18352 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 72 /Wednesday, April 15, 1998 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 8

[FRL–5994–1]

Extension of Effective Date of

Environmental Impact Assessment of

Nongovernmental Activities in

Antarctica

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: On April 30, 1997, the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

promulgated a regulation on

environmental impact assessment of

nongovernmental activities in

Antarctica under Public Law 104–227,

the Antarctic Science, Tourism, and

Conservation Act of 1996. The April 30,

1997, Interim Final Rule applies only to

nongovernmental activities that may

occur through the 1998–99 austral

summer, to be replaced by a final rule.

The EPA had planned to promulgate the

final rule prior to October 2, 1998.

However, representatives from the

affected industry and environmental

nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)

have requested that EPA delay

promulgation of the final rule for at least

one year so that more experience with

the Interim Final Rule can be

considered in developing the final rule.

After consultation with other Federal

agencies which are involved with

nongovernmental activities in

Antarctica, EPA has determined that

this request is reasonable and that

additional time to develop the final rule

will be beneficial. In order to delay

promulgation of the final rule, EPA

must amend the Interim Final Rule to

extend its applicability through the

2000–2001 austral summer.

Accordingly, EPA is proposing this

amendment to extend the effective date

of the Interim Final Rule.

The EPA is also publishing an

identical amendment to the Interim

Final Rule as a direct amendment to the

interim final rule in the final rules

section of today’s Federal Register. The

EPA is promulgating the amendment to

extend the effective date of the Interim

Final Rule as a direct amendment to the

interim final rule without prior

proposal, because EPA views this as a

noncontroversial action and anticipates

no adverse comments. However, if the

time extension amendment in the direct

final rule receives relevant adverse

comment, then EPA will withdraw the

direct amendment to the interim final

rule prior to its effective date and

consider the comments received on it as

comments on this proposed rule. For

instructions on commenting to EPA on

this proposed rule, please see the

ADDRESSES section.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 15, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be

addressed to Mr. Joseph Montgomery or

Ms. Katherine Biggs, Office of Federal

Activities (2252A), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Joseph Montgomery or Ms. Katherine

Biggs, Office of Federal Activities

(2252A), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,

DC 20460; telephone: (202) 564–7157 or

(202) 564–7144, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For

additional information, see the direct

amendment to interim final rule

published in the final rules section of

this Federal Register. For information

on this proposed rule and the associated

direct amendment to interim final

rulemaking, see the SUMMARY section of

this document.

I. Executive Order Clearance

Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR

51,735 (October 4, 1993)) the EPA must

determine whether the regulatory action

is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to

review by the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) 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.

Pursuant to the terms of Executive

Order 12866, EPA determined that the

Interim Final Rule (62 FR 83, 23544

(April 30, 1997)) was a ‘‘significant

regulatory action.’’ Although none of the

first three criteria apply, the Interim

Final Rule raised novel legal or policy

issues arising out of legal mandates

under P.L. 104–227, the Antarctic

Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act

of 1996 and the Protocol on

Environmental Protection to the

Antarctic Treaty of 1959. Accordingly,

the Interim Final Rule was submitted to

OMB for review. Changes were made in

response to OMB recommendations.

The EPA has determined, however, that

this action to amend the effective date

of the Interim Final Rule is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ because

the legal and policies issues raised are

no longer novel and were considered

previously by OMB and because the first

three criteria still do not apply.

Accordingly, this action was not

submitted to OMB for review.

II. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The EPA determined that the Interim

Final Rule issued April 30, 1997, was

not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility

Act (RFA), which generally requires an

agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility

analysis for any proposed and final rule,

unless the agency certifies that the rule

will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. By its terms, the RFA applies

only to rules for which the Agency is

required to conduct notice-andcomment rulemaking under the

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) or

any other statute. The Interim Final

Rule was not subject to the RFA because

EPA promulgated the rule invoking the

‘‘good cause’’ exemption provided in

section 553(b) of the APA, 5 U.S.C.

