Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 22229 

11The rule is projected to result in benefit-cost 

savings for petroleum refineries using the 

exclusion. Petroleum refineries choosing not to take 

advantage of the exclusion would experience no 

direct impact from the rule. The benefit-cost 

analysis showed between $5.2 million and $48.7 

million in net social benefits per year with avoided 

waste management costs constituting the most 

significant share of the benefits, followed by the 

energy savings from increased fuel production. The 

analysis further showed that the areas potentially 

affected by the rule showed disproportionately high 

minority/low income populations, but that 

gasification of oil-bearing hazardous secondary 

materials does not represent a greater risk to the 

public than baseline management, and that as less 

material is received by hazardous waste 

management facilities, low income and minority 

populations would likely experience a potential 

reduction in risk under the rule. 

1See the public docket for this rule regarding the 

specific comments that were submitted on the four 

amendments that are not being finalized today. 

than the baseline used to develop the 

analysis.11

As previously stated, a document will be 

published in the Federal Register 

announcing the agency’s final decision to 

deny your administrative petition. If you 

should have any questions, please contact 

Alan Carpien, EPA’s Office of General 

Counsel at (202) 564–5507. 

Sincerely, 

Mathy Stanislaus, 

Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid 

Waste and Emergency Response. 

Dated: April 3, 2012. 

Mathy Stanislaus, 

Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid 

Waste and Emergency Response. 

[FR Doc. 2012–8921 Filed 4–12–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 261 and 266 

[EPA–RCRA–2008–0678; FRL–9659–7] 

RIN 2050–AG52 

Hazardous Waste Technical 

Corrections and Clarifications Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA or the Agency) is taking 

final action on two of six technical 

amendments that were withdrawn in a 

June 4, 2010, Federal Register partial 

withdrawal notice. The two 

amendments that are the subject of 

today’s final rule are: A correction of the 

typographical error in the entry ‘‘K107’’ 

in a table listing hazardous wastes from 

specific sources; and a conforming 

change to alert certain recycling 

facilities that they have existing 

certification and notification 

requirements under the Land Disposal 

Restrictions regulations. The other four 

amendments that were withdrawn in 

the June 2010 partial withdrawal notice 

will remain withdrawn unless and until 

EPA determines action is warranted in 

the future. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

May 14, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–RCRA–2008–0678. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically at 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the OSWER Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the RCRA Docket is (202) 

566–0270. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim 

O’Leary, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery, MC 5304P, 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20460, Phone: (703) 

308–8827; or email: oleary.jim@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Why is EPA publishing this final 

rule? 

On March 18, 2010, EPA published in 

the Federal Register a Direct Final rule 

entitled, Hazardous Waste Technical 

Corrections and Clarifications Rule (75 

FR 12989) (hereafter the Direct Final 

rule). This Direct Final rule included 

approximately 90 specific technical 

amendments to correct or clarify parts of 

the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste 

regulations. At the same time, EPA also 

published a parallel proposed rule (75 

FR 13006) that requested comment on 

the same changes. 

We stated in that Direct Final rule that 

if we received adverse comment on any 

of the amendments by May 3, 2010, the 

affected amendments would not take 

effect and we would publish a timely 

withdrawal in the Federal Register of 

those specific amendments. We received 

some adverse comments and as a result 

withdrew six amendments on June 4, 

2010 (75 FR 31716). The remaining 

amendments for which we did not 

receive adverse comment became 

effective on June 16, 2010. 

The six amendments that were 

withdrawn are: 

• 40 CFR 262.34(a)—related to the 

hazardous waste accumulation time for 

large quantity generators; 

• 40 CFR 262.34(a)(2)—related to the 

date upon which each period of 

accumulation begins and which must be 

clearly marked and visible for 

inspection on each container and tank; 

• 40 CFR 262.34(a)(5)—related to the 

closure requirements for tanks, 

containers, drip pads and containment 

buildings; 

• 40 CFR 262.34(a)(1)(iv)(B)—also 

related to the closure requirements for 

tanks, containers, drip pads and 

containment buildings; 

• 40 CFR 266.20(b)—related to 

recyclable materials used in a manner 

constituting disposal; and 

• 40 CFR 261.32(a)—related to the 

entry for hazardous waste number K107 

in a table. 

