Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 61107 

Office of Ecosystem Protection, Suite 

1100 (CAP), One Congress Street, 

Boston, Massachusetts 02114–2023. 

Massachusetts Department of 

Environmental Protection, Business 

Compliance Division, One Winter 

Street, Boston, Massachusetts 04333–

0017, (617) 292–5500. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Courcier, Office of Ecosystem Protection 

(CAP), EPA-New England, Region 1, 

Boston, Massachusetts 02203, telephone 

number (617) 918–1659, fax number 

(617) 918–0659, e-mail 

courcier.john@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules Section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the 

Massachusetts Negative Declaration 

submittal as a direct final rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this action, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the Rules Section of this Federal 

Register. 

Dated: October 13, 2005. 

Robert W. Varney, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

[FR Doc. 05–20984 Filed 10–19–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 194 

[FRL–7985–8] 

Notification of Completeness of the 

Department of Energy’s Compliance 

Recertification Application for the 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of completeness of the 

Department of Energy’s Waste Isolation 

Pilot Plant Compliance Recertification 

Application and announcement of end 

of public comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA, ‘‘we’’ or ‘‘the Agency’’) 

has determined that the Department of 

Energy’s (DOE) Compliance 

Recertification Application (CRA, or 

‘‘application’’) for the Waste Isolation 

Pilot Plant (WIPP) is complete. EPA 

provided written notice of the 

completeness decision to the Secretary 

of Energy on September 29, 2005. The 

text of the letter is contained in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. The 

Agency has determined that the 

Compliance Recertification Application 

is complete, in accordance with 40 CFR 

Part 194, ‘‘Criteria for the Certification 

and Recertification of the WIPP’s 

Compliance with the 40 CFR part 191 

Disposal Regulations’’ (Compliance 

Certification Criteria). The completeness 

determination is an administrative step 

that is required by regulation, and it 

does not imply in any way that the 

Compliance Recertification Application 

demonstrates compliance with the 

Compliance Criteria and/or the disposal 

regulations. EPA is now engaged in the 

full technical review that will determine 

if WIPP remains in compliance with the 

disposal regulations. As required by the 

1992 WIPP Land Withdrawal Act and 

our implementing regulations, EPA will 

make a final recertification decision 

within six months of issuing the 

completeness letter to the Secretary of 

Energy. 

DATES: EPA opened the public comment 

period upon receipt of the Compliance 

Recertification Application (69 FR 

29646–49, May 24, 2004). Comments 

must be received by EPA’s official Air 

Docket on or before December 5, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted by mail to: EPA Docket 

Center (EPA/DC), Air and Radiation 

Docket, Environmental Protection 

Agency, EPA West, Mail Code 6102T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. Attention 

Docket ID No. OAR–2004–0025. 

Comments may also be submitted 

electronically, by facsimile, or through 

hand delivery/courier. Follow the 

detailed instructions as provided in 

Unit I.B of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa 

Sharp, telephone number: 202–343–

9265 or Ray Lee, telephone number: 

(202) 343–9601, address: Radiation 

Protection Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, NW., Mail Code 6608J, 

Washington, DC 20460. You can also 

call EPA’s toll-free WIPP Information 

Line, 1–800–331–WIPP or visit our Web 

site at http://www.epa/gov/radiation/ 

wipp. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General 

A. How Can I Get Copies of This 

Document and Other Related 

Information? 

1. Docket. EPA has established an 

official public docket for this action 

under Docket ID No. OAR–2004–0025. 

The official public docket consists of the 

documents specifically referenced in 

this action, any public comments 

received, and other information related 

to this action. Although a part of the 

official docket, the public docket does 

not include Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

The official public docket is the 

collection of materials that is available 

for public viewing at the Air and 

Radiation Docket in the EPA Docket 

Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room 

B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC. The EPA Docket 

Center Public Reading Room is open 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the Air 

and Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. 

These documents are also available for 

review in paper form at the official EPA 

Air Docket in Washington, DC, Docket 

No. A–98–49, Category II–A2, and at the 

following three EPA WIPP informational 

docket locations in New Mexico: in 

Carlsbad at the Municipal Library, 

Hours: Monday–Thursday, 10 a.m.–9 

p.m., Friday–Saturday, 10 a.m.–6 p.m., 

and Sunday, 1 p.m.–5 p.m.; in 

Albuquerque at the Government 

Publications Department, Zimmerman 

Library, University of New Mexico, 

Hours: vary by semester; and in Santa 

Fe at the New Mexico State Library, 

Hours: Monday–Friday, 9 a.m.–5 p.m. 

As provided in EPA’s regulations at 40 

CFR Part 2, and in accordance with 

normal EPA docket procedures, if 

copies of any docket materials are 

requested, a reasonable fee may be 

charged for photocopying. 

2. Electronic Access. You may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the Federal Register listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. 

An electronic version of the public 

docket is available through EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

61108 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA 

Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ 

to submit or view public comments, 

access the index listing of the contents 

of the official public docket, and to 

access those documents in the public 

docket that are available electronically. 

Once in the system, select ‘‘search,’’

then key in the appropriate docket 

identification number. 

Certain types of information will not 

be placed in the EPA Dockets. 

Information claimed as CBI and other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute, which is not 

included in the official public docket, 

will not be available for public viewing 

in EPA’s electronic public docket. EPA’s 

policy is that copyrighted material will 

not be placed in EPA’s electronic public 

docket but will be available only in 

printed, paper form in the official public 

docket. To the extent feasible, publicly 

available docket materials will be made 

available in EPA’s electronic public 

docket. When a document is selected 

from the index list in EPA Dockets, the 

system will identify whether the 

document is available for viewing in 

EPA’s electronic public docket. 

Although not all docket materials may 

be available electronically, you may still 

access any of the publicly available 

docket materials through the docket 

facility identified in Unit I.B. EPA 

intends to work towards providing 

electronic access to all of the publicly 

available docket materials through 

EPA’s electronic public docket. 

For public commenters, it is 

important to note that EPA’s policy is 

that public comments, whether 

submitted electronically or in paper, 

will be made available for public 

viewing in EPA’s electronic public 

docket as EPA receives them and 

without change, unless the comment 

contains copyrighted material, CBI, or 

other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. When EPA 

identifies a comment containing 

copyrighted material, EPA will provide 

a reference to that material in the 

version of the comment that is placed in 

EPA’s electronic public docket. The 

entire printed comment, including the 

copyrighted material, will be available 

in the public docket. 

Public comments submitted on 

computer disks that are mailed or 

delivered to the docket will be 

transferred to EPA’s electronic public 

docket. Public comments that are 

mailed or delivered to the docket will be 

scanned and placed in EPA’s electronic 

public docket. Where practical, physical 

objects will be photographed, and the 

photograph will be placed in EPA’s 

electronic public docket along with a 

brief description written by the docket 

staff. 

For additional information about 

EPA’s electronic public docket visit EPA 

Dockets online or see 67 FR 38102, May 

31, 2002. 

B. How and to Whom Do I Submit 

Comments? 

You may submit comments 

electronically, by mail, by facsimile, or 

through hand delivery/courier. To 

ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify 

the appropriate docket identification 

number in the subject line on the first 

page of your comment. Please ensure 

that your comments are submitted 

within the specified comment period. 

Comments received after the close of the 

comment period will be marked ‘‘late.’’

EPA is not required to consider these 

late comments. However, late comments 

may be considered if time permits. 

1. Electronically. If you submit an 

electronic comment as prescribed 

below, EPA recommends that you 

include your name, mailing address, 

and an e-mail address or other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment. Also include this contact 

information on the outside of any disk 

or CD ROM you submit, and in any 

cover letter accompanying the disk or 

CD ROM. This ensures that you can be 

identified as the submitter of the 

comment and allows EPA to contact you 

in case EPA cannot read your comment 

due to technical difficulties or needs 

further information on the substance of 

your comment. EPA’s policy is that EPA 

will not edit your comment, and any 

identifying or contact information 

provided in the body of a comment will 

be included as part of the comment that 

is placed in the official public docket, 

and made available in EPA’s electronic 

public docket. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. 

i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA’s 

electronic public docket to submit 

comments to EPA electronically is 

EPA’s preferred method for receiving 

comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets 

at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, and 

follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. To access EPA’s 

electronic public docket from the EPA 

Internet Home Page, select ‘‘Information 

Sources,’’ ‘‘Dockets,’’ and ‘‘EPA 

Dockets.’’ Once in the system, select 

‘‘search,’’ and then key in Docket ID No. 

OAR–2004–0025. The system is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity, 

e-mail address, or other contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. 

ii. E-mail. Comments may be sent by 

electronic mail (e-mail) to a-and-rdocket@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID 

No. OAR–2004–0025. In contrast to 

EPA’s electronic public docket, EPA’s email system is not an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to the Docket without 

going through EPA’s electronic public 

docket, EPA’s e-mail system 

automatically captures your e-mail 

address. E-mail addresses that are 

automatically captured by EPA’s e-mail 

system are included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the official 

public docket, and made available in 

EPA’s electronic public docket. 

2. By Mail. Send your comments to: 

EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Air and 

Radiation Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA West, Mail 

Code 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. 

Attention Docket ID No. OAR–2004–

0025. 

3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. 

Deliver your comments to: Air and 

Radiation Docket, EPA Docket Center, 

(EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC, Attention Docket ID No. OAR–

2004–0025. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Docket’s normal 

hours of operation as identified in Unit 

I.A.1. 

4. By Facsimile. Fax your comments 

to: (202) 566–1741, Attention Docket ID. 

No. OAR–2004–0025. 

C. What Should I Consider as I Prepare 

My Comments for EPA? 

You may find the following 

suggestions helpful for preparing your 

comments: 

1. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible. 

2. Describe any assumptions that you 

used. 

3. Provide any technical information 

and/or data you used that support your 

views. 

4. If you estimate potential burden or 

costs, explain how you arrived at your 

estimate. 

5. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns. 

6. Offer alternatives. 

7. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, 

identify the appropriate docket 

identification number in the subject line 

on the first page of your response. It 

would also be helpful if you provided 

the name, date, and Federal Register 

citation related to your comments. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 61109 

1The 1992 WIPP Land Withdrawal Act was 

amended by the ‘‘Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land 

Withdrawal Act Amendments,’’ which were part of 

the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 1997. 

II. Background 

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 

(WIPP) was authorized in 1980, under 

section 213 of the DOE National 

Security and Military Applications of 

Nuclear Energy Authorization Act of 

1980 (Pub. L. 96–164, 93 Stat. 1259, 

1265), ‘‘for the express purpose of 

providing a research and development 

facility to demonstrate the safe disposal 

of radioactive wastes resulting from the 

defense activities and programs of the 

United States.’’ WIPP is a disposal 

system for transuranic (TRU) radioactive 

waste. Developed by DOE, WIPP is 

located near Carlsbad in southeastern 

New Mexico. TRU waste is emplaced 

2,150 feet underground in an ancient 

layer of salt that will eventually ‘‘creep’’

and encapsulate the waste containers. 

WIPP has a total capacity of 6.2 million 

cubic feet of TRU waste. 

The 1992 WIPP Land Withdrawal Act 

(LWA; Pub. L. 102–579) 1 limits 

radioactive waste disposal in WIPP to 

TRU radioactive wastes generated by 

defense-related activities. TRU waste is 

defined as waste containing more than 

100 nano-curies per gram of alphaemitting radioactive isotopes, with halflives greater than twenty years and 

atomic numbers greater than 92. The 

WIPP Land Withdrawal Act further 

stipulates that radioactive waste shall 

not be TRU waste if such waste also 

meets the definition of high-level 

radioactive waste, has been specifically 

exempted from regulation with the 

concurrence of the Administrator, or has 

been approved for an alternate method 

of disposal by the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. The TRU radioactive 

waste proposed for disposal in WIPP 

consists of materials such as rags, 

equipment, tools, protective gear, and 

sludges that have become contaminated 

during atomic energy defense activities. 

The radioactive component of TRU 

waste consists of man-made elements 

created during the process of nuclear 

fission, chiefly isotopes of plutonium. 

Some TRU waste is contaminated with 

hazardous wastes regulated under the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act (RCRA; 42 U.S.C. 6901–6992k). The 

waste proposed for disposal at WIPP 

derives from Federal facilities across the 

United States, including locations in 

Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, Nevada, 

Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, and 

Washington. 

WIPP must meet EPA’s generic 

disposal standards at 40 CFR part 191, 

subparts B and C, for high-level and 

TRU radioactive waste. These standards 

limit releases of radioactive materials 

from disposal systems for radioactive 

waste, and require implementation of 

measures to provide confidence for 

compliance with the radiation release 

limits. Additionally, the regulations 

limit radiation doses to members of the 

public, and protect ground water 

resources by establishing maximum 

concentrations for radionuclides in 

ground water. To determine whether 

WIPP performs well enough to meet 

these disposal standards, EPA issued 

the WIPP Compliance Criteria (40 CFR 

Part 194) in 1996. The Compliance 

Criteria interpret and implement the 

disposal standards specifically for the 

WIPP site. They describe what 

information DOE must provide and how 

EPA evaluates the WIPP’s performance 

and provides ongoing independent 

oversight. Thus, EPA implemented its 

environmental radiation protection 

standards, 40 CFR Part 191, by applying 

the WIPP Compliance Criteria, 40 CFR 

Part 194, to the disposal of TRU 

radioactive waste at the WIPP. For more 

information about 40 CFR part 191, refer 

to Federal Register notices published in 

1985 (50 FR 38066–38089, Sep. 19, 

1985) and 1993 (58 FR 66398–66416, 

Dec. 20, 1993). For more information 

about 40 CFR part 194, refer to Federal 

Register notices published in 1995 (60 

FR 5766–5791, Jan. 30, 1995) and in 

1996 (61 FR 5224–5245, Feb. 9, 1996). 

Using the process outlined in the 

WIPP Compliance Criteria, EPA 

determined on May 18, 1998 (63 FR 

27354), that DOE had demonstrated that 

the WIPP will comply with EPA’s 

radioactive waste disposal regulations at 

Subparts B and C of 40 CFR Part 191. 

EPA’s certification determination 

permitted the WIPP to begin accepting 

transuranic waste for disposal, provided 

that other applicable conditions and 

environmental regulations were met. 

Disposal of TRU waste at WIPP began in 

March 1999. 

Since the 1998 certification decision, 

EPA has conducted ongoing 

independent technical review and 

inspections of all WIPP activities related 

to compliance with the EPA’s disposal 

regulations. The initial certification 

decision identified the starting 

(baseline) conditions for WIPP and 

established the waste and facility 

characteristics necessary to ensure 

proper disposal in accordance with the 

regulations. At that time, EPA and DOE 

understood that future information and 

knowledge gained from the actual 

operation of WIPP would result in 

changes to the best practices and 

procedures for the facility. 

In recognition of this, section 8(f) of 

the amended WIPP Land Withdrawal 

Act requires EPA to evaluate all changes 

in conditions or activities at WIPP every 

five years to determine if WIPP 

continues to comply with EPA’s 

disposal regulations for the facility. This 

determination is not subject to standard 

rulemaking procedures or judicial 

review, as stated in the aforementioned 

section of the WIPP Land Withdrawal 

Act. This first recertification process 

includes a review of all of the changes 

made at the WIPP facility since the 

original 1998 EPA certification decision. 

Recertification is not a 

reconsideration of the decision to open 

WIPP, but a process to reaffirm that 

WIPP meets all requirements of the 

disposal regulations. The recertification 

process will not be used to approve any 

new significant changes proposed by 

DOE; any such proposals will be 

addressed separately by EPA. 

Recertification will ensure that WIPP is 

operated using the most accurate and 

up-to-date information available and 

provides documentation requiring DOE 

to operate to these standards. 

EPA received DOE’s first Compliance 

Recertification Application on March 

26, 2004. On May 24, 2004, EPA 

announced the availability of the 

Compliance Recertification Application 

and EPA’s intent to evaluate compliance 

with the disposal regulations and 

compliance criteria in the Federal 

Register (69 FR 29646). At that time, 

EPA also began accepting public 

comments on the application. 

In a letter dated September 29, 2005, 

from EPA’s Director of the Office of 

Radiation and Indoor Air, the Agency 

notified DOE that it had determined that 

the Compliance Recertification 

Application for WIPP is complete. This 

determination is solely an 

administrative measure and does not 

reflect any conclusion regarding WIPP’s 

continued compliance with the disposal 

regulations. 

This determination was made using a 

number of the Agency’s WIPP-specific 

guidances; most notably, the 

‘‘Compliance Application Guidance’’

(CAG; EPA Pub. 402–R–95–014) and 

‘‘Guidance to the U.S. Department of 

Energy on Preparation for 

Recertification of the Waste Isolation 

Pilot Plant with 40 CFR Parts 191 and 

194’’ (Docket A–98–49, Item II–B3–14; 

December 12, 2000). Both guidance 

documents include guidelines 

regarding: (1) Content of certification/ 

recertification applications; (2) 

documentation and format 

requirements; (3) time frame and 

evaluation process; and (4) change 

reporting and modification. The Agency 

61110 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

developed these guidance documents to 

assist DOE with the preparation of any 

compliance application for the WIPP. 

They are also intended to assist in EPA’s 

review of any application for 

completeness and to enhance the 

readability and accessibility of the 

application for EPA and public scrutiny. 

EPA has been reviewing the 

Compliance Recertification Application 

for ‘‘completeness’’ since its receipt. 

EPA’s review identified several areas of 

the application where additional 

information was necessary to perform a 

technical evaluation. EPA sent six 

letters to DOE requesting additional 

information, which are detailed below: 

• May 20, 2004 (EPA Docket A–98–

49, II–B3–72)—EPA requested 

additional information on the 

performance assessment and 

monitoring. 

• July 12, 2004 (EPA Docket A–98–49, 

II–B3–73)—EPA requested additional 

information on waste chemistry. 

• September 2, 2004 (EPA Docket A–

98–49, II–B3–74)—EPA requested 

additional references, clarification of 

issues related to chemistry and actinide 

solubilities, waste inventory, hydrology, 

and documentation on computer codes 

and parameters. 

• December 17, 2004 (EPA Docket A–

98–49, II–B3–78)—EPA requested 

additional information on the Hanford 

tank wastes that are included in the 

WIPP waste inventory. 

• February 3, 2005 (EPA Docket A–

98–49, II–B3–79)—EPA requested 

additional information on DOE’s 

proposed MgO emplacement plan. 

• March 4, 2005 (EPA Docket A–98–

49, II–B3–80)—EPA requested 

additional information on performance 

assessment (PA) issues. 

DOE submitted the requested 

information with a series of 11 letters, 

which were sent on the following dates: 

• July 15, 2004 (EPA Docket A–98–

49, II–B2–34). 

• August 16, 2004 (EPA Docket A–

98–49, II–B2–34). 

• September 7, 2004 (EPA Docket A–

98–49, II–B2–36). 

• September 29, 2004 (EPA Docket 

A–98–49, II–B2–37). 

• October 20, 2004 (EPA Docket A–

98–49, II–B2–38). 

• November 1, 2004 (EPA Docket A–

98–49, II–B2–39). 

• December 17, 2004 (EPA Docket A–

98–49, II–B2–40). 

• January 19, 2005 (EPA Docket A–

98–49, II–B2–41). 

• March 21, 2005 (EPA Docket A–98–

49, II–B2–47). 

• May 11, 2005 (EPA Docket A–98–

49, II–B2–50). 

• September 20, 2005 (EPA Docket 

A–98–49, II–B2–51). 

All completeness related 

correspondence was placed in our 

dockets (A–98–49, EDOCKET No. OAR–

2004–0025) and on our WIPP Web site 

(http://www.epa.gov/radiation/wipp). 

Since receipt of the Compliance 

Recertification Application, EPA 

received two rounds of public 

comments from stakeholder groups 

regarding both the completeness and 

technical adequacy of the recertification 

application. In addition to soliciting 

written public comments, EPA held a 

series of public meetings in New Mexico 

during July 2004, and June 2005, to hear 

public comments and to discuss WIPP 

recertification. These comments were 

instrumental in developing EPA’s 

requests for additional information from 

DOE, particularly regarding the Hanford 

tank waste and its inclusion in the WIPP 

waste inventory. 

EPA will now evaluate the complete 

application in determining whether the 

WIPP continues to comply with the 

radiation protection standards for 

disposal. EPA will also consider any 

additional public comments and other 

information relevant to WIPP’s 

compliance. The Agency is most 

interested in whether new or changed 

information has been appropriately 

incorporated into performance 

assessment calculations for WIPP, and 

whether the potential effects of changes 

are properly characterized. 

The Agency will review DOE’s 

recertification application to ensure that 

WIPP will continue to safely contain 

TRU radioactive waste. If EPA approves 

the Compliance Recertification 

Application, it will set the parameters 

for how WIPP will be operated by DOE 

over the following five years. The 

approved Compliance Recertification 

Application will then serve as the 

baseline for the next recertification. As 

required by the WIPP Land Withdrawal 

Act, EPA will make a final 

recertification decision within six 

months of issuing its completeness 

determination. 

September 29, 2005. 

Honorable Samuel W. Bodman, 

Secretary, 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, 

DC 20585. 

Dear Mr. Secretary: 

Pursuant to section 8(f) of the Waste 

Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Land Withdrawal 

Act, as amended, and in accordance with the 

WIPP Compliance Criteria at 40 CFR 194.11, 

I hereby notify you that the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or 

‘‘the Agency’’) has determined that the U.S. 

Department of Energy’s (DOE) Compliance 

Recertification Application for WIPP is 

complete. This completeness determination 

is an administrative determination required 

under the WIPP Compliance Criteria, which 

implement the Agency’s Final Radioactive 

Waste Disposal Regulations at subparts B and 

C of 40 CFR part 191. While the 

completeness determination initiates the sixmonth evaluation period provided for in 

section 8(f)(2) of the Land Withdrawal Act, 

it does not have any generally applicable 

legal effect. Further, this determination does 

not imply or indicate that DOE’s Compliance 

Recertification Application demonstrates 

compliance with the Compliance Criteria 

and/or the Disposal Regulations. 

Section 8(f) of the amended Land 

Withdrawal Act requires EPA to evaluate all 

changes in conditions or activities at WIPP 

every five years to determine if the facility 

continues to comply with EPA’s disposal 

regulations. This first recertification process 

includes a review of all of the changes made 

at the WIPP facility since the original 1998 

EPA certification decision. 

Under the applicable regulations, EPA may 

recertify the WIPP only after DOE has 

submitted a ‘‘full’’ (or complete) application 

(see 40 CFR 194.11). Upon receipt of the 

Compliance Recertification Application on 

March 26, 2004, EPA immediately began its 

review to determine whether the application 

was complete. Shortly thereafter, the Agency 

began to identify areas of the Compliance 

Recertification Application that required 

supplementary information and analyses. In 

addition, EPA received public comments and 

held public meetings on the application that 

identified areas where additional information 

was needed for EPA’s review. 

• May 20, 2004—EPA requested additional 

information on the performance assessment 

and monitoring. 

• July 12, 2004—EPA requested additional 

information on waste chemistry. 

• September 2, 2004—EPA requested 

additional references, clarification of issues 

related to chemistry and actinide solubilities, 

waste inventory, hydrology, and 

documentation on computer codes and 

parameters. 

• December 17, 2004—EPA requested 

additional information on the Hanford tank 

wastes that are included in the WIPP waste 

inventory. 

• February 3, 2005—EPA requested 

additional information on DOE’s proposed 

MgO emplacement plan. 

• March 4, 2005—EPA requested 

additional information on performance 

assessment (PA) issues. 

DOE submitted the requested information 

with a series of 11 letters, which were sent 

on the following dates: 

• July 15, 2004. 

• August 16, 2004. 

• September 7, 2004. 

• September 29, 2004. 

• October 20, 2004. 

• November 1, 2004. 

• December 17, 2004. 

• January 19, 2005. 

• March 21, 2005. 

• May 11, 2005. 

• September 20, 2005. 

All completeness-related correspondence 

was placed in our dockets (A–98–49, 

EDOCKET OAR–2004–0025) and on our Web 

site (http://www.epa.gov/radiation/wipp). 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2005 / Proposed Rules 61111 

Based on the information provided by 

DOE, we conclude that the Compliance 

Recertification Application is now complete. 

Again, this is the initial, administrative step 

that indicates DOE has provided information 

relevant to each applicable provision of the 

WIPP Compliance Criteria and in sufficient 

detail for us to proceed with a full technical 

evaluation of the adequacy of the application. 

In accordance with section 8(f)(2) of the 

amended Land Withdrawal Act, EPA will 

make its recertification decision within six 

months of this letter. 

To the extent possible, the Agency began 

conducting a preliminary technical review of 

the application upon its submittal by DOE, 

and has provided the Department with 

relevant technical comments on an ongoing 

basis. EPA will continue to conduct its 

technical review of the Compliance 

Recertification Application as needed, and 

will convey further requests for additional 

information and analyses. The Agency will 

issue its compliance recertification decision, 

in accordance with 40 CFR part 194 and part 

191, subparts B and C, after it has thoroughly 

evaluated the complete CRA and considered 

relevant public comments. The public 

comment period on our completeness 

determination will remain open for 45 days 

following the publication of this letter in the 

Federal Register. 

Thank you for your cooperation during our 

review process. Should your staff have any 

questions regarding this request, they may 

contact Bonnie Gitlin at (202) 343–9290 or by 

e-mail at gitlin.bonnie@epa.gov. 

Sincerely, 

Elizabeth A. Cotsworth. 

Director, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air. 

Dated: October 13, 2005. 

William L. Wehrum, 

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation. 

[FR Doc. 05–20987 Filed 10–19–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 387 

[Docket No. FHWA–1997–2923] 

RIN 2126–AA82 (Formerly RIN 2126–AA28) 

Qualifications of Motor Carriers To 

Self-Insure Their Operations and Fees 

To Support the Approval and 

Compliance Process 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM); withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: This notice is a withdrawal of 

a proposed rule under RIN 2126–AA28, 

which was inadvertently deleted from a 

prior agenda. The 1999 NPRM requested 

comments on the financial security and 

collateral requirements of self-insured 

motor carriers and fees associated with 

self-insurance. Section 103 of the 

Interstate Commerce Commission 

Termination Act of 1995 (ICCTA) 

directed the Secretary to create a single, 

on-line Federal system to replace four 

existing DOT and former ICC systems—

one of those being the financial 

responsibility information system. 

Because self-insurance is an aspect of 

carrier financial responsibility, the 

agency has decided to withdraw the 

1999 NPRM and has proposed 

amendments to the self-insurance 

regulations within the context of the 

financial reporting requirements being 

proposed under a new Unified 

Registration System and announced in a 

separate NPRM. 

DATES: The NPRM published on May 5, 

1999, at 64 FR 24123 is withdrawn as 

of October 20, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Robert F. Schultz, Jr., Driver and Carrier 

Operations Division, (202) 366–4001, 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration, Department of 

Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Washington, DC 20590. Office 

hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., 

ET, Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 104(h) of the Interstate 

Commerce Commission Termination 

Act of 1995 [Pub. L. 104–88, December 

29, 1995, 109 Stat. 888] (ICCTA) 

directed the Secretary to continue to 

enforce the rules and regulations of the 

former ICC, which were in effect on July 

1, 1995, governing qualifications for 

approval of a motor carrier as a selfinsurer, until the Secretary deemed it in 

the public interest to revise those rules. 

Section 104(h) also specified that any 

revised rulemakings regarding selfinsurance must provide for the 

continuing ability of motor carriers to 

obtain self-insurance authorizations, 

and the continued qualification of all 

carriers conducting self-insured 

operations pursuant to grants issued by 

the ICC or the Secretary. On September 

23, 1997, the predecessor agency to the 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA)—the Federal 

Highway Administration, Office of 

Motor Carriers—announced its intention 

to revise the self-insurance regulations 

in an advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking (ANPRM) (62 FR 49654). 

(The Federal Highway Administration, 

Office of Motor Carriers, became 

FMCSA on January 1, 2000, pursuant to 

the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement 

Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 106–159, 113 Stat. 

1748 (December 9, 1999).) The public 

was invited to comment on a proposal 

to examine the sufficiency of the 

existing requirements for self-insurance 

authorizations, as well as the need for 

additional fees for functions performed 

in addition to the processing of the 

initial application. More specifically, 

the agency announced that it was 

considering the need for fees to cover 

costs associated with processing multicarrier applications and alterations to 

self-insurance authorizations, and for a 

monitoring fee to cover costs related to 

compliance responsibilities. The 

ANPRM solicited comments on the 

merits of continuing the self-insurance 

program and whether congressional 

action should be proposed to terminate 

the authorizations. 

On May 5, 1999, the agency proposed 

procedural changes to the self-insurance 

process for for-hire motor carriers (66 

FR 24123). Specifically, the agency 

would reevaluate the security and 

collateral requirements of any selfinsured carrier that fails to generate 

from operations, after payment of all 

expenses except annual self-insurance 

claims expenses, twice the level of cash 

needed to pay the self-insurance claims. 

An additional application fee would be 

assessed to cover carrier requests for 

modifications and alternations to selfinsurance authorizations that require a 

reevaluation of the carrier’s financial 

condition. Because the agency was able 

to process the basic first-time selfinsurance applications for less than it 

was currently charging, the fee for 

processing the initial application would 

be reduced from $4,200 to $3,000 for an 

economic cost savings. Finally, the 

NPRM proposed implementing 

additional procedures necessary for 

motor carriers to establish billing 

accounts to pay all insurance-related 

fees required by the agency. The 

proposal included a schedule of filing 

fees and general instructions regarding 

payment. 

Section 103 of ICCTA amended 

Section IV of title 49, United States 

Code by adding a new sec. 13908. 

Section 13908 directs the Secretary to 

issue regulations to replace four systems 

with a ‘‘single, on-line, Federal system.’’

The financial responsibility information 

system under 49 U.S.C. 13906 is one of 

the four systems to be merged under the 

unified system. Because the issue of 

self-insurance falls under the umbrella 

of financial responsibility, the agency 

has decided to withdraw the 1999 

NPRM and discuss its proposals within 

the context of the Unified Registration 

System (URS) NPRM (published in the