553(b)(B), which removed the rule from

the APA notice and comment

requirements.

Today’s proposed regulation,

although it does no more than extend

the effective date of the Interim Final

Rule, is not exempt from APA notice

and comment requirements, and is,

therefore, subject to the requirements of

the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The

Agency has carefully assessed the

impact of this proposed regulation on

small entities, and has determined that

it is appropriate to certify that it will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

This determination is based on

several factors. First, the total number of

entities subject to the rule is small,

probably no more than 10. However, the

overwhelming majority of the affected

entities will be small. Nevertheless, the

impact of the rule will be low because

assessments are already done pursuant

to the current rule. Further, because the

Interim Final Rule, as proposed today,

only requires assessment of

environmental impacts, it will not cause

any revenue reductions. The only

economic effects of the rule on small

businesses will be limited primarily to

the cost of preparing an assessment. As
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 72 /Wednesday, April 15, 1998 / Proposed Rules 18353

explained further below in the

discussion of the Paperwork Reduction

Act, these costs should have been

relatively minor even for the first year’s

submission, which all operators

completed. Further, EPA anticipates

few, if any, new operators will enter the

field, and that for existing operators

submissions in succeeding years will be

able to re-use or modify substantial

portions of the first year’s

documentation, further reducing costs.

In addition, EPA has ensured the

impact to small entities is minimized by

drafting the Interim Final Rule such that

the requirements it imposes are no

greater than necessary to ensure that the

United States will be in compliance

with its international obligations under

the Protocol and the Treaty. Finally,

EPA has included a number of

provisions, e.g., incorporation of

information and consolidation of

documentation, in the Interim Final

Rule which should minimize the cost of

such an analysis.

III. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

and Executive Order 12875

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L. 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. The UMRA did not apply to the

Interim Final Rule because it was

necessary for the ratification and

implementation of international treaty

obligations. The Interim Final Rule was

not subject to the requirements of

sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In

any event, EPA determined that the

Interim Final Rule did not contain a

Federal mandate that may result in

annual expenditures of $100 million or

more for state, local, and tribal

governments, in the aggregate, or for the

private sector. The EPA also determined

that the Interim Final Rule contained no

regulatory requirements that might

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments under section 203 of the

UMRA. This proposed action is merely

an extension of the effective date of the

Interim Final Rule and imposes no

burdens that may result in annual

expenditures of $100 million or more.

The rule, as extended, also is not

expected to impact small governments

significantly or uniquely. Accordingly,

the requirements of UMRA do not

apply.

Executive Order 12875, Enhancing

Intergovernmental Partnerships,

likewise requires EPA to address certain

effects on state, local, and tribal

governments, but does not apply to the

private sector. Since this regulation will

affect only the private sector, and not

any local, state, or tribal governments,

the Executive Order does not apply.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection

requirements in the Interim Final Rule

were submitted for approval to the OMB

under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Under Section

1320.13 of this Act, EPA received

emergency approval, and a six month

extension of this approval, from OMB

for the Interim Final Rule. The OMB’s

approval expires in August 1998.

Information Collection Request (ICR)

Supporting Statements were prepared

by EPA for the emergency approval of

the ICR for the Interim Final Rule (ICR

No. 1808.01) and the extension of this

approval, and copies may be obtained

from Ms. Sandy Farmer, Regulatory

Information Division (2136), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460;

telephone: (202) 260–2740.

The emergency request for ICR

approval along with the Interim Final

Rule were necessary so that

implementing regulations would be in

place contemporaneously with the

United States’ ratification of the

Protocol and in order to implement its

obligations under the Protocol as soon

as the Protocol entered into force. The

Interim Final Rule provides

nongovernmental operators with the

specific environmental documentation

requirements they must meet in order to

comply with the Protocol.

Nongovernmental operators,

including tour operators, conducting

expeditions to Antarctica are required to

submit environmental documentation to

EPA that evaluates the potential

environmental impact of their proposed

activities. If EPA has no comments, or

if the documentation is satisfactorily

revised in response to EPA’s comments,

and the operator does not receive a

notice from EPA that the environmental

documentation does not meet the

requirements of Article 8 and Annex I

of the Protocol and the provisions of the

interim final regulations, the operator

will have no further obligations

pursuant to the applicable requirements

of the interim final regulations provided

that any appropriate measures, which

may include monitoring, are put in

place to assess and verify the impact of

the activity.

The type of environmental document

required depends upon the nature and

intensity of the environmental impacts

that could result from the activity under

consideration. The Interim Final Rule

provides for incorporation of material

into an environmental document by

referring to it in the document when the

effect will be to reduce paperwork.

Further, an operator may include more

than one proposed expedition within

one environmental document and one

environmental document may also be

used to address expeditions being

carried out by more than one operator

further reducing burden. In addition,

EPA anticipates that operators will

likely use the environmental documents

submitted for their 1997–1998

expeditions, with appropriate revisions,

for submittal in subsequent years under

the Interim Final Rule.

This proposed action is merely an

extension of the effective date of the

Interim Final Rule, and is being

proposed in part in response to

Antarctica tour operators. The EPA is

preparing the ICR Supporting Statement

for the Interim Final Rule taking into

account the experience of the Federal

agencies and the nongovernmental

operators, including tour operators,

subject to the Interim Final Rule during

the 1997–1998 austral season covered

by OMB’s emergency ICR approval. A

Federal Register Notice will be

published informing the public of the

availability of the Supporting Statement

for review and comment. Following the

public comment period, EPA will

address any relevant comments and

then request OMB’s approval of the ICR

for the Interim Final Rule prior to the

information collection schedule for the

1998–1999 austral season. For the

limited time the Interim Final Rule will

be in effect, the EPA anticipates that

operators will, as they did for the 1997–

1998 austral season, make one submittal

per year for all of their expeditions for

that year. No capital costs or operational

and maintenance costs are anticipated

to be incurred as a result of the ICR for

the Interim Final Rule. The following

estimates were provided in the Interim

Final Rule promulgated on April 30,

1997 (62 FR 83, 23538 (April 30, 1997)).

Frequency of Reporting: Once per

year.

Affected Public: Businesses, other

nongovernmental entities including for

profit entities, and not for profit

institutions.

Number of Respondents: 8.

Estimated Average Time Per

Respondent: 120 Hours.

Total Annual Burden Hours: 960.

Burden means the total time, effort, or

financial resources expended by persons

to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose

or provide information to or for a

Federal agency. This includes the time

needed to: review instructions; develop,

acquire, install, and utilize technology

and systems for the purposes of

collecting, validating, and verifying
18354 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 72 /Wednesday, April 15, 1998 / Proposed Rules

information, processing and

maintaining information, and disclosing

and providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information.

An agency may not conduct or

sponsor, and a person is not required to

respond to, a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid OMB

control number. The OMB control

numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed

in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter

15.

V. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act

Under the National Technology

Transfer and Advancement Act, 15

U.S.C. 272 note, EPA must use

voluntary consensus standards to carry

out policy objectives or activities unless

it would be impractical to do so. In this

case, such standards, applicable to this

regulation, do not exist. Accordingly,

the use of such standards is not

required.

VI. 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. EPA will submit a

report containing the final 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 final rule in the

Federal Register. This proposed rule is

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5

U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 8

Environmental protection, Antarctica,

Enforcement, Environmental

documentation, Environmental impact

assessment, Penalties, Prohibited acts.

Dated: April 2, 1998.

Steven A. Herman,

Assistant Administrator, Office of

Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.

[FR Doc. 98–10007 Filed 4–14–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 261

[SW–FRL–5996–2]

Hazardous Waste Management

System; Identification and Listing of

Hazardous Waste; Proposed Exclusion

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule and request for

comment.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) is proposing to grant a

petition submitted by Kokoku Steel

Cord Corporation in Scottsburg, Indiana

to exclude (or ‘‘delist’’) certain solid

wastes generated by its wastewater

treatment plant from the lists of

hazardous wastes contained in Title 40

of the Code of Federal Regulations,

Subpart D of Part 261. Since submitting

the petition, Kokoku Steel Cord has

been bought by American Steel Cord, a

division of Michelin North America,

Inc. and the name of the facility has

been changed to American Steel Cord.

American Steel Cord has stated that no

changes have occurred in the raw

material or the processes generating the

waste as described in the original

petition. American Steel Cord has

adopted the petition as its own, and has

certified that all information contained

in the original petition and in

subsequent submittals is true, accurate,

and complete. This action responds to a

‘‘delisting’’ petition submitted under

§ 260.20, which allows any person to

petition the Administrator to modify or

revoke any provision of Parts 260

through 266, 268 and 273, and under

§ 260.22, which specifically provides

generators the opportunity to petition

the Administrator to exclude a waste on

a ‘‘generator-specific’’ basis from the

hazardous waste lists. This proposed

decision is based on an evaluation of

waste-specific information provided by

the petitioner. If this proposed decision

is finalized, the petitioned waste will be

conditionally excluded from the

requirements of the hazardous waste

regulations under the Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).

DATES: EPA is requesting public

comments on this proposed decision.

Comments must be received in writing

by June 1, 1998. Comments postmarked

after the close of the comment period

will be stamped ‘‘late.’’

Any person may request a hearing on

this proposed decision by filing a

request with Norman R. Niedergang,

Director, Waste, Pesticides and Toxics

Division, at the address below, by May

15, 1998. The request must contain the

information prescribed in § 260.20(d).

ADDRESSES: Two copies of any

comments should be sent to Judy

Kleiman, Waste Management Branch

(DRP–8J), U.S. EPA Region 5, 77 W.

Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604.

Requests for a hearing should be

addressed to Norman R. Niedergang,

Director, Waste, Pesticides and Toxics

Division (D–8J), U.S. EPA Region 5, 77

W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604.

The RCRA regulatory docket for this

proposed rule is located at the U.S. EPA

Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago,

IL 60604, and is available for viewing

from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday

through Friday, excluding Federal

holidays. Call Judy Kleiman at (312)

886–1482 for appointments. The public

may copy material from the regulatory

docket at $0.15 per page.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

technical information concerning this

notice, contact Judy Kleiman at the

address above or at (312) 886–1482.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Authority

On January 16, 1981, as part of its

final and interim final regulations

implementing Section 3001 of RCRA,

EPA published an amended list of

hazardous wastes from non-specific and

specific sources. This list has been

amended several times, and is

published in §§ 261.31 and 261.32.

These wastes are listed as hazardous

because they typically and frequently

exhibit one or more of the

characteristics of hazardous wastes

identified in Subpart C of Part 261 (i.e.,

ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and

toxicity) or meet the criteria for listing

contained in § 261.11(a)(2) or (a)(3).

Individual waste streams may vary,

however, depending on raw materials,

industrial processes, and other factors.

Thus, while a waste that is described in

these regulations generally is hazardous,

a specific waste from an individual

facility meeting the listing description

may not be. For this reason, §§ 260.20

and 260.22 provide an exclusion

procedure, allowing a person to

demonstrate that a specific waste from

a particular generating facility should

not be regulated as a hazardous waste.

To have its waste excluded, a

petitioner must show that the waste

generated at the facility does not meet

any of the criteria for which the waste

was listed. See § 260.22(a)(1) and the

background documents for the listed

wastes. In addition, the Hazardous and

Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of

1984 require EPA to consider any