14846 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 1997 / Proposed Rules

regulatory proposals with significant

Federal intergovernmental mandates,

and informing, educating, and advising

small governments on compliance with

the regulatory requirements. Because

EPA’s determination to approve of any

revisions to Michigan’s NPDES program

resulting from the Executive Orders

would merely recognize an internal

reorganization of an existing approved

NPDES State program, EPA has

determined that such a determination

would contain no regulatory

requirements that might significantly or

uniquely affect small governments.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

provides that, whenever an agency

promulgates a final rule under 5 U.S.C.

§ 553, after being required to publish a

general notice of proposed rulemaking,

an agency must prepare a final

regulatory flexibility analysis unless the

head of the agency certifies that the final

rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. 5 U.S.C. §§ 604

& 605. The Regional Administrator

today certifies, pursuant to section

605(b) of the RFA, that approval of any

revisions to Michigan’s NPDES program

resulting from Executive Orders would

not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

The basis for the certification is that

EPA’s approval would simply result in

an administrative change in the

structure of the approved NPDES

program, rather than a change in the

substantive requirements imposed on

any small entity in the State of

Michigan. Such an approval would not

affect the substantive regulatory

requirements under existing State law to

which small entities are already subject.

Additionally, approval of the NPDES

program modification would not impose

any new burdens on small entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This preliminary determination

contains no requests for information and

consequently is not subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.

Dated: March 14, 1997.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–7819 Filed 3–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 233

[FRL–5803–4]

Modification of Michigan’s Assumed

Program to Administer Section 404

Permitting Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed approval;

request for public comment.

SUMMARY: This document announces

EPA’s intention to approve modification

of Michigan’s assumed Clean Water Act

Section 404 (Section 404) permitting

program, specifically, to explicitly and

formally recognize that a recent internal

reorganization of Michigan’s

environmental agencies is consistent

with the minimum requirements of the

State Section 404 program regulations.

EPA invites public comment on its

approval of any modification of the

State program that may have resulted

from the reorganization.

DATES: Comments on this document

must be received in writing by April 28,

1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on

today’s notice may be submitted to Jo

Lynn Traub, Director, Water Division,

Attn: Michigan Section 404 Program

Modification, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. In

the alternative, EPA will accept

comments electronically. Comments

should be sent to the following Internet

Email address:

pierard.kevin@epamail.gov. Electronic

comments must be submitted in an

ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

EPA will print electronic comments in

hard-copy paper form for the official

administrative record. EPA will attempt

to clarify electronic comments if there is

an apparent error in transmission.

Comments provided electronically will

be considered timely if they are

submitted electronically by 11:59 p.m.

(Central time) April 28, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kevin Pierard, Chief, Watersheds and

Non-Point Source Programs Branch, at

the EPA address noted above or

telephone at (312) 886–4448.

A copy of the supporting information

for today’s notice is available for review

at: EPA, Region 5, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, 16th Floor, Chicago, Illinois;

Library of Michigan, Government

Documents Section, 717 West Allegan,

Lansing, Michigan; Olson Library,

Northern Michigan University, Harden

Circle Drive, Marquette, Michigan; and

Detroit Public Library Main Branch,

Sociology and Economics Department,

5201 Woodward Avenue, Detroit,

Michigan. To arrange for access to the

docket materials in Chicago, call (312)

886–4448 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.

(Central time); in Lansing, call 517–373–

9489 between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. on

Mondays through Saturdays and

between 12 p.m. and 4 p.m. on Sundays

(Eastern time); in Marquette, call 906–

227–2260 between 8 a.m. and 12 a.m. on

Mondays through Thursdays, between 8

a.m. and 9 p.m. on Fridays, and between

10 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Sundays (Eastern

time); and in Detroit, call 313–833–1440

between 9:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on

Tuesdays and Thursdays through

Saturdays, and between 1 p.m. and 9

p.m. on Wednesdays (Eastern time).

