Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 200 / Monday, October 16, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 61109

Subpart C—Section 107 Attainment

Status Designations

2. Section 81.304 is amended by

removing the table for TSP and adding

a table for PM–10 to read as follows:

§ 81.304 Arkansas.

* * * * *

ARKANSAS—PM–10

Designated area

Designation Classification

Date Type Date Type

AQCR 016 Central Arkansas Intrastate ............................................ ........................... Unclassifiable ... ........................... Unclassifiable.

AQCR 017 Metropolitan Fort Smith Interstate .................................. ........................... Unclassifiable ... ........................... Unclassifiable.

AQCR 018 Metropolitan Memphis Intrastate .................................... ........................... Unclassifiable ... ........................... Unclassifiable.

AQCR 019 Monroe (Louisiana)-El Dorado Interstate ....................... ........................... Unclassifiable ... ........................... Unclassifiable.

AQCR 020 Northeast Arkansas Intrastate ........................................ ........................... Unclassifiable ... ........................... Unclassifiable.

AQCR 021 Northwest Arkansas Intrastate ....................................... ........................... Unclassifiable ... ........................... Unclassifiable.

AQCR 022 Shreveport-Texarkana-Tyler Interstate ........................... ........................... Unclassifiable ... ........................... Unclassifiable.

[FR Doc. 00–26509 Filed 10–13–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[FRL–6885–5]

Utah: Final Authorization of State

Hazardous Waste Management

Program Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Immediate final rule.

SUMMARY: Utah has applied to EPA for

Final authorization of the changes to its

hazardous waste program under the

Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that

these changes satisfy all requirements

needed to qualify 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

proposal because we believe this action

is not controversial. Unless we get

written comments which oppose this

authorization during the comment

period, the decision to authorize Utah’s

changes to their hazardous waste

program will take effect. If we get

comments that oppose this action, we

will publish a document in the Federal

Register withdrawing this rule before it

takes effect and a separate document in

the proposed rules section of this

Federal Register will serve as a proposal

to authorize the changes.

DATES: This Final authorization will

become effective on January 16, 2001

unless EPA receives adverse written

comment by November 30, 2000. If EPA

receives such comment, it will publish

a timely withdrawal of this immediate

final rule in the Federal Register and

inform the public that this authorization

will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Utah program

revision applications and the materials

which EPA used in evaluating the

revisions are available for inspection

and copying at the following locations:

EPA Region VIII Library, from Noon to

4 p.m., 999 18th Street, Suite 500,

Denver, Colorado 80202–2466, contact:

Environmental Information Service

Center (EISC), phone number: (303)

312–6312; or Utah Department of

Environmental Quality (UDEQ), from 8

a.m. to 5 p.m., 288 North 1460 West,

Salt Lake City, Utah 84114–4880,

contact: Susan Toronto, phone number:

(801) 538–6776. Send written comments

to Kris Shurr, 8P–HW, U.S. EPA, Region

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

Colorado 80202–2466, phone number:

(303) 312–6139.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kris

Shurr, 8P–HW, U.S. 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 which have received final

authorization from 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 EPA to authorize the

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 Utah’s application

to revise its authorized program meets

all of the statutory and regulatory

requirements established by RCRA.

Therefore, we grant Utah Final

authorization to operate its hazardous

waste program with the changes

described in the authorization

application. Utah has 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 EPA promulgates under

the authority of HSWA take effect in

authorized States before they are

authorized for the requirements. Thus,

EPA will implement those requirements

and prohibitions in Utah, including

issuing permits, until the State is

granted authorization to do so.

C. What Is the Effect of Today’s

Authorization Decision?

This decision means that a facility in

Utah subject to RCRA will now have to

comply with the authorized State

requirements instead of the equivalent

Federal requirements in order to comply

with RCRA. Utah has enforcement

responsibilities under its State

hazardous waste program for violations

of such program, but EPA retains its

authority under RCRA sections 3007,

61110 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 200 / Monday, October 16, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

3008, 3013, and 7003, which include,

among others, authority to:

do inspections, and require monitoring, tests,

analyses or reports;

enforce RCRA requirements and suspend or

revoke permits;

and 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 Utah is being

authorized by today’s action 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 proposal before

today’s rule because we view this as a

routine program change. We are

providing an opportunity for the public

to comment now. In addition to this

rule, in the proposed rules section of

today’s Federal Register we are

publishing a separate document that

proposes to authorize the State program

changes.

E. What Happens if EPA Receives

Comments That Oppose This Action?

If EPA receives comments that oppose

this authorization, we will withdraw

this rule by publishing a document in

the Federal Register before the rule

becomes effective. EPA will base any

further decision on the authorization of

the State program changes on the

proposal mentioned in the previous

paragraph. We will then address all

public comments in a later final rule.

You may not have another opportunity

to comment. If you want to comment on

this authorization, you must do so at

this time.

If we receive comments that oppose

only the authorization of a particular

change to the State hazardous waste

program, we will withdraw that part of

this rule but the authorization of the

program changes that the comments do

not oppose 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 Utah Previously Been

Authorized for?

Utah initially received Final

Authorization on October 10, 1984,

effective October 24, 1984 (49 FR 39683)

to implement its base hazardous waste

management program. Utah received

authorization for revisions to its

program on February 21, 1989, effective

March 7, 1989 ( 54 FR 7417); May 23,

1991 (56 FR 23648) and August 6, 1991

(56 FR 37291, both effective July 22,

1991; May 15, 1992, effective July 14,

1992 (57 FR 20770); February 12, 1993

(58 FR 8232) and May 5, 1993 (58 FR

26689), both effective April 13, 1993;

October 14, 1994, effective December

13, 1994 (59 FR 52084); May 20, 1997

(62 FR 27501), effective July 21, 1997;

and January 13, 1999, effective March

15, 1999 (64 FR 02144).

G. What Changes Are We Authorizing

With Today’s Action?

On April 4, 2000, Utah submitted a

final complete program revision

application, seeking authorization of

their changes in accordance with 40

CFR 271.21. We now make an

immediate final decision, subject to

receipt of written comments that oppose

this action, that Utah’s hazardous waste

program revision satisfies all of the

requirements necessary to qualify for

Final authorization. Therefore, we grant

Utah Final authorization for the

following program changes:

Federal citation State analog 1

Removal of Legally Obsolete Rules [60 FR 33912, 06/29/95) (Checklist

144).

R315–1–1; R315–2–10; R315–3–3; R315–14–7.

Liquids in Landfills III [60 FR 35703, 07/11/95] (Checklist 145) .............. R315–7–21; R315–8–14.

RCRA Expanded Public Participation [60 FR 63417, 12/11/95] (Checklist 148).R315–1–1; R315–3–5; R315–3–10; R315–3–19; R315–3–20; R315–3–

37; R315–3–38.

Amendments to the Definition of Solid Waste; Amendment II [61 FR

13103, 03/26/96] (Checklist 150).

R315–2–4.

Land Disposal Restrictions Phase III-Decharacterized Wastewaters,

Carbamate Wastes, & Spent Potliners [61 FR 15566, 08/08/96, as

amended thru 62 FR 07502, 02/09/97] (Checklists 151 thru 151.6).

R315–13–1.

Imports & Exports of Hazardous Waste: Implementation of OECD

Council Decision [61 FR 16290, 04/12/96] (Checklist 152).

R315–2–6; R315–4–3; R315–4–4; R315–5–1; R315–5–13; R315–5–

15; R315–6–1; R315–7–9.3; R315–7–12.2; R315–8–2.3; R315–14–

5; R315–16–2.11; R315–16–3.11; R315–16–4.7; R315–16–6.

Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator Disposal Options

Under Subtitle D [61 FR 34252, 07/01/96] (Checklist 153).

R315–2–5.

Consolidated Organic Air Emission Standards for Tanks, Surface Impoundments, & Containers [59 FR 62896, 12/06/94, as amended

thru 61 FR 59997, 11/25/96] (Checklists 154 thru 154.6).

R307–210–1; R315–1–2; R315–2–6; R315–3–5; R315–3–6; R315–3–

13; R315–5–10; R315–7–8; R315–7–9; R315–7–12; R315–7–16;

R315–7–17; R315–7–18; R315–7–26; R315–7–27; R315–7–30;

R315–8–2; R315–8–5; R315–8–9; R315–8–10; R315–8–11; R315–

8–16; R315–8–17; R315–8–18; R315–8–22; R315–50–17.

Land Disposal Restrictions Phase III—Emergency Extension of the

K088 Capacity Variance [62 FR 01992, 01/14/97] (Checklist 155).

R315–13–1.

Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV—Treatment Standards for Wood

Preserving Wastes, Paperwork Reduction & Streamlining, Exemptions from RCRA for Certain Processed Materials; & Miscellaneous

Hazardous Waste Provisions [62 FR 25998, 05/12/97] (Checklist

157).

R315–1–1; R315–2–2; R315–2–4; R315–2–6; R315–13–1.

Testing & Monitoring Activities Amendment III [62 FR 32452, 06/13/97]

(Checklist 158).

R315–1–2; R315–7–26; R315–7–27; R315–8–17; R315–8–18; R315–

14–7; R315–50–14.

Conformance with the Carbamate Vacature [62 FR 01992, 05/29/97]

(Checklist 159).

R315–2–10; R315–2–11; R315–13–1; R315–50–9; R315–50–10.

Land Disposal Restrictions Phase III—Emergency Extension of the

K088 National Capacity Variance, Amendment [60 FR 37694, 07/14/

97] (Checklist 160).

R315–13–1.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 200 / Monday, October 16, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 61111

Federal citation State analog 1

Emergency Revision of the Carbamate Land Disposal Restrictions [62

FR 45568, 08/28/97] (Checklist 161).

R315–13–1.

1 Utah Administrative Code, revised December 15, 1999.

H. Where Are the Revised State Rules

Different From the Federal Rules?

We consider the following State

requirements to be more stringent than

the Federal requirements: R315–8–

2.3(a)(2), R315–4–4(e), R315–7–9.3(a)(2),

and R315–7–12.2(d) because the State

requires that notification also be given

to the Utah Division of Solid and

Hazardous Waste, as well as, the Federal

entities.

These requirements are part of Utah’s

authorized program and are Federally

enforceable.

Utah’s rules, promulgated pursuant to

this application, contain several errors

which may create confusion within the

regulated community. EPA has

determined that the errors associated

with the issues do not pose

implementation or enforcement

problems. Therefore, EPA will proceed

to approve this application with the

understanding that the State will correct

these items during its next rulemaking.

These errors are at the following citation

within the Utah Administrative Code,

revised December 15, 1999: R315–3–

20(d).

I. Who Handles Permits After the

Authorization Takes Effect?

Utah will issue permits for all the

provisions for which it is authorized

and will administer the permits it

issues. EPA will continue to administer

any RCRA hazardous waste permits or

portions of permits which we issued

prior to the effective date of this

authorization until Utah has equivalent

instruments in place. We will not issue

any new permits or new portions of

permits for the provisions listed in the

Table above after the effective date of

this authorization. EPA has previously

suspended issuance of permits for other

provisions on October 24, 1984, the

effective date of Utah’s Final

Authorization for the RCRA base

program. EPA will continue to

implement and issue permits for HSWA

requirements for which Utah is not yet

authorized.

J. How Does Today’s Action Affect

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

Utah?

This program revision does not

extend to ‘‘Indian Country’’ as defined

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

includes lands within the exterior

boundaries of the following Indian

reservations located within or abutting

the State of Utah:

1. Goshute Indian Reservation

2. Navajo Indian Reservation

3. Northwestern Band of Shoshoni

Nation of Utah (Washakie) Indian

Reservation

4. Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah Indian

Reservation

5. Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians

of Utah Indian Reservation

6. Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation

(see below)

7. Ute Mountain Indian Reservation

With respect to the Uintah & Ouray

Indian Reservation, Federal courts have

determined that certain lands within the

exterior boundaries of the Reservation

do not constitute Indian Country. This

State program revision approval will

extend to those lands which the courts

have determined are not Indian

Country.

In excluding Indian Country from the

scope of this program revision, EPA is

not making a determination that the

State either has adequate jurisdiction or

lacks jurisdiction over sources in Indian

Country. Should the State of Utah

choose to seek program authorization

within Indian Country, it may do so

without prejudice. Before EPA would

approve the State’s program for any

portion of Indian Country, EPA would

have to 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.

K. What Is Codification and Is EPA

Codifying Utah’s Hazardous Waste

Program as Authorized in This Rule?

Codification is the process of placing

the State’s statutes and regulations that

comprise the State’s authorized

hazardous waste program 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

TT for the codification of Utah’s

program until a later date.

L. Administrative Requirements

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

pre-existing 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 (Public Law 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 13084

(63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998). 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.

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

National Technology Transfer and

61112 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 200 / Monday, October 16, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

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 January 16, 2001.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Confidential business information,

Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste

transportation, Indian lands,

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: October 5, 2000.

William P. Yellowtail,

Regional Administrator, Region VIII.

[FR Doc. 00–26503 Filed 10–13–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL–6886–4]

National Oil and Hazardous

Substances Pollution Contingency

Plan; National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final

deletion of the Warwick Landfill Site

from the National Priorities List.

SUMMARY: On August 15, 2000, EPA

published a direct final deletion (65 FR

49739) to delete the Warwick Landfill

Superfund Site (Site) from the National

Priorities List. The EPA is withdrawing

this final action due to adverse

comments that were received during the

public comment period. After

consideration of the comments received,

if appropriate, EPA will publish a notice

of deletion in the Federal Register based

on the parallel notice of proposed

deletion (65 FR 49776 dated August 15,

2000) and place a copy of the final

deletion package, including a

Responsiveness Summary in the Site

repositories.

DATES: The direct final action amending

40 CFR part 300, published on August

15, 2000 (65 FR 49739), is withdrawn as

of October 16, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comprehensive information

on the Site, as well as the comments

that were received during the comment

period, are available through the public

docket contained at: U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Superfund Records

Center, Region II, Superfund Records

Center, 290 Broadway, Room 1828, New

York, New York 10007–1866, (212) 637–

4308, Hours: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.,

Monday through Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Damian J. Duda, Remedial Project

Manager, Emergency and Remedial

Response Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region II, 290

Broadway, 20th Floor, New York, New

York 10007–1866, (212) 637–4269 and

Fax: (212) 637–3966.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Information Repositories

Repositories have been established to

provide detailed information concerning

this decision at the following addresses:

Warwick Town Hall, 132 Kings

Highway, Warwick, New York 10990,

(914) 986–1120 and the Greenwood

Lake Village Hall, Church Street,

Greenwood Lake, New York 10925,

(914) 477–9215.

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C.

9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR,

1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923;

3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.

Dated: October 5, 2000.

William J. Muszynski,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region II.

[FR Doc. 00–26530 Filed 10–13–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Health Care Financing Administration

42 CFR Parts 413, 489, and 498

[HCFA–1155–N]

Medicare Program; Open Town Hall

Meeting to Discuss Implementation of

Provider-Based Regulations; October

31, 2000

AGENCY: Health Care Financing

Administration (HCFA), HHS.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice announces a town

hall meeting for all interested parties to

discuss specific issues related to

implementation of the provider-based

status regulations published in a final

rule on April 7, 2000 (65 FR 18434).

Those regulations established

requirements for facilities or

organizations seeking provider-based

status under Medicare.

DATES: This meeting is scheduled for

October 31, 2000, from 9 a.m. until 4:30

P.M., E.S.T.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in

the HCFA Central Office Main

Auditorium, 7500 Security Boulevard,

Baltimore, Maryland 21244.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Beverly Parker at 410–786–5320.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On April 7, 2000, we published in the

Federal Register (65 FR 18434), a final

rule with comment period entitled

‘‘Prospective Payment System for

Hospital Outpatient Services’’. Among

the regulatory provisions included were

new §§ 413.24(d)(6) and 413.65 and

revisions to §§ 489.24, 498.2, and 498.3.

These regulations established

requirements for facilities or

organizations that seek provider-based

status. The effective date of the

provider-based regulations, as stated in

the April 2000 rule, was October 10,

2000. On October 3, 2000, we published

a notice in the Federal Register (65 FR

58919) that delayed the effective date of

these provider-based regulations from