31338 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 105 / Tuesday, June 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

regulatory impact analysis. Because no 

notice of proposed rulemaking is 

required, the provisions of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601– 

612, do not apply. 

The regulation will not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the Federal 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, it is 

determined that this proposed rule does 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. 

Pursuant to the requirements of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601– 

612, it is hereby certified that these 

regulations will not significantly affect a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The proposed rule imposes no duties or 

obligations on small entities. 

List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 1 

Privacy. 

Part 1, subpart C of title 31 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 1—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 and 31 U.S.C. 321. 

Subpart A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552 as 

amended. Subpart C also issued under 5 

U.S.C. 552a. 

■ 2. Section 1.36 paragraph (g)(1)(iii) is 

amended by adding the following text to 

the table in numerical order. 

§ 1.36 Systems exempt in whole or in part 

from provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a and this 

part. 

(g) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(iii) * * * 

Number Name of system 

* * * * * 

CC .800 Office of Inspector General Investigations System. 

* * * * * 

* * * * * 

Dated: May 12, 2015. 

Helen Goff Foster, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Privacy, 

Transparency, and Records. 

[FR Doc. 2015–13166 Filed 6–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–33–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0824; FRL–9928–34– 

Region 5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Michigan; Part 3 Rules 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving revisions to 

the Part 3 rules into the Michigan State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). On 

December 13, 2013, the Michigan 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(MDEQ) submitted to EPA for approval 

revisions to Part 3, Emission Limitations 

and Prohibitions—Particulate Matter 

(PM), for open burning and electro-static 

precipitators (ESPs). The revisions for 

open burning eliminate specific 

provisions to allow household waste 

burning, and add a provision to allow 

for burning of fruit and vegetable storage 

bins for pest or disease control with 

specific location limitations. The SIP 

request also removes rule 330 dealing 

with operation parameters for 

electrostatic precipitators because of 

redundancy, and rule 349 dealing with 

compliance dates for coke ovens 

because it is now obsolete. EPA is 

approving this SIP revision because it 

will not interfere with attainment or 

maintenance of the fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before July 2, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0824, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 692–2450. 

4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, 

Control Strategies Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Final Rules section of 

this Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carolyn Persoon, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312)353–8290, 

persoon.carolyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the state’s 

SIP submittal as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this rule, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

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. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the Rules section of this Federal 

Register. 

Dated: May 18, 2015. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2015–13119 Filed 6–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 271 

[EPA–R10–RCRA–2015–0307; FRL–9928– 

38–Region 10] 

Idaho: Authorization of State 

Hazardous Waste Management 

Program Revision 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 105 / Tuesday, June 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules 31339 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Idaho has applied to the EPA 

for final authorization of certain changes 

to its hazardous waste program under 

the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended. 

RCRA allows the EPA to authorize State 

hazardous waste management programs 

if the EPA finds that such programs are 

equivalent to and consistent with the 

Federal program and provide adequate 

enforcement of compliance. The EPA 

has reviewed Idaho’s application, has 

preliminarily determined these changes 

satisfy all requirements needed to 

qualify for final authorization, and is 

proposing to authorize the State’s 

changes. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule 

must be received on or before July 2, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

RCRA–2015–0307 by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: mccullough.barbara@

epa.gov. 

• Mail: Barbara McCullough, U.S. 

EPA, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 

Suite 900, Mail Stop AWT–150, Seattle, 

Washington 98101. 

• Hand Delivery: Barbara 

McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region 10, 1200 

Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mail Stop 

AWT–150, Seattle, Washington 98101. 

Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the normal business hours of 

operation; special arrangements should 

be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R10–RCRA–2015– 

0307. The EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means the EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment through www.regulations.gov, 

the EPA recommends that you include 

your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any 

form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses. For additional 

information about the EPA’s public 

docket visit the EPA Docket Center 

homepage at http://www.epa.gov/

epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Region 10 Library, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue, First Floor Lobby, Seattle, 

Washington 98101. The EPA Region 10 

Library is open from 9:00 a.m. to noon, 

and 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. PST Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The EPA Region 10 Library 

telephone number is (206) 553–1289. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Barbara McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region 

10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mail 

Stop AWT–150, Seattle, Washington 

98101, email: mccullough.barbara@

epa.gov or phone number (206) 553– 

2416. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Proposed Authorization Revision 

A. Why are revisions to State programs 

necessary? 

States which have received final 

authorization from the EPA under RCRA 

section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must 

maintain a hazardous waste program 

that is equivalent to, consistent with, 

and no less stringent than the Federal 

program. As the Federal program 

changes, States must change their 

programs and ask the EPA to authorize 

their changes. Changes to State 

programs may be necessary when 

Federal or State statutory or regulatory 

authority is modified or when certain 

other changes occur. Most commonly, 

States must change their programs 

because of changes to the EPA’s 

regulations codified in Title 40 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 

124, 260 through 268, 270, 273, and 279. 

B. What decisions have we made in this 

proposed rule concerning 

authorization? 

The EPA has preliminarily 

determined that Idaho’s application to 

revise its authorized program meets all 

of the statutory and regulatory 

requirements established by RCRA. 

Therefore, we are proposing to grant 

Idaho final authorization to operate its 

hazardous waste management program 

with the changes described in the 

authorization application. Idaho will 

have responsibility for permitting 

Treatment, Storage, and Disposal 

Facilities (TSDFs) within its borders 

(except in Indian country) and for 

carrying out the aspects of the RCRA 

program described in its revised 

program application, subject to the 

limitations of the Hazardous and Solid 

Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). 

New Federal requirements and 

prohibitions imposed by Federal 

regulations that the EPA promulgates 

under the authority of HSWA, and 

which are not less stringent than 

existing requirements, take effect in 

authorized States before the States are 

authorized for the requirements. Thus, 

the EPA will implement those 

requirements and prohibitions in Idaho, 

including issuing permits, until the 

State is granted authorization to do so. 

C. What will be the effect if Idaho is 

authorized for these changes? 

If Idaho is authorized for these 

changes, a facility in Idaho subject to 

RCRA will have to comply with the 

authorized State requirements in lieu of 

the corresponding Federal requirements 

to comply with RCRA. Additionally, 

such facilities will have to comply with 

any applicable Federal requirements, 

such as, for example, HSWA regulations 

issued by the EPA for which the State 

has not received authorization, and 

RCRA requirements that are not 

supplanted by authorized State 

requirements. Idaho continues to have 

enforcement authorities and 

responsibilities under its State 

hazardous waste management program 

for violations of the requirements of this 

program. However, the EPA retains 

authority under RCRA sections 3007, 

3008, 3013, and 7003, which includes, 

among others, the authority to: 

• Conduct inspections; which may 

include but are not limited to requiring 

monitoring, tests, analyses, and/or 

reports; 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31340 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 105 / Tuesday, June 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

• Enforce RCRA requirements which 

may include but are not limited to 

suspending, terminating, modifying 

and/or revoking permits; and 

• Take enforcement actions regardless 

of whether the State has taken its own 

actions. 

The action to approve these revisions 

will not impose additional requirements 

on the regulated community because the 

regulations for which Idaho is 

requesting authorization are already 

effective under State law and are not 

changed by the act of authorization. 

D. What happens if the EPA receives 

comments on this action? 

If the EPA receives comments on this 

action, we will address those comments 

in a later final rule. You may not have 

another opportunity to comment. If you 

want to comment on this authorization, 

you should do so at this time. 

E. What has Idaho previously been 

authorized for? 

Idaho initially received final 

authorization for its hazardous waste 

management program effective April 9, 

1990 (55 FR 11015, March 26, 1990). 

Subsequently, the EPA authorized 

revisions to the State’s program effective 

June 5, 1992 (57 FR 11580, April 6, 

1992), August 10, 1992 (57 FR 24757, 

June 11, 1992), June 11, 1995 (60 FR 

18549, April 12, 1995), January 19, 1999 

(63 FR 56086, October 21, 1998), July 1, 

2002 (67 FR 44069, July 1, 2002), March 

10, 2004 (69 FR 11322, March 10, 2004), 

July 22, 2005 (70 FR 42273, July 22, 

2005), February 26, 2007 (72 FR 8283, 

February 26, 2007), December 23, 2008 

(73 FR 78647, December 23, 2008) and 

July 11, 2012 (77 FR 34229, June 11, 

2012). 

F. What changes are we proposing? 

On February 11, 2015, Idaho 

submitted a program revision 

application to the EPA requesting 

authorization for all delegable Federal 

hazardous waste regulations codified as 

of July 1, 2012, incorporated by 

reference in IDAPA 58.01.05.000 et seq., 

which were adopted and effective in the 

State of Idaho on April 4, 2013. This 

authorization revision request includes 

the following federal rules for which 

Idaho is being authorized for the first 

time: Removal of Saccharin and its Salts 

from the Lists of Hazardous 

Constituents, Hazardous Wastes, and 

Hazardous Substances, 75 FR 78918, 

December 17, 2010; Technical 

Corrections to the Academics Lab Rule, 

75 FR 79304, December 20, 2010; 

Revisions to the Treatment Standards 

for Carbamate Wastes, 76 FR 34147, 

June, 13, 2011; Hazardous Waste 

Manifest Printing Specifications 

Corrections, 76 FR 36363, June 22, 2011; 

and Hazardous Waste Technical 

Corrections and Clarifications Rule, 77 

FR 22229, April 13, 2012. The EPA 

proposes to revise the state’s authorized 

hazardous waste program in its entirety 

through July 1, 2013. There were no 

final federal RCRA hazardous waste 

regulations promulgated by the EPA 

from July 1, 2012 to July 1, 2013. Notice 

and an opportunity for the public to 

comment on this proposed 

authorization revision is being provided 

at this time. 

G. Where are the revised State rules 

different from the Federal rules? 

Under RCRA section 3009, the EPA 

may not authorize State law that is less 

stringent than the Federal program. Any 

State law that is less stringent does not 

supplant the Federal regulations. State 

law that is broader in scope than the 

Federal program requirements is not 

authorized. State law that is equivalent 

to, and State law that is more stringent 

than, the Federal program may be 

authorized, in which case those 

provisions are enforceable by the EPA. 

This section discusses certain rules 

where the EPA has made the finding 

that Idaho’s program is more stringent 

and will be authorized, and discusses 

certain portions of the Federal program 

that are not delegable to the State 

because of the Federal government’s 

special role in foreign policy matters 

and because of national concerns that 

arise with certain decisions. 

The EPA does not authorize States to 

administer Federal import and export 

functions in any section of the RCRA 

hazardous waste regulations. Even 

though States do not receive 

authorization to administer the Federal 

government’s import and export 

functions, found in 40 CFR part 262, 

subparts E, F and H, State programs are 

required to adopt the Federal import 

and export provisions to maintain their 

equivalency with the Federal program. 

Idaho amended its import and export 

laws to include the Federal rule on 

Organization for Economic Cooperation 

and Development (OECD) 

Requirements; Export Shipments of 

Spend Lead-Acid Batteries (75 FR 1236, 

January 8, 2010). The State’s rule is 

found at IDAPA 58.01.05.006. The EPA 

will continue to implement those 

requirements directly through the RCRA 

regulations. 

The EPA has found that Idaho’s 

Emergency Notification Requirements, 

(IDAPA 58.01.05.006.02), are more 

stringent than the Federal program. This 

is because the State’s regulations require 

that the State Communications Center 

be contacted along with the Federal 

Center. The EPA has found the State’s 

statutory requirement requiring 

hazardous waste generators and 

commercial hazardous waste disposal 

facilities to file annual hazardous waste 

generation reports, Idaho Code Section 

39–4411(4) and 39–4411(5), to be more 

stringent than the Federal program. As 

the EPA can authorize rules that are 

determined to be more stringent than 

the Federal program, this requirement is 

authorized. 

H. Who handles permits after the 

authorization takes effect? 

Idaho will continue to issue permits 

for all the provisions for which it is 

authorized and will administer the 

permits it issues. If the EPA issued 

permits prior to authorizing Idaho for 

these revisions, these permits would 

continue in force until the effective date 

of the State’s issuance or denial of a 

State hazardous waste permit, at which 

time the EPA would modify the existing 

EPA permit to expire at an earlier date, 

terminate the existing EPA permit for 

cause, or allow the existing EPA permit 

to otherwise expire by its terms, except 

for those facilities located in Indian 

Country. The EPA will not issue new 

permits or new portions of permits for 

provisions for which Idaho is 

authorized after the effective date of this 

authorization. The EPA will continue to 

implement and issue permits for HSWA 

requirements for which Idaho is not 

authorized. 

I. How would authorizing Idaho for 

these revisions affect Indian country 

(18 U.S.C. 1151) in Idaho? 

Idaho is not authorized to carry out its 

hazardous waste program in Indian 

country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. 

Indian country includes: 

1. All lands within the exterior 

boundaries of Indian reservations 

within or abutting the State of Idaho; 

2. Any land held in trust by the U.S. 

for an Indian tribe; and 

3. Any other land, whether on or off 

an Indian reservation, that qualifies as 

Indian country. Therefore, this action 

has no effect on Indian country. The 

EPA will continue to implement and 

administer the RCRA program on these 

lands. 

II. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This proposed rule seeks to revise the 

State of Idaho’s authorized hazardous 

waste program pursuant to section 3006 

of RCRA and imposes no requirements 

other than those currently imposed by 

State law. This proposed rule complies 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 105 / Tuesday, June 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules 31341 

with applicable executive orders and 

statutory provisions as follows: 

A. Executive Order 12866 and 13563 

This action will authorize revisions to 

the federally approved hazardous waste 

program in Idaho. This type of action is 

exempt from review under Executive 

Order (E.O.) 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993), and Executive Order 

13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). 

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). This 

proposed rule does not establish or 

modify any information or 

recordkeeping requirements for the 

regulated community. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 

as amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 

(SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., 

generally requires Federal agencies 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 

proposed rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small 

business, as codified in the Small 

Business Size Regulations at 13 CFR 

part 121; (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. The EPA has 

determined that this proposed action 

will not have a significant impact on 

small entities because the proposed rule 

will only have the effect of authorizing 

pre-existing requirements under State 

law and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

State law. After considering the 

economic impacts of this action, I 

certify that this action will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

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. This 

action imposes no new 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 the 

UMRA because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small government 

entities. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action 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 

Executive Order 13132. This rule 

proposes to authorize pre-existing State 

rules. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does 

not apply to this action. Although 

section 6 of Executive Order 13132 does 

not apply to this action, the EPA did 

consult with officials of the State of 

Idaho Department of Environmental 

Quality in developing this action. In the 

spirit of E.O. 13132 and consistent with 

the EPA policy to promote 

communications between the EPA and 

state and local governments, the EPA 

specifically solicits comment on this 

proposed action from state and local 

officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. This action proposes to 

authorize pre-existing State rules. Thus, 

the EPA has determined that Executive 

Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. 

The EPA specifically solicits comment 

on this proposed action from tribal 

officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

The 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 E.O. has the 

potential to influence the regulation. 

This action is not subject to E.O. 13045 

because it proposes to authorize preexisting State rules. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 

2001), because it is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined under 

Executive Order 12866. 

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, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 

note) directs the 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 bodies. 

The NTTAA directs the EPA to provide 

Congress, through the OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. This 

proposed action does not involve 

technical standards. Therefore the EPA 

is not considering 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 (E.O.) 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. 

The EPA has determined that this 

proposed action will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

because it does not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment. This action proposes 

to authorize pre-existing State rules 

which are equivalent to, and no less 

stringent than, existing federal 

requirements. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31342 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 105 / Tuesday, June 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Confidential business information, 

Hazardous materials transportation, 

Hazardous waste, Indians-lands, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Authority 

This proposed action is issued under 

the authority of sections 2002(a), 3006 

and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal 

Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 

6926, 6974(b). 

Dated: May 18, 2015. 

Dennis J. McLerran, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2015–12932 Filed 6–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 435 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2014–0598; FRL–9928– 

58–OW] 

RIN 2040–AF35 

Effluent Limitations Guidelines and 

Standards for the Oil and Gas 

Extraction Point Source Category; 

Extension of Comment Period 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule, extension of the 

public-comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) received requests for an 

extension of the period for providing 

comments on the proposed rule entitled 

‘‘Effluent Limitations Guidelines and 

Standards for the Oil and Gas Extraction 

Point Source Category,’’ published in 

the Federal Register on April 7, 2015. 

EPA extends the comment period in 

order to provide the public additional 

time to submit comments and 

supporting information. 

DATES: Comments: The public comment 

period for the proposed rule published 

April 7, 2015, (80 FR 18557, is being 

extended to July 17, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Comments: Written 

comments on the proposed rule may be 

submitted to the EPA electronically, by 

mail, by facsimile or through hand 

delivery/courier. Please refer to the 

proposal (80 FR 18557) for the addresses 

and detailed instructions. 

Docket. Publically available 

documents relevant to this action are 

available for public inspection either 

electronically at http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Water Docket in the EPA Docket 

Center, 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 Water Docket is 202–566–2426. The 

EPA has established the official public 

docket No. EPA–HQ–OW–2014–0598. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa 

Biddle, Engineering and Analysis 

Division (4303T), Office of Water, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone: 202–566– 

0350; email: biddle.lisa@epa.gov. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 435 

Environmental protection, 

Pretreatment, Waste treatment and 

disposal, Water pollution control, 

Unconventional oil and gas extraction. 

Dated: May 21, 2015. 

Kenneth J. Kopocis, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 

Water. 

[FR Doc. 2015–13414 Filed 6–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Part 2 

[FAR Case 2015–019; Docket No. 2015– 

0019; Sequence No. 1] 

RIN 9000–AM96 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; 

Definition of Multiple-Award Contract 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are 

proposing to amend the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to define 

multiple-award contract. 

DATES: Interested parties should submit 

written comments to the Regulatory 

Secretariat at one of the addresses 

shown below on or before August 3, 

2015 to be considered in the formation 

of the final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in 

response to FAR Case 2015–019 by any 

of the following methods: 

• Regulations.gov: http://

www.regulations.gov. Submit comments 

via the Federal eRulemaking portal by 

searching for ‘‘FAR Case 2015–019’’. 

Select the link ‘‘Comment Now’’ that 

corresponds with ‘‘FAR Case 2015– 

019.’’ Follow the instructions provided 

at the ‘‘Comment Now’’ screen. Please 

include your name, company name (if 

any), and ‘‘FAR Case 2015–019’’ on your 

attached document. 

• Mail: General Services 

Administration, Regulatory Secretariat 

(MVCB), ATTN: Ms. Flowers, 1800 F 

Street NW., 2nd Floor, Washington, DC 

20405. 

Instructions: Please submit comments 

only and cite FAR Case 2015–019, in all 

correspondence related to this case. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal and/or business confidential 

information provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Mahruba Uddowla, Procurement 

Analyst, at 703–605–2868, for 

clarification of content. For information 

pertaining to status or publication 

schedules, contact the Regulatory 

Secretariat at 202–501–4755. Please cite 

FAR Case 2015–019. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On October 2, 2013, the U.S. Small 

Business Administration (SBA) issued a 

final rule establishing new policies and 

procedures for multiple-award contracts 

and task and delivery orders in the 

Federal Register at 78 FR 61114. The 

final rule implemented several 

provisions of the Small Business Jobs 

Act of 2010, Public Law 111–240. 

Section 1311 of Public Law 111–240 (15 

U.S.C. 632(v)) added a definition of 

‘‘multiple award contract’’. The SBA 

final rule included a definition of 

‘‘multiple award contract’’ at 13 CFR 

125.1(k). 

II. Proposed FAR Change 

The purpose of the proposed FAR 

change is to define multiple-award 

contract. The proposed FAR change 

would add a definition of multipleaward contract to FAR subpart 2.1, 

Definitions. 

III. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 

13563 direct agencies to assess all costs 

and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS