Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 28397

tolerances and exemptions that are

established on the basis of a petition

under FFDCA section 408(d), such as

the tolerance in this final rule, do not

require the issuance of a proposed rule,

the requirements of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et

seq.) do not apply. In addition, the

Agency has determined that this action

will not have a substantial direct effect

on 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, entitled

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,

1999). Executive Order 13132 requires

EPA to develop an accountable process

to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input

by State and local officials in the

development of regulatory policies that

have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies

that have federalism implications’’ is

defined in the Executive Order to

include regulations that 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.’’ This final rule

directly regulates growers, food

processors, food handlers and food

retailers, not States. This action does not

alter the relationships or distribution of

power and responsibilities established

by Congress in the preemption

provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4).

For these same reasons, the Agency has

determined that this rule does not have

any tribal implications as described in

Executive Order 13175, entitled

Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR

67249, November 6, 2000). Executive

Order 13175, requires EPA to develop

an accountable process to ensure

meaningful and timely input by tribal

officials in the development of

regulatory policies that have tribal

implications. Policies that have tribal

implications is defined in the Executive

Order to include regulations that have

substantial direct effects on one or more

Indian tribes, on the relationship

between the Federal government and

the Indian tribes, or on the distribution

of power and responsibilities between

the Federal government and Indian

tribes. This rule will not have

substantial direct effects on tribal

governments, on the relationship

between the Federal government and

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities between the

Federal government and Indian tribes,

as specified in Executive 13175. Thus,

Executive Order 13175 does not apply

to this rule.

VIII. 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 this 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 this final

rule in the Federal Register. This final

rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by

5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated:May 14, 2001.

James Jones,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is

amended as follows:

PART 180—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346(a) and

371.

2. Section 180.565 is amended by

alphabetically adding commodities to

the table in paragraph (a) to read as

follows:

§ 180.565 Thiamethoxam; tolerances for

resdues.

(a) General. * * *

Commodity Parts per

million

*****

Cucurbit Vegetables Crop

Group .................................... 0.2

Fruiting Vegetables Crop Group 0.25

*****

Pome Fruit Crop Group ............ 0.2

*****

Tomato Paste ........................... 0.80

Tuberous and Corm Vegetables

Crop Subgroup ...................... 0.02

*****

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 01–12899 Filed 5–22–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 272

[FRL–6983–2]

Wisconsin: Clarification of Codification

of Approved State Hazardous Waste

Program for Wisconsin

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Clarification.

SUMMARY: Under the Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976,

as amended, the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) may grant

Final Authorization to States to operate

their hazardous waste management

programs in lieu of the Federal program.

EPA uses part 272 of title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations (40 CFR part 272)

to codify its authorization of State

programs. Through codification the

authorized elements of approved State

programs are placed in the Code of

Federal Regulations (CFR). The

codification of State programs is

designed to enhance the public’s ability

to discern the current status of the

approved State program and to better

alert the public to the specific State

regulations that the Federal government

can enforce if necessary. The purpose of

today’s Federal Register document is to

clarify EPA’s codification of

Wisconsin’s authorized hazardous waste

program.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Denise Reape, U.S. EPA Region 5, Waste

Pesticides and Toxics Division, Program

Management Branch (DM–7J), 77 W.

Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604, Phone

(312) 353–7925.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does This Action Apply to Me?

This action is directed to the public

in general. This document clarifies

certain requirements of the authorized

RCRA program in the State of Wisconsin

and, therefore, may be of particular

interest to persons who generate, treat,

store, dispose of, or otherwise handle

hazardous waste in the State of

Wisconsin.

B. How Can I Get Additional

Information, Including Copies of This

Document and Other Related

Documents?

Electronically. You may obtain

electronic copies of this document by

going to the listings from the EPA

Internet Home Page at http://

www.epa.gov/. To access this

28398 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

1Unlike the Federal RCRA program, Wisconsin’s

hazardous waste requirements do not include a

specific waiver for the double liner requirements for

RCRA regulated surface impoundments. Instead,

the Wisconsin Attorney General, in a statement

supporting State authorization, referenced the State

hardship waiver as State authority to grant such

waivers. EPA is unaware of any instance wherein

Wisconsin has granted a waiver from the double

liner requirements for surface impoundments.

document, on the Home Page select

‘‘Laws and Regulations’’ and then look

up the entry for this document under

the ‘‘Federal Register—Environmental

Documents.’’ You can also go directly to

the Federal Register listings at http://

www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. If you have any

questions regarding the information in

this notice or want copies of any other

related documents, consult the person

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT.

II. Background

A. What is Authorization?

When a state is authorized to

administer the RCRA program, EPA has

made a determination that the state’s

authorized program is equivalent to the

federal program. Thereafter the state’s

authorized laws and regulations apply

in the state in lieu of the equivalent

federal program regulations. ( See RCRA

section 3006(b) and (c)). Authorized

States are required to maintain a

hazardous waste program that is

equivalent to, consistent with, and no

less stringent than the Federal

hazardous waste program. As the

Federal hazardous waste program

changes, the States must revise their

programs and apply for authorization of

the revisions. Revisions to State

hazardous waste programs may be

necessary when Federal or State

statutory or regulatory authority is

modified or when certain other changes

occur. Authorization revision

applications generally consist of a copy

of the State regulations, a revised

Attorney General’s (AG) statement, a

revised Program Description, a revised

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), or

other documents EPA determines to be

necessary (see 40 CFR 271.21(b)(1)).

EPA maintains authority to bring

enforcement action in authorized States

under RCRA sections 3008, 3013, and

7003.

B. Why does EPA Codify Authorized

Programs?

EPA codifies authorized State

programs through incorporating the

authorized state law in the Code of

Federal Regulations, to better place

regulated entities and members of the

public on notice of the requirements

pertaining to the generation and

management of hazardous waste in a

particular State. EPA incorporates by

reference only the substantive

authorized rules because the federal

government uses its own enforcement

authorities when bringing actions for

alleged violations of the authorized state

RCRA program. 40 CFR part 272 has

been reserved for codification of

approved State RCRA programs.

C. Wisconsin

1. What is the Authorization and

Codification History for Wisconsin?

Wisconsin initially received Final

Authorization on January 31, 1986 (51

FR 3783, January 30, 1986) to

implement its base hazardous waste

management program. Wisconsin

received authorization for revisions to

its program on June 6, 1989 (54 FR

22278, May 23, 1989), January 22, 1990

(54 FR 48243, November 22, 1989),

April 24, 1992 (57 FR 15029, April 24,

1992), August 2, 1993 (58 FR 31344,

June 2, 1993), October 4, 1994 (59 FR

39971, August 5, 1994) and October 4,

1999 (64 FR 42602, August 5, 1999).

EPA uses 40 CFR 272.2501 for

codification of decisions to authorize

Wisconsin’s program and for

incorporation by reference of those

provisions of its statutes and regulations

that EPA will enforce under sections

3008, 3013 and 7003 of RCRA. EPA

codified Wisconsin’s authorized

program on April 24, 1989 (54 FR 7422,

February 21, 1989), May 29, 1990 (55 FR

11910, March 30, 1990), and November

22, 1993 (58 FR 49199).

2. Which Notices and Requirements are

Being Clarified?

In the following authorization and

codification documents, EPA included

references to a state variance authority

which allows the Wisconsin Department

of Natural Resources (WDNR) to issue

variances from hazardous waste

licensing requirements in cases of

‘‘undue or unreasonable hardship:’’

Effective date FR cite This document clarifies references to

April 24, 1989 ................ 54 FR 7422, February 21, 1989, at 7424 ............................................. Wis. Stat. 144.64(3) and WAC NR

181.55(10).

May 29, 1990 ................ 55 FR 11910, March 30, 1990, at 11911 ............................................. WAC NR 181.55(10).

August 2, 1993 .............. 58 FR 31344, June 2, 1993, at 31344 ................................................. WAC NR 181.55(10).

November 22, 1993 ...... 58 FR 49199, November 22, 1993, at 49200 ....................................... Wis. Stat. 144.64(3) and WAC NR 680.50.

October 4, 1999 ............ 64 FR 42602, August 5, 1999, at 42607 .............................................. Wis. Stat. 144.64(3) and 291.31.

There is no analogous Federal

variance authority. The purpose of this

document is to clarify the limited

circumstances under which the State

may use this authority to vary an

authorized RCRA requirement.

The Wisconsin legislature enacted the

State hardship variance in 1978 and the

WDNR adopted implementing

administrative rules in 1981. Both the

statutory and administrative provisions

have been amended and renumbered

over time; however, at all times relevant

to this clarification document the

hardship variance authority has been

codified in State law at section

144.64(3) or section 291.31 of the

Wisconsin Statutes and section NR

181.55(10) or section NR 680.50 of the

Wisconsin Administrative Code.

Consequently, this document clarifies

all references to those specific state

statutory and regulatory provisions in

the authorization and codification of

Wisconsin’s hazardous waste program.

3. What is the Clarification?

In the Federal Register documents

listed above, EPA included reference to

section 144.64(3) or section 291.31 of

the Wisconsin Statutes and section NR

181.55(10) or section NR 680.50 of the

Wisconsin Administrative Code without

explaining that the use of these

authorities to waive authorized RCRA

rules is generally limited to granting

variances from the surface

impoundment double liner

requirements of section 3005(j)(2)

through (9) and (13) of RCRA 1 or when

the State varies authorized State

requirements that are more stringent

than current Federal requirements

imposing instead the same standards as

the less stringent Federal requirements.

For example, EPA may promulgate less

stringent amendments to Federal rules

while the States, because of a temporary

lag in authorization, remain authorized

for the pre-existing more stringent rules.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 28399

States may use State waiver authorities

to relax authorized State rules to the

extent those rules are more stringent

than analogous Federal rules (See, for

example, 63 FR 65874 at 65925

(November 30, 1998)).

In addition, if a State authorized to

implement the RCRA program has a

permit waiver authority that is

analogous to EPA’s authority under

section 121(e) of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response, Compensation

and Liability Act (CERCLA) or RCRA

section 7003, it may use this authority

to waive the requirement to obtain a

RCRA permit with respect to on-site

response actions. As explained in EPA

guidance, the two preconditions to

allowing the use of this authority are

that: ‘‘(1) The State has the authority

under its own statutes or regulations to

grant permit waivers; and (2) the State

waiver authority is used in no less

stringent a manner than allowed under

Federal permit waiver authority, for

example, section 7003 of RCRA or

section 121(e) of CERCLA.’’ (See the

Memorandum, ‘‘RCRA Permit

Requirements for State Superfund

Actions’’, from J. Winston Porter to

Regional Administrators, Region I–X

(Nov. 16, 1987) (OSWER Dir. No.

9522.00–2).) Nothing in this

clarification document changes or

affects this policy in any way.

4. Summary

The references in 40 CFR 272.2501

and appendix A to part 272 to sections

144.64(3) and 291.31 of the Wisconsin

Statutes and sections NR 181.55(10) and

680.50 of the Wisconsin Administrative

Code provide notice that the State, as

part of the authorized program, may use

this authority only: (1) to grant

variances from the surface

impoundment double liner

requirements of RCRA in those cases

wherein the facility meets all of the

requirements of RCRA section 3005(j);

(2) to grant variances from more

stringent authorized requirements that

impose instead the same standards as

the less stringent federal requirement;

and (3) in the manner consistent with

sections 7003 of RCRA or 121(e) of

CERCLA, as described in applicable

EPA guidance. Use of the State hardship

variance authority with respect to any

other authorized RCRA requirements is

not part of the RCRA approved State

program. Of course, States retain

authority to waive or vary those State

requirements that are broader in scope

than, and therefore not part of, the

Federal RCRA program. Therefore, with

certain limited exceptions discussed

herein, a State hardship variance cannot

excuse compliance with RCRA program

requirements. Persons who fail to

comply with RCRA program

requirements are subject to Federal

enforcement under sections 3008, 3013,

and 7003 of RCRA.

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).

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

[FR Doc. 01–12894 Filed 5–22–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 01–1221, MM Docket No. 01–45, RM–

9997]

Digital Television Broadcast Service;

Mountain View, AR

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the

request of Arkansas Educational

Television Commission, licensee of

noncommercial educational station

KEMB(TV), substitutes DTV channel

*13 for DTV channel *35 at Mountain

View, Arkansas. See 66 FR 12748,

February 28, 2001. DTV channel *13

can be allotted to Mountain View in

compliance with the principle

community coverage requirements of

section 73.625(a) at reference

coordinates (35–48–47 N. and 92–17–24

W.) with a power of 20.0, HAAT of 425

meters and with a DTV service

population of 337 thousand. With this

action, this proceeding is terminated.

DATES: Effective July 2, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam

Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

418–1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Report

and Order, MM Docket No. 01–45,

adopted May 16, 2001, and released

May 18, 2001. The full text of this

Commission decision is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center 445 12th Street, SW.,

Washington, DC. The complete text of

this decision may also be purchased

from the Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Services,

Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20036.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Television, Digital television

broadcasting.

Part 73 of Title 47 of the Code of

Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

47 CFR Part 73—[Amended]

1. The authority citation for Part 73

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.

§ 73.622 [Amended]

2. Section 73.622(b), the Table of

Digital Television Allotments under

Arkansas, is amended by removing DTV

channel *35 and adding DTV channel

*13 at Mountain View.

Federal Communications Commission.

Barbara A. Kreisman,

Chief, Video Services Division, Mass Media

Bureau.

[FR Doc. 01–12991 Filed 5–22–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 01–1222, MM Docket No. 01–29, RM–

10044]

Digital Television Broadcast Service;

Butte, MT

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the

request of Eagle Communications, Inc.,

licensee of station KTVM(TV),

substitutes DTV channel 33 for DTV

channel 2 at Butte, Montana. See 66 FR

9062, February 6, 2001. DTV channel 33

can be allotted to Butte in compliance

with the principle community coverage

requirements of section 73.625(a) at

reference coordinates (46–00–27 N. and

112–26–30 W.) with a power of 1000,

HAAT of 576 meters and with a DTV

service population of 122 thousand.

Since Butte is located within 400

kilometers of the U.S.-Canadian border,

concurrence by the Canadian

government has been obtained for this

allotment.

With this action, this proceeding is

terminated.

DATES: Effective July 2, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam

Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

418–1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Report

and Order, MM Docket No. 01–29,