12280 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

to promote such coordination, 

simplification, and harmonization.’’ 

This change will clarify BIS’s authority 

to revise, suspend, or revoke licenses 

and will harmonize Section 750.8(a) of 

the EAR, concerning licenses, with an 

analogous provision in Section 740.2(b) 

regarding the revision, suspension or 

revocation of license exceptions under 

the EAR. BIS makes this change in Part 

750 to make it clear and consistent with 

§ 740.2(b) that the United States’ ability 

to revoke or suspend a license is not 

limited to only when the EAR have been 

violated or that a violation is about to 

occur but also to prevent licensed 

export transactions in which the United 

States may subsequently have an 

interest, including a foreign policy 

interest. 

Since August 21, 2001, the Export 

Administration Act has been in lapse 

and the President, through Executive 

Order 13222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR, 

2001 Comp., p. 783 (2002)), as extended 

most recently by the Notice of August 

16, 2010 (75 FR 50681, August 16, 

2010), has continued the EAR in effect 

under the International Emergency 

Economic Powers Act. BIS continues to 

carry out the provisions of the Act, as 

appropriate and to the extent permitted 

by law, pursuant to Executive Order 

13222. 

Rulemaking Requirements 

1. This final rule has been determined 

to be significant for the purposes of 

Executive Order 12866. 

2. Notwithstanding any other 

provisions of law, no person is required 

to respond to nor be subject to a penalty 

for failure to comply with a collection 

of information, subject to the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.) (PRA), unless that collection of 

information displays a currently valid 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Control Number. This rule does 

not involve a collection of information 

and, therefore, does not implicate 

requirements of the PRA. 

3. This rule does not contain policies 

with Federalism implications as that 

term is defined under Executive Order 

13132. 

4. The Department finds that the 

provisions of the Administrative 

Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) requiring 

prior notice, the opportunity for public 

participation, and a delay in effective 

date are inapplicable because this 

regulation involves a military and 

foreign affairs function of the United 

States (5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1)) or, in the 

alternative, the Department for good 

cause finds that prior notice and 

opportunity for public comment are 

contrary to the public interest (5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B)). It is contrary to the public 

interest to delay clarifying the 

Department’s authority to revise, 

suspend or revoke licenses because this 

delay may allow for the occurrence of 

certain export transactions that the 

United States has an interest, including 

a foreign policy interest, in preventing. 

Therefore, this regulation is issued in 

final form. In addition, the Department 

finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3) to waive the 30-day delay in 

effectiveness for the reasons provided 

above. Accordingly, this regulation is 

made effective immediately upon 

publication. 

No other law requires that a notice of 

proposed rulemaking and an 

opportunity for public comments be 

given for this final rule. Because a 

notice of proposed rulemaking and an 

opportunity for public comment are not 

required to be given for this rule under 

the Administrative Procedure Act or by 

any other law, the analytical 

requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) are 

not applicable. 

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 750 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Exports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Accordingly, part 750 of the Export 

Administration Regulations (15 CFR 

Parts 730–774) is amended as follows: 

PART 750—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for 15 CFR 

Part 750 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 

U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; Sec 1503, Pub. L. 108– 

11, 117 Stat. 559: E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 

3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 

44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; 

Presidential Determination 2003–21 of May 

7, 2003, 68 FR 26459, May 16, 2003; Notice 

of August 12, 2010, 75 FR 50681 (August, 16, 

2010). 

§ 750.8 [Amended] 

■ 2. The first sentence of paragraph (a) 

of § 750.8 is amended by removing the 

text ‘‘whenever it is known that the EAR 

have been violated or that a violation is 

about to occur.’’ 

Dated: March 2, 2011. 

Kevin J. Wolf, 

Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2011–5079 Filed 3–2–11; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0813; FRL–9239–6] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, for Imperial 

County, Kern County, and Ventura 

County; Air Pollution Control Districts 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the 

Imperial County Air Pollution Control 

District (ICAPCD), Kern County Air 

Pollution Control District (KCAPCD), 

and Ventura County Air Pollution 

Control District (VCAPCD) portions of 

the California State Implementation 

Plan (SIP). Under authority of the Clean 

Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the 

Act), we are approving local rules that 

define terms used in other air pollution 

regulations in these areas. 

DATES: This rule is effective on May 6, 

2011 without further notice, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by April 6, 

2011. If we receive such comments, we 

will publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register to notify the public 

that this direct final rule will not take 

effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2010–0813, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://www.regulations.gov is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA 

will not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 12281 

and included as part of the public 

comment. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://www.regulations.gov and in hard 

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. While 

all documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cynthia Allen, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4120, allen.cynthia@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rules we are 

approving with the dates that they were 

adopted by the local air agencies and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule 

# Rule title Adopted Submitted 

ICAPCD .............................................................. 101 Definitions ......................................................................... 02/23/10 07/20/10 

KCAPCD ............................................................ 102 Definitions ......................................................................... 03/11/10 07/20/10 

VCAPCD ............................................................ 2 Definitions ......................................................................... 01/12/10 07/20/10 

On August 25, 2010, EPA determined 

that the submittal for ICAPCD Rule 101, 

KCAPCD Rule 102, and VCAPCD Rule 

2 met the completeness criteria in 40 

CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must be 

met before formal EPA review. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

rules? 

