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 

Designated area 

Designation for the 2008 NAAQSa

Date 1 Type 

Whole State ........................................................................................................................................ ........................ 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 

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 http://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 

http://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, 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 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 § 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 

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 


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 

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 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 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 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 112 

continues to read as follows: 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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: 

§ 112.3 Requirement to prepare and 

implement a Spill Prevention, Control, and 

Countermeasure Plan. 

* * * * * 

(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] 

Internet-Based Telecommunications 

Relay Service Numbering 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; announcement of 

effective date. 

SUMMARY: 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 

Policy Division, Wireline Competition 

Bureau, at (202) 418–7295, or email: 

Heather.Hendrickson@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 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). 

Synopsis 

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. 

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 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES