26750 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[COTP Western Alaska 00–001]

RIN 2115–AA97

Safety Zone; Kachemak Bay, Alaska;

Correction

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Temporary final rule; correction

of effective dates.

SUMMARY: This document corrects the

effective dates of temporary final rule

(COTP Western Alaska 00–001) which

published April 28, 2000. The

temporary final rule establishes a

temporary 200-yard radius safety zone

around the M/V SWAN to ensure the

safe and timely anchoring, loading, and

departure of vessels and a barge

operating in Kachemak Bay.

DATES: As of May 4, 2000, the effective

dates of the temporary rule published at

65 FR 24874 are corrected to 12:01 a.m.

on May 11, 2000 until 11:59 p.m. on

May 13, 2000. The correction to

§ 165.T17–00–001 is effective from May

11, 2000 until May 13, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lieutenant Commander Rick Rodriguez,

Chief of Port Operations, USCG Marine

Safety Office, Anchorage, at (907) 271–

6724.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On April 28, 2000, the Coast Guard

published a temporary final rule

entitled Safety Zone; Kachemak Bay,

Alaska, in the Federal Register (65 FR

24874) to be effective from 12:01 a.m. on

May 4, 2000, until 11:59 p.m. on May

9, 2000. The Coast Guard has been

notified that the estimated time of

arrival of the M/V SWAN has been

changed to May 10, 2000.

Need for Modification

As published, the effective date of the

temporary final rule is now incorrect

and therefore needs to be changed to

reflect the new arrival time of M/V

SWAN.

Modification of Publication

Accordingly, the publication on April

28, 2000 of the temporary final rule

(COTP Western Alaska 00–001), which

is the subject of FR Doc. 00–10607, is

corrected as follows:

1. On page 24874, in the second

column, in the DATES section, lines 2

and 3, correct the dates ‘‘May 4,

2000’’and ‘‘May 9, 2000’’ to read ‘‘May

11, 2000’’ and ‘‘May 13, 2000’’

respectively.

§ 165.T17–00–001 [Corrected]

2. On page 24875, in the second

column, in § 165.T17–00–001,

paragraph (b), lines 2 and 3, correct the

dates ‘‘May 4, 2000’’ and ‘‘May 9, 2000’’

to read ‘‘May 11, 2000’’ and ‘‘May 13,

2000’’ respectively.

Dated: May 2, 2000.

R. Rodriguez,

LCDR, U.S. Coast Guard, COTP, Western

Alaska, Acting.

[FR Doc. 00–11554 Filed 5–4–00; 3:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

POSTAL SERVICE

39 CFR Part 111

Barcode Requirements for Special

Services Labels

AGENCY: Postal Service.

ACTION: Extension of compliance date

for commercially printed special

services labels.

SUMMARY: In response to information

received by the Postal Service from the

mailing community, the Postal Service

is extending the compliance date for

barcoded special services labels from

June 10, 2000, to February 3, 2001.

DATES: Effective May 9, 2000. All parties

must comply with the final rules

(published on January 24, 2000, at 65 FR

3609) for barcoding of special services

labels and forms by February 3, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Tandelyia Samuels, (202) 268–5236.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

January 24, 2000, the Postal Service

made a public announcement in the

Federal Register, Volume 65, that any

mailer using commercially printed

special services labels on or after June

10, 2000, will be required to meet the

new barcoded special services label

requirements. In response to

information received by the Postal

Service from the mailing community

since the January 24, 2000,

announcement, the Postal Service is

extending the compliance date for

barcoded special services labels from

June 10, 2000, to February 3, 2001. Any

mail with PS Form 3800, Certified Mail

Receipt, PS Form 3813P, Receipt for

Insured Mail—Domestic-International,

PS Form 8099, Receipt for Recorded

Delivery, Label 200, Registered Mail,

and PS Form 3804, Return Receipt for

Merchandise, on or after February 3,

2001, will be required to meet the

barcode requirements. The final rule

changes affecting the barcoding of

special services labels and forms are set

forth in the June 1 update to the

Domestic Mail Manual (DMM) and in

the International Mail Manual (IMM).