EPA is publishing today’s final rule to 

address the adverse comments received 

on the last two amendments listed 

above and to finalize these amendments. 

The amendments we are finalizing are: 

(1) Making the conforming change to 40 

CFR 266.20(b); and (2) correcting the 

entry ‘‘K107’’ in the table at 40 CFR 

261.32(a). The other four amendments 

that were withdrawn will remain 

withdrawn unless and until EPA 

decides to take action on them in the 

future.1

II. Does this action apply to me? 

Entities potentially affected by this 

action include facilities subject to the 

RCRA hazardous waste regulations and 

states implementing the RCRA 

hazardous waste regulations. 

III. Acronyms 

Acronym Definition 

CFR ............. United States Code of Federal 

Regulations. 

EPA ............. United States Environmental 

Protection Agency. 

HSWA .......... Hazardous and Solid Waste 

Amendments. 

OMB ............ Office of Management and 

Budget. 

RCRA .......... Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act. 

U.S.C ........... United States Code. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
22230 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

2When 40 CFR 268.7(b)(6) was revised in 2006, 

it was deemed less stringent than the previous 

version, and therefore states with final 

authorization for their RCRA base program were not 

required to adopt it. Section 3009 of RCRA allows 

states to be more stringent than the federal 

hazardous waste rules. Specifically, it states, 

‘‘* * * Nothing in this title shall be construed to 

prohibit any State or political subdivision thereof 

from imposing any requirements, including those 

for site selection, which are more stringent than 

those imposed by such regulations * * *’’ 

IV. Background 

A. What is the legal authority for this 

final rule? 

This rule is authorized under Sections 

1004 and 3001 through 3005 of the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act of 1976, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 

6903, 6921–6925. 

B. Description of Final Rule 

Amendments to Parts 261 and 266 

For each of the two technical 

corrections being finalized today, the 

following sections provide a summary 

of the Agency’s original proposal, a 

discussion of the adverse comments 

received on the proposal, and the 

Agency’s response to those comments. 

1. Correction to 40 CFR 261.32(a) 

In our March 18, 2010, Direct Final 

rule (and companion proposed rule), we 

amended the entry for K107 in the table 

at 40 CFR 261.32 by correcting the 

misspelled chemical name ‘‘* * * 

carboxylic acid hydrazines’’ to read 

‘‘* * * carboxylic acid hydrazides.’’ We 

explained that this was a misspelling as 

evidenced by the original listing 

background document supporting the 

K107 listing, which discusses 

‘‘carboxylic acid hydrazides.’’ 

However, in the process of making 

this correction in the Direct Final rule, 

we inadvertently omitted the word 

‘‘acid’’ in ‘‘carboxylic acid hydrazides’’ 

from the entry for K107. We withdrew 

this correction given the omission of the 

word ‘‘acid’’ on June 4, 2010 (see 75 FR 

31716). Today’s final rule corrects the 

misspelled chemical name. 

2. Conforming Change to 40 CFR 

266.20(b) 

In 1988, EPA promulgated various 

certification and notification 

requirements under the Land Disposal 

Restrictions (‘‘LDR’’) regulatory program 

(53 FR 31138, August 17, 1988). This 

rule included, in 40 CFR 268.7(b)(8), 

specific certification and notification 

requirements for recyclers using 

recyclable materials in a manner 

constituting disposal. This provision 

included a reference to 40 CFR 

266.20(b), a separate provision that 

specifies regulatory requirements for 

certain use constituting disposal 

activities. However, at that time, the 

Agency failed to add a similar reference 

in 40 CFR 266.20(b) alerting recyclers to 

the LDR certification and notification 

requirements in 40 CFR 268.7(b)(8). The 

LDR certification and notification 

requirement for use constituting 

disposal was later renumbered from 40 

CFR 268.7(b)(8) to 40 CFR 268.7(b)(6). 

In the March 18, 2010, Direct Final 

rule (and parallel proposed rule), 40 

CFR 266.20(b) was revised by adding 

the phrase ‘‘and the recycler complies 

with § 268.7(b)(6) of this chapter’’ to 

alert recyclers to the existing LDR 

certification and notification 

requirement that is located elsewhere in 

the regulations. 

EPA received one adverse comment 

concerning this amendment from Safe 

Food and Fertilizer (hereafter referred to 

as Safe Food), a grassroots citizens’ 

organization. In their comments, Safe 

Food stated that making this change to 

40 CFR 266.20(b) would not be a 

‘technical correction’ but rather the 

promulgation of a new rule. Safe Food 

stated that when, in 2006, EPA amended 

40 CFR 268.7(b)(6) as part of a larger 

RCRA Burden Reduction Initiative to 

require less frequent notification and 

certification (71 FR 16862, April 4, 

2006), many states did not adopt this 

less-stringent provision and retained the 

more frequent notification and 

certification requirements.2 Safe Food 

believes that because the amendment to 

40 CFR 266.20(b) references the federal 

requirements in 40 CFR 268.7(b)(6), a 

state that adopts this amendment will 

also be inadvertently forced to adopt the 

more recent federal less-stringent 

notification and certification provision 

in 40 CFR 268.7(b)(6). 

EPA disagrees. The amendment 

simply alerts persons subject to 40 CFR 

266.20(b) that they also have an existing 

obligation to certify and notify under 

the LDR regulations. If and when states 

adopt this reference, they will translate 

the reference into their own existing 

regulatory structure and the reference 

will point to the existing state LDR 

certification and notification 

requirements, not the federal 

requirements. Thus, adoption of today’s 

amendment by a state as part of their 

authorized RCRA program will not 

change that state’s existing authorized 

LDR notification and certification 

requirements for recyclers using 

materials in a manner constituting 

disposal. The proposed addition to 

section 40 CFR 266.20(b) is an 

informational reference to alert recyclers 

to the existing LDR certification and 

notification obligations applicable to 

their activities. When incorporated into 

state regulations, the reference will refer 

to the appropriate existing state LDR 

requirements. 

Safe Food also commented that the 

proposed change would be contrary to 

law, specifically, to 42 U.S.C. 6929. 

They believe such a change would 

‘‘prohibit a State from requiring that the 

State be provided with a copy of each 

manifest used in conjunction with 

hazardous waste which is generated 

within that State or transported to a 

treatment, storage, or disposal facility.’’ 

Safe Food argues that the proposed 

amendment would change states’ 

regulations governing materials used in 

a manner constituting disposal, 

including any state manifesting 

requirements, because the change made 

to the federal regulations would go into 

effect immediately on the effective date 

in all states. 

The Agency disagrees. In the Direct 

Final rule (and parallel proposed rule), 

EPA explained that amendments to 40 

CFR part 266 would only go into effect 

in authorized states if and when a state 

adopts the amendment. When an 

authorized state adopts this amendment, 

it will not retain the federal regulatory 

citation. The state will translate the 

citation into the appropriate state 

citation to refer to the existing state LDR 

certification and notification 

requirements for materials used in a 

manner constituting disposal (see 

section V.B. of this notice). Thus, this 

amendment will not change a state’s 

existing regulations for materials used 

in a manner constituting disposal, 

including any existing state manifesting 

requirements. 

Finally, Safe Food argued that the 

clarification to 40 CFR 266.20(b) is not 

necessary because recyclers subject to 

40 CFR 266.20(b) are also subject to 40 

CFR 266.23, which references all of 40 

CFR part 268 (which would include 40 

CFR 268.7(b)(6)). Again, the Agency 

disagrees. The parenthetical phrase at 

the end of 40 CFR 266.23(a), ‘‘these 

requirements do not apply to products 

which contain these recycled materials 

under the provisions of 40 CFR 

266.20(b) of this chapter,’’ specifically 

exempts materials regulated under 40 

CFR 266.20(b) from 40 CFR 266.23. This 

means that the reference in 40 CFR 

266.23 to 40 CFR part 268 (which would 

include 40 CFR 268.7(b)(6)) is not 

applicable to, and not likely to be seen 

by, persons managing materials under 

40 CFR 266.20(b). Thus, the amendment 

being promulgated today is a useful and 

important informational aid alerting 

recyclers managing hazardous wastes 

under 40 CFR 266.20(b) to their existing 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 22231 

LDR notification and certification 

requirements. 

As explained above, EPA does not 

agree that the proposed amendment will 

have any of the consequences that Safe 

Food is concerned about. Thus, to better 

alert recyclers to their existing LDR 

certification and notification 

requirements, EPA is today 

promulgating the change to add a 

reference to 40 CFR 266.20(b) as was 

proposed. 

V. State Authorization 

A. Applicability of Rules in Authorized 

States 

Under section 3006 of RCRA, EPA 

may authorize a qualified state to 

administer its own hazardous waste 

program within the state in lieu of the 

federal program. Following 

authorization, EPA retains enforcement 

authority under Sections 3008, 3013, 

and 7003 of RCRA, although authorized 

states have primary enforcement 

responsibility. The standards and 

requirements for state authorization are 

found at 40 CFR part 271. 

Prior to enactment of the Hazardous 

and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 

(HSWA), a state with final RCRA 

authorization administered its 

hazardous waste program entirely in 

lieu of EPA administering the federal 

program in that state. The federal 

requirements no longer applied in the 

authorized state, and EPA could not 

issue permits for any facilities in that 

state, since only the state was 

authorized to issue RCRA permits. 

When new, more stringent federal 

requirements were promulgated, the 

state was obligated to enact equivalent 

authorities within specified time frames. 

However, the new federal requirements 

did not take effect in an authorized state 

until the state adopted the federal 

requirements as state law. 

In contrast, under RCRA section 

3006(g) (42 U.S.C. 6926(g)), which was 

added by HSWA, new requirements and 

prohibitions imposed under HSWA 

authority take effect in authorized states 

at the same time that they take effect in 

unauthorized states. EPA is directed by 

the statute to implement these 

requirements and prohibitions in 

authorized states, including the 

issuance of permits, until the state is 

granted authorization to do so. While 

states must still adopt HSWA related 

provisions as state law to retain final 

authorization, EPA implements the 

HSWA provisions in authorized states 

until the states do so. 

RCRA section 3009 allows states to 

impose standards more stringent than 

those in the federal program (see also 40 

CFR 271.1). Therefore, authorized states 

may, but are not required to, adopt 

federal regulations, both HSWA and 

non-HSWA, that are considered less 

stringent than previous federal 

regulations. 

B. Effect on State Authorization 

Today’s Final rule promulgates two 

technical corrections to regulations in 

40 CFR parts 261 and 266 under nonHSWA authority. Thus, the technical 

corrections and clarifications finalized 

today under non-HSWA authority 

would be applicable on the effective 

date only in those states that do not 

have final authorization of their base 

RCRA programs. Moreover, authorized 

states are required to modify their 

programs only when EPA promulgates 

federal regulations that are more 

stringent or broader in scope than the 

authorized state regulations. For those 

changes that are less stringent or reduce 

the scope of the federal program, states 

are not required to modify their 

program. This is a result of section 3009 

of RCRA, which allows states to impose 

more stringent regulations than the 

federal program. Today’s final rule is 

considered to be neither more nor less 

stringent than the current standards. 

Therefore, authorized states are not 

required to modify their programs to 

adopt the technical corrections 

promulgated today, although we 

strongly urge authorized states to adopt 

these technical corrections to avoid any 

confusion or misunderstanding by the 

regulated community and the public. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

As explained above, this rule takes 

final action on two amendments for 

which we received adverse comment in 

response to our March 18, 2010, RCRA 

Technical Corrections and Clarifications 

Direct Final rule (and parallel proposed 

rule). Because today’s Final rule does 

not create any new regulatory 

requirements, but rather makes 

technical corrections, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) or Executive Order 

13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review (76 FR 3821, January 

21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132: Federalism (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045: Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health and Safety Risks 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211: 

Actions that Significantly Affect Energy 

Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Does not involve technical 

standards; thus the requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272) do not 

apply; and 

• Does not have tribal implications as 

specified by Executive Order 13175: 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000), because as 

the rule does not make any substantive 

change, it will not impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

A. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to the 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 rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR 

121.201; (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impact of today’s final rule 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 create any new 

regulatory requirements, but rather 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
22232 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

clarifies existing requirements and 

makes conforming changes. 

B. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this rule and other 

information required by the 

Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 

et seq., as amended) to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication in the 

Federal Register. A major rule cannot 

take effect until 60 days after it is 

published in the Federal Register. This 

action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined 

by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will be 

effective May 14, 2012. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 261 

Environmental protection, Hazardous 

waste, Recycling, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

40 CFR Part 266 

Environmental protection, Energy, 

Hazardous waste, Recycling, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: April 4, 2012. 

Mathy Stanislaus, 

Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste 

and Emergency Response. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND 

LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 261 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, 

6922, 6924(y), and 6938. 

■ 2. In § 261.32(a), the table is amended 

by revising the entry for ‘‘K107’’ to read 

as follows: 

§ 261.32 Hazardous wastes from specific 

sources. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

Industry and EPA 

hazardous waste No. Hazardous waste Hazard code 

*******

Organic chemicals 

*******

K107 ................................... Column bottoms from product separation from the production of 1,1-dimethylhydrazine (UDMH) 

from carboxylic acid hydrazides.

(C,T) 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

PART 266—STANDARDS FOR THE 

MANAGEMENT OF SPECIFIC 

HAZARDOUS WASTES AND SPECIFIC 

TYPES OF HAZARDOUS WASTE 

MANAGEMENT FACILITIES 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 266 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912, 6922– 

6925, 6935–6937, unless otherwise noted. 

■ 4. Amend § 266.20 by revising 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 266.20 Applicability. 

* * * * * 

(b) Products produced for the general 

public’s use that are used in a manner 

that constitutes disposal and that 

contain recyclable materials are not 

presently subject to regulation if the 

recyclable materials have undergone a 

chemical reaction in the course of 

producing the products so as to become 

inseparable by physical means and if 

such products meet the applicable 

treatment standards in subpart D of part 

268 (or applicable prohibition levels in 

§ 268.32 of this chapter or RCRA section 

3004(d), where no treatment standards 

have been established) for each 

recyclable material (i.e., hazardous 

waste) that they contain, and the 

recycler complies with § 268.7(b)(6) of 

this chapter. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–8924 Filed 4–12–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

46 CFR Parts 2, 24, 30, 70, 90, 91, and 

188 

[Docket No. USCG–2011–0363] 

RIN 1625–AB71 

Seagoing Barges 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Direct final rule; withdrawal of 

correction. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is 

withdrawing its correction published on 

March 29, 2012, to a direct final rule 

published on December 14, 2011 and 

withdrawn on April 6, 2012. The 

correction was published to correct an 

inadvertent transposition in the titles of 

two tables in our amendatory 

instructions and to publish vessel 

inspection tables in their entirety so that 

the format of the tables would be 

consistent with current Federal Register 

format requirements. The direct final 

rule was withdrawn on April 6, 2012, 

because we received two adverse 

comments and the direct final rule will 

not become effective as scheduled. 

Therefore, we must also withdraw the 

vessel inspection tables published as 

part of the correction because they are 

not consistent with the current 

regulatory text. 

DATES: The correction published March 

29, 2012, (77 FR 18929), is withdrawn 

on April 11, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this 

withdrawn rulemaking is available for 

inspection or copying at the 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, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. You may also 

find this docket on the Internet by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES