58520 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 228 / Tuesday November 28, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

(7) Prior to tending hawser;

(8) Prior to transiting Point Pinellas

Channel Light I in either direction.

(c) Each Navigational Advisory

required by this section shall be made

in the English language and will contain

the following information:

(1) The words "Hello all vessels, a

Navigational Advisory follows"

(2) Name of vessel;

(3) If engaged in towing, the nature of

the tow-

(4) Direction of Movement;

(5) Present location; and,

(6) The nature of any hazardous

conditions as defined by 33 CFR

160.203.

(d) Nothing in this section shall

supersede either the International

Regulations for Preventing Collisions at

Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS) or the Inland

Navigation Rules, as applicable, or

relieve the Master or person in charge of

the vessel of responsibility for the safe

navigation of the vessel.

Dated: October 19, 1995.

Roger T. Rufe, Jr.,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,

Seventh Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 95-29049 Filed 11-27-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-14-M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[FRL-6334-7]

Oregon: Affirmation of Immediate Final

Rule To Authorize State Hazardous

Waste Program Revision

AGENCY, Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Affirmation of immediate final

rule and response to comments.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA or the Agency) today is

responding to a significant adverse

comment received in response to EPA's

published decision in the Federal

Register at Vol. 60, No. 195, FR 52629,

October 10, 1995, to grant final

authorization of Oregon's hazardous

waste program revision under the

Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act, as amended (RCRA). After

consideration of the comment, EPA's

decision that Oregon's hazardous waste

program revision satisfies all of the

requirements necessary to qualify for

final authorization remains unchanged.

Thus, EPA approves Oregon's hazardous

waste program revision and

authorization of the revised program

shall become effective on December 7

1995.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 7 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Cheryl Williams. U.S. EPA, M/S HW105, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,

Washington 98101, Phone (206) 553-

2137

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

EPA published an Immediate Final

Rule in the Federal Register Vol. 60, No.

195 on October 10, 1995, FR 52629,

stating that authorization of a revision to

Oregon's hazardous waste program "shall become effective on December 7

1995, unless significant adverse

comments on Oregon's program revision

application are received by the close of

business on November 8, 1995." One

significant comment was received on

November 8, 1995, by the Techmcal

Staff of the Confederated Tribes of the

Umatilla Indian Reservation. EPA's

Immediate Final Decision explained

-that if an adverse comment was

received, EPA would publish either "(1)

A withdrawal of the Immediate Final

Decision or (2) a notice containing a

response to comments which either

affirms that the Immediate Final

Decision takes effect or reverses the

decision." EPA does not believe that the

significant adverse comment made by

the Technical Staff of the Confederated

Tribes of the Umatilla Indian

Reservation (Techmcal Staff of CTUIR

or Technical Staff) merits a withdrawal

of the Immediate Final Decision.

However, EPA believes that a response

to the Technical Staff of CTUIR is

important to address the concerns raised

and to affirm that the Immediate Final

Decision will take effect as described.

B. Comments Regarding the Immediate

Final Decision

The Technical Staff raised five issues

concerning the Agency's decision to

authorize Oregon's hazardous waste

program revision. The heart of the

comments go to the Technical Staff's

concern over disposal of chemical

weapons at the Umatilla Army Depot.

To address the underlying concern, EPA

reaffirms its role in environmental

protection in this country. EPA is firmly

committed to protection of human

health and the environment and to

ensuring that hazardous wastes are

managed in an environmentally sound

manner. After authonzing a state for a

revision to its hazardous waste program,

EPA functions in an oversight capacity

with a strong mandate to see that the

goals of RCRA are met. Based on its

decision to authorize a revision to

Oregon's hazardous waste program, EPA

believes that Oregon can meet its

delegated obligation to carry out a

hazardous waste program equivalent to

the federal RCRA program. EPA does

not abdicate its central role in

protection of this nation's human health

and the environment when it delegates

a program to a state. EPA continues to

monitor and assess a delegated program

and, when necessary calls upon the

Agency's own enforcement authorities

to fulfill the goals of RCRA. This core

commitment is central to RCRA and no

delegation alters the Agency's firm

stance on upholding its obligation to

protect the environment.

The specific concerns raised by the

Technical Staff can be addressed one by

one. The first issue is a concern that

Tribal staff had neither initiated nor

completed an independent Tribal

evaluation of Oregon's authority

compared to the federal requirements.

EPA appreciates the difficulty in

evaluating a state's application for

revision to its authorized program. This

complex task is detailed and resource

intensive. To assist interested parties

who wish to review a state application,

EPA makes the state application

available for review and designates staff

to be available to respond to concerns.

EPA believes that these measures,

combined with publication in two of the

largest newspapers in the state and in

the Federal Register as well as the

provision of an opportunity to comment

on an authorization decision, are

adequate. The Agency makes the

decision to authonze a state program

based on its findings that a state

program is equivalent to the federal

program, consistent on a national basis

and provides adequate enforcement.

The second issue raised by the

Technical Staff is a concern with

proposed incinerators on ceded lands. If

hazardous waste incinerators are built

and permitted under RCRA, Oregon will

have primary responsibility for

enforcing corrective action requirements

for these units. EPA will continue to

oversee and assess the delegated

program and anticipates working closely

with Oregon as Oregon initiates its

authorized corrective action program.

Through the Memorandum of

Agreement (MOA) between Oregon and

EPA, the integrity of the delegated

program will be maintained. EPA will

use the Agency's enforcement

authorities where necessary to ensure

that human health and the environment

are protected. Additionally where EPA

has trust obligations on ceded lands,

EPA will act to fulfill those obligations.

The third issue raised is a concern

that Oregon lacks a baseline

environmental and human health

monitonng system to predict, identify or

HeinOnline -- 60 Fed. Reg. 58520 1995
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 228 / Tuesday November 28, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 58521

mitigate operational or accidental

impacts. This concern raises a basic

authorization issue about the delegated

program currently in Oregon. EPA has

not identified a similar concern in

Oregon's delegated program but

appreciates the comment. Although this

concern does not effect the immediate

decision to authorize this revision to

Oregon's program, EPA will assess this

concern in light of the existing

delegated program.

The fourth issue raises a concern that

the Confederated Tribes have interests,

such as Natural Resource Trustee

authority under CERCLA and Local

Reuse of disposal of excess federal

property land issues, that are directly

impacted by the increased permitting

authority available to Oregon upon

authorization for this program revision.

EPA and Oregon will work closely as

Oregon undertakes this new delegation

of authority in its hazardous waste

program. In its evaluation of Oregon's

revision to its delegated program, EPA

has no reason to believe that these

Tribal interests will not be addressed.

The final issue raises a concern

related to emergency preparedness

should proposed hazardous waste

incinerators be sited as proposed on

ceded lands near the Umatilla

Reservation. EPA believes that

emergency preparedness and planning

is very important at all hazardous waste

management sites. All appropriate

parties should be included as part of the

emergency planmng coordination

process. EPA will encourage Oregon to

include all such appropriate parties in

this process.

After consideration of these issues,

EPA affirms its Immediate Final

Decision to grant final authorization for

Oregon's hazardous waste program

revision.

C. Decision

I conclude that the immediate final

decision, as noticed in the Federal

Register Vol. 60, No. 195, on October

10, 1995, will take effect on December

7 1995 as d3scribed. Accordingly,

Oregon is granted final authorization to

operate its hazardous waste program, as

revised.

Compliance With Ekecutive Order

12866

The Office of management and Budget

has exempted this rule from the

requirements of section 6 of Executive

Order 12866.

Certification Under the Regulatory

Flexibility Act

Pursuant to the provisions of 4 U.S.C.

605(b), I hereby certify that this

authorization will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. It does not

impose any new burdens on small

entities. This rule, therefore, does not

require a regulatory flexibility analysis.

Authority: This notice is issued under the

authority of Section 2002(a), 3006 and

7004(b) of the solid Waste Disposal Act as

amended 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).

Dated: November 14, 1995.

Chuck Clarke,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95-29036 Filed 11-27-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-60-P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

43 CFR Public Land Order 7174

[MT-930-1430-01; SDM 79849]

Withdrawal of National Forest System

Lands for the Pactola Visitor

Information Center, Pactola Marina

North, and Pactola Marina South;

South Dakota

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Public land order.

SUMMARY, This order withdraws 35 acres

of National Forest System lands from

location and entry under the United

States mining laws for a period of 20

years for the Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service to protect the Pactola

Visitor Information Center, Pactola

Marina North, and Pactola Manna

South. The lands have been and remain

open to such forms of disposition as

may by law be made of National Forest

System lands and to mineral leasing.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 28, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sandra Ward, BLM Montana State

Office, P.O. Box 36800, Billings,

Montana 59107 406-255-2949.

By virtue of the authority vested in

the Secretary of the Interior by Section

204 of the Federal Land Policy and

Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C.

1714 (1988), it is ordered as follows:

1. Subject to valid exising rights, the

following described National Forest

System lands are hereby withdrawn

from location and entry under the

United States mining laws (30 U.S.C.

Ch. 2 (1988)), but not from leasing under

the mineral leasing laws, to protect

three Forest Service recreation areas:

Black Hills Meridian

Black Hills National Forest

Pactola Visitor Information Center

T. 1N., R. 5 E.,

Sec. 2, W/2SW/4SW/4SE1/4.

The area described contains 5 acres.

Pactola Marina South

T. 1N., R. 5 E.,

Sec. 10, SW'/4 of lot 4, and

NWIANE/SE/ 4 .

The area described contains 20 acres.

Pactola Marina North

T. 2 N., R. 5 E.,

Sec. 34, SE'/4SWI4SE/a.

The area described contains 10 acres.

The total areas described above aggregate

35 acres in Pennington County.

2. The withdrawal made by this order

does not alter the applicability of those

public land laws governing the use of

the National Forest System lands under

lease, license, or permit, or governing

the disposal of their mineral or

vegetative resources other than under

the mining laws.

3. This withdrawal will expire 20

years from the effective date of this

order unless, as a result of a review

conducted before the expiration date

pursuant to section 204(f) of the Federal

Land Policy and Management Act of

1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714(f) (1988), the

Secretary determines that the

withdrawal shall be extended.

Dated: November 8, 1995.

Bob Armstrong,

Assistant Secretary of the Interior.

[FR Doc. 95-28914 Filed 11-27-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-ON-P

43 CFR Public Land Order 7175

[NM-010-1430-01; NMNM 90118

Withdrawal of Public Land and Federal

Minerals to Allow Sale of Humate; New

Mexico

AGENCY' Bureau of Land Management,

Interior.

ACTION: Public land order.

SUMMARY' This order withdraws 120

acres of public land from surface entry

and mining, and 680 acres of federally

reserved mineral interests underlying

private surface estate from mining, for a

period of 20 years, for the Bureau of

Land Management to protect an area

having high potential for development

of humate (a carbonaceous shale) from

encumbrances due to mining claim

location. The land has been and will

remain open to mineral leasing.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 28, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Margie Martinez, BLM, Rio Puerco

Resource Area Office, 435 Montano

HeinOnline -- 60 Fed. Reg. 58521 1995