The technical requirements for

producing barcoded special services

labels and forms are published in

Publication 109, Special Services

Technical Guide—Postal Forms and

Labels, published March 2000.

Publication 109 is available on the

Postal Service Web site (http://

www.usps.com). Click on ‘‘Get Info,’’

then ‘‘Postal Periodicals and

Publications,’’ then ‘‘Publications,’’ and

scroll to Publication 109.

Stanley F. Mires,

Chief Counsel, Legislative.

[FR Doc. 00–11588 Filed 5–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710–12–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[FRL–6601–3]

Montana: Final Authorization of State

Hazardous Waste Management

Program Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Immediate final rule.

SUMMARY: Montana has applied to EPA

for Final authorization of changes to its

hazardous waste program under the

Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that

these changes satisfy all requirements

for Final authorization and is

authorizing the State’s changes through

this immediate final action. EPA is

publishing this rule to authorize the

changes without a prior proposed rule

because we believe this action is not

controversial. Unless we get significant

written comments opposing this

authorization during the comment

period, the decision to authorize

Montana’s changes to their hazardous

waste program will take effect as

provided below. If we receive

significant comments that oppose this

action, we will publish a document in

the Federal Register withdrawing this

rule before it takes effect. A separate

document in the proposed rules section

of this Federal Register will serve as the

proposal to authorize the State’s

changes.

DATES: This Immediate Final Rule will

become effective August 7, 2000, unless

we receive significant adverse or critical

written comments by June 23, 2000. If

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 26751

significant adverse or critical written

comments are received, we will publish

a timely withdrawal of the rule in the

Federal Register, informing the public

that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to

Kris Shurr, 8P–HW, U.S. EPA, Region

VIII, 999 18th St, Ste 500, Denver,

Colorado 80202–2466, phone number:

(303) 312–6139. You can view and copy

Montana’s application at the following

addresses: Air and Waste Management

Bureau, Permitting and Compliance

Division, Montana Department of

Environmental Quality, Metcalf

Building, 1520 East Sixth Ave., Helena,

Montana 59620, Phone: 406/444–1430;

and U.S. EPA Region VIII, Montana

Office, 301 S. Park, Federal Building,

Helena, MT 59626, Phone: 406/441–

1130 ext 239.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric

Finke, Waste and Toxics Team Leader,

U.S. EPA, 301 S. Park, Drawer 10096,

Helena, MT 59626, Phone: (406) 441–

1130 ext 239, or Kris Shurr, EPA Region

VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver,

Colorado 80202–2466, phone number:

(303) 312–6139.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Why Are Revisions to State

Programs Necessary?

States that have received final

authorization from EPA under RCRA

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

maintain a hazardous waste program

equivalent to, consistent with, and no

less stringent than the Federal program.

As the Federal program changes, States

must change their programs and ask

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 EPA’s

regulations in 40 Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) parts 124, 260

through 266, 268, 270, 273 and 279.

B. What Decisions Have We Made in

This Rule?

We conclude that Montana’s

application to revise its authorized

program meets all of the statutory and

regulatory requirements established by

RCRA. Therefore, we grant Montana

Final authorization to operate its

hazardous waste program with the

changes described in the authorization

application. Montana has responsibility

for permitting Treatment, Storage, and

Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) within its

borders, except in Indian Country, and

for carrying out those portions 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 EPA under the

authority of HSWA take effect

immediately and will be implemented

by EPA until the State is granted

authorization.

C. What Is the Effect of Today’s

Authorization Decision?

The effect of this decision is that a

facility in Montana subject to RCRA will

now have to comply with the authorized

State requirements instead of the

equivalent Federal requirements.

Montana has primary enforcement

responsibilities under its state

hazardous waste program for violations

of the program, but EPA retains its

authority under RCRA sections 3007,

3008, 3013, and 7003, which include,

among others, authority to:

• Conduct inspections, and require

monitoring, tests, analyses, or reports;

and

• Enforce RCRA requirements and

suspend or revoke permits.

• Take enforcement actions regardless

of whether the State has taken its own

actions.

This action does not impose

additional requirements on the

regulated community because the

regulations for which Montana is being

authorized are already effective, and are

not changed by today’s action.

D. Why Wasn’t There a Proposed Rule

Before Today’s Rule?

EPA did not publish a proposed rule

before today’s rule because we view this

as a routine program change and do not

expect significant written comments

opposing this approval. We are

providing an opportunity for public

comment at this time. In addition, in the

proposed rules section of today’s

Federal Register, there is a separate

document that proposes to authorize the

State program changes. If we receive

significant written comments opposing

this authorization, that document will

serve as a proposal to authorize the

changes.

E. What Happens if EPA Receives

Written Comments Opposing This

Action?

If we receive significant written

comments opposing this authorization,

we will withdraw this rule by

publishing a document in the Federal

Register before the rule becomes

effective. We then will address all

public comments in a later Federal

Register. You may not have another

opportunity to comment. If you want to

comment on this action, you must do so

at this time.

If we receive significant written

comments opposing authorization of

only a particular change to the State

hazardous waste program, we will

withdraw that part of the rule. However,

the authorization of program changes

that are not opposed by any comments

will become effective on the date

specified above. The Federal Register

withdrawal document will specify

which part of the authorization will

become effective and which part is

being withdrawn.

F. What Has Montana Previously Been

Authorized For?

Montana initially received Final

authorization on July 11, 1984, effective

July 25, 1984 (49 FR 28245) to

implement the RCRA hazardous waste

management program. We granted

authorization for changes to their

program on July 11, 1984, effective

September 25, 1985 (49 FR 28245), and

January 19 1994, effective March 21,

1994 (59 FR 02752).

G. Notice of Change in the Numbering

System for the Administrative Rules of

Montana (ARM).

The Administrative Rules of Montana

(ARM) were renumbered on October 30,

1995. The Montana hazardous waste

rules that were previously found at

ARM 16.44 are now found at ARM

17.54. All chapter and paragraph

numbering remain the same (i.e., the old

16.44.101 is now 17.54.101) except as

noted below:

Old New

16.44.103 .............................. 17.54.105

16.44.104 .............................. 17.54.106

16.44.105 .............................. 17.54.107

16.44.106 .............................. 17.54.108

16.44.107 .............................. 17.54.109

16.44.108 .............................. 17.54.110

16.44.109 .............................. 17.54.111

16.44.110 .............................. 17.54.112

16.44.111 .............................. 17.54.113

16.44.112 .............................. 17.54.118

16.44.113 .............................. 17.54.119

16.44.114 .............................. 17.54.120

16.44.115 .............................. 17.54.125

16.44.116 .............................. 17.54.126

16.44.117 .............................. 17.54.127

16.44.118 .............................. 17.54.128

16.44.119 .............................. 17.54.130

16.44.120 .............................. 17.54.131

16.44.121 .............................. 17.54.132

16.44.122 .............................. 17.54.133

16.44.123 .............................. 17.54.136

16.44.124 .............................. 17.54.137

16.44.125 .............................. 17.54.138

16.44.126 .............................. 17.54.140

16.44.127 .............................. 17.54.145

16.44.128 .............................. 17.54.146

16.44.129 .............................. 17.54.150

16.44.130 .............................. 17.54.155

26752 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Old New

16.44.202 .............................. 17.54.201

16.44.304 .............................. 17.54.307

16.44.305 .............................. 17.54.308

16.44.306 .............................. 17.54.309

16.44.307 .............................. 17.54.310

16.44.308 .............................. 17.54.312

16.44.310 .............................. 17.54.315

16.44.311 .............................. 17.54.316

16.44.405 .............................. 17.54.408

16.44.406 .............................. 17.54.409

16.44.407 .............................. 17.54.410

16.44.416 .............................. 17.54.425

16.44.417 .............................. 17.54.426

16.44.418 .............................. 17.54.427

16.44.425 .............................. 17.54.435

16.44.430 .............................. 17.54.440

16.44.703 .............................. 17.54.705

16.44.804 .............................. 17.54.807

16.44.805 .............................. 17.54.808

16.44.806 .............................. 17.54.809

16.44.807 .............................. 17.54.810

16.44.808 .............................. 17.54.811

16.44.809 .............................. 17.54.812

16.44.810 .............................. 17.54.813

16.44.811 .............................. 17.54.814

16.44.812 .............................. 17.54.817

16.44.813 .............................. 17.54.818

Old New

16.44.814 .............................. 17.54.820

16.44.815 .............................. 17.54.821

16.44.816 .............................. 17.54.822

16.44.817 .............................. 17.54.823

16.44.818 .............................. 17.54.824

16.44.819 .............................. 17.54.825

16.44.820 .............................. 17.54.830

16.44.821 .............................. 17.54.831

16.44.822 .............................. 17.54.832

16.44.823 .............................. 17.54.833

16.44.904 .............................. 17.54.905

16.44.905 .............................. 17.54.907

16.44.906 .............................. 17.54.908

16.44.907 .............................. 17.54.909

16.44.908 .............................. 17.54.910

16.44.909 .............................. 17.54.911

16.44.910 .............................. 17.54.912

16.44.911 .............................. 17.54.915

16.44.1103 ............................ 17.54.1105

16.44.1104 ............................ 17.54.1106

16.44.1105 ............................ 17.54.1107

16.44.1106 ............................ 17.54.1108

16.44.1107 ............................ 17.54.1109

16.44.408 .............................. 17.54.411

16.44.410 .............................. 17.54.415

16.44.411 .............................. 17.54.416

16.44.412 .............................. 17.54.417

Old New

16.44.413 .............................. 17.54.418

16.44.415 .............................. 17.54.421

16.44.1108 ............................ 17.54.1112

16.44.1109 ............................ 17.54.1113

16.44.1110 ............................ 17.54.1114

16.44.1111 ............................ 17.54.1118

16.44.1112 ............................ 17.54.1119

H. What Changes Are We Authorizing

With Today’s Action?

In February 1995, Montana submitted

a final revision application, seeking

authorization of program changes in

accordance with 40 CFR 271.21.

We now make an immediate final

decision, subject to receipt of significant

written comments opposing this action,

that Montana’s hazardous waste

program revision satisfies all of the

requirements necessary for Final

authorization. Therefore, we grant

Montana Final authorization for the

following program changes:

Description of federal requirement Analogous state authority 1 and effective date

Dioxin Waste Listing and Management Standards; 50 FR 01978, 01/14/

85. (Checklist 14).

ARM 17.54.131, .310, .330, .331, .333, .351, .352, .401, .603, .609,

.702.

Paint Filter Test; 50 FR 18370, 04/30/85. (Checklist 16) ........................ ARM 17.54.609, .702.

Sharing of Information with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry; HSWA 3019(b), 07/15/85. (Non-checklist SI).ARM 17.54.1008; & MCA 2–6–102.

HSWA Codification Rule; 50 FR 28701, 07/15/85. (Checklist 17) .......... ARM 17.54.106, .107, .108, .111, .113, .126, .131, .132, .140, .303,

.307, .309, .402, .408, .409, .426, .605, .609, .702; & MCA 75–10–

406.

Listing of TDI, TDA, and DNT; 50 FR 42936, 10/23/85. (Checklist 18) .. ARM 17.54.332, .333, .351, .352.

Burning of Waste Fuel and Used Oil Fuel in Boilers and Industrial Furnaces; 50 FR 49164, 11/29/85; & 52 FR 11819, 04/13/87. (Checklist

19 & 19.1).

ARM 17.54.303, .309, .402, .609, .702.

Listing of Spent Solvents; 50 FR 53315, 12/31/85, & 51 FR 2702, 01/

21/86. (Checklist 20).

ARM 17.54.331.

Listing of EDB Waste, 51 FR 5327, 02/13/86. (Checklist 21) ................. ARM 17.54.332, .351, .352.

