918 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Marina, CA, Marina Muni, VOR/DME RWY 

29, Amdt 1 

New Haven, CT, Tweed-New Haven, Takeoff 

Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 5 

Dunnellon, FL, Dunnellon/Marion Co and 

Park of Commerce, Takeoff Minimums and 

Obstacle DP, Orig 

Bainbridge, GA, Decatur Co Industrial Air 

Park, LOC/NDB RWY 27, Orig, 

CANCELLED 

Bainbridge, GA, Decatur Co Industrial Air 

Park, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Amdt 1 

Bainbridge, GA, Decatur Co Industrial Air 

Park, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 1 

Greensboro, GA, Green County Rgnl, LOC 

RWY 25, Amdt 3 

Greensboro, GA, Green County Rgnl, RNAV 

(GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 1 

Greensboro, GA, Green County Rgnl, RNAV 

(GPS) RWY 25, Amdt 1 

Greensboro, GA, Green County Rgnl, VOR/ 

DME–B, Amdt 2 

Hilo, HI, Hilo Intl, PARIS FOUR Graphic 

Obstacle DP 

Clarinda, IA, Schenck Field, GPS RWY 2, 

Orig-A, CANCELLED 

Clarinda, IA, Schenck Field, GPS RWY 20, 

Orig-B, CANCELLED 

Clarinda, IA, Schenck Field, RNAV (GPS) 

RWY 2, Orig 

Clarinda, IA, Schenck Field, RNAV (GPS) 

RWY 20, Orig 

Eagle Grove, IA, Eagle Grove Muni, NDB 

RWY 13, Amdt 2 

Eagle Grove, IA, Eagle Grove Muni, RNAV 

(GPS) RWY 13, Orig 

Eagle Grove, IA, Eagle Grove Muni, RNAV 

(GPS) RWY 31, Amdt 1 

Eagle Grove, IA, Eagle Grove Muni, Takeoff 

Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3 

Eagle Grove, IA, Eagle Grove Muni, VOR/ 

DME–A, Amdt 2 

Webster City, IA, Webster City Muni, GPS 

RWY 32, Orig, CANCELLED 

Webster City, IA, Webster City Muni, RNAV 

(GPS) RWY 32, Orig 

Webster City, IA, Webster City Muni, Takeoff 

Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig 

Topeka, KS, Philip Billard Muni, ILS OR 

LOC RWY 13, Amdt 33 

Millinocket, ME, Millinocket Muni, Takeoff 

Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3 

Granite Falls, MN, Granite Falls Muni/ 

Lenzen-Roe Memorial Fld, GPS RWY 33, 

Orig-B, CANCELLED 

Granite Falls, MN, Granite Falls Muni/ 

Lenzen-Roe Memorial Fld, RNAV (GPS) 

RWY 33, Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, ILS OR 

LOC RWY 5, Amdt 38 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, ILS OR 

LOC RWY 18C, Amdt 10 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, ILS OR 

LOC RWY 18L, Amdt 7 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, ILS OR 

LOC RWY 18R, ILS RWY 18R (CAT II), ILS 

RWY 18R (CAT III), Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, ILS OR 

LOC RWY 23, Amdt 3 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, ILS OR 

LOC RWY 36C, ILS RWY 36C (CAT II), ILS 

RWY 36C (CAT III), Amdt 16 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, ILS OR 

LOC RWY 36L, ILS RWY 36L (CAT II), ILS 

RWY 36L (CAT III), Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, ILS OR 

LOC RWY 36R, ILS RWY 36R (CAT II), ILS 

RWY 36R (CAT III), Amdt 11 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(GPS) Y RWY 5, Amdt 3 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(GPS) Y RWY 18C, Amdt 3 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(GPS) Y RWY 18L, Amdt 3 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(GPS) Y RWY 18R, Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(GPS) Y RWY 23, Amdt 1 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(GPS) Y RWY 36C, Amdt 3 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(GPS) Y RWY 36L, Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(GPS) Y RWY 36R, Amdt 3 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(RNP) Z RWY 5, Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(RNP) Z RWY 18C, Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(RNP) Z RWY 18L, Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(RNP) Z RWY 18R, Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(RNP) Z RWY 23, Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(RNP) Z RWY 36C, Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(RNP) Z RWY 36L, Orig 

Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV 

(RNP) Z RWY 36R, Orig 

Concord, NC, Concord Rgnl, Takeoff 

Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3 

Monroe, NC, Charlotte-Monroe Executive, 

Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 

1 

Gastonia, NC, Gastonia Muni, Takeoff 

Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 5 

Kindred, ND, Hamry Field, Takeoff 

Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig 

Ithaca, NY, Ithaca Tompkins Rgnl, RNAV 

(GPS) Y RWY 14, Orig 

Ithaca, NY, Ithaca Tompkins Rgnl, RNAV 

(GPS) Z RWY 14, Orig 

Ithaca, NY, Ithaca Tompkins Rgnl, VOR RWY 

14, Amdt 14 

Ithaca, NY, Ithaca Tompkins Rgnl, VOR RWY 

32, Amdt 2 

Isla De Vieques, PR, Antonio Rivera 

Rodriquez, Takeoff Minimums and 

Obstacle DP, Amdt 2 

Rock Hill, SC, Rock Hill/York Co/Bryant 

Field, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, 

Amdt 1 

Walterboro, SC, Lowcountry Rgnl, GPS RWY 

5, Orig-B, CANCELLED 

Walterboro, SC, Lowcountry Rgnl, GPS RWY 

17, Orig-A, CANCELLED 

Walterboro, SC, Lowcountry Rgnl, GPS RWY 

35, Orig-A, CANCELLED 

Walterboro, SC, Lowcountry Rgnl, ILS OR 

LOC/DME RWY 23, Orig 

Walterboro, SC, Lowcountry Rgnl, NDB RWY 

23, Amdt 12 

Walterboro, SC, Lowcountry Rgnl, RNAV 

(GPS) RWY 5, Orig 

Walterboro, SC, Lowcountry Rgnl, RNAV 

(GPS) RWY 17, Orig 

Walterboro, SC, Lowcountry Rgnl, RNAV 

(GPS) RWY 23, Orig 

Walterboro, SC, Lowcountry Rgnl, RNAV 

(GPS) RWY 35, Orig 

Graford, TX, Possum Kingdom, NDB OR 

GPS–A, Amdt 1, CANCELLED 

Graford, TX, Possum Kingdom, RNAV (GPS) 

RWY 2, Orig 

Graford, TX, Possum Kingdom, RNAV (GPS) 

RWY 20, Orig 

Graford, TX, Possum Kingdom, Takeoff 

Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig 

Houston, TX, Sugar Land Rgnl, NDB RWY 

17, Orig, CANCELLED 

Salt Lake City, UT, Salt Lake City Intl, 

Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 

11 

Martinsville, VA, Blue Ridge, Takeoff 

Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3 

Riverton, WY, Riverton Rgnl, GPS RWY 28, 

Orig-A, CANCELLED 

Riverton, WY, Riverton Rgnl, ILS OR LOC 

RWY 28, Amdt 2 

Riverton, WY, Riverton Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) 

RWY 10, Amdt 1 

Riverton, WY, Riverton Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) 

RWY 28, Orig 

Riverton, WY, Riverton Rgnl, Takeoff 

Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1 

Riverton, WY, Riverton Rgnl, VOR RWY 10, 

Amdt 9 

Riverton, WY, Riverton Rgnl, VOR RWY 28, 

Amdt 9 

On Monday, November 23, 2009 (74 FR 

224) The FAA published an Amendment in 

Docket No. 30697; Amdt No. 3348 to Part 97 

of the Federal Aviation Regulations under 

section 97.23. The following entry should not 

have been published: 

Wrangell AK, Wrangell, VOR/DME–B, Amdt 

1, CANCELLED 

[FR Doc. E9–31309 Filed 1–6–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 271 

[EPA–R10–RCRA–2009–0766; FRL–9098–6] 

Oregon: Final Authorization of State 

Hazardous Waste Management 

Program Revision 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Oregon has applied to EPA for 

final authorization of certain changes to 

its hazardous waste management 

program under the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act, as 

amended (RCRA). On November 18, 

2009, EPA published a proposed rule to 

authorize the changes and opened a 

public comment period under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R10–RCRA–2009–0766. The 

comment period closed on December 

18, 2009. EPA has decided that the 

revisions to the Oregon hazardous waste 

management program satisfy all of the 

requirements necessary to qualify for 

final authorization and EPA is 

authorizing these revisions to Oregon’s 


cprice-sewell on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 919 

authorized hazardous waste 

management program in this final rule. 

DATES: Effective Date: Final 

authorization for the revisions to the 

hazardous waste management program 

in Oregon shall be effective at 1 p.m. 

EST on January 7, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: EPA established a docket 

for this action under Docket ID No. 

EPA–R10–RCRA–2009–0766. All 

documents in the docket are available 

electronically on the Web site http:// 

www.regulations.gov. A hard copy of the 

authorization application is also 

available for viewing, during normal 

business hours, at the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 10, Office of Air Waste and 

Toxics, 1200 Sixth Avenue., Suite 900, 

Seattle, Washington 98101, contact Nina 

Kocourek at (206) 553–6502; or at the 

Oregon Department of Environmental 

Quality, 811 SW Sixth, Portland, Oregon 

97204, contact Scott Latham at (503) 

229–5953. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nina Kocourek, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of 

Air, Waste & Toxics (AWT–122), 1200 

Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, 

Washington 98101, phone number: 

(206) 553–6502, e-mail: 

kocourek.nina@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Why Are Revisions to State 

Programs Necessary? 

States which have received final 

authorization from EPA under RCRA 

section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must 

maintain a hazardous waste 

management program that is equivalent 

to and consistent with the Federal 

program. States are required to have 

enforcement authority which is 

adequate to enforce compliance with the 

requirements of the hazardous waste 

management program. Under section 

3009, States are not allowed to impose 

any requirements which are less 

stringent than the Federal program. 

Changes to State programs may be 

necessary when Federal or State 

statutory or regulatory authority is 

modified or when certain other changes 

occur. Most commonly, States must 

change their programs because of 

changes to EPA’s regulations codified in 

Title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) Parts 124, 260 

through 268, 270, 273, and 279. 

B. What Decisions Have We Made in 

This Rule? 

EPA has made a final determination 

that Oregon’s application to revise its 

authorized program meets all of the 

statutory and regulatory requirements 

established by RCRA. Therefore, we are 

granting Oregon final authorization to 

operate its hazardous waste 

management program with the changes 

described in the authorization 

application. Oregon will have 

responsibility for permitting Treatment, 

Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) 

within its borders, except in Indian 

country (18 U.S.C. 1151), and for 

carrying out the aspects of the RCRA 

program described in its revised 

program application, subject to the 

limitations of the Hazardous and Solid 

Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). 

New Federal requirements and 

prohibitions imposed by Federal 

regulations that EPA promulgates under 

the authority of HSWA, and which are 

not less stringent than existing 

requirements, take effect in authorized 

States before the States are authorized 

for the requirements. Thus, EPA will 

implement those requirements and 

prohibitions in Oregon, including 

issuing permits, until the State is 

granted authorization to do so. 

C. What Is the Effect of This 

Authorization Decision? 

The effect of this action is that a 

facility in Oregon subject to RCRA will 

have to comply with the authorized 

State requirements in lieu of the 

corresponding Federal requirements in 

order to comply with RCRA. 

Additionally, such persons will have to 

comply with any applicable Federal 

requirements, such as, for example, 

HSWA regulations issued by EPA for 

which the State has not received 

authorization, and RCRA requirements 

that are not supplanted by authorized 

State-issued requirements. Oregon has 

enforcement responsibilities under its 

State hazardous waste management 

program for violations of its currently 

authorized program and will have 

enforcement responsibilities for the 

revisions which are the subject of this 

final rule. EPA continues to have 

independent enforcement authority 

under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, 

and 7003, which includes, among 

others, the authority to: 

• Conduct inspections; require 

monitoring, tests, analyses, or reports; 

• Enforce RCRA requirements, 

including State program requirements 

that are authorized by EPA and any 

applicable Federally-issued statutes and 

regulations; suspend, terminate, modify 

or revoke permits; and 

• Take enforcement actions regardless 

of whether the State has taken its own 

actions. 

This action approving these revisions 

will not impose additional requirements 

on the regulated community because the 

regulations for which Oregon’s program 

is being authorized are already effective 

under State law. 

D. What Were the Comments on EPA’s 

Proposed Rule? 

On November 18, 2009 (74 FR 59497), 

EPA published a proposed rule to grant 

authorization of changes to Oregon’s 

hazardous waste management program 

subject to public comment. The public 

comment period opened November 18, 

2009 and ended on December 18, 2009. 

The Agency did not receive any 

comments on the proposed rule. 

E. What Has Oregon Previously Been 

Authorized for? 

Oregon initially received final 

authorization on January 30, 1986, 

effective January 31, 1986 (51 FR 3779), 

to implement the RCRA hazardous 

waste management program. EPA 

granted authorization for changes to 

Oregon’s program on March 30, 1990, 

effective on May 29, 1990 (55 FR 

11909); August 5, 1994, effective 

October 4, 1994 (59 FR 39967); June 16, 

1995, effective August 15, 1995 (60 FR 

31642); October 10, 1995, effective 

December 7, 1995 (60 FR 52629); 

September 10, 2002, effective September 

10, 2002 (67 FR 57337); and June 26, 

2006 effective June 26, 2006 (71 FR 

36216). 

F. What Changes Are We Authorizing 

With This Action? 

EPA is authorizing revisions to 

Oregon’s authorized hazardous waste 

management program described in 

Oregon’s official program revision 

application, submitted to EPA on 

October 15, 2009 and deemed complete 

by EPA on October 23, 2009. EPA has 

determined that Oregon’s hazardous 

waste management program revisions, 

as described in the State’s authorization 

revision application dated October 15, 

2009 satisfy the requirements necessary 

to qualify for final authorization. The 

following table identifies those 

equivalent and more stringent State 

regulatory analogues to the Federal 

regulations which will be authorized 

with this action. The referenced 

analogous State authorities were legally 

adopted and effective as of June 25, 

2009. 


cprice-sewell on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES
920 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Description of Federal requirements 

CL1 Federal Register reference 

Analogous State authority 

(Oregon administrative rules 

(OAR 340–* * *) 

Land Disposal Restrictions: Treatment Variance for Radioactively Contaminated Batteries, CL 201.67 FR 62618, 11/21/2002 ........... ¥100–0002. 

NESHAP: Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Hazardous Waste 

Combustors-Corrections, CL 202.

67 FR 77687, 12/19/2002 ........... ¥100–0002. 

Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of hazardous Waste; Used Oil Management Standards, CL 203.68 FR 44659, 7/30/2003 ............. ¥100–0002. 

NESHAP: Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks, CL 

205.

69 FR 22601, 4/26/2004 ............. ¥100–0002. 

Non-wastewaters from Dyes and Pigments, CL 206 .................................. 70 FR 9138, 2/24/2005 ............... ¥100–0002. 

Non-wastewaters from Dyes and Pigments Correction, CL 206.1 ............. 70 FR 35032, 6/13/2005 ............. ¥100–0002. 

Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest, CL 207 2 ........................................... 70 FR 10776, 3/4/2005 ............... ¥100–0002. 

Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest Correction, CL 207.1.3 ...................... 70 FR 35034, 6/16/2005 ............. ¥100–0002. 

Methods Innovation; SW–846, CL 208 ....................................................... 70 FR 34538, 6/14/2005 ............. ¥100–0002. 

Methods Innovation; SW–846 Correction, CL 208.1 ................................... 70 FR 44150, 8/1/2005 ............... ¥100–0002. 

Mercury Containing Equipment, CL 209 ..................................................... 70 FR 45508, 8/5/2005 ............... ¥100–0002. 

Headworks Exemption, CL 211 ................................................................... 70 FR 57769, 10/4/2005 ............. ¥100–0002. 

NESHAP: Phase I Final Replacement Standards, CL 212 ......................... 70 FR 59402, 10/12/2005 ........... ¥100–0002. 

Burden Reduction Rule, CL 213 3 ............................................................... 71 FR 16862, 4/4/2006 ............... ¥100–0002; 

¥104–0021(1), (2) and (3); 

¥105–0140(1), (2), (3), (4) 

and (5). 

CFR Corrections Rule 1, CL 214 ................................................................ 71 FR 40254, 7/14/2006 ............. ¥100–0002. 

CRT Exclusion, CL 215 ............................................................................... 71 FR 42928, 7/28/2006 ............. ¥100–0002. 

1 CL (Checklist) is a document that addresses the specific changes made to the Federal regulations by one or more related final rules published in the Federal Register. EPA develops these checklists as tools to assist States in developing their authorization application and in documenting specific State regulations analogous to the Federal regulations. For more information see EPA’s RCRA State Authorization Web page at 

http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/osw/laws-regs/state/index.htm. 2 Concurrent with the incorporation by reference of this rule package on June 18, 2009, the Environmental Quality Commission repealed a 

State-only hazardous waste manifest rule (OAR–34–102–0060) that had previously been authorized by EPA. The State took this action to avoid 

any potential conflict with the Federal Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest Rules (CL 207 and 207.1) which are incorporated by reference into Oregon’s hazardous waste rules and effective state law as of June 25, 2009. 3State rule contains some more stringent provisions. For identification of the more stringent State provisions refer to the authorization revision 

application and the discussion in Section G of this rule. 

G. Where Are the Revised State Rules 

Different From the Federal Rules? 

This section discusses differences 

between Oregon’s authorized revisions 

and the Federal regulations. EPA has 

made a final determination that the 

State does have more stringent 

requirements related to the Federal 

Burden Reduction Rule (70 FR 16862, 

April 4, 2006). 

In 1999, EPA initiated a new Federal 

program, National Environmental 

Performance Track. This was a 

voluntary program designed to 

recognize facilities that had a sustained 

record of compliance and implemented 

high quality environmental management 

systems. EPA provided exclusive 

regulatory and administrative benefits to 

the Performance Track member 

facilities. The State of Oregon did not 

participate in the Federal National 

Environmental Performance Track 

Program. In May 2009, EPA terminated 

the Federal National Performance Track 

Program (74 FR 22742, May 14, 2009); 

therefore there are no current Federal 

Performance Track member facilities. 

However, EPA did not remove the 

Federal rules applicable to the 

Performance Track member facilities 

from its regulations, and if EPA’s 

Performance Track Program were 

reinstated these Federal rules would 

continue to be applicable to future 

member facilities. 

The State incorporated by reference 

the Federal Burden Reduction Rule (70 

FR 16862, April 4, 2006), which 

included special allowances to lower 

priorities on routine inspections for 

Performance Track member facilities. 

The State also adopted rules which 

deleted those portions of the rule that 

referenced Federal Performance Track 

member facilities. The effect of deleting 

those references is that the State’s rules 

do not allow any special or 

administrative benefits for Performance 

Track member facilities. Therefore, the 

State’s rules found at OAR 340–104– 

0021(1), (2) and (3); OAR 340–105– 

0140(1), (2), (3), (4) and (5) are more 

stringent than those corresponding 

federal counterparts found at 40 CFR 

264.15(b)(4) and (5); 40 CFR 264.174; 40 

CFR 264.195(e)(1); 40 CFR 265.15(b)(4) 

and (5); 40 CFR 265.174; 40 CFR 

265.195(d); and 40 CFR 265.201(e). 

H. Who Handles Permits After the 

Authorization Takes Effect? 

Oregon will continue to issue permits 

for all the provisions for which it is 

authorized and administer the permits it 

issues. If EPA issued permits prior to 

authorizing Oregon for these revisions, 

these permits would continue in force 

until the effective date of the State’s 

issuance or denial of a State hazardous 

waste permit, at which time EPA would 

modify the existing EPA permit to 

expire at an earlier date, terminate the 

existing EPA permit for cause, or allow 

the existing EPA permit to otherwise 

expire by its terms, except for those 

facilities located in Indian Country. EPA 

will not issue new permits or new 

portions of permits for provisions for 

which Oregon is authorized after the 

effective date of this authorization. EPA 

will continue to implement and issue 

permits for HSWA requirements for 

which Oregon is not yet authorized. 

Oregon will have responsibility for 

permitting Treatment, Storage, and 

Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) within its 

borders, except in Indian country (18 

U.S.C. 1151), and for carrying out the 

aspects of the RCRA program described 

in its revised program application, 

subject to the limitations of the 

Hazardous and Solid Waste 

Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New 

Federal requirements and prohibitions 

imposed by Federal regulations that 

EPA promulgates under the authority of 

HSWA, and which are not less stringent 

than existing requirements, take effect 

in authorized States before the States are 


cprice-sewell on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 921 

authorized for the requirements. Thus, 

EPA will implement those requirements 

and prohibitions in Oregon, including 

issuing permits, until the State is 

granted authorization to do so. 

I. What Is Codification and Is EPA 

Codifying Oregon’s Hazardous Waste 

Management Program as Authorized in 

This Rule? 

Codification is the process of placing 

the State’s statutes and regulations that 

comprise the State’s authorized 

hazardous waste management program 

into the Code of Federal Regulations. 

This is done by referencing the 

authorized State rules in 40 CFR Part 

272. EPA is reserving the amendment of 

40 CFR Part 272, Subpart MM for 

codification to a later date. 

J. How Does This Action Affect Indian 

Country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in Oregon? 

EPA’s decision to authorize the 

Oregon hazardous waste management 

program does not include any land that 

is, or becomes after the date of this 

authorization ‘‘Indian Country,’’ as 

defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. This 

includes: (1) All lands within the 

exterior boundaries of Indian 

reservations within or abutting the State 

of Oregon; (2) Any land held in trust by 

the U.S. for an Indian tribe; and (3) Any 

other land, whether on or off an Indian 

reservation, that qualifies as Indian 

country. Therefore, this action has no 

effect on Indian country. EPA retains 

jurisdiction over ‘‘Indian Country’’ as 

defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151, and EPA will 

continue to implement and administer 

the RCRA program on these lands. 

K. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This final rule revises the State of 

Oregon’s authorized hazardous waste 

management program pursuant to 

section 3006 of RCRA and imposes no 

requirements other than those currently 

imposed by State law. This final rule 

complies with applicable executive 

orders and statutory provisions as 

follows: 

1. Executive Order 12866 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency 

must determine whether the regulatory 

action is ‘‘significant’’, and therefore 

subject to OMB review and the 

requirements of the Executive Order. 

The Executive 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. EPA 

has determined that this final rule is not 

a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

the terms of Executive Order 12866 and 

is therefore not subject to OMB review. 

2. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., because this 

final rule does not establish or modify 

any information or recordkeeping 

requirements for the regulated 

community and only seeks to authorize 

the pre-existing requirements under 

State law and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

State law. 

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 

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 in Title 

40 of the CFR are listed in 40 CFR Part 

9. 

3. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires Federal agencies to 

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis 

of any rule subject to notice and 

comment rulemaking requirements 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

or any other statute unless the agency 

certifies that the rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. For 

purposes of assessing the impacts of 

today’s final rule on small entities, 

small entity is defined as: (1) A small 

business defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s size regulations at 13 

CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district, or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. As part of the 

State’s rule development process, the 

State of Oregon prepared a ‘‘Department 

of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Chapter 

340, Proposed Rulemaking Statement of 

Need and Fiscal and Economic Impact’’ 

which included an analysis on impacts 

to small businesses. The state concluded 

that there are no economic or fiscal 

impacts resulting from DEQ’s proposed 

rulemaking. See the Oregon 

Environmental Quality Commission 

Agenda, dated June 19, 2009, Action 

Item N—Hazardous Waste Omnibus 

Rulemaking, Attachment E, for the DEQ 

‘‘Impact to Small Business Analysis’’ 

http://www.deq.state.or.us/about/eqc/ 

agendas/2009/ 

2009juneEQCagenda.htm. I certify that 

this final rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because the 

final rule will only have the effect of 

authorizing pre-existing requirements 

under State law and imposes no 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by State law. 

4. Unfunded Mandates Reform 

This action contains no Federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Pub. 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. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 

EPA generally must prepare a written 

statement, including a cost-benefit 

analysis, for proposed and final rules 

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures and final rules 

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures to State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or to the private sector, of $100 million 

or more in any one year. Before 

promulgating an EPA rule for which a 

written statement is needed section 205 


cprice-sewell on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES
922 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

of the UMRA generally requires EPA to 

identify and consider a reasonable 

number of regulatory alternatives and 

adopt the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative 

that achieves the objectives of the rule. 

The provisions of section 205 do not 

apply when they are inconsistent with 

applicable law. Moreover, section 205 

allows EPA to adopt an alternative other 

than the least costly, most cost-effective, 

or least burdensome alternative if the 

Administrator publishes with the rule 

an explanation why the alternative was 

not adopted. Before EPA establishes any 

regulatory requirements that may 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments, including tribal 

governments, it must have developed 

under section 203 of the UMRA a small 

government agency plan. The plan must 

provide for notifying potentially 

affected small governments, enabling 

officials of affected small governments 

to have meaningful and timely input in 

the development of EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising 

small governments on compliance with 

the regulatory requirements. Today’s 

action contains no Federal mandates 

(under the regulatory provisions of Title 

II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. It 

imposes no new enforceable duty on 

any State, local or tribal governments or 

the private sector. Similarly, EPA has 

also determined that this action 

contains no regulatory requirements that 

might significantly or uniquely affect 

small government entities. Therefore, 

today’s action is not subject to the 

requirements of sections 202 and 203 of 

the UMRA. 

5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This final rule does not have 

federalism implications. It will not 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 various levels of 

government, as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999). This final rule authorizes preexisting State rules. Therefore, 

Executive Order 13132 does not apply 

to this final rule. 

6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (59 FR 

22951, November 9, 2000), 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.’’ This final rule does not 

have tribal implications, as specified in 

Executive Order 13175 because EPA 

retains its authority over Indian 

Country. Therefore, Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to this final rule. 

7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it 

approves a state program. 

8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This final rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001) because it is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as defined under 

Executive Order 12866. 

9. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272), 

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus bodies. The 

NTTAA directs EPA to provide 

Congress, through OMB, explanations 

when the Agency decides not to use 

available and applicable voluntary 

consensus standards. This final 

rulemaking does not involve technical 

standards. Therefore, EPA will not be 

considering the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

10. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and Low 

Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. EPA 

has determined that this final rule will 

not have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority or low-income 

populations. This final rule does not 

affect the level of protection provided to 

human health or the environment 

because this rule authorizes pre-existing 

State rules which are equivalent to, and 

no less stringent than existing federal 

requirements. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Confidential business information, 

Hazardous materials transportation, 

Hazardous waste, Indians—lands, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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). 

Dated: December 23, 2009. 

Michelle L. Pirzadeh, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13 Filed 1–6–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION 

SAFETY BOARD 

49 CFR Part 830 

Notification and Reporting of Aircraft 

Accidents or Incidents and Overdue 

Aircraft, and Preservation of Aircraft 

Wreckage, Mail, Cargo, and Records 

AGENCY: National Transportation Safety 

Board (NTSB). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The NTSB is amending its 

regulations concerning notification and 

reporting requirements regarding 

aircraft accidents or incidents. In 

particular, the NTSB is adding 

regulations to require operators to report 

certain incidents to the NTSB. The 

NTSB is also amending existing 

regulations to provide clarity and ensure 

that the appropriate means for notifying 

the NTSB of a reportable incident is 

listed correctly in the regulation. 


cprice-sewell on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES