
prepare or amend and implement a
SPCC Plan.
DATES: This rule is effective on
November 22, 2011.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OPA–2011–0838. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:43 Nov 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the RCRA Docket, EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the RCRA Docket is (202)
566–1744.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general information, contact the
Superfund, TRI, EPCRA, RMP and Oil
Information Center at (800) 424–9346 or
TDD (800) 553–7672 (hearing impaired).
In the Washington, DC metropolitan
area, call (703) 412–9810 or TDD (703)
412–3323. For more detailed
information on specific aspects of this
final rule, contact either Lynn Beasley at
(202) 564–1965 (beasley.lynn@epa.gov)
or Mark W. Howard at (202) 564–1964
(howard.markw@epa.gov), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0002, Mail Code 5104A.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Does this action apply to me?
Industry sector
NAICS code
Farms ....................................
Government ..........................
111, 112
92
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
regulated by this action. This table lists
the types of entities that EPA is now
aware could potentially be regulated by
this action. Other types of entities not
listed in the table could also be
regulated. If you have questions
regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
II. What does this amendment do?
This action amends the date by which
farms as defined in section 112.2 must
prepare or amend, and implement their
SPCC Plan to May 10, 2013. A farm is
defined in this section as a facility on
a tract of land devoted to the production
of crops or raising of animals, including
fish, which produced and sold, or
normally would have produced and
sold, $1,000 or more of agricultural
products during a year.
On June 19, 2009 (74 FR 29136), EPA
issued a final rule in the Federal
Register that amended the dates by
which facilities must prepare or amend
their SPCC Plans, and implement those
Plans to November 10, 2010. On October
14, 2010 (75 FR 63093), EPA issued a
final rule in the Federal Register with
a new compliance date of November 10,
2011, by which certain facilities must
prepare or amend, and implement their
SPCC Plans, providing an additional
year for the remaining facilities. On
October 18, 2011, EPA issued a direct
final rule (76 FR 64245) and a
concurrent proposed rule (76 FR 64296),
in the Federal Register that amended
the dates by which farms must prepare
or amend their SPCC Plans, and
implement those Plans to May 10, 2013.
Prior to the close of the public
comment period for the concurrent
proposed rule, the Agency received
written adverse comments concerning
the amended compliance dates. This
final rule supersedes any and all prior
published rules, including the direct
final rule, in extending the compliance
date to May 10, 2013 for the owners or
operators of farms as defined in 40 CFR
112.2. We have addressed the public
comments in the Response to Comment
section of this preamble. This action
further extends the compliance date to
May 10, 2013 for the owners or
operators of farms as defined in 40 CFR
112.2. The Agency recognizes that the
owners or operators of some facilities
excluded from the extension of the
compliance date may still require
additional time to amend or prepare
their SPCC Plans as a result of either
non-availability of qualified personnel,
E:\FR\FM\22NOR1.SGM
22NOR1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
or delays in construction or equipment
delivery beyond the control and without
the fault of the owner or operator. If so,
the owner or operator of the facility may
submit a written request for additional
time to amend or prepare a SPCC Plan
to the Regional Administrator in
accordance with § 112.3(f).
Under 40 CFR 112.3(f) the Regional
Administrator may authorize an
extension of time for the preparation
and full implementation of a SPCC Plan,
or any amendment thereto, beyond the
time permitted for the preparation,
implementation, or amendment of a
SPCC Plan under this part, when he
finds that the owner or operator of a
facility subject to this section, cannot
fully comply with the requirements as a
result of either non-availability of
qualified personnel, or delays in
construction or equipment delivery
beyond the control and without the fault
of such owner or operator or his agents
or employees. If you are an owner or
operator seeking an extension of time,
you may submit a written extension
request to the Regional Administrator.
Your request must include a:
(i) Full explanation of the cause for
any such delay and the specific aspects
of the Plan affected by the delay;
(ii) Full discussion of actions being
taken or contemplated to minimize or
mitigate such delay; and
(iii) Proposed time schedule for the
implementation of any corrective
actions being taken or contemplated,
including interim dates for completion
of tests or studies, installation and
operation of any necessary equipment,
or other preventive measures. In
addition you may present additional
oral or written statements in support of
your extension request.
The submission of a written extension
request does not relieve you of your
obligation to comply with the
requirements of 40 CFR part 112. The
Regional Administrator may request a
copy of your Plan to evaluate the
extension request. When the Regional
Administrator authorizes an extension
of time for particular equipment or other
specific aspects of the SPCC Plan, such
extension does not affect your obligation
to comply with the requirements related
to other equipment or other specific
aspects of the SPCC Plan for which the
Regional Administrator has not
expressly authorized an extension.
This action is not the vehicle for other
extensions. EPA is not extending the
compliance date for any other facilities
as other facilities are not seasondependent and are less likely to be
impacted by severe weather conditions.
Additionally, other facilities retain the
alternative mechanism for requesting an
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:43 Nov 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
extension to the compliance date
through 40 CFR 112.3(f).
III. What was the basis for extending
the SPCC compliance date for farms?
A large segment of the continental
U.S. was affected by flooding during the
spring and summer of 2011. Other areas
were impacted by devastating fires and
drought conditions. In fact, many
counties in several states were declared
disaster areas by either the federal or
their state government or both. EPA has
received a number of letters and other
correspondence, from State Agricultural
Departments and other parties,
explaining the impact of these recent
floods on the owners and operators of
farms and their ability to comply with
the SPCC rule. These owners and
operators have experienced
interruptions in planting, cultivation
and harvesting due to these floods.
According to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) in 2011,
the Agency issued 56 Major Disaster/
Emergency Declarations specifically
associated with flooding events.
According to FEMA’s 2011 data,
approximately two thirds of the fifty
states had a FEMA flooding Major
Disaster/Emergency Declarations.
Almost a quarter of the fifty states had
multiple FEMA declarations due to
flooding. These declarations are
widespread throughout the crop
production areas of the country. The
Agency was also advised in the
correspondence that there may be a lack
of available qualified Professional
Engineers (PEs) in some areas of the
country to assist in the preparation,
implementation, and review of SPCC
Plans for farms.
In addition, despite the targeted farm
outreach efforts by EPA over the past
ten months, the sheer number of farms
throughout the U.S. makes it a challenge
to reach those owners and operators of
farms that may be subject to the SPCC
Plan regulations. As a result, the Agency
believes that farms, as defined in section
112.2, need additional time to come into
compliance with the requirements to
prepare or amend and implement a
SPCC Plan. While the Agency could
require farms to request an extension
pursuant to 40 CFR 112.3(f), as
described above, the Agency believes
that unless the Agency extends the
compliance date for farms, we will
receive an overwhelming number of
requests for individual extensions. The
Agency believes that this would be an
inefficient use of scarce Agency
resources to address this problem by
processing a great number of individual
extension requests.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
72121
Thus, the Agency has decided to
extend the compliance date by which
owners or operators of a farm must
prepare or amend and implement a
SPCC Plans to May 10, 2013. The
additional 18 months allows enough
time for farms to come in compliance
with this regulation. The owners and
operators of farms are strongly
encouraged not to delay, and to take
advantage of the off-season for planting
and growing, in preparing their SPCC
Plans. However, any farm owner or
operator who is not able to come into
compliance by May 10, 2013, and
wishes to seek a further extension of the
compliance date, should submit a
written request to the Regional
Administrator of the EPA Regional
Office for the state where the farm is
located in accordance with paragraph (f)
of 40 CFR 112.3.
Finally, we would note that the
amendment to the compliance date does
not remove the regulatory requirement
for owners or operators of farms in
operation before August 16, 2002, to
have and to maintain and continue
implementing a SPCC Plan in
accordance with the SPCC regulations
then in effect. Such owners and
operators continue to be required to
maintain their SPCC Plans during the
interim until the applicable compliance
date for amending and implementing
the amended SPCC Plans. In addition,
the amendment of the compliance date
does not relieve owners or operators of
farms from the potential liability under
the Clean Water Act or other
environmental statutes or regulations for
any spills (see 40 CFR part 110) that
may occur.
IV. Response to Comments
The Agency received four comments.
All of the comments were adverse in
nature. A response to comment
document can be found in the Agency’s
docket for this rule (EPA–HQ–OPA–
2011–0838).
Comments: Comments received on the
direct final rule with a concurrent
proposed rule either disagreed with
providing any extension or in one case
the length of time (18 months) for the
extension, suggesting instead a shorter
extension. The commenters that
expressly requested that the 18 month
extension for farms not be granted cited
one or more of the following concerns:
(1) That repeated extensions (eight
times) of compliance dates removes the
urgency for farms to ‘‘do the right thing’’
from an environmental perspective or
otherwise put off their SPCC
obligations; (2) interferes with the
(commenters’) ability to communicate to
potential clients (farmers) the need to
E:\FR\FM\22NOR1.SGM
22NOR1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
72122
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
come into compliance soon; (3) there are
many companies ready to assist farmers
with their SPCC Plans; and (4) there are
millions of dollars in grants available to
farmers to help them come into
compliance with the SPCC regulations.
Two of the commenters suggested that
greater outreach to farms regarding the
SPCC Plan requirements is needed
instead of the extension.
One commenter agreed that an
extension is necessary but does not
agree with the time frame of 18 months.
The commenter stated that a vast
majority of farming clients have
indicated that they are out of harvest
and feel confident that they can finalize
their SPCC Plans during the winter
months. Therefore, a three to four
month extension coupled with a
concerted effort to inform farmers of
their regulatory responsibilities would
be of far greater benefit to the farming
community. The commenter cited three
primary concerns of the proposed
extension: (1) It jeopardizes the
resources that are currently available to
help producers gain compliance; (2)
there are solutions and professionals
available including a ‘‘free of charge’’
online SPCC Plan creation tool, even
though most farms do not need a
professional engineer (PE) to certify
their SPCC Plan and are able to prepare
a self-certified SPCC Plan; and (3) a
concerted effort must be made to inform
and educate farmers about the SPCC
rule and their responsibilities. One
commenter cited a potential loss of jobs
associated with the action and the
inequity of EPA’s enforcement of the
SPCC regulation on farmers as
compared to other sectors, such as the
oil and gas sector.
Response: While we recognize that
there have been multiple extensions to
the compliance date under 40 CFR
112.3—Requirement to prepare and
implement a Spill Prevention, Control,
and Countermeasure Plan, at this time,
we are further extending the date for
compliance for a narrow segment of
industries that are covered by this
regulation; i.e., farms.
The Agency considered comments
that opposed any extension to the
compliance date and the comment that
recognized a compliance date extension
was appropriate, but suggested a shorter
compliance date, as well as letters from
the Secretary of Agriculture, Arkansas
Agriculture Department, the
Commissioner of the Mississippi
Department of Agriculture and
Commerce and the Commissioner of the
Louisiana Department of Agriculture
previously received by the Agency, that
specifically requested an additional 24
months for farms to implement SPCC
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:43 Nov 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
Plans and recover financially from the
impacts of extreme weather, find
qualified engineers, and install the
proper equipment. The Agency
proposed an 18 month extension
determining that 24 months may be too
long a period and decided 18 months
should be adequate time for the farms.
We still believe 18 months is the correct
timeframe upon hearing from
commenters that there are firms
available to assist the farmers to come
into compliance.
The Agency recognizes that farms,
more than other industries, are directly
impacted by extreme weather
conditions, such as the devastating
flooding and drought that was
experienced this past year by a
substantial portion of the continental
U.S. Rather than requiring all impacted
farms to submit a written request to the
Regional Administrator of the EPA
Regional Office for the state where the
farm is located in accordance with
paragraph (f) of 40 CFR 112.3, we
determined that it is more efficient to
extend the compliance date for the farm
industry. We also want to emphasize
that farms should not wait until May 10,
2013, to ready their SPCC Plans. Farms
should take advantage of non-growing
and non-harvesting seasons to focus on
preparing and implementing their SPCC
Plans.
Comments: Additionally, three of the
four comments correctly explain that
EPA’s action does not provide an
extension for those farms that were in
operation on or before August 16, 2002,
and which did not have a previously
developed SPCC Plan. Such farms may
be in noncompliance with the rule. A
commenter also questioned the
necessity of the current action, pointing
out that most farms are in
noncompliance and would not benefit
from the extension. A second
commenter also pointed out the
misconception that all farmers
(producers) will be eligible for the
extension. The commenter stated that
many farmers do not have SPCC Plans,
thus, making them ineligible for the
extension.
Response: The Agency agrees with
commenters that said that only existing
farms maintaining an SPCC plan or new
farms coming into operation after
August 16, 2002, are eligible for the
extension provided by this action.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993), and therefore is not
subject to review under Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011).
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This final action does not impose any
new information collection burden. The
amendments in this final rule simply
extend the compliance date for farms.
This final rule does not change any
reporting requirements in the general
provisions. However, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has
previously approved the information
collection requirements contained in the
existing subparts of 40 CFR 112 under
the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
and has assigned OMB control number
2050–0021. The OMB control numbers
for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are
listed in 40 CFR part 9. Subparts that
will be added through separate
rulemakings will document the
respective information collection
requirements in their own ICR
documents.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The RFA generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility
analysis of any rule subject to notice
and comment rulemaking requirements
under the Administrative Procedure Act
or any other statute unless the agency
certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts
of this rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business
as defined by the Small Business
Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (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.
After considering the economic
impacts of this final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not
E:\FR\FM\22NOR1.SGM
22NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The final rule simply amends the date
for compliance. The final rule does not
itself add any additional subparts or
requirements. The final rule will not
impose any new requirements on small
entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
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. The action imposes no
enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector.
Therefore, this action is not subject to
the requirements of sections 202 or 205
of the UMRA. This action is also not
subject to the requirements of section
203 of UMRA because it contains no
regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The amendments in this
final rule change the compliance date
for farms.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order (EO) 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 EO to include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects on the states,
on the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’
This final rule 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 EO
13132. This amendment applies directly
to farms. It does not apply to
governmental entities unless the
government entity owns a farm, as
defined in 40 CFR 112.2 Definitions.
This regulation also does not limit the
power of states or localities to regulate
farms. Thus, EO 13132 does not apply
to this final rule.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:43 Nov 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000). The changes in this final rule do
not result in any changes to the
requirements of the 2009 rule. Thus
Executive Order 13175 does not apply
to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
This final rule is not subject to EO
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
because it is not economically
significant as defined in EO 12866, and
because the Agency does not believe the
environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. The
changes in this final rule do not result
in any changes to the requirements
applicable to farms, other than the date
for compliance.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy
action’’ as defined in Executive Order
13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001) because it is not likely to have
any adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
I. 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 note) directs
EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
This action does not involve technical
standards. Therefore, EPA did not
consider the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
72123
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 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 the final rule
amendments will not have
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority or low-income populations
because the amendments do not affect
the level of protection provided to
human health or the environment.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added 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 rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the U.S.
prior to publication of the rule 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 rule will be
effective November 22, 2011.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 112
Oil pollution prevention, Farms,
Compliance date, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: November 10, 2011.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out above, title 40,
chapter I of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 112—OIL POLLUTION
PREVENTION
1. The authority citation for part 112
continues to read as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\22NOR1.SGM
22NOR1
72124
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 33 U.S.C.
2720; and E.O. 12777 (October 18, 1991), 3
CFR, 1991 Comp., p.351.
2. Section 112.3 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as
follows:
■
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(3) If your farm, as defined in § 112.2,
was in operation on or before August 16,
2002, you must maintain your Plan, but
must amend it, if necessary to ensure
compliance with this part, and
implement the amended Plan on or
before May 10, 2013. If your farm
becomes operational after August 16,
2002, through May 10, 2013, and could
reasonably be expected to have a
discharge as described in § 112.1(b), you
must prepare and implement a Plan on
or before May 10, 2013. If your farm
becomes operational after May 10, 2013,
and could reasonably be expected to
have a discharge as described in
§ 112.1(b), you must prepare and
implement a Plan before you begin
operations.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–29901 Filed 11–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket No. 03–123; WC Docket No.
05–196; WC Docket No. 10–191; FCC 11–
123]
Synopsis
Internet-Based Telecommunications
Relay Service Numbering
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule; announcement of
effective date.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission announces that the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved, for a period of three years, the
information collection associated with
the Commission’s Internet-Based
Telecommunications Relay Service
Numbering, Report and Order (Report
and Order). The information collection
requirements were approved on
September 27, 2011 by OMB.
DATES: 47 CFR 64.611(e)(2), 64.611(e)(3),
64.611(g)(1)(v), 64.611 (g)(1)(vi), and
64.613(a)(3), are effective November 22,
2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Heather Hendrickson, Competition
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:43 Nov 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
This
document announces that, on
September 27, 2011, OMB approved, for
a period of three years, the information
collection requirements contained in 47
CFR 64.611(e)(2), 64.611(e)(3),
64.611(g)(1)(v), 64.611 (g)(1)(vi), and
64.613(a)(3). The Commission publishes
this notice as an announcement of the
effective date of the rules. See InternetBased Telecommunications Relay
Service Numbering, CG Docket No. 03–
123; WC Docket No. 05–196; WC Docket
No. 10–191; FCC 11–123, published at
76 FR 59511, September 27, 2011. If you
have any comments on the burden
estimates listed below, or how the
Commission can improve the
collections and reduce any burdens
caused thereby, please contact Cathy
Williams, Federal Communications
Commission, Room 1–C823, 445 12th
Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.
Please include the OMB Control
Number, 3060–1089, in your
correspondence. The Commission will
also accept your comments via the
Internet if you send them to
PRA@fcc.gov.
To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities
(Braille, large print, electronic files,
audio format), send an email to
fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer
and Governmental Affairs Bureau at
(202) 418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432
(TTY).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
§ 112.3 Requirement to prepare and
implement a Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure Plan.
SUMMARY:
Policy Division, Wireline Competition
Bureau, at (202) 418–7295, or email:
Heather.Hendrickson@fcc.gov.
As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507),
the FCC is notifying the public that it
received OMB approval on September
27, 2011, for the information collection
requirements contained in the
Commission’s rules at 47 CFR
64.611(e)(2), 64.611(e)(3),
64.611(g)(1)(v), 64.611(g)(1)(vi), and
64.613(a)(3).
Under 5 CFR part 1320, an agency
may not conduct or sponsor a collection
of information unless it displays a
current, valid OMB Control Number.
No person shall be subject to any
penalty for failing to comply with a
collection of information subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act that does not
display a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number is
3060–1089.
The foregoing notice is required by
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13, October 1, 1995,
and 44 U.S.C. 3507.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The total annual reporting burdens
and costs for the respondents are as
follows:
OMB Control Number: 3060–1089.
OMB Approval Date: September 27,
2011.
OMB Expiration Date: December 31,
2013.
Title: Telecommunications Relay
Services and Speech-to-Speech Services
for Individuals with Hearing and
Speech Disabilities; E911 Requirements
for IP–Enabled Service Providers;
Internet-Based Telecommunications
Relay Service Numbering, CG Docket
No. 03–123, WC Docket No. 05–196, and
WC Docket No. 10–191; FCC 11–123.
Form Number: N/A.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities; Not-for-profit
institutions; Individuals or households;
State, local or tribal government.
Number of Respondents and
Responses: 15 respondents; 5,763,199
responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 0.25–
1.5 hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion,
quarterly and one time reporting
requirements, recordkeeping and third
party disclosure requirements.
Obligation to Respond: Required to
obtain or retain benefits. The statutory
authority for the collection is contained
in Sections 1, 2, 4(i), 4(j), 225, 251, and
303(r) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152,
154(i), 154(j), 225, 251, 303(r).
Total Annual Burden: 279,891 hours.
Total Annual Cost: $4,269,135.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality:
An assurance of confidentiality is not
offered because this information
collection does not require the
collection of personally identifiable
information (PII) from individuals by
the Commission.
Privacy Impact Assessment: This
information collection affects
individuals or households, and thus
there are impacts under the Privacy Act.
However, a third party, the individual
or household’s VRS or IP Relay
provider, collects the information that is
related to individuals or households;
and the Commission has no direct
involvement in this collection. As such,
the Commission is not required to
complete a privacy impact assessment.
Further, VRS and IP Relay providers
generally have written privacy policies
governing the treatment of information
collected from their users, and the
Commission expects that much of the
information collected here would fall
under those policies.
Needs and Uses: On August 4, 2011
the Commission released Report and
E:\FR\FM\22NOR1.SGM
22NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 22, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72120-72124]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29901]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 112
[EPA-HQ-OPA-2011-0838; FRL-9494-8]
RIN 2050-AG69
Oil Pollution Prevention; Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure (SPCC) Rule--Compliance Date Amendment for Farms
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA (or the Agency) is taking final action to amend the date
by which farms must prepare or amend, and implement their Spill
Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plans to May 10, 2013. The date
is being amended because a large segment of the continental U.S. was
affected by flooding during the spring and summer of 2011, and other
areas were impacted by devastating fires and drought conditions. In
addition, despite the targeted farm outreach efforts by EPA over the
past ten months, the sheer number of farms throughout the U.S. makes it
a challenge to reach those owners and operators of farms that may be
subject to the SPCC Plan regulations. As a result, the Agency believes
that farms need additional time to come into compliance with the
requirements to prepare or amend and implement a SPCC Plan.
DATES: This rule is effective on November 22, 2011.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OPA-2011-0838. All documents in the docket are listed on the
https://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the RCRA Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the
telephone number for the RCRA Docket is (202) 566-1744.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact the
Superfund, TRI, EPCRA, RMP and Oil Information Center at (800) 424-9346
or TDD (800) 553-7672 (hearing impaired). In the Washington, DC
metropolitan area, call (703) 412-9810 or TDD (703) 412-3323. For more
detailed information on specific aspects of this final rule, contact
either Lynn Beasley at (202) 564-1965 (beasley.lynn@epa.gov) or Mark W.
Howard at (202) 564-1964 (howard.markw@epa.gov), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0002, Mail Code 5104A.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Does this action apply to me?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry sector NAICS code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farms................................................... 111, 112
Government.............................................. 92
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities
not listed in the table could also be regulated. If you have questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
II. What does this amendment do?
This action amends the date by which farms as defined in section
112.2 must prepare or amend, and implement their SPCC Plan to May 10,
2013. A farm is defined in this section as a facility on a tract of
land devoted to the production of crops or raising of animals,
including fish, which produced and sold, or normally would have
produced and sold, $1,000 or more of agricultural products during a
year.
On June 19, 2009 (74 FR 29136), EPA issued a final rule in the
Federal Register that amended the dates by which facilities must
prepare or amend their SPCC Plans, and implement those Plans to
November 10, 2010. On October 14, 2010 (75 FR 63093), EPA issued a
final rule in the Federal Register with a new compliance date of
November 10, 2011, by which certain facilities must prepare or amend,
and implement their SPCC Plans, providing an additional year for the
remaining facilities. On October 18, 2011, EPA issued a direct final
rule (76 FR 64245) and a concurrent proposed rule (76 FR 64296), in the
Federal Register that amended the dates by which farms must prepare or
amend their SPCC Plans, and implement those Plans to May 10, 2013.
Prior to the close of the public comment period for the concurrent
proposed rule, the Agency received written adverse comments concerning
the amended compliance dates. This final rule supersedes any and all
prior published rules, including the direct final rule, in extending
the compliance date to May 10, 2013 for the owners or operators of
farms as defined in 40 CFR 112.2. We have addressed the public comments
in the Response to Comment section of this preamble. This action
further extends the compliance date to May 10, 2013 for the owners or
operators of farms as defined in 40 CFR 112.2. The Agency recognizes
that the owners or operators of some facilities excluded from the
extension of the compliance date may still require additional time to
amend or prepare their SPCC Plans as a result of either non-
availability of qualified personnel,
[[Page 72121]]
or delays in construction or equipment delivery beyond the control and
without the fault of the owner or operator. If so, the owner or
operator of the facility may submit a written request for additional
time to amend or prepare a SPCC Plan to the Regional Administrator in
accordance with Sec. 112.3(f).
Under 40 CFR 112.3(f) the Regional Administrator may authorize an
extension of time for the preparation and full implementation of a SPCC
Plan, or any amendment thereto, beyond the time permitted for the
preparation, implementation, or amendment of a SPCC Plan under this
part, when he finds that the owner or operator of a facility subject to
this section, cannot fully comply with the requirements as a result of
either non-availability of qualified personnel, or delays in
construction or equipment delivery beyond the control and without the
fault of such owner or operator or his agents or employees. If you are
an owner or operator seeking an extension of time, you may submit a
written extension request to the Regional Administrator. Your request
must include a:
(i) Full explanation of the cause for any such delay and the
specific aspects of the Plan affected by the delay;
(ii) Full discussion of actions being taken or contemplated to
minimize or mitigate such delay; and
(iii) Proposed time schedule for the implementation of any
corrective actions being taken or contemplated, including interim dates
for completion of tests or studies, installation and operation of any
necessary equipment, or other preventive measures. In addition you may
present additional oral or written statements in support of your
extension request.
The submission of a written extension request does not relieve you
of your obligation to comply with the requirements of 40 CFR part 112.
The Regional Administrator may request a copy of your Plan to evaluate
the extension request. When the Regional Administrator authorizes an
extension of time for particular equipment or other specific aspects of
the SPCC Plan, such extension does not affect your obligation to comply
with the requirements related to other equipment or other specific
aspects of the SPCC Plan for which the Regional Administrator has not
expressly authorized an extension.
This action is not the vehicle for other extensions. EPA is not
extending the compliance date for any other facilities as other
facilities are not season-dependent and are less likely to be impacted
by severe weather conditions. Additionally, other facilities retain the
alternative mechanism for requesting an extension to the compliance
date through 40 CFR 112.3(f).
III. What was the basis for extending the SPCC compliance date for
farms?
A large segment of the continental U.S. was affected by flooding
during the spring and summer of 2011. Other areas were impacted by
devastating fires and drought conditions. In fact, many counties in
several states were declared disaster areas by either the federal or
their state government or both. EPA has received a number of letters
and other correspondence, from State Agricultural Departments and other
parties, explaining the impact of these recent floods on the owners and
operators of farms and their ability to comply with the SPCC rule.
These owners and operators have experienced interruptions in planting,
cultivation and harvesting due to these floods. According to the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in 2011, the Agency issued
56 Major Disaster/Emergency Declarations specifically associated with
flooding events.
According to FEMA's 2011 data, approximately two thirds of the
fifty states had a FEMA flooding Major Disaster/Emergency Declarations.
Almost a quarter of the fifty states had multiple FEMA declarations due
to flooding. These declarations are widespread throughout the crop
production areas of the country. The Agency was also advised in the
correspondence that there may be a lack of available qualified
Professional Engineers (PEs) in some areas of the country to assist in
the preparation, implementation, and review of SPCC Plans for farms.
In addition, despite the targeted farm outreach efforts by EPA over
the past ten months, the sheer number of farms throughout the U.S.
makes it a challenge to reach those owners and operators of farms that
may be subject to the SPCC Plan regulations. As a result, the Agency
believes that farms, as defined in section 112.2, need additional time
to come into compliance with the requirements to prepare or amend and
implement a SPCC Plan. While the Agency could require farms to request
an extension pursuant to 40 CFR 112.3(f), as described above, the
Agency believes that unless the Agency extends the compliance date for
farms, we will receive an overwhelming number of requests for
individual extensions. The Agency believes that this would be an
inefficient use of scarce Agency resources to address this problem by
processing a great number of individual extension requests.
Thus, the Agency has decided to extend the compliance date by which
owners or operators of a farm must prepare or amend and implement a
SPCC Plans to May 10, 2013. The additional 18 months allows enough time
for farms to come in compliance with this regulation. The owners and
operators of farms are strongly encouraged not to delay, and to take
advantage of the off-season for planting and growing, in preparing
their SPCC Plans. However, any farm owner or operator who is not able
to come into compliance by May 10, 2013, and wishes to seek a further
extension of the compliance date, should submit a written request to
the Regional Administrator of the EPA Regional Office for the state
where the farm is located in accordance with paragraph (f) of 40 CFR
112.3.
Finally, we would note that the amendment to the compliance date
does not remove the regulatory requirement for owners or operators of
farms in operation before August 16, 2002, to have and to maintain and
continue implementing a SPCC Plan in accordance with the SPCC
regulations then in effect. Such owners and operators continue to be
required to maintain their SPCC Plans during the interim until the
applicable compliance date for amending and implementing the amended
SPCC Plans. In addition, the amendment of the compliance date does not
relieve owners or operators of farms from the potential liability under
the Clean Water Act or other environmental statutes or regulations for
any spills (see 40 CFR part 110) that may occur.
IV. Response to Comments
The Agency received four comments. All of the comments were adverse
in nature. A response to comment document can be found in the Agency's
docket for this rule (EPA-HQ-OPA-2011-0838).
Comments: Comments received on the direct final rule with a
concurrent proposed rule either disagreed with providing any extension
or in one case the length of time (18 months) for the extension,
suggesting instead a shorter extension. The commenters that expressly
requested that the 18 month extension for farms not be granted cited
one or more of the following concerns: (1) That repeated extensions
(eight times) of compliance dates removes the urgency for farms to ``do
the right thing'' from an environmental perspective or otherwise put
off their SPCC obligations; (2) interferes with the (commenters')
ability to communicate to potential clients (farmers) the need to
[[Page 72122]]
come into compliance soon; (3) there are many companies ready to assist
farmers with their SPCC Plans; and (4) there are millions of dollars in
grants available to farmers to help them come into compliance with the
SPCC regulations. Two of the commenters suggested that greater outreach
to farms regarding the SPCC Plan requirements is needed instead of the
extension.
One commenter agreed that an extension is necessary but does not
agree with the time frame of 18 months. The commenter stated that a
vast majority of farming clients have indicated that they are out of
harvest and feel confident that they can finalize their SPCC Plans
during the winter months. Therefore, a three to four month extension
coupled with a concerted effort to inform farmers of their regulatory
responsibilities would be of far greater benefit to the farming
community. The commenter cited three primary concerns of the proposed
extension: (1) It jeopardizes the resources that are currently
available to help producers gain compliance; (2) there are solutions
and professionals available including a ``free of charge'' online SPCC
Plan creation tool, even though most farms do not need a professional
engineer (PE) to certify their SPCC Plan and are able to prepare a
self-certified SPCC Plan; and (3) a concerted effort must be made to
inform and educate farmers about the SPCC rule and their
responsibilities. One commenter cited a potential loss of jobs
associated with the action and the inequity of EPA's enforcement of the
SPCC regulation on farmers as compared to other sectors, such as the
oil and gas sector.
Response: While we recognize that there have been multiple
extensions to the compliance date under 40 CFR 112.3--Requirement to
prepare and implement a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure
Plan, at this time, we are further extending the date for compliance
for a narrow segment of industries that are covered by this regulation;
i.e., farms.
The Agency considered comments that opposed any extension to the
compliance date and the comment that recognized a compliance date
extension was appropriate, but suggested a shorter compliance date, as
well as letters from the Secretary of Agriculture, Arkansas Agriculture
Department, the Commissioner of the Mississippi Department of
Agriculture and Commerce and the Commissioner of the Louisiana
Department of Agriculture previously received by the Agency, that
specifically requested an additional 24 months for farms to implement
SPCC Plans and recover financially from the impacts of extreme weather,
find qualified engineers, and install the proper equipment. The Agency
proposed an 18 month extension determining that 24 months may be too
long a period and decided 18 months should be adequate time for the
farms. We still believe 18 months is the correct timeframe upon hearing
from commenters that there are firms available to assist the farmers to
come into compliance.
The Agency recognizes that farms, more than other industries, are
directly impacted by extreme weather conditions, such as the
devastating flooding and drought that was experienced this past year by
a substantial portion of the continental U.S. Rather than requiring all
impacted farms to submit a written request to the Regional
Administrator of the EPA Regional Office for the state where the farm
is located in accordance with paragraph (f) of 40 CFR 112.3, we
determined that it is more efficient to extend the compliance date for
the farm industry. We also want to emphasize that farms should not wait
until May 10, 2013, to ready their SPCC Plans. Farms should take
advantage of non-growing and non-harvesting seasons to focus on
preparing and implementing their SPCC Plans.
Comments: Additionally, three of the four comments correctly
explain that EPA's action does not provide an extension for those farms
that were in operation on or before August 16, 2002, and which did not
have a previously developed SPCC Plan. Such farms may be in
noncompliance with the rule. A commenter also questioned the necessity
of the current action, pointing out that most farms are in
noncompliance and would not benefit from the extension. A second
commenter also pointed out the misconception that all farmers
(producers) will be eligible for the extension. The commenter stated
that many farmers do not have SPCC Plans, thus, making them ineligible
for the extension.
Response: The Agency agrees with commenters that said that only
existing farms maintaining an SPCC plan or new farms coming into
operation after August 16, 2002, are eligible for the extension
provided by this action.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), and
therefore is not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This final action does not impose any new information collection
burden. The amendments in this final rule simply extend the compliance
date for farms. This final rule does not change any reporting
requirements in the general provisions. However, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information
collection requirements contained in the existing subparts of 40 CFR
112 under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2050-0021. The OMB control
numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
Subparts that will be added through separate rulemakings will document
the respective information collection requirements in their own ICR
documents.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR 121.201;
(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.
After considering the economic impacts of this final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not
[[Page 72123]]
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The final rule simply amends the date for compliance. The
final rule does not itself add any additional subparts or requirements.
The final rule will not impose any new requirements on small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
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. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this action is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. This
action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA
because it contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly
or uniquely affect small governments. The amendments in this final rule
change the compliance date for farms.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order (EO) 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 EO to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the states, on the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
This final rule 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 EO 13132. This amendment applies directly to farms. It
does not apply to governmental entities unless the government entity
owns a farm, as defined in 40 CFR 112.2 Definitions. This regulation
also does not limit the power of states or localities to regulate
farms. Thus, EO 13132 does not apply to this final rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The changes in
this final rule do not result in any changes to the requirements of the
2009 rule. Thus Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This final rule is not subject to EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) because it is not economically significant as defined in EO
12866, and because the Agency does not believe the environmental health
or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate
risk to children. The changes in this final rule do not result in any
changes to the requirements applicable to farms, other than the date
for compliance.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001) because it is not likely to have any adverse effect on
the supply, distribution, or use of energy.
I. 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 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 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 the final rule amendments will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because the amendments do
not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added 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 rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the U.S. prior to
publication of the rule 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 rule will be effective November 22, 2011.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 112
Oil pollution prevention, Farms, Compliance date, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: November 10, 2011.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out above, title 40, chapter I of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 112--OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION
0
1. The authority citation for part 112 continues to read as follows:
[[Page 72124]]
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 33 U.S.C. 2720; and E.O.
12777 (October 18, 1991), 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p.351.
0
2. Section 112.3 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 112.3 Requirement to prepare and implement a Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasure Plan.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(3) If your farm, as defined in Sec. 112.2, was in operation on or
before August 16, 2002, you must maintain your Plan, but must amend it,
if necessary to ensure compliance with this part, and implement the
amended Plan on or before May 10, 2013. If your farm becomes
operational after August 16, 2002, through May 10, 2013, and could
reasonably be expected to have a discharge as described in Sec.
112.1(b), you must prepare and implement a Plan on or before May 10,
2013. If your farm becomes operational after May 10, 2013, and could
reasonably be expected to have a discharge as described in Sec.
112.1(b), you must prepare and implement a Plan before you begin
operations.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-29901 Filed 11-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P