Listing of Four Spent Solvents, 51 FR 6537, 02/25/86. (Checklist 22) ... ARM 17.54.331, .333, .351, .352.

Codification Rule; Technical Correction (Paint Filter Test), 51 FR

19176, 05/28/96. (Checklist 25).

ARM 17.54.609.

Exports of Hazardous Waste, 51 FR 28664, 08/08/86. (Checklist 31) ... ARM 17.54.201, .309, .402, .408, .426, .435, .440, .505.

Standards for Generators; Waste Minimization Certifications, 51 FR

35190, 10/01/86. (Checklist 32).

ARM 17.54.408.

Listing of EBDC, 51 FR 37725, 10/24/86. (Checklist 33) ........................ ARM 17.54.332, .351, .352.

Farmer Exemptions; Technical Corrections, 53 FR 27164, 07/19/88.

(Checklist 48).

ARM 17.54.105, .150, .401, .612.

Exports of Hazardous Waste; Technical Corrections, 56 FR 43704, 09/

04/91. (Checklist 97).

ARM 17.54.435.

Land Disposal Restrictions; 51 FR 40572, 11/07/86,&52 FR21010, 06/

04/87. (Checklist 34).

ARM 17.54.101, .112, .128, .131, .150, .201, .301, .307, .308, .309,

.310, .320, .330, .401, .402, .504, .601, .609, .701, .702, .1008.

California List Waste Restrictions; 52 FR 25760, 07/08/87,&52 FR

41295, 11/27/87. (Checklist 39).

ARM 17.54.102, .128, .150, .440, .609, .610, .702.

Land Disposal Restrictions for First Third Scheduled Wastes; 53 FR

31138, 08/17/88, & 54 FR 8264, 02/27/89. (Checklist 50).

ARM 17.54.150, .309, .609, .702.

Land Disposal Restriction Amendments to First Third Scheduled

Wastes, 54 FR 18836, 05/02/89. (Checklist 62).

ARM 17.54.150.

Land Disposal Restrictions for Second Third Scheduled Wastes, 54 FR

26594, 06/23/89. (Checklist 63).

ARM 17.54.150.

Land Disposal Restrictions; Corrections to First Third Scheduled

Wastes, 54 FR 36967, 09/06/89, & 55 FR 23935, 06/13/90. (Checklist 66).

ARM 17.54.150.

Land Disposal Restrictions for Third Third Scheduled Wastes, 55 FR

22520, 06/01/90. (Checklist 78).

ARM 17.54.128, .150, .320, .321, .322, .323, .324, .331, .333, .352,

.402, .421, .601, .609, .702.

Land Disposal Restrictions for Third Third Scheduled Wastes; Technical Amendment, 56 FR 3864, 01/31/91. (Checklist 83).ARM 17.54.128, .150, .303, .320, .331, .402, .421.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 26753

Description of federal requirement Analogous state authority 1 and effective date

Standards for Generators of Hazardous Waste, 53 FR 45089, 11/08/

88. (Checklist 58).

ARM 17.54.408.

1Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM), revised September 30, 1995, and the Montana Code Annotated (MCA).

I. Where Are the Revised State Rules

Different From the Federal Rules?

The following State requirements are

considered to be more stringent than the

Federal requirements: ARM 17.54.113(4)

and 17.54.126(2) as they relate to Boiler

and Industrial Furnaces only and ARM

17.54.435(6) regarding Annual

Reporting requirements. Nevertheless,

these requirements are part of

Montana’s authorized program and are

Federally enforceable.

States cannot assume the authority at

40 CFR 262.53 regarding the

‘‘Notifications of Intent to Export’’ and

‘‘Acknowledgments of Consent.’’ EPA

will continue to implement these

requirements. As indicated in the above

paragraph, Montana is more stringent

because it requires reporting to the State

(ARM 17.54.435(6)), as well as, the EPA.

J. Who Handles Permits After This

Authorization Takes Effect?

Montana will issue and administer

permits for all the provisions for which

it is authorized. EPA will continue to

administer any RCRA hazardous waste

permits or portions of permits that we

issued prior to the effective date of this

authorization. EPA will transfer any

pending permit applications, completed

permits, or pertinent file information to

Montana within 30 days after the

effective date of this approval. We will

not issue any more new permits or new

portions of permits for the provisions

listed in the Table above after the

effective date of this authorization. EPA

and Montana have agreed to joint

permitting and enforcement for those

HSWA requirements for which Montana

is not yet authorized.

K. How Does Today’s Action Affect

Indian Country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in

Montana?

Montana is not authorized to carry out

its hazardous waste program in Indian

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

This includes:

1. Lands within the exterior boundaries

of the following Indian Reservations

located within the State of

Montana:

a. Blackfeet Indian Reservation

b. Crow Tribe of Montana Indian

Reservation

c. Flathead Indian Reservation

d. Fort Belknap Indian Reservation

e. Fort Peck Indian Reservation

f. Northern Cheyenne Indian

Reservation

g. Rocky Boy’s Indian Reservation

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

an Indian tribe, and

3. Any other land, whether on or off a

reservation that qualifies as Indian

country.

Therefore, this action has no effect in

Indian country where EPA will continue

to implement and administer the RCRA

program in these lands.

The State’s application did not seek to

demonstrate authority over Indian

country in Montana. Before EPA could

approve the State’s program for any

portion of Indian country, we must be

satisfied that the State has authority,

either pursuant to explicit

Congressional authorization or

applicable principles of Federal Indian

law, to enforce its laws against existing

and potential pollution sources within

any geographical area for which it seeks

program approval and that such

approval would constitute sound

administrative practice.

L. What Is Codification and Is EPA

Codifying Montana’s Hazardous Waste

Program as Authorized in This Rule?

Codification is the process of placing

the State’s authorized hazardous waste

program statutes and regulations into

the Code of Federal Regulations. We do

this by referencing the authorized State

rules in 40 CFR part 272. We reserve the

amendment of 40 CFR part 272, subpart

BB for this authorization of Montana’s

program changes until a later date.

M. Regulatory Analysis and Notices

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for

Federal agencies to assess the effects of

their regulatory actions on State, local,

and tribal governments and the private

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,

EPA generally must prepare a written

statement, including a cost-benefit

analysis, for proposed and final rules

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may

result in expenditures to State, local,

and tribal governments, in the aggregate,

or to the private sector, of $100 million

or more in any one year. Before

promulgating an EPA rule for which a

written statement is needed, section 205

of the UMRA generally requires EPA to

identify and consider a reasonable

number of regulatory alternatives and

adopt the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule.

The provisions of section 205 do not

apply when they are inconsistent with

applicable law. Moreover, section 205

allows EPA to adopt an alternative other

than the least costly, most cost-effective

or least burdensome alternative if the

Administrator publishes with the final

rule an explanation why that alternative

was not adopted. Before EPA establishes

any regulatory requirements that may

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments, including tribal

governments, it must have developed

under section 203 of the UMRA a small

government agency plan. The plan must

provide for notifying potentially

affected small governments, enabling

officials of affected small governments

to have meaningful and timely input in

the development of EPA regulatory

proposals with significant Federal

intergovernmental mandates, and

informing, educating, and advising

small governments on compliance with

the regulatory requirements.

EPA has determined that section 202

and 205 requirements do not apply to

today’s action because this rule does not

contain a Federal mandate that may

result in annual expenditures of $100

million or more for State, local, and/or

tribal governments in the aggregate, or

the private sector. Costs to State, local

and/or tribal governments already exist

under the State program, and today’s

action does not impose any additional

obligations on regulated entities. In fact,

EPA’s approval of State programs

generally may reduce, not increase,

compliance costs for the private sector.

Further, as it applies to the State, this

action does not impose a Federal

intergovernmental mandate because

UMRA does not include duties arising

from participation in a voluntary federal

program.

The requirements of section 203 of

UMRA also do not apply to today’s

action because this rule contains no

regulatory requirements that might

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments. Although small

governments may be hazardous waste

generators, transporters, or own and/or

operate TSDFs, they are already subject

to the regulatory requirements under the

26754 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

existing State laws that are being

authorized by EPA, and, thus, are not

subject to any additional significant or

unique requirements by virtue of this

program approval.

Certification Under the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by

the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

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

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 today’s action on small entities, small

entity is defined as: (1) A small business

as specified in the Small Business

Administration regulations; (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-forprofit enterprise which is independently

owned and operated and is not

dominant in its field.

After considering the economic

impacts of this authorization on small

entities, I certify that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

This action does not impose any new

requirements on small entities because

small entities that are hazardous waste

generators, transporters, or that own

and/or operate TSDFs are already

subject to the regulatory requirements

under the State laws which EPA is now

authorizing. This action erely authorizes

for the purpose of RCRA section 3006

those existing State requirements.

Submission to Congress and the

Comptroller General

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. The EPA will

submit a report containing this rule and

other required information to the U.S.

Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives and the Comptroller

General of the United States prior to

publication of the rule in today’s

Federal Register. This rule is not a

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

Compliance With Executive Order

12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this rule from the

requirements of Executive Order 12866.

Compliance With Executive Order

13132 (Federalism)

Executive Order 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 Executive Order to include

regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct

effects on the States, on the relationship

between the national government and

the States, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government.’’

Under section 6 of Executive Order

13132, EPA may not issue a regulation

that has federalism implications, that

imposes substantial direct compliance

costs, and that is not required by statute,

unless the Federal government provides

the funds necessary to pay the direct

compliance costs incurred by State and

local governments, or EPA consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation. EPA also may not issue a

regulation that has federalism

implications and that preempts State

law unless the Agency consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation.

This authorization does not have

federalism implications. It will not have

a substantial direct effect on States, on

the relationship between the national

government and the States, or on the

distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government, as specified in

Executive Order 13132, because this

rule affects only one State. This action

simply approves the State’s proposal to

be authorized for updated requirements

of the hazardous waste program that the

State has voluntarily chosen to operate.

Further, as a result of this action, newly

authorized provisions of the State’s

program now apply in lieu of the

equivalent Federal program provisions

implemented by EPA under HSWA.

Affected parties are subject only to those

authorized State program provisions, as

opposed to being subject to both Federal

and State regulatory requirements.

Thus, the requirements of section 6 of

the Executive Order do not apply.

Compliance With Executive Order

13045

Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of

Children from Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks,’’ applies to any

rule that: (1) The Office of Management

and Budget determines is ‘‘economically

significant’’ as defined under Executive

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an

environmental health or safety risk that

EPA has reason to believe may have a

disproportionate effect on children. If

the regulatory action meets both criteria,

the Agency must evaluate the

environmental health or safety effects of

the planned rule on children and

explain why the planned regulation is

preferable to other potentially effective

and reasonably feasible alternatives

considered by the Agency.

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045

as applying only to those regulatory

actions that are based on health or safety

risks, such that the analysis required

under section 5–501 of the Order has

the potential to influence the regulation.

This rule is not subject to Executive

Order 13045 because it authorizes a

state program.

Compliance With Executive Order

13084

Under Executive Order 13084, EPA

may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute, that significantly or

uniquely affects the communities of

Indian tribal governments, and that

imposes substantial direct compliance

costs on those communities, unless the

Federal government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by the tribal

governments, or EPA consults with

those governments. If EPA complies

with consulting, Executive Order 13084

requires EPA to provide to the Office of

Management and Budget, in a separately

identified section of the preamble to the

rule, a description of the extent of EPA’s

prior consultation with representatives

of affected tribal governments, a

summary of the nature of their concerns,

and a statement supporting the need to

issue the regulation. In addition,

Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to

develop an effective process permitting

elected officials and other

representatives of Indian tribal

governments ‘‘to provide meaningful

and timely input in the development of

regulatory policies on matters that

significantly or uniquely affect their

communities.’’

This rule is not subject to Executive

Order 13084 because it does not

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 26755

significantly or uniquely affects the

communities of Indian tribal

governments. The State is not

authorized to implement the RCRA

hazardous waste program in Indian

country. This action has no effect on the

hazardous waste program that EPA

implements in the Indian country

within the State.

Paperwork Reduction Act

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act,

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., Federal agencies

must consider the paperwork burden

imposed by any information request

contained in a proposed rule or a final

rule. This rule will not impose any

information requirements upon the

regulated community.

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 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. The 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.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Confidential business information,

Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste

transportation, Indian country,

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Authority: This 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: April 28, 2000.

Jack W. McGraw,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region VIII.

[FR Doc. 00–11420 Filed 5–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[FRL–6601–4]

South Dakota: Final Authorization of

State Hazardous Waste Management

Program Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is granting final

authorization to the hazardous waste

program revisions submitted by South

Dakota. The Agency published a

proposed rule on August 10, 1999 at 64

FR 43331 and provided for public

comment. The public comment period

ended on September 9, 1999. No

comments were received regarding

Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act (RCRA) program issues and no

further opportunity for comment will be

provided.

DATES: This authorization will be

effective on June 8, 2000.

ADDRESSES: You can view and copy

South Dakota’s applications at the

following addresses:

SDDENR, from 9 AM to 5 PM, Joe Foss

Building, 523 E. Capitol, Pierre, South

Dakota 57501–3181. Contact: Carrie

Jacobson, phone number (605) 773–

3153; and

EPA Region VIII, from 8 AM to 4 PM,

999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO

80202–2466. Contact: Kris Shurr,

phone number: (303) 312–6139.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kris

Shurr, EPA Region VIII, 999 18th Street,

Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202–2466,

phone number: (303) 312–6139.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August

1, 1997, September 3, 1997, and March

23, 1999, South Dakota submitted final

complete program revision applications

seeking authorization of their changes in

accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. We

now make a final decision that South

Dakota’s hazardous waste program

revisions satisfy all of the requirements

necessary to qualify for final

authorization. For a list of rules that

become effective with this final rule,

please see the proposed rule published

in the August 10, 1999 Federal Register

at 64 FR 43331.

How This Action Affects Indian

Country in South Dakota

South Dakota is not authorized to

carry out its hazardous waste program

in Indian country, as defined in 18

U.S.C. 1151. This includes, but is not

limited to: Lands within the exterior

boundaries of the following Indian

Reservations located within the State of

South Dakota:

a. Cheyenne River Indian Reservation.

b. Crow Creek Indian Reservation.

c. Flandreau Indian Reservation.

d. Lower Brule Indian Reservation.

e. Pine Ridge Indian Reservation.

f. Rosebud Indian Reservation.

g. Standing Rock Indian Reservation.

h. Yankton Indian Reservation

EPA held a public hearing on

December 2, 1999, in Badlands National

Park, South Dakota, and accepted public

comments on the question of the

location and extent of Indian country

within the State of South Dakota. In a

forthcoming Federal Register notice,

EPA will respond to comments and

more specifically identify Indian

country areas in the State of South

Dakota.

Regulatory Analysis and Notices

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for

Federal agencies to assess the effects of

their regulatory actions on State, local,

and tribal governments and the private

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,

EPA generally must prepare a written

statement, including a cost-benefit

analysis, for proposed and final rules

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may

result in expenditures to State, local,

and tribal governments, in the aggregate,

or to the private sector, of $100 million

or more in any one year. Before

promulgating an EPA rule for which a

written statement is needed, section 205

of the UMRA generally requires EPA to

identify and consider a reasonable

number of regulatory alternatives and

adopt the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule.

The provisions of section 205 do not

apply when they are inconsistent with

applicable law. Moreover, section 205

allows EPA to adopt an alternative other

than the least costly, most cost-effective

or least burdensome alternative if the

Administrator publishes with the final

rule an explanation why that alternative

was not adopted. Before EPA establishes

any regulatory requirements that may

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments, including tribal

governments, it must have developed

under section 203 of the UMRA a small

government agency plan. The plan must

provide for notifying potentially

affected small governments, enabling

officials of affected small governments

to have meaningful and timely input in