Environmental Protection Agency March 9, 2006 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents
Results 1 - 12 of 12
Proposed CERCLA Agreement for Recovery of Response Costs, Intermountain Waste Oil Refinery NPL Site, Bountiful, Davis County, UT
In accordance with the requirements of section 122(h)(1) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended (``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9622(h)(1), notice is hereby given of a proposed administrative settlement under section 122(h) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9622(h), between EPA and Intermountain Oil Company (``Settling Party'') regarding the Intermountain Oil Company facility (the ``Facility'') at the Intermountain Waste Oil Refinery NPL Site (``Site''). The property which is the subject of this proposed settlement is a parcel of land approximately two acres in size and is located at approximately 995 South and 500 West in Bountiful, Davis County, Utah. The settlement, embodied in the proposed Agreement for Recovery of Response Costs (``Agreement''), is intended to resolve the Settling Party's liability at the Site for all response costs incurred and paid, or to be incurred and paid, by EPA in connection with the work performed at the Site as provided for in the Agreement and is based on the Settling Party's inability to pay for a significant portion of the response costs incurred by EPA at the Site. Intermountain Oil Company is the owner of a parcel of land which has been impacted by business operations at the Intermountain Oil Company Facility and is included within the defined boundaries of the Site. The proposed Agreement will resolve Settling Party's liability under section 107(a)(1) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607(a)(1). Under the terms of the proposed Agreement, the Settling Party agrees to pay to EPA the Net Sales Proceeds from the sale of Settling Party's property, i.e., Settling Party's only asset. In exchange, the Settling Party will settle its liability for all response costs incurred and paid, or to be incurred and paid, at the Site in connection with the work performed at the Site as provided for in the Agreement. Opportunity for Comment: For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this notice, the Agency will consider all comments received on the Agreement and may modify or withdraw its consent to the Agreement if comments received disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the Agreement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. The Agency's response to any comments received will be available for public inspection at the EPA Superfund Record Center, 999 18th Street, 5th Floor, in Denver, Colorado.
Program Requirement Revisions Related to the Public Water System Supervision Programs for the States of Connecticut, New Hampshire and Rhode Island
Notice is hereby given that the States of Connecticut, New Hampshire and Rhode Island are in the process of revising their respective approved Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) programs to meet the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The State of Connecticut has adopted drinking water regulations for the Filter Backwash Recycling Rule (66 FR 31086-311054) promulgated on June 8, 2001. After review of the submitted documentation, EPA has determined that Connecticut's Filter Backwash Recycling Rule is no less stringent than federal regulations. Therefore, EPA intends to approve Connecticut's PWSS program revision for the Filter Backwash Rule. The State of New Hampshire has adopted drinking water regulations for the new Public Water System definition (63 FR 23362, 23364) promulgated on April 28, 1998. After review of the submitted documentation, EPA has determined that New Hampshire's public water system definition is no less stringent than federal regulations. Therefore, EPA intends to approve New Hampshire's PWSS program revision for the Public Water System definition. The State of Rhode Island has adopted drinking water regulations for the Variances and Exemptions Rule (63 FR 43834-43851) promulgated on August 14, 1998. After review of the submitted documentation, EPA has determined that Rhode Island's Variances and Exemptions Rule is no less stringent than federal regulations. Therefore, EPA intends to approve Rhode Island's PWSS program revision for the Variances and Exemptions Rule.
Federal Advisory Committee on Detection and Quantitation Approaches and Uses in Clean Water Act Programs
As required by the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, the Environmental Protection Agency is announcing two separate two-day meetings of the Federal Advisory Committee on Detection and Quantitation Approaches and Uses in Clean Water Act (CWA) Programs.
National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology
Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92463, EPA gives notice of a public teleconference of the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT). NACEPT provides advice to the EPA Administrator on a broad range of environmental policy, technology, and management issues. The Council is a panel of experts who represent diverse interests from academia, industry, non-governmental organizations, and local, state, and tribal governments. The purpose of this teleconference is two-fold: To discuss and approve recommendations from the NACEPT Environmental Technology Subcommittee and to discuss and approve comments on the Draft 2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan Architecture from a subset of the Council. A copy of the agenda for the meeting will be posted at https://www.epa.gov/ocem/ nacept/cal-nacept.htm.