The supporting information for

today’s notice includes: a copy of

Executive Order 1995–18 signed by the

Governor of Michigan on July 31, 1995;

copies of the correspondence from

Michigan to EPA dated January 19,

1996, regarding the effects of the

executive order on Michigan’s Section

404 program; a statement of the

Michigan Attorney General dated June

13, 1996; Program documents submitted

to EPA in support of Michigan’s original

(1983) assumption request; the materials

submitted by Michigan and considered

by EPA in approving revisions to

Michigan’s Section 404 program on

November 25, 1994; May 20, 1994,

comments submitted by the National

Wildlife Federation and Michigan

United Conservation Club to EPA which

EPA is treating as a petition to withdraw

Michigan’s Section 404 program; a June

14, 1996, letter from the Michigan

Environmental Council to EPA

regarding Michigan Public Act 132 of

1996; a February 4, 1997, letter and

attached report from the Michigan

Environmental Council to EPA

requesting that EPA withdraw

Michigan’s Section 404 program; and

EPA’s preliminary finding of no

substantial modification and

preliminary approval of any revisions

resulting from Executive Order 1995–18.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The State

of Michigan assumed Federal Clean

Water Act Section 404 permitting

authority on October 16, 1984.

Procedures for revision of State

programs at 40 CFR 233.16 require that

EPA review any revisions to state

assumed Section 404 programs,

determine whether such revisions are

substantial, and approve or disapprove

the revisions.

On July 31, 1995 Governor Engler of

Michigan issued Executive Order 1995–

18, which elevated the former

Environmental Protection Bureau of the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 1997 / Proposed Rules 14847

Michigan Department of Natural

Resources (MDNR) to full independent

departmental status as the Michigan

Department of Environmental Quality

(MDEQ). MDEQ retained all of its

environmental responsibilities and

virtually all of the personnel formerly

assigned to it as a bureau in the MDNR,

including its statutory and regulatory

obligations and responsibilities to

administer Michigan’s federally

approved CWA section 404 program.

EPA announces today that has made

preliminary determinations that the

executive order did not make any

substantial changes in Michigan’s

Section 404 program, and that any

changes to the Michigan program

resulting from the executive order

should be approved. While not required

to do so according to the State section

404 program regulations, EPA invites

public comment concerning the

Agency’s conclusions, specifically, its

preliminary determination that the

executive order caused no substantial

revisions to Michigan’s Section 404

program, as well as EPA’s preliminary

decision to approve any revisions to

Michigan’s Section 404 program that

resulted from the executive order. EPA

may conduct a public hearing, if there

is significant public interest based on

requests received.

EPA notes that it currently has

pending before it a May 20, 1994,

petition to withdraw that was filed by

the National Wildlife Federation (NWF)

and Michigan United Conservation

Clubs (MUCC), as well as a February 4,

1997, petition to withdraw that was

filed by the Michigan Environmental

Council (MEC). EPA has commenced

informal investigations into the

allegations in those Petitions to

determine whether there is cause to

commence withdrawal proceedings.

EPA further notes that MEC, by letter

dated June 14, 1996, has raised concerns

regarding the impact of Michigan’s

recent enactment of Public Act 132 of

1996 on Michigan’s Section 404

program. In response to that letter, EPA

is currently conducting an informal

investigation into Michigan’s Public Act

132 of 1996 and its potential impact on

Michigan’s federally delegated and

authorized programs, including Section

404.

EPA’s preliminary decision only

addresses, and this notice is seeking

comment only on, the impact of the

executive order noted above on

Michigan’s Section 404 program. EPA’s

preliminary decision does not address

the issues raised by NWF, MUCC and

MEC in their Petitions or by MEC

regarding Public Act 132 of 1996. EPA

intends to address those issues in the

course of the separate informal

investigations described above.

Regulatory Assessment Requirements

Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735; October 4, 1993), the Agency

must determine whether a regulatory

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to OMB review and the

requirements of the Executive Order.

The Order defines ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ as one that is likely

to result in a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the

economy of $100 million or more, or

adversely affect in a material way the

economy, a sector of the economy,

productivity, competition, jobs, the

environment, public health or safety, or

State, local, or tribal governments or

communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or

otherwise interfere with an action taken

or planned by another agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary

impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,

or loan programs or the rights and

obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in the Executive Order.

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has exempted EPA action on

State Section 404 programs from OMB

review.

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.

If EPA finally determines that any

revisions to Michigan’s Section 404

program resulting from the executive

order should be approved, EPA’s

determination would contain no Federal

mandates (under the regulatory

provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for

State, local, or tribal governments or the

private sector. Instead, EPA’s

determination would merely recognize

an internal reorganization of an existing

assumed State Section 404 program.

EPA has determined that such a

determination would not contain any

Federal mandate that may result in

expenditures of $100 million or more

for State, local, and tribal governments,

in the aggregate, or the private sector in

any one year. Therefore, EPA’s

determination would not be subject to

the requirements of section 202 of the

UMRA.

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. Because

EPA’s determination to approve of any

revisions to Michigan’s Section 404

program resulting from the executive

order would merely recognize an

internal reorganization of an existing

assumed State Section 404 program,

EPA has determined that such a

determination would contain no

regulatory requirements that might

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

provides that, whenever an agency

promulgates a final rule under 5 U.S.C.

§ 553, after being required to publish a

general notice of proposed rulemaking,

an agency must prepare a final

regulatory flexibility analysis unless the

head of the agency certifies that the final

rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. 5 U.S.C. 604

& 605. The Regional Administrator

today certifies, pursuant to section

605(b) of the RFA, that approval of any

revisions to Michigan’s Section 404

program resulting from the executive

order will not have a significant impact

on a substantial number of small

entities.

The basis for the certification is that

EPA’s approval would simply result in

an administrative change in the

structure of the assumed Section 404

program, rather than a change in the

substantive requirements imposed on

any small entity in the State of

Michigan. Such an approval would not

affect the substantive regulatory

requirements under existing State law to

which small entities are already subject.

Additionally, approval of the Section

404 program modification would not
14848 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 1997 / Proposed Rules

impose any new burdens on small

entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This preliminary determination

contains no requests for information and

consequently is not subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.

Dated: March 14, 1997.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–7820 Filed 3–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 271

[FRL–5803–1]

Michigan: Final Authorization of State

Hazardous Waste Management

Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

and public comment period.

SUMMARY: Michigan has applied for final

authorization of revisions to its

hazardous management program under

the Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act on 1976, as amended,

(hereinafter RCRA) resulting from

Michigan Executive Order 1995–18 (EO

1995–18). The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) has reviewed Michigan’s

application and has reached a proposed

decision, subject to public review and

comment, that the hazardous waste

management program revisions

resulting from EO 1995–18 satisfy the

requirements necessary to qualify for

final authorization. Thus, EPA believes

it is appropriate to approve these

Michigan hazardous waste management

program revisions. Michigan’s

application for program revision is

available for public review and

comment.

DATES: All comments on this proposed

rulemaking must be received by close of

business on April 28, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

document may be submitted to Ms. Judy

Feigler, U.S. EPA, State Programs and

Authorization Section, Waste, Pesticides

and Toxics Division (DR–7J), 77 West

Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604–3590.

In the alternative, U.S. EPA will accept

comments electronically. Comments

should be sent to the following Internet

E-mail address:

feigler.judith@epamail.epa.gov.

Electronic comments must be submitted

in an ASCII file avoiding the use of

special characters and any form of

encryption. EPA will print electronic

comments in hard-copy paper form for

the official administrative record. EPA

will attempt to clarify electronic

comments if there is an apparent error

in transmission. Comments provided

electronically will be considered timely

if they are submitted electronically by

11:59 p.m. (Central Time) April 28,

1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Judy Feigler at the EPA address noted

above or telephone at (312) 886–4179.

Copies of the State of Michigan’s final

authorization revision application are

available during normal business hours

at the following addresses for inspection

and copying: Library of Michigan,

Government Documents Section, 717

West Allegan, Lansing, Michigan; Olson

Library, Northern Michigan University,

Harden Circle Drive, Marquette,

Michigan; Detroit Public Library Main

Branch, Sociology and Economics

Department, 5201 Woodward Avenue,

Detroit, Michigan; and Ms. Judy Feigler,

U.S. EPA, State Programs and

Authorization Section, Waste, Pesticides

and Toxics Division (DR–7J), 77 West

Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604-3590,

or telephone (312) 886–4179. To arrange

for access to the materials in Lansing,

call (517) 373–9489 between 9 a.m. and

6 p.m. on Mondays through Saturdays

and between 12 p.m. and 4 p.m. on

Sundays (Eastern time); in Marquette,

call (906) 227–2260 for current library

hours; in Detroit, call (313) 833–1440

between 9:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on

Tuesdays and Thursdays through

Saturdays, and between 1 p.m. and 9

p.m. on Wednesdays (Eastern time); and

in Chicago, call (312) 886–4179 between

9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on Mondays

through Fridays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

States with final authorization under

Section 3006(b) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C.

6929(b), have a continuing obligation to

maintain a hazardous waste program

that is equivalent to, consistent with,

and no less stringent than the Federal

hazardous waste management program.

When either EPA’s or a State program’s

controlling statutory or regulatory

authority is modified or supplemented,

or when certain other changes occur,

revisions to State hazardous waste

management programs may be

necessary. The procedures that States

and EPA must follow for revision of

State programs are found at 40 CFR

271.21.

The State of Michigan initially

received final authorization for its

hazardous waste management program

effective on October 30, 1986 (51 FR

36804–36805, October 16, 1986).

Subsequently, Michigan received

authorization for revisions to its

program, effective on January 23, 1990

(54 FR 225, November 24, 1989); June

24, 1991 (56 FR 18517, April 23, 1991);

November 30, 1993 (58 FR 51244,

October 1, 1993); and April 8, 1996 (61

FR 4742, February 8, 1996). Michigan’s

Program Description, dated June 30,

1984, and addenda thereto dated June

30, 1986; September 12, 1988; July 31,

1990; August 10, 1992; and March 22,

1995, which is a component of the

State’s original final authorization and

subsequent revision applications,

specified that the Michigan Department

of Natural Resources (MDNR) was the

agency responsible for implementing

Michigan’s hazardous waste

management program. The Program

Description indicated that the Site

Review Board (SRB) also had authority

to approve or deny construction permit

applications. The SRB was subsequently

made a consultative body and the SRB’s

powers were transferred to the Director

of the MDNR by Executive Order 1991–

31, which took effect on September 2,

1993.

On July 31, 1995, the Governor of

Michigan issued Executive Order 1995–

18 (EO 1995–18), which became

effective on October 1, 1995. On January

19, 1996, Michigan submitted materials

for EPA to determine the impact of EO

1995–18 upon the authorized State

hazardous waste management program.

The materials consisted of a letter from

the Michigan Attorney General’s office

setting forth the State of Michigan’s

analysis as to why the establishment of

the new Michigan DEQ does not

represent a transfer to a ‘‘new agency’’

pursuant to 40 CFR 271.21(c), a copy of

EO 1995–18, updated letters of

delegation and procedures regarding

avoidance of conflict of interest in

contested case proceedings. On June 13,

1996, Michigan submitted a

supplemental statement of the Michigan

Attorney General regarding the

appraisal of the Attorney General of the

impact of EO 1995–18 on Michigan’s

delegated environmental programs. In

the supplemental statement, the

Attorney General explained that the

effect of EO 1995–18 was to elevate the

former Environmental Protection

Bureau of the Department of Natural

Resources to full independent

departmental status as the Department

of Environmental Quality (DEQ).

According to the Michigan Attorney

General, ‘‘the DEQ retained all of its

environmental responsibilities and

virtually all of the personnel formerly

assigned to it as a bureau of the DNR.’’