Natural Resource Damages for Hazardous Substances, 43611-43613 [2018-18498]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2018 / Proposed Rules
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
or solicitation; (ii) the telehealth
technologies must be provided for the
purpose of furnishing telehealth
services related to the patient’s ESRD;
and (iii) the provision of the telehealth
technologies must ‘‘meet[] any other
requirements set forth in regulations
promulgated by the Secretary.’’
i. For the purposes of this exception,
please provide input on how ‘‘telehealth
technologies’’ should be defined. Please
provide examples of telehealth
technologies that may be used to furnish
telehealth services related to a
beneficiary’s ESRD (e.g., technologies
that address services on the Medicare
telehealth list). Also, please indicate
whether telehealth technologies should
include services. If so, please explain, in
detail, what services should be
considered ‘‘telehealth technologies.’’
ii. For the purposes of this exception,
should OIG include protections or
safeguards as ‘‘any other requirements
set forth in regulations promulgated by
the Secretary?’’ If so, please explain
what protections or safeguards and why.
4. Intersection of Physician Self-Referral
Law and Anti-Kickback Statute
Please share any feedback regarding
specific circumstances in which (i)
exceptions to the physician self-referral
law and safe harbors to the antikickback statute should align for
purposes of the goals of this RFI; and (ii)
exceptions to the physician self-referral
law in furtherance of care coordination
or value-based care should not have a
corresponding safe harbor to the antikickback statute.
Respondents are encouraged to
provide complete but concise and
organized responses, including any
relevant data and specific examples.
Respondents are not required to address
every issue or respond to every question
discussed in this RFI to have their
responses considered. All responses
will be considered, provided they
contain information OIG can use to
identify the commenter.
Please note: This is a request for
information only. This RFI is issued
solely for information and planning
purposes; it does not constitute a
Request for Proposal (RFP), application,
proposal abstract, or quotation. This RFI
does not commit the U.S. Government
to contract for any supplies or services
or make a grant award. Further, OIG is
not seeking proposals through this RFI
and will not accept unsolicited
proposals. Respondents are advised that
the U.S. Government will not pay for
any information or administrative costs
incurred in response to this RFI; all
costs associated with responding to this
RFI will be solely at the interested
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Aug 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
party’s expense. Not responding to this
RFI does not preclude participation in
any future procurement, if conducted. It
is the responsibility of the potential
responders to monitor this RFI
announcement for additional
information pertaining to this request.
Please note that OIG will not respond to
questions about the policy issues raised
in this RFI. Contractor support
personnel may be used to review RFI
responses.
Responses to this RFI are not offers
and cannot be accepted by the U.S.
Government to form a binding contract
or issue a grant. Information obtained as
a result of this RFI may be used by the
U.S. Government for program planning
on a nonattribution basis. Respondents
should not include any information that
might be considered proprietary or
confidential. This RFI should not be
construed as a commitment or
authorization to incur costs for which
reimbursement would be required or
sought. All submissions become U.S.
Government property and will not be
returned. OIG may publicly post the
comments received or a summary
thereof.
IV. Collection of Information
Requirements
This document does not impose
information collection requirements,
that is, reporting, recordkeeping, or
third-party disclosure requirements.
However, section III of this document
does contain a general solicitation of
comments in the form of a request for
information. In accordance with the
implementing regulations of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA),
specifically 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(4), this
general solicitation is exempt from the
PRA. Facts or opinions submitted in
response to general solicitations of
comments from the public, published in
the Federal Register or other
publications, regardless of the form or
format thereof, provided that no person
is required to supply specific
information pertaining to the
commenter, other than that necessary
for self-identification, as a condition of
the agency’s full consideration, are not
generally considered information
subject to the PRA. Consequently, there
is no need for review by the Office of
Management and Budget under the
authority of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.).
V. Response to Comments
Because of the large number of public
comments we normally receive on
Federal Register documents, we are not
able to acknowledge or respond to them
individually. We will consider all
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43611
comments we receive by the date and
time specified in the DATES section of
this preamble, and, if we proceed with
a subsequent document, we may
respond to the comments in the
preamble to that document.
Dated: August 20, 2018.
Daniel R. Levinson,
Inspector General.
[FR Doc. 2018–18519 Filed 8–24–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4152–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of the Secretary
43 CFR Part 11
[Docket No. DOI–2018–0006; XXXD5198NI.
DS61600000.DNINR0000.000000.DX61604]
RIN 1090–AB17
Natural Resource Damages for
Hazardous Substances
Office of Restoration and
Damage Assessment, Interior.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking; request for public
comment.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Office of Restoration and
Damage Assessment (ORDA) is seeking
comments and suggestions from State,
Tribal, and Federal natural resource cotrustees, other affected parties, and the
interested public on whether revisions
to the regulations for conducting natural
resource damage assessments and
restoration (NRDAR) for hazardous
substance releases are needed, and if so,
what specific revisions should be
considered.
We will accept comments
through October 26, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
to ORDA on this ANPRM by any of the
following methods. Please reference the
Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
DOI–2018–0006 in your comments.
• Electronically: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov. In the ‘‘Search’’
box enter ‘‘DOI–2018–0006.’’ Follow the
instructions to submit public comments.
We will post all comments.
• Hand deliver or mail comments to
the Office of Restoration and Damage
Assessment, U.S. Department of the
Interior, 1849 C Street Northwest, Mail
Stop/Room 5538, Washington, DC
20240.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Glomb, Director, Office of
Restoration and Damage Assessment at
(202) 208–4863 or email to steve_
glomb@ios.doi.gov.
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
43612
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2018 / Proposed Rules
The
regulations provide procedures that
State, Tribal, and Federal natural
resource co-trustees may use to evaluate
the need for and means of restoring,
replacing, or acquiring the equivalent of
public natural resources that are injured
or destroyed because of releases of
hazardous substances into the
environment. The Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA)—which authorizes natural
resource damage claims by States,
federally recognized Indian Tribes, and
the Federal government—specifies that
the regulations are optional, but if the
State, Tribal, and Federal governments
(described as natural resource ‘‘cotrustees’’ by CERCLA) utilize them, they
are entitled to a ‘‘rebuttable
presumption’’ on their claim in any
subsequent legal proceeding.
This notice seeks comment and
suggestions in response to the CERCLA
biennial review requirement and
Executive Order 13777 (February 24,
2017), which directed the Department of
the Interior (DOI) and other Federal
agencies to establish Regulatory Reform
Task Forces to evaluate existing
regulations and make recommendations
regarding repeal, replacement, or
modification, consistent with applicable
law.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
CERCLA authorizes the Federal
government, States, and federally
recognized Indian Tribes to act as
‘‘trustees’’ on behalf of the public, for
the purpose of bringing claims for injury
to natural resources injured or destroyed
by hazardous substance releases. Such
claims are not fines or penalties, and the
measure of damages is calculated by the
cost to restore or replace the injured or
destroyed natural resources. Trustees
may also recover compensation for
services the resources would have
provided to the public pending
restoration, along with the reasonable
cost of assessing injury and determining
appropriate restoration. The statute
requires trustees to spend restoration
recoveries ‘‘only to restore, replace, or
acquire the equivalent’’ of injured
natural resources pursuant to a publicly
reviewed restoration plan.
Section 301(c) of CERCLA requires
the promulgation of regulations to guide
natural resource damage assessment and
restoration. The statute explicitly
provides that the regulations are not
mandatory, but if State, Tribal, or
Federal trustees conduct an assessment
in accordance with the regulations, they
would receive a ‘‘rebuttable
presumption’’ for their claim in any
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Aug 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
subsequent administrative or judicial
proceeding. The Department of the
Interior (DOI) was designated by the
President to develop the regulations
currently in effect at 43 CFR part 11.
DOI previously developed two types
of NRDAR regulations (as specified by
CERCLA). Standard procedures for
simplified assessments requiring
minimal field observations (the Type A
Rule); and site-specific procedures for
detailed assessment in individual cases
(the Type B Rule). The CERCLA NRDAR
Regulations were last revised in 2008.
These revisions to the Type B Rule
emphasized natural resource restoration
over litigation and monetary damages,
made technical corrections to
procedural timing inconsistencies, and
responded to two court decisions
addressing previous versions of the
regulations: State of Ohio v. U.S.
Department of the Interior, 880 F.2d 432
(D.C. Cir. 1989) (Ohio v. Interior); and
Kennecott Utah Copper Corp. v. U.S.
Department of the Interior, 88 F.3d 1191
(D.C. Cir. 1996) (Kennecott v. Interior).
The 2008 revisions were based on the
report of a committee convened by DOI
under the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA) to make recommendations
on improving NRDAR practice. The
committee was comprised of
representatives from States, Tribes,
Federal agencies, industrial
corporations, industry consultants and
attorneys, local and national nongovernmental organizations, and
academics. Unlike previous iterations of
the NRDAR regulations, the final
regulatory revisions based on the FACA
Committee report were not challenged
by States, Tribes, industry or
environmental groups.
Description of Information Requested
We are interested in comments or
suggestions that improve the efficiency
and cost effectiveness of the NRDAR
process. An internal biennial review of
the CERCLA NRDAR regulations
identified some remaining issues from
the NRDAR FACA Committee Report
that could be addressed, and NRDAR
practice issues that have developed or
progressed since the last revision of the
regulations. DOI is particularly
interested in comments and suggestions
related to these issues, outlined below.
We also welcome comments and
suggestions on any other aspect of the
regulations that trustees, stakeholders,
and the general public would like us to
consider.
Simplification and ‘‘Plain Language’’
With the exceptions of the provision
of the Type B Regulations that were
revised in 2008, the CERCLA NRDAR
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
regulations are arguably complicated,
overly prescriptive, repetitive, and
dense—particularly when compared to
the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) NRDAR
Rule promulgated by the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration at 15 CFR part 990. A
number of stakeholders have suggested
that DOI should consider a
comprehensive ‘‘plain English’’ revision
to the CERCLA NRDAR Regulations that
closely aligns with the structure of the
existing OPA NRDAR Regulations.
Type A Regulations
The Type A Regulations were
designed to result in efficient, cost
effective, standardized assessments. It
has been challenging, however, to
develop workable Type A Regulations
that are streamlined and utilize minimal
actual field observations but are still
relevant and reliable enough to be
entitled to a rebuttable presumption of
correctness. Accordingly, DOI is seeking
comments or suggestions regarding
revision to and utilization of the
CERCLA NRDAR Type A Regulations.
Early Emphasis on Restoration Over
Damages
The NRDAR FACA Committee Report
recommended that DOI could encourage
a restoration focus and negotiated
agreements by revising the regulations
to encourage early scoping of restoration
opportunities at NRDAR sites. DOI is
interested in any additional comments
or suggestions on where specifically in
the assessment process restoration
scoping may be cost effective and
appropriate and how that could best be
addressed in the regulations.
Procedures to Further Encourage
Negotiated Settlements and Early
Restoration
Since the last revision of CERCLA
NRDAR Regulations, a number of
matters have utilized partial negotiated
settlements early in the assessment
process to cost effectively resolve
discrete NRDAR claims and re-inforce
an overall restoration focus for ultimate
comprehensive resolution. However, the
current regulations offer little guidance
on how to align early restoration
settlements with existing statutory and
regulatory requirements for assessment
and restoration planning.
Advance Restoration and Restoration
Banking
Restoration ‘‘banking’’ and advance
restoration—where restoration is
undertaken in anticipation of marketing
portions of such restoration to
responsible parties to address natural
resource injury caused by releases of
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2018 / Proposed Rules
hazardous substances—has been
considered at a number of sites since the
last revision of the CERCLA NRDAR
regulations. Some States (such as
Louisiana) have enacted specific
statutory provisions and promulgated
regulations on NRDAR banking. The
existing CERCLA NRDAR regulations do
not provide any guidance on the use of
advance restoration and restoration
banking techniques.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) Compliance
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Public Comment Procedures
DOI is not obligated to consider
comments that we receive after the close
of the comment period for this ANPRM,
or comments that are delivered to an
address other than those listed in this
notice. After the comment period for
this ANPRM closes, DOI will review all
comment submissions. Upon
consideration, DOI may publish a notice
of proposed rulemaking.
We are particularly interested in
receiving comments and suggestions
about the topics identified in the
Description of Information Requested
section. Written comments that are
specific, explain the rationale for the
comment or suggestion, address the
issues outlined in this notice, and where
possible, refer to specific statutes,
existing regulations, case law, or
NRDAR practices are most useful.
Before including your address, phone
number, email address or other personal
identifying information in you
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—might
be made publicly available at any time.
While you may ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review we
cannot guarantee that we will do so.
Steve Glomb,
Director, Office of Restoration and Damage
Assessment.
[FR Doc. 2018–18498 Filed 8–24–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4334–63–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Aug 24, 2018
Jkt 244001
47 CFR Part 73
[MB Docket No. 18–214, GN Docket No. 12–
268; FCC 18–113]
LPTV, TV Translator, and FM
Broadcast Station Reimbursement,
Expanding the Economic and
Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum
Through Incentive Auctions
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The NRDAR FACA Committee Report
encouraged DOI to adopt Departmentwide categorical exclusions from NEPA
as appropriate and to ensure that
compliance with NEPA requirements
occurs concurrently with NRDAR
restoration planning. DOI is interested
in comments or suggestions whether
that would best be addressed in the
NRDAR regulations, NEPA regulations,
or in Departmental guidance.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9601, secs.
104,107,111(I), 122.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
SUMMARY: In this document, the
Commission proposes rules to
implement Congress’s recent directive
that we reimburse certain Low Power
Television (LPTV), television translator
(TV translator), and FM broadcast
stations for costs incurred as a result of
the Commission’s broadcast television
spectrum incentive auction. When
Congress authorized the Commission to
conduct the incentive auction, it
required the Commission to reimburse
certain costs incurred by full power and
Class A television licensees and
multichannel video program
distributors (MVPDs). On March 23,
2018, Congress adopted the
Reimbursement Expansion Act (REA),
which, among other things, expands the
list of entities eligible to be reimbursed
for auction-related expenses to include
LPTV, TV translator, and FM broadcast
stations, and to provide additional
funds to the Reimbursement Fund to be
used for this purpose. The REA requires
the Commission to complete a
rulemaking to adopt a reimbursement
process for LPTV, TV translator, and FM
stations within a year from the adoption
date of the Act. This NPRM commences
the proceeding to implement this
directive and enable the Commission to
meet this statutory deadline.
DATES: Comments may be filed on or
before September 26, 2018; and reply
comments may be filed on or before
October 26, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may
submit comments and reply comments,
identified by MB Docket No. 18–214
and GN Docket No. 12–268, by any of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Federal Communications
Commission’s website: https://fjallfoss.
fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions
for submitting comments.
• Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43613
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All
filings must be addressed to the
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
• People with Disabilities: Contact the
FCC to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters,
CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov
or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202)
418–0432. For detailed instructions for
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the supplementary information
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim
Matthews of the FCC’s Media Bureau,
Policy Division, Kim.Matthews@fcc.gov,
(202) 418–2154.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), FCC 18–
113, adopted August 2, 2018 and
released August 3, 2018. The full text of
this document is available for public
inspection and copying during regular
business hours in the FCC Reference
Center, Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street SW, Room
CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. The
complete text may be purchased from
the Commission’s copy contractor, 445
12th Street SW, Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554. This document
will also be available via ECFS at https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Documents will
be available electronically in ASCII,
Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat.
Alternative formats are available for
people with disabilities (Braille, large
print, electronic files, audio format) by
sending an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or
calling the Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202)
418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432
(TTY).
The NPRM may result in new or
revised information collection
requirements. If the Commission adopts
any new or revised information
collection requirements, the
Commission will publish a notice in the
Federal Register inviting the public to
comment on such requirements, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995. In addition, pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, the Commission will seek specific
comment on how it might ‘‘further
reduce the information collection
burden for small business concerns with
fewer than 25 employees.’’
Synopsis
I. Introduction
1. In the NPRM, we propose rules to
implement Congress’s recent directive
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 166 (Monday, August 27, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43611-43613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18498]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of the Secretary
43 CFR Part 11
[Docket No. DOI-2018-0006;
XXXD5198NI.DS61600000.DNINR0000.000000.DX61604]
RIN 1090-AB17
Natural Resource Damages for Hazardous Substances
AGENCY: Office of Restoration and Damage Assessment, Interior.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; request for public
comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Restoration and Damage Assessment (ORDA) is
seeking comments and suggestions from State, Tribal, and Federal
natural resource co-trustees, other affected parties, and the
interested public on whether revisions to the regulations for
conducting natural resource damage assessments and restoration (NRDAR)
for hazardous substance releases are needed, and if so, what specific
revisions should be considered.
DATES: We will accept comments through October 26, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to ORDA on this ANPRM by any of the
following methods. Please reference the Regulation Identifier Number
(RIN) DOI-2018-0006 in your comments.
Electronically: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. In the
``Search'' box enter ``DOI-2018-0006.'' Follow the instructions to
submit public comments. We will post all comments.
Hand deliver or mail comments to the Office of Restoration
and Damage Assessment, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street
Northwest, Mail Stop/Room 5538, Washington, DC 20240.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Glomb, Director, Office of
Restoration and Damage Assessment at (202) 208-4863 or email to
[email protected].
[[Page 43612]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The regulations provide procedures that
State, Tribal, and Federal natural resource co-trustees may use to
evaluate the need for and means of restoring, replacing, or acquiring
the equivalent of public natural resources that are injured or
destroyed because of releases of hazardous substances into the
environment. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA)--which authorizes natural resource damage
claims by States, federally recognized Indian Tribes, and the Federal
government--specifies that the regulations are optional, but if the
State, Tribal, and Federal governments (described as natural resource
``co-trustees'' by CERCLA) utilize them, they are entitled to a
``rebuttable presumption'' on their claim in any subsequent legal
proceeding.
This notice seeks comment and suggestions in response to the CERCLA
biennial review requirement and Executive Order 13777 (February 24,
2017), which directed the Department of the Interior (DOI) and other
Federal agencies to establish Regulatory Reform Task Forces to evaluate
existing regulations and make recommendations regarding repeal,
replacement, or modification, consistent with applicable law.
Background
CERCLA authorizes the Federal government, States, and federally
recognized Indian Tribes to act as ``trustees'' on behalf of the
public, for the purpose of bringing claims for injury to natural
resources injured or destroyed by hazardous substance releases. Such
claims are not fines or penalties, and the measure of damages is
calculated by the cost to restore or replace the injured or destroyed
natural resources. Trustees may also recover compensation for services
the resources would have provided to the public pending restoration,
along with the reasonable cost of assessing injury and determining
appropriate restoration. The statute requires trustees to spend
restoration recoveries ``only to restore, replace, or acquire the
equivalent'' of injured natural resources pursuant to a publicly
reviewed restoration plan.
Section 301(c) of CERCLA requires the promulgation of regulations
to guide natural resource damage assessment and restoration. The
statute explicitly provides that the regulations are not mandatory, but
if State, Tribal, or Federal trustees conduct an assessment in
accordance with the regulations, they would receive a ``rebuttable
presumption'' for their claim in any subsequent administrative or
judicial proceeding. The Department of the Interior (DOI) was
designated by the President to develop the regulations currently in
effect at 43 CFR part 11.
DOI previously developed two types of NRDAR regulations (as
specified by CERCLA). Standard procedures for simplified assessments
requiring minimal field observations (the Type A Rule); and site-
specific procedures for detailed assessment in individual cases (the
Type B Rule). The CERCLA NRDAR Regulations were last revised in 2008.
These revisions to the Type B Rule emphasized natural resource
restoration over litigation and monetary damages, made technical
corrections to procedural timing inconsistencies, and responded to two
court decisions addressing previous versions of the regulations: State
of Ohio v. U.S. Department of the Interior, 880 F.2d 432 (D.C. Cir.
1989) (Ohio v. Interior); and Kennecott Utah Copper Corp. v. U.S.
Department of the Interior, 88 F.3d 1191 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (Kennecott v.
Interior).
The 2008 revisions were based on the report of a committee convened
by DOI under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) to make
recommendations on improving NRDAR practice. The committee was
comprised of representatives from States, Tribes, Federal agencies,
industrial corporations, industry consultants and attorneys, local and
national non-governmental organizations, and academics. Unlike previous
iterations of the NRDAR regulations, the final regulatory revisions
based on the FACA Committee report were not challenged by States,
Tribes, industry or environmental groups.
Description of Information Requested
We are interested in comments or suggestions that improve the
efficiency and cost effectiveness of the NRDAR process. An internal
biennial review of the CERCLA NRDAR regulations identified some
remaining issues from the NRDAR FACA Committee Report that could be
addressed, and NRDAR practice issues that have developed or progressed
since the last revision of the regulations. DOI is particularly
interested in comments and suggestions related to these issues,
outlined below. We also welcome comments and suggestions on any other
aspect of the regulations that trustees, stakeholders, and the general
public would like us to consider.
Simplification and ``Plain Language''
With the exceptions of the provision of the Type B Regulations that
were revised in 2008, the CERCLA NRDAR regulations are arguably
complicated, overly prescriptive, repetitive, and dense--particularly
when compared to the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) NRDAR Rule promulgated by
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration at 15 CFR part 990.
A number of stakeholders have suggested that DOI should consider a
comprehensive ``plain English'' revision to the CERCLA NRDAR
Regulations that closely aligns with the structure of the existing OPA
NRDAR Regulations.
Type A Regulations
The Type A Regulations were designed to result in efficient, cost
effective, standardized assessments. It has been challenging, however,
to develop workable Type A Regulations that are streamlined and utilize
minimal actual field observations but are still relevant and reliable
enough to be entitled to a rebuttable presumption of correctness.
Accordingly, DOI is seeking comments or suggestions regarding revision
to and utilization of the CERCLA NRDAR Type A Regulations.
Early Emphasis on Restoration Over Damages
The NRDAR FACA Committee Report recommended that DOI could
encourage a restoration focus and negotiated agreements by revising the
regulations to encourage early scoping of restoration opportunities at
NRDAR sites. DOI is interested in any additional comments or
suggestions on where specifically in the assessment process restoration
scoping may be cost effective and appropriate and how that could best
be addressed in the regulations.
Procedures to Further Encourage Negotiated Settlements and Early
Restoration
Since the last revision of CERCLA NRDAR Regulations, a number of
matters have utilized partial negotiated settlements early in the
assessment process to cost effectively resolve discrete NRDAR claims
and re-inforce an overall restoration focus for ultimate comprehensive
resolution. However, the current regulations offer little guidance on
how to align early restoration settlements with existing statutory and
regulatory requirements for assessment and restoration planning.
Advance Restoration and Restoration Banking
Restoration ``banking'' and advance restoration--where restoration
is undertaken in anticipation of marketing portions of such restoration
to responsible parties to address natural resource injury caused by
releases of
[[Page 43613]]
hazardous substances--has been considered at a number of sites since
the last revision of the CERCLA NRDAR regulations. Some States (such as
Louisiana) have enacted specific statutory provisions and promulgated
regulations on NRDAR banking. The existing CERCLA NRDAR regulations do
not provide any guidance on the use of advance restoration and
restoration banking techniques.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance
The NRDAR FACA Committee Report encouraged DOI to adopt Department-
wide categorical exclusions from NEPA as appropriate and to ensure that
compliance with NEPA requirements occurs concurrently with NRDAR
restoration planning. DOI is interested in comments or suggestions
whether that would best be addressed in the NRDAR regulations, NEPA
regulations, or in Departmental guidance.
Public Comment Procedures
DOI is not obligated to consider comments that we receive after the
close of the comment period for this ANPRM, or comments that are
delivered to an address other than those listed in this notice. After
the comment period for this ANPRM closes, DOI will review all comment
submissions. Upon consideration, DOI may publish a notice of proposed
rulemaking.
We are particularly interested in receiving comments and
suggestions about the topics identified in the Description of
Information Requested section. Written comments that are specific,
explain the rationale for the comment or suggestion, address the issues
outlined in this notice, and where possible, refer to specific
statutes, existing regulations, case law, or NRDAR practices are most
useful.
Before including your address, phone number, email address or other
personal identifying information in you comment, you should be aware
that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--might be made publicly available at any time. While you
may ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review we cannot guarantee that we will do so.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9601, secs. 104,107,111(I), 122.
Steve Glomb,
Director, Office of Restoration and Damage Assessment.
[FR Doc. 2018-18498 Filed 8-24-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4334-63-P