National and Governmental Advisory Committees to the U.S. Representative to the Commission for Environmental Cooperation
Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92463, EPA gives notice of a meeting of the National Advisory Committee (NAC) and Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) to the U.S. Representative to the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). The National and Governmental Advisory Committees advise the EPA Administrator in his capacity as the U.S. Representative to the CEC Council. The Committees are authorized under Articles 17 and 18 of the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, Public Law 103-182, and as directed by Executive Order 12915, entitled ``Federal Implementation of the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation.'' The NAC is composed of 12 members representing academia, environmental non-governmental organizations, and private industry. The GAC consists of 12 members representing state, local, and tribal governments. The Committees are responsible for providing advice to the U.S. Representative on a wide range of strategic, scientific, technological, regulatory, and economic issues related to implementation and further elaboration of the NAAEC. The purpose of the meeting is to continue the Committee's consideration of environment and trade issues in the CEC context. A copy of the agenda for the meeting will be posted at https://www.epa.gov/ocem/nacgac-page.htm.
Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC): Notice of Meeting
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC) on November 19, 1990, to provide independent advice and counsel to EPA on policy issues associated with implementation of the Clean Air Act of 1990. The Committee advises on economic, environmental, technical scientific, and enforcement policy issues.
Human Studies Review Board; Notice of Public Meeting and Proposed Candidates for Membership to the Board
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA or Agency) Office of the Science Advisor (OSA) announces a public meeting of the Human Studies Review Board (HSRB) to advise the Agency on EPA's scientific and ethical reviews of human subjects research. In addition, OSA is soliciting public comment on its proposed list of candidates for membership to the HSRB.
Proposed CERCLA Administrative Agreement for Recovery of Past Response Costs; Stringfellow Acid Pits Superfund Site
In accordance with section 122(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given of a proposed Agreement for Recovery of Past Response Costs (``Agreement,'' Region 9 Docket No. 9- 2006-0004) pursuant to section 122(h) of CERCLA concerning the Stringfellow Acid Pits Superfund Site (the ``Site''), located near Glen Avon, California. The respondent to the Agreement is the state of California (the ``State''). The issues resolved in the Agreement stem from the fact that, from 1983 to 1996, the Agency provided federal funds to the State through a State Superfund Contract as a cooperative means to further the remediation of the Site. Section 104(c)(3) of CERCLA requires that, in such a cooperative agreement, the State shall nonetheless be responsible for 10% of the remedial action costs, or 50-100% of the total response costs if the State was an ``operator'' of the Site. Because the State was involved in selecting the original location and management techniques for the Site as a hazardous waste disposal facility, in 1995, a federal district court ruled that the State's role at the facility made it a liable ``operator'' for the purpose section 107(a) of CERCLA. This court ruling potentially affected the share of response costs for which the State would be liable pursuant to section 104(c)(3) of CERCLA. In November 2004, the Agency's Office of Inspector General concluded an audit of the assistance accounts accessed by the State through the State Superfund Contract and made recommendations on the balance due to the State for its response work, but also recommended that the State was not entitled to reimbursement for substantial claims for interest accrued on its incurred costs. The Office of Inspector General did not consider in its recommendation the State's potential liability as an ``operator'' of the Site. Through the proposed Agreement, the Agency will reimburse the State in an amount consistent with the recommendations of the Office of the Inspector General, and will not seek additional costs from the State for its potential liability as an ``operator'' of the Site. The State covenants to accept the settlement as a final determination of the amount of its reimbursement, precluding further claims for recovery of the interest accrued on the State's response costs. A portion of the payments from the Agency to the State will go specifically toward further investigation and response to the recently discovered perchlorate contamination at the Site. For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this Notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to the proposed Agreement. The Agency's response to any comments will be available for public inspection at the Agency's Region IX offices, located at 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105.
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alabama: State Implementation Plan Revision
EPA is approving revisions to the Alabama State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) on September 11, 2003. The revisions include modifications to Alabama's open burning rules found at Alabama Administrative Code (AAC) Chapter 335-3-3-.01. These revisions are part of Alabama's strategy to meet the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) by reducing emissions of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides. Open burning creates smoke that contains fine particles (PM2.5) and precursors to ozone. ADEM has found that elevated levels of PM2.5 mirror the months when ozone levels are highest (May- September). These rules are intended to help control levels of PM2.5 and ozone precursors that contribute to high ozone and PM2.5 levels. Today's action is being taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA). In its September 11, 2003, submittal, ADEM also proposed SIP revisions to include changes to AAC Chapter 335-3-4, concerning opacity. EPA is not acting on that part of the revision at this time.
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Alabama: State Implementation Plan Revision
EPA is approving revisions to the Alabama State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) on September 11, 2003. The revisions include modifications to Alabama's open burning rules found at Alabama Administrative Code (AAC) Chapter 335-3-3-.01. These revisions are part of Alabama's strategy to meet the national ambient air quality standards by reducing emissions of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides. Open burning creates smoke that contains fine particles (PM2.5) and precursors to ozone. ADEM has found that elevated levels of PM2.5 mirror the months when ozone levels are highest (May-September). These rules are intended to help control levels of PM2.5 and ozone precursors that contribute to high ozone and PM2.5 levels. Today's action is being taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air Act. In its September 11, 2003, submittal, ADEM also proposed SIP revisions to include changes to AAC Chapter 335- 3-4, concerning opacity. EPA is not acting on that part of the revision at this time. In the Rules Section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving Alabama's SIP revision as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule, and incorporated herein by reference. If no significant, material, and adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no further activity is contemplated with regard to this proposed action. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this document. Any parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at this time.
Prevention of Significant Deterioration, Nonattainment New Source Review, and Title V: Treatment of Corn Milling Facilities Under the “Major Emitting Facility” Definition
The EPA has treated wet and dry corn milling facilities differently under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) depending on whether the facilities in question produce ethanol fuel or ethanol fit for human consumption. In particular, EPA has applied different major source size cut offs to these facilities under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program based on the product these facilities produce. Additionally, when the list of source categories relative to the definition of ``major emitting facility'' was first promulgated on August 7, 1980, this same list was promulgated in the same final regulatory package for determining from which source categories fugitive emissions were to be counted in determining whether a source is a major source. As a result, although two of the regulatory changes being proposed today address the major source threshold for PSD sources, the remaining proposed regulatory changes address when fugitive emissions are counted for purposes of determining whether a source is a major source under the PSD, nonattainment New Source Review (NSR), or title V programs. In today's action, we are requesting public comment on two options under consideration by EPA with respect to corn milling facilities. Under Option 1, EPA would treat wet and dry corn milling facilities in the same manner under the PSD, nonattainment NSR, and title V programs regardless of whether they produce ethanol fuel or ethanol fit for human consumption. If EPA adopts Option 1, EPA would redefine chemical process plants under the definition of ``major emitting facility'' to exclude wet and dry corn milling facilities which produce ethanol fuel. Under Option 2, EPA would retain the current distinction between wet and dry corn milling facilities under these regulatory programs based on whether they produce ethanol fuel or ethanol fit for human consumption. The EPA's preferred option is Option 1. We are requesting comment on these two options and on the revisions that we propose to make if we adopt Option 1.
Michigan: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revision
The EPA is granting Michigan final authorization of the changes to its hazardous waste management program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The Agency published a proposed rule on November 23, 2005, at 70 FR 70761 and provided for public comment. The public comment period ended on December 23, 2005. We received no comments. No further opportunity for comment will be provided. EPA has determined that these changes satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for final authorization and is authorizing the State's changes through this final action.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
