47302 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

‘‘Corn, pop’’; ‘‘Corn, pop, stover’’; ‘‘Goat 

meat byproducts’’; ‘‘Hog, meat 

byproducts’’; ‘‘Horse meat byproducts’’; 

and ‘‘Sheep meat byproducts’’ to the 

table in paragraph (a). 

■ iii. Remove the entries for ‘‘Corn, 

field, forage’’; ‘‘Corn, field, grain’’; 

‘‘Corn, field, refined oil’’; ‘‘Corn, field, 

stover’’; ‘‘Corn, pop’’; and ‘‘Corn, pop, 

stover’’ from the table in paragraph (d). 

The added entries read as follows: 

§ 180.629 Flutriafol; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Cattle, meat byproducts ..... 0 .07 

Corn, field, forage ............... 0 .75 

Corn, field, grain ................. 0 .01 

Corn, field, refined oil ......... 0 .02 

Corn, field, stover ............... 1 .5 

Corn, pop ............................ 0 .01 

Corn, pop, stover ................ 1 .5 

* * * * * 

Goat, meat byproducts ....... 0 .07 

* * * * * 

Hog, meat byproducts ........ 0 .02 

Horse, meat byproducts ..... 0 .07 

* * * * * 

Sheep, meat byproducts .... 0 .07 

* * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–19317 Filed 8–7–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 271 

[EPA–R08–RCRA–2010–0933; FRL–9712–3] 

South Dakota: Final Authorization of 

State Hazardous Waste Management 

Program Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is granting final 

authorization of the changes to the 

hazardous waste program revisions 

submitted by South Dakota. The Agency 

published a Proposed Rule on December 

27, 2010, and provided for public 

comment. No comments were received 

on the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA) program issues. 

There was one comment from the South 

Dakota State Deputy Attorney General 

regarding Indian country language. No 

further opportunity for comment will be 

provided. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

August 8, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R08–RCRA–2010–0933. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Publicly available 

docket materials are available either 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

EPA Region 8, from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m., 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202, contact: Moye Lin, phone 

number (303) 312–6667, email address: 

lin.moye@epa.gov, or SDDENR, from 9 

a.m. to 5 p.m., Joe Foss Building, 523 E. 

Capitol, Pierre, South Dakota 57501, 

contact: Carrie Jacobson, phone number 

(605) 773–3153. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Moye Lin, 303–312–6667, 

lin.moye@epa.gov or Carrie Jacobson, 

phone number (605) 773–3153, 

Carrie.Jacobson@state.sd.us. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Authorization of Revisions to South 

Dakota’s Hazardous Waste Program 

On April 1, 2010, South Dakota 

submitted a final complete program 

revision application 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 December 27, 2010 Federal 

Register at 75 FR 81187. 

Response to Comments: The EPA 

proposed to authorize South Dakota’s 

State Hazardous waste management 

Program revisions published in the 

December 27, 2010 Federal Register at 

75 FR 81187. The EPA received only 

one comment from the state of South 

Dakota objecting to the EPA’s definition 

of Indian country, where the state is not 

authorized to administer its program. 

Specifically, the state disagreed that all 

‘‘trust land’’ in South Dakota is Indian 

country. With this Final Rule the EPA 

is clarifying that Indian country lands 

within the exterior boundary of the 

Yankton Reservation are excluded from 

the state’s authorized program. Further 

explanation of this interpretation of 

Indian country can be found at 67 FR 

45684 through 45686 (July 10, 2002). 

II. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

The Office of Management and Budget 

has exempted this action from the 

requirements of Executive Order 12866 

(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), and 

therefore this action is not subject to 

review by OMB. This action authorizes 

State requirements for the purpose of 

RCRA 3006 and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

State law. Accordingly, I certify that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). Because this action authorizes 

preexisting requirements under State 

law and does not impose any additional 

enforceable duty beyond that required 

by State law, it 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). For 

the same reason, this action also does 

not significantly or uniquely affect the 

communities of Tribal governments, as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action 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 (64 

FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it 

merely authorizes State requirements as 

part of the State RCRA hazardous waste 

program without altering the 

relationship or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities established by 

RCRA. This action also is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant and it does not 

make decisions based on environmental 

health or safety risks. This rule is not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May 

22, 2001)) because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

Under RCRA 3006(b), EPA grants a 

State’s application for authorization as 

long as the State meets the criteria 

required by RCRA. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a State 

authorization application, to require the 

use of any particular voluntary 

consensus standard in place of another 

standard that otherwise satisfies the 

requirements of RCRA. Thus, the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 47303 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. As required by 

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing 

this rule, EPA has taken the necessary 

steps to eliminate drafting errors and 

ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, 

and provide a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct. EPA has complied 

with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 

8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the 

takings implications of the rule in 

accordance with the ‘‘Attorney 

General’s Supplemental Guidelines for 

the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of 

Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under 

the Executive Order. This rule does not 

impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

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

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 document 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 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 

action will be effective August 8, 2012. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Hazardous waste, Indian lands, 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: July 2, 2012. 

James B. Martin, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2012–19324 Filed 8–7–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 635 

[Docket No. 110208116–2233–02] 

RIN 0648–BA75 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 

Electronic Dealer Reporting 

Requirements 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule will require 

that Federal Atlantic swordfish, shark, 

and tuna dealers report receipt of 

Atlantic sharks, swordfish, and bigeye, 

albacore, skipjack, and yellowfin 

(BAYS) tunas to NMFS through an 

electronic reporting system on a weekly 

basis. At this time, Atlantic Highly 

Migratory Species (HMS) dealers will 

not be required to report bluefin tuna 

through this electronic reporting system, 

as a separate reporting system is 

currently in place for this species. This 

final rule changes the current definition 

of who is considered an Atlantic HMS 

dealer and will require Atlantic HMS 

dealers to submit dealer reports to 

NMFS in a timely manner in order to be 

able to purchase commerciallyharvested Atlantic sharks, swordfish, 

and BAYS tunas. Any delinquent 

reports will need to be submitted by the 

dealer and received by NMFS before a 

dealer can purchase commerciallyharvested Atlantic sharks, swordfish, 

and BAYS tunas from a fishing vessel. 

These measures are necessary to ensure 

timely and accurate reporting, which is 

critical for quota monitoring and 

management of these species. 

DATES: Effective January 1, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Highly Migratory Species 

Management Division, 1315 East-West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. 

Copies of the supporting documents, 

including a Regulatory Impact Review 

(RIR), Final Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (FRFA), and small entity 

compliance guide, are available online 

at the HMS Management Division Web 

site at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/ 

hms/. Written comments regarding the 

burden-hour estimates or other aspects 

of the collection-of-information 

requirements contained in this final rule 

may be submitted to Delisse Ortiz with 

the Atlantic Highly Migratory Species 

Management Division and by email to 

OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or fax 

to 202–395–7285. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Delisse Ortiz or Karyl Brewster-Geisz at 

301–427–8541, or Jackie Wilson at 240– 

338–3936. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Atlantic HMS are managed under the 

dual authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., and 

the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act 

(ATCA), 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. Under the 

MSA, NMFS must ensure consistency 

with the National Standards and 

manage fisheries to maintain optimum 

yield, rebuild overfished fisheries, and 

prevent overfishing. Under the ATCA, 

the Secretary of Commerce is required 

to promulgate regulations, as may be 

necessary and appropriate, to 

implement the recommendations 

adopted by the International 

Commission for the Conservation of 

Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). The authority 

to issue regulations under MSA and 

ATCA has been delegated from the 

Secretary to the Assistant Administrator 

for Fisheries, NOAA (AA). The 

implementing regulations for Atlantic 

HMS are at 50 CFR part 635. 

Background 

On June 28, 2011 (76 FR 37750), 

NMFS published a proposed rule in the 

Federal Register to require that Federal 

Atlantic swordfish, shark, and tunas 

dealers report receipts of Atlantic 

sharks, swordfish, and BAYS tunas to 

NMFS through an electronic reporting 

system. The proposed rule also included 

flexible reporting regimes, which would 

allow NMFS to collect more frequent 

dealer reports when key Atlantic shark 

fisheries are open or as quotas become 

filled in the Atlantic swordfish and 

BAYS tunas fisheries, and addressed 

two additional topics: the definition of 

an Atlantic HMS dealer and the timely 

submission of Atlantic HMS dealer 

reports. The proposed rule contained 

additional details regarding the impacts 

of the alternatives considered and a 

brief summary of the recent 

management history. Those details are 

not repeated here. 

This final rule implements the 

requirement of electronic HMS dealer 

reporting, and is necessary to ensure 

timely and accurate reporting, which is 

critical for quota monitoring and 

management of these species. As 

described below, based in part on public 

comment, in this final rule, NMFS is 

changing several aspects of the 

proposed rule. 

In the proposed rule, NMFS 

considered and analyzed four 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES