76688 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

information that would reveal the 

existence of a SAR, within the loan or 

finance company’s corporate 

organizational structure for purposes 

consistent with Title II of the Bank 

Secrecy Act as determined by regulation 

or in guidance. 

(2) Prohibition on disclosures by 

government authorities. A Federal, state, 

local, territorial, or tribal government 

authority, or any director, officer, 

employee, or agent of any of the 

foregoing, shall not disclose a SAR, or 

any information that would reveal the 

existence of a SAR, except as necessary 

to fulfill official duties consistent with 

Title II of the Bank Secrecy Act. For 

purposes of this section, official duties 

shall not include the disclosure of a 

SAR, or any information that would 

reveal the existence of a SAR, to a nongovernmental entity in response to a 

request for disclosure of non-public 

information or a request for use in a 

private legal proceeding, including a 

request pursuant to 31 CFR 1.11. 

(e) Limitation on liability. A loan or 

finance company, and any director, 

officer, employee, or agent of any loan 

or finance company, that makes a 

voluntary disclosure of any possible 

violation of law or regulation to a 

government agency or makes a 

disclosure pursuant to this section or 

any other authority, including a 

disclosure made jointly with another 

institution, shall be protected from 

liability for any such disclosure, or for 

failure to provide notice of such 

disclosure to any person identified in 

the disclosure, or both, to the full extent 

provided by 31 U.S.C. 5318(g)(3). 

(f) Compliance. Loan or finance 

companies shall be examined by 

FinCEN or its delegates under the terms 

of the Bank Secrecy Act, for compliance 

with this section. Failure to satisfy the 

requirements of this section may be a 

violation of the Bank Secrecy Act and of 

this part. 

(g) Applicability date. This section 

applies to transactions initiated after an 

anti-money laundering program 

required by section 103.142 of this part 

is required to be implemented. 

4. Add new § 103.142 to subpart I to 

read as follows: 

§ 103.142 Anti-money laundering 

programs for loan or finance companies. 

(a) Anti-money laundering program 

requirements for loan or finance 

companies. Each loan or finance 

company shall develop and implement 

a written anti-money laundering 

program that is reasonably designed to 

prevent the loan or finance company 

from being used to facilitate money 

laundering or the financing of terrorist 

activities. The program must be 

approved by senior management. A loan 

or finance company shall make a copy 

of its anti-money laundering program 

available to the Financial Crimes 

Enforcement Network, or its designee 

upon request. 

(b) Minimum requirements. At a 

minimum, the anti-money laundering 

program shall: 

(1) Incorporate policies, procedures, 

and internal controls based upon the 

loan or finance company’s assessment of 

the money laundering and terrorist 

financing risks associated with its 

products and services. Policies, 

procedures, and internal controls 

developed and implemented by a loan 

or finance company under this section 

shall include provisions for complying 

with the applicable requirements of 

subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31, 

United States Code and this part, 

integrating the company’s agents and 

brokers into its anti-money laundering 

program, and obtaining all relevant 

customer-related information necessary 

for an effective anti-money laundering 

program. 

(2) Designate a compliance officer 

who will be responsible for ensuring 

that: 

(i) The anti-money laundering 

program is implemented effectively, 

including monitoring compliance by the 

company’s agents and brokers with their 

obligations under the program; 

(ii) The anti-money laundering 

program is updated as necessary; and 

(iii) Appropriate persons are educated 

and trained in accordance with 

paragraph (b)(3) of this section. 

(3) Provide for on-going training of 

appropriate persons concerning their 

responsibilities under the program. A 

loan or finance company may satisfy 

this requirement with respect to its 

employees, agents, and brokers by 

directly training such persons or 

verifying that such persons have 

received training by a competent third 

party with respect to the products and 

services offered by the loan or finance 

company. 

(4) Provide for independent testing to 

monitor and maintain an adequate 

program, including testing to determine 

compliance of the company’s agents and 

brokers with their obligations under the 

program. The scope and frequency of 

the testing shall be commensurate with 

the risks posed by the company’s 

products and services. Such testing may 

be conducted by a third party or by any 

officer or employee of the loan or 

finance company, other than the person 

designated in paragraph (b)(2) of this 

section. 

(c) Compliance. Compliance with this 

section shall be examined by FinCEN or 

its delegates, under the terms of the 

Bank Secrecy Act. Failure to comply 

with the requirements of this section 

may constitute a violation of the Bank 

Secrecy Act and of this part. 

(d) Effective date. A loan or finance 

company must develop and implement 

an anti-money laundering program that 

complies with the requirements of this 

section on or before the later of six 

months from the effective date of the 

regulation, or six months after the date 

a loan or finance company is established 

and becomes subject to the requirements 

of this section. 

5. Amend § 103.170 as follows: 

a. Remove paragraph (b)(1)(ii). 

b. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) 

through (b)(1)(x) as paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) 

through (b)(1)(ix) respectively. 

Dated: December 2, 2010. 

James H. Freis, Jr., 

Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement 

Network. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30765 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4802–10–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[Docket No. USCG–2010–0612] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Isle 

of Wight (Sinepuxent) Bay, Ocean City, 

MD 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

change the regulations that govern the 

operation of the US 50 Bridge over Isle 

of Wight (Sinepuxent) Bay, mile 0.5, at 

Ocean City, MD. This proposed rule will 

require any mariner requesting an 

opening in the evening hours during the 

off-season, to do so before the tender 

office has vacated for the night. The 

proposed change will ensure draw 

tender availability for every scheduled 

opening. The Coast Guard also proposes 

to change the waterway location from 

Isle of Wight Bay to Isle of Wight 

(Sinepuxent) Bay. This waterway is 

known locally as both Isle of Wight Bay 

and Sinepuxent Bay. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

February 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Proposed Rules 76689 

2010–0612 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility 

(M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these four methods. See the 

‘‘Public Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or e-mail Ms. Lindsey 

Middleton, Fifth District Bridge 

Administration Division, Coast Guard; 

telephone 757–398–6629, e-mail 

Lindsey.R.Middleton@uscg.mil. If you 

have questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted, 

without change to http://

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2010–0612), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online (http://

www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or 

hand delivery, but please use only one 

of these means. If you submit a 

comment online via http://

www.regulations.gov, it will be 

considered received by the Coast Guard 

when you successfully transmit the 

comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or 

mail your comment, it will be 

considered as having been received by 

the Coast Guard when it is received at 

the Docket Management Facility. We 

recommend that you include your name 

and a mailing address, an e-mail 

address, or a phone number in the body 

of your document so that we can contact 

you if we have questions regarding your 

submission. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will 

then become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu 

select ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ and insert 

‘‘USCG–2010–0612’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ 

box. Click ‘‘Search’’ then click on the 

balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ column. 

If you submit your comments by mail or 

hand delivery, submit them in an 

unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 

11 inches, suitable for copying and 

electronic filing. If you submit them by 

mail and would like to know that they 

reached the Facility, please enclose a 

stamped, self-addressed postcard or 

envelope. We will consider all 

comments and material received during 

the comment period and may change 

the rule based on your comments. 

Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then 

become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Keyword’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2010– 

0612’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the 

‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’ 

column. You may also visit the Docket 

Management Facility in Room W12–140 

on the ground floor of the Department 

of Transportation West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. We have an agreement with 

the Department of Transportation to use 

the Docket Management Facility. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of comments received into any of 

our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

signing the comment, if submitted on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). You may review a Privacy 

Act notice regarding our public dockets 

in the January 17, 2008, issue of the 

Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 

Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one using one of the four methods 

specified under ADDRESSES. Please 

explain why one would be beneficial. If 

we determine that one would aid this 

rulemaking, we will hold one at a time 

and place announced by a later notice 

in the Federal Register. 

Basis and Purpose 

The Maryland Department of 

Transportation (MdTA) has requested a 

change to the operating procedure for 

the double-leaf bascule US 50 Bridge. 

This change would require that the 

draw shall open on signal; except that, 

from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m., from October 1 

to April 30 of every year, the draw shall 

open on signal if notice is given to the 

bridge before 6 p.m. 

The current regulation, set out in 33 

CFR 117.559, requires that the US 50 

Bridge over Isle of Wight (Sinepuxent) 

Bay, mile 0.5, at Ocean City, with a 

vertical clearance of 13 feet above mean 

high tide in the closed position, shall 

open on signal; except from October 1 

through April 30 from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m., 

the draw shall open if at least three 

hours notice is given and from May 25 

through September 15, from 9:25 a.m. to 

9:55 p.m., the draw shall open at 25 

minutes after and 55 minutes after the 

hour for a maximum of five minutes to 

let accumulated vessel pass, except that, 

on Saturdays from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., the 

draw shall open on the hour for all 

waiting vessels and shall remain in the 

open position until all waiting vessels 

pass. 

According to the records furnished by 

MdTA, draw tender logs for the past 

three years show that there have been 

little to no requests for bridge openings 

from October 1 to April 30, between the 

hours of 6 p.m. and 6 a.m. By providing 

notice to the bridge tender before 6 p.m., 

mariners can plan their transits and 

minimize delay in accordance with the 

proposed rule. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes to revise 33 

CFR 117.559 for the US 50 bridge, mile 

0.5, at Ocean City. The current 

paragraph would be divided into 

paragraphs (a) and (b). 

Paragraph (a) would contain the 

proposed rule and require the 

drawbridge to open on signal from 

October 1 through April 30, from 6 p.m. 

to 6 a.m., if notice has been given to the 

bridge tender before 6 p.m. 

Paragraph (b) would contain the 

existing regulation that states the 

following: From May 25 through 

September 15 from 9:25 a.m. to 9:55 

p.m. the draw shall open at 25 minutes 

after and 55 minutes after the hour for 

a maximum of five minutes to let 

accumulated vessels pass, except that, 

on Saturdays from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., the 

draw shall open on the hour for all 

waiting vessels and shall remain in the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
76690 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

open position until all waiting vessels 

pass. 

The change in the operating 

regulation would ensure a timely bridge 

opening for mariners during the offseason, from October 1 through April 30 

from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. 

The Atlantic Ocean is the alternate 

route for vessels transiting this section 

of Isle of Wight (Sinepuxent) Bay. 

Vessels with a mast height of less than 

13 feet can pass underneath the bridge 

in the closed position at anytime. 

The Coast Guard also proposes to 

change the waterway location at section 

117.559 Isle of Wight Bay, by inserting 

the name Sinepuxent Bay, since this 

waterway is known locally as both the 

Isle of Wight Bay and the Sinepuxent 

Bay. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

This proposed rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, 

Regulatory Planning and Review, and 

does not require an assessment of 

potential costs and benefits under 

section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office 

of Management and Budget has not 

reviewed it under that Order. The 

proposed changes are expected to have 

only a minimal impact on maritime 

traffic transiting the bridge. 

Mariners can plan their trips in 

accordance with the scheduled bridge 

openings to minimize delays. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. 

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. This proposed rule would affect 

the following entities, some of which 

might be small entities: the owners or 

operators of vessels needing to transit 

the bridge from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. from 

October 1 to April 30. This action will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

because the rule adds minimal 

restrictions to the movement of 

navigation, by requiring mariners from 

October 1 to April 30, from 6 p.m. to 6 

a.m., to give notice to the bridge tender 

before 6 p.m. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on it, 

please submit a comment (see 

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it 

qualifies and how and to what degree 

this rule would economically affect it. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

If the rule would affect your small 

business, organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please contact Lindsey 

Middleton, Bridge Management 

Specialist, Fifth Coast Guard District, 

(757) 398–6629 or 

Lindsey.R.Middleton@uscg.mil. The 

Coast Guard will not retaliate against 

small entities that question or complain 

about this proposed rule or any policy 

or action of the Coast Guard. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call for no 

new collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on State or local governments and 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. We have analyzed 

this proposed rule under that Order and 

have determined that it does not have 

implications for federalism. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this 

proposed rule will not result in such an 

expenditure, we do discuss the effects of 

this rule elsewhere in this preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not cause a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform, to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This rule is not an economically 

significant rule and would not create an 

environmental risk to health or risk to 

safety that might disproportionately 

affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175, Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, because it would not have 

a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, 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. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Proposed Rules 76691 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01, 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD which guides the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment because it 

simply promulgates the operating 

regulations or procedures for 

drawbridges. We seek any comments or 

information that may lead to the 

discovery of a significant environmental 

impact from this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 

Bridges. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: 

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE 

OPERATION REGULATIONS 

1. The authority citation for part 117 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

2. Revise § 117.559 to read as follows: 

§ 117.559 Isle of Wight (Sinepuxent) Bay 

The draw of the US 50 Bridge, mile 

0.5, at Ocean City, shall open on signal; 

except: 

(a) From October 1 through April 30, 

from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m., the draw shall 

open if notice has been given to the 

bridge tender before 6 p.m. 

From May 25 through September 15, 

from 9:25 a.m. to 9:55 p.m., the draw 

shall open at 25 minutes after and 55 

minutes after the hour for a maximum 

of five minutes to let accumulated 

vessels pass, except that on Saturdays, 

from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., the draw shall 

open on the hour for all waiting vessels 

and shall remain in the open position 

until all waiting vessels pass. 

Dated: November 24, 2010. 

William D. Lee, 

Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, 

Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30918 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 271 

[EPA–R10–RCRA–2010–0947; FRL–9236–9] 

Oregon; Correction of Federal 

Authorization of the State’s Hazardous 

Waste Management Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA Region 10 proposes 

to approve a correction to the State of 

Oregon’s federally authorized RCRA 

hazardous waste management program. 

On January 7, 2010, EPA published a 

final rule under docket EPA–R10–RCRA 

2009–0766 granting final authorization 

for changes the State of Oregon made to 

its federally authorized RCRA 

Hazardous Waste Management Program. 

These authorized changes included, 

among others, the Federal Recycled 

Used Oil Management Standards; 

Clarification rule, promulgated on July 

30, 2003. During a post-authorization 

review of the State of Oregon’s 

regulations, EPA identified that the 

Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR), 

related to the federal used oil 

management requirements (OAR 340– 

100–0002), had not been updated to 

include the adoption of the Federal 

Recycled Used Oil Management 

Standards; Clarification rule. Therefore, 

the State did not have an effective state 

rule and EPA inaccurately referenced 

this rule in the State’s Final 

Authorization Action published and 

effective on January 7, 2010. This action 

will correct the State of Oregon’s 

federally authorized program, by 

removing the inaccurate authorization 

reference to the federal Recycled Used 

Oil Management Standards; 

Clarification rule. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

action must be received in writing on or 

before January 10, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

RCRA–2010–0947, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: Kocourek.Nina@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (206) 553–8509, to the 

attention of Nina Kocourek. 

• Mail: Send written comments to 

Nina Kocourek, U.S. EPA, Region 10, 

1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mail 

Stop AWT–122, Seattle, Washington 

98101. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver 

your comments to: Nina Kocourek, U.S. 

EPA, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 

Suite 900, Mail Stop AWT–122, Seattle, 

Washington 98101. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the Office’s 

normal hours of operation. 

For detailed instructions on how to 

submit comments, please see the direct 

final rule which is located in the Rules 

section of this Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nina Kocourek at (206) 553–6502 or by 

e-mail at Kocourek.Nina@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Rules section of this Federal Register, 

EPA is approving Oregon’s 

Authorization of State Hazardous Waste 

Management Program Revision though a 

direct final rule without prior proposal 

because the Agency views this as a 

noncontroversial action and anticipates 

no adverse comments to this action. 

Unless we get written adverse 

comments which oppose this approval 

during the comment period, the direct 

final rule will become effective on the 

date it establishes, and we will not take 

further action on this proposal. 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. 

EPA will not institute a second 

comment period on this action. Any 

parties interested in commenting on this 

action should do so at this time. For 

additional information, see the direct 

rule which is located in the Rules 

section of this Federal Register. 

Dated: December 1, 2010. 

Dennis J. McLerran, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31011 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1