We approved an earlier version of 

these rules into the SIP on the dates 

listed: ICAPCD Rule 101 on November 

15, 2007, KCAPCD Rule 102 on 

February 3, 2000, and VCAPCD Rule 2 

on November 19, 2004. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rules revisions? 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

States to submit regulations that control 

volatile organic compounds, oxides of 

nitrogen, particulate matter, and other 

air pollutants which harm human health 

and the environment. These rules were 

developed as part of the local agency’s 

program to control these pollutants. 

Imperial County Rule 101, 

Definitions, is being amended by adding 

new definitions associated with recently 

adopted as amended Rule 400.1, 

Stationary Gas Turbines (Reasonably 

Available Control Technology), Rule 

400.2, Boilers, Process Heaters and 

Steam Generators, Rule 424, 

Architectural Coatings, Rule 425, 

Aerospace Coating Operations and Rule 

427, Automotive Refinishing 

Operations. In addition, definitions that 

became obsolete because of the newly 

adopted or amended rules were 

removed. 

Kern County Rule 102, Definitions, is 

being amended to update the Exempt 

Compounds list to conform to the 

Exempt Compounds list of the EPA. 

Four definitions have also been added 

to the Rule along with modifications to 

Standard Conditions and minor 

formatting. 

Ventura County Rule 2, Definitions, is 

being amended by adding four new 

‘‘exempt organic compounds’’ to the list 

of low reactive compounds. 

EPA’s technical support documents 

(TSD) have more information about 

these rules. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

These rules describe administrative 

provisions and definitions that support 

emission controls found in other local 

agency requirements. In combination 

with the other requirements, these rules 

must be enforceable (see section 110(a) 

of the Act) and must not relax existing 

requirements (see sections 110(l) and 

193). EPA policy that we use to evaluate 

enforceability requirements includes the 

Bluebook (‘‘Issues Relating to VOC 

Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988) and the 

Little Bluebook (‘‘Guidance Document 

for Correcting Common VOC & Other 

Rule Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, 

August 21, 2001). 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these rules are consistent 

with the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability and SIP antibacksliding. The TSDs have more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act, EPA is fully approving the 

submitted rules because we believe they 

fulfill all relevant requirements. We do 

not anticipate objections to this 

approval, so we are finalizing it without 

proposing it in advance. However, in 

the Proposed Rules section of this 

Federal Register, we are simultaneously 

submitting and proposing approval of 

these rules. If we receive adverse 

comments by April 6, 2011, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register to notify the public 

that the direct final approval will not 

take effect and we will address the 

comments in a subsequent final action 

based on the proposal. If we do not 

receive timely adverse comments, the 

direct final approval will be effective 

without further notice on May 6, 2011. 

This action will incorporate these rules 

into the Federally enforceable SIP. 

Please note that if EPA receives 

adverse comment on an amendment, 

paragraph, or section of this rule and if 

that provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

12282 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

action from Executive Order 12866, 

entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review.’’ 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to conduct 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements 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 not-for-profit enterprises, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. 

This rule will not have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities because SIP approvals under 

section 110 and subchapter I, part D of 

the Clean Air Act do not create any new 

requirements but simply approve 

requirements that the State is already 

imposing. Therefore, because the 

Federal SIP approval does not create 

any new requirements, I certify that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Moreover, due to the nature of the 

Federal-State relationship under the 

Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility 

analysis would constitute Federal 

inquiry into the economic 

reasonableness of State action. The 

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its 

actions concerning SIPs on such 

grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. 

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42 

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2). 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Under sections 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed into 

law on March 22, 1995, EPA must 

prepare a budgetary impact statement to 

accompany any proposed or final rule 

that includes a Federal mandate that 

may result in estimated costs to State, 

local, or Tribal governments in the 

aggregate; or to the private sector, of 

$100 million or more. Under section 

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule and is consistent with 

statutory requirements. Section 203 

requires EPA to establish a plan for 

informing and advising any small 

governments that may be significantly 

or uniquely impacted by the rule. 

EPA has determined that the approval 

action promulgated does not include a 

Federal mandate that may result in 

estimated costs of $100 million or more 

to either State, local, or Tribal 

governments in the aggregate, or to the 

private sector. This Federal action 

approves pre-existing requirements 

under State or local law, and imposes 

no new requirements. Accordingly, no 

additional costs to State, local, or Tribal 

governments, or to the private sector, 

result from this action. 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) revokes and replaces Executive 

Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 

(Enhancing the Intergovernmental 

Partnership). Executive Order 13132 

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 Executive Order 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.’’ Under 

Executive Order 13132, EPA may not 

issue a regulation that has federalism 

implications, that imposes substantial 

direct compliance costs, and that is not 

required by statute, unless the Federal 

government provides the funds 

necessary to pay the direct compliance 

costs incurred by State and local 

governments, or EPA consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the proposed 

regulation. EPA also may not issue a 

regulation that has federalism 

implications and that preempts State 

law unless the Agency consults with 

State and local officials early in the 

process of developing the proposed 

regulation. 

This rule will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132, because it 

merely approves a State rule 

implementing a Federal standard, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. Thus, the requirements of 

section 6 of the Executive Order do not 

apply to this rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA 

to develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

Tribal officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have Tribal 

implications.’’ This final rule does not 

have Tribal implications, as specified in 

Executive Order 13175. It will not have 

substantial direct effects on Tribal 

governments, on the relationship 

between the Federal government and 

Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal government and Indian Tribes. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this rule. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045, because it 

approves a State rule implementing a 

Federal standard. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This rule is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is 

not a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12 of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal 

agencies to evaluate existing technical 

standards when developing a new 

regulation. To comply with NTTAA, 

EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary 

consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available 

and applicable when developing 

programs and policies unless doing so 

would be inconsistent with applicable 

law or otherwise impractical. 

The EPA believes that VCS are 

inapplicable to this action. Today’s 

action does not require the public to 

perform activities conducive to the use 

of VCS. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 12283 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Population 

Executive Order 12898, ‘‘Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations’’ (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. The 

Executive Order has informed the 

development and implementation of 

EPA’s environmental justice program 

and policies. Consistent with the 

Executive Order and the associated 

Presidential Memorandum, the 

Agency’s environmental justice policies 

promote environmental protection by 

focusing attention and Agency efforts on 

addressing the types of environmental 

harms and risks that are prevalent 

among minority, low-income and Tribal 

populations. 

This action will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority, low-income or Tribal 

populations because it increases the 

level of environmental protection for all 

affected populations. 

Specifically, EPA’s action would have 

the affect of standardizing 

environmental requirements throughout 

the area, and would not relax 

environmental requirements in any 

subsection of the area. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. section 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 United 

States 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. section 804(2). This 

rule will be effective May 6, 2011. 

L. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by May 6, 2011. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements (see section 

307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: November 23, 2010. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52 [AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(381) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(381) New and amended regulations 

were submitted on July 20, 2010, by the 

Governor’s designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Imperial County Air Pollution 

Control District. 

(1) Rule 101, ‘‘Definitions,’’ adopted 

on February 23, 2010. 

(B) Kern County Air Pollution Control 

District. 

(1) Rule 102, ‘‘Definitions,’’ adopted 

on March 11, 2010. 

(C) Ventura County Air Pollution 

Control District. 

(1) Rule 2, ‘‘Definitions’’, ‘‘Exempt 

Organic Compounds,’’ revised on 

January 12, 2010. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–4914 Filed 3–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 271 and 272 

[EPA–R06–RCRA–2010–0587.; FRL–9274–4] 

Texas: Final Authorization of Stateinitiated Changes and Incorporation by 

Reference of State Hazardous Waste 

Management Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: During a review of Texas’ 

regulations, the EPA identified a variety 

of State-initiated changes to its 

hazardous waste program under the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act (RCRA). We have determined that 

these changes are minor and satisfy all 

requirements needed to qualify for Final 

authorization and are authorizing the 

State-initiated changes through this 

Direct Final action. 

The Solid Waste Disposal Act, as 

amended, commonly referred to as the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act (RCRA), allows the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) to authorize 

States to operate their hazardous waste 

management programs in lieu of the 

Federal program. The EPA uses the 

regulations entitled ‘‘Approved State 

Hazardous Waste Management 

Programs’’ to provide notice of the 

authorization status of State programs 

and to incorporate by reference those 

provisions of the State statutes and 

regulations that will be subject to the 

EPA’s inspection and enforcement. The 

rule codifies in the regulations the prior 

approval of Texas’ hazardous waste 

management program and incorporates 

by reference authorized provisions of 

the State’s statutes and regulations. 

DATES: This regulation is effective May 

6, 2011, unless the EPA receives adverse 

written comment on the codification of 

the Texas authorized RCRA program by 

the close of business April 6, 2011. If 

the EPA receives such comments, it will 

publish a timely withdrawal of this 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that this rule will 

not take effect. The incorporation by 

reference of authorized provisions in the 

Texas statutes and regulations contained 

in this rule is approved by the Director 

of the Federal Register as of May 6, 2011 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES