13722 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Notices

[FRL–5171–7]

National Advisory Council for

Environmental Policy and Technology;

Public Meetings

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public meetings.

SUMMARY: Under the Federal Advisory

Committee Act, Public Law 92–463,

EPA gives notice of a two-day series of

meetings involving four of the Standing

Committees of the National Advisory

Council for Environmental Policy and

Technology (NACEPT). NACEPT

provides advice and recommendations

to the Administrator of EPA on a broad

range of environmental policy issues.

These meetings are being held to

continue discussions of

recommendations from these NACEPT

Committees on actions EPA can take to

implement Community-Based

Environmental Protection.

The four NACEPT Committees that

will be meeting are:

• The Ecosystems Sustainable

Economies Committee—which is

examining issues associated with

harmonizing economic activity and

ecosystem management, and is focusing

on the economic, social, and political

factors needed to achieve sustainable

economies.

• The Ecosystems Information and

Assessments Committee—which is

examining the role and use of data and

information in ecosystem management

strategies, including data needs, data

accessibility, and opportunities for

partnerships and data sharing with

public and private organizations.

• The Ecosystems Implementation

Tools Committee—which is evaluating

the opportunities to re-orient existing

statutory and regulatory authorities to

integrate place-driven environmental

management into the Agency’s decisionmaking processes.

• The NACEPT Executive

Committee—which serves as a steering

Committee for all NACEPT activities

and is coordinating the efforts of the

three NACEPT Ecosystems Committees.

Scheduling constraints preclude oral

comments from the public during the

meeting. Written comments can be

submitted by mail and will be

transmitted to Committee members for

consideration

DATES: The public meetings will be held

on Wednesday, April 12, and Thursday,

April 13, 1995. The NACEPT Executive

Committee will meet in plenary session

from 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on

Wednesday, April 12, and again on

Thursday, April 13 from 3:00 p.m. to

5:00 p.m. The Ecosystems Sustainable

Economies Committee, the Ecosystems

Information and Assessments

Committee, and the Ecosystems

Implementation Tools Committee will

meet concurrently from 1:00 p.m. to

5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, April 12, and

again from 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on

Thursday, April 13. On both days, the

meetings will be held at the Dupont

Plaza Hotel; 1500 New Hampshire

Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to: Abby J. Pirnie, Director,

Office of Cooperative Environmental

Management, U.S. EPA (1601), 401 M.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Abby J. Pirnie, Designated Federal

Official, Direct line (202) 260–8079,

Secretary’s line (202) 260–7567.

Dated: March 8, 1995.

Abby J. Pirnie,

Designated Federal Official.

[FR Doc. 95–6271 Filed 3–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

[FRL–5171–9]

State of New York: Final Determination

of Adequacy of State/Tribal Municipal

Solid Waste Permit Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of final determination of

adequacy to fully approve the New York

State Municipal Solid Waste Permit

Program.

SUMMARY: Section 4005(c)(1)(B) of the

Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act (RCRA), as amended by the

Hazardous and Solid Waste

Amendments (HSWA) of 1984, requires

States to develop and implement permit

programs to ensure that municipal solid

waste landfills (MSWLFs) which may

receive hazardous household waste or

small quantity generator waste will

comply with the revised Federal

MSWLF Criteria (40 CFR Part 258).

RCRA Section 4005(c)(1)(C) requires the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

to determine whether States have

adequate ‘‘permit’’ programs for

MSWLFs, but does not mandate

issuance of a rule for such

determinations. EPA has drafted and is

in the process of proposing a State/

Tribal Implementation Rule (STIR) that

will provide procedures by which EPA

will approve, or partially approve,

State/Tribal landfill permit programs.

The Agency intends to approve

adequate State/Tribal MSWLF permit

programs as applications are submitted.

Thus, these approvals are not dependent

on final promulgation of the STIR. Prior

to promulgation of the STIR, adequacy

determinations will be made based on

the statutory authorities and

requirements. In addition, States/Tribes

may use the draft STIR as an aid in

interpreting these requirements. The

Agency believes that early approvals

have an important benefit. Approved

State/Tribal permit programs provide

interaction between the State/Tribe and

the owner/operator regarding sitespecific permit conditions. Only those

owners/operators located in State/Tribes

with approved permit programs can use

the site-specific flexibility provided by

Part 258 to the extent the State/Tribal

permit program allows such flexibility.

EPA notes that regardless of the

approval status of a State/Tribe and the

permit status of any facility, the Federal

landfill criteria will apply to all

permitted and unpermitted MSWLF

facilities.

The State of New York applied for a

determination of adequacy under

section 4005 of RCRA. The components

of authority and capability were

contained in New York State’s

application and its revisions. EPA

reviewed New York State’s application,

and certain revisions thereto, and on

July 28, 1994, proposed a determination

that New York State’s MSWLF permit

program is adequate to ensure

compliance with the revised MSWLF

Criteria. After consideration of all

comments received regarding the

tentative determination of adequacy,

EPA is today issuing a final

determination that New York State’s

program is adequate.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The determination of

adequacy for the New York State shall

be effective on March 14, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Savetsky, U.S. EPA Region II,

Mail Stop 2AWM, Room 1006, 26

Federal Plaza, New York, New York,

10278, telephone (212) 637–4098.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

On October 9, 1991, EPA promulgated

revised Criteria for MSWLFs (40 CFR

Part 258). Subtitle D of RCRA, as

amended by the Hazardous and Solid

Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA),

requires States to develop permitting

programs to ensure that facilities

comply with the Federal Criteria under

Part 258. Subtitle D also requires in

Section 4005 that EPA determine the

adequacy of State municipal solid waste

landfill permit programs to ensure that

facilities comply with the revised

Federal Criteria. To fulfill this

requirement, the Agency has drafted
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Notices 13723

and is in the process of proposing a

State/Tribal Implementation Rule

(STIR). The rule will specify the

requirements which State/Tribal

programs must satisfy to be determined

adequate.

EPA intends to approve State/Tribal

MSWLF permit programs prior to the

promulgation of STIR. EPA interprets

the requirements for States or Tribes to

develop ‘‘adequate’’ programs for

permits or other forms of prior approval

to impose several minimum

requirements. First, each State/Tribe

must have enforceable standards for

new and existing MSWLFs that are

technically comparable to EPA’s revised

MSWLF criteria. Next, the State/Tribe

must have the authority to issue a

permit or other notice of prior approval

to all new and existing MSWLFs in its

jurisdiction. The State/Tribe also must

provide for public participation in

permit issuance and enforcement as

required in Section 7004(b)(1) of RCRA.

Finally, EPA believes that the State/

Tribe must show that it has sufficient

compliance monitoring and

enforcement authorities to take specific

action against any owner or operator

that fails to comply with an approved

MSWLF program.

EPA Regions will determine whether

a State/Tribe has submitted an

‘‘adequate’’ program based on the

interpretation outlined above. EPA

plans to provide more specific criteria

for this evaluation when it proposes the

State/Tribal Implementation Rule. EPA

expects States/Tribes to meet all of these

requirements for all elements of a

MSWLF program before it gives full

approval to a MSWLF program.

On September 24, 1993, the State of

New York submitted an application for

adequacy determination for New York

State’s municipal solid waste landfill

permit program. On March 14, 1994,

May 10, 1994, and June 28, 1994, New

York made revisions to its original

submission. On July 28, 1994, after

reviewing New York State application

and the revised submissions, EPA

published a tentative determination of

adequacy for all portions of New York

State’s program. Further background on

the tentative determination of adequacy

appears at 59 FR 38463, July 28, 1993.

Along with the tentative

determination, EPA announced the

availability of the application for public

comment. New York State’s application

for program adequacy determination

and its revisions were available for

public review and comment at the New

York State Department of

Environmental Conservation, in Albany

New York and at the EPA Region II

Library in New York City. The public

comment period commenced on July 28,

1994 and ended on September 13, 1994.

Although RCRA does not require EPA

to hold a hearing on any determination

to approve a State/Tribe’s MSWLF

program, the Region scheduled two

public hearings on this tentative

determination. A public hearing was

held in Albany New York and in New

York City. A summary of the comments

received, and EPA’s responses thereto is

contained in the public comment

section of this notice.

On October 9, 1993, New York, acting

through the New York State Department

of Environmental Conservation, adopted

comprehensive, revised regulations

governing solid waste disposal. These

regulations are patterned after the 40

CFR Part 258 criteria, and are intended

to bring New York into full conformity

with the Federal criteria. The New York

State Department of Environmental

Conservation has sufficient authority

and responsibility for implementing and

enforcing solid waste management

regulations, including a permit program,

inspection authority and enforcement

activities.

New York does not have the statutory

authority to enforce the MSWLF permit

program on Indian Lands. MSWLFs

located on Indian Lands are subjected to

the Federal Criteria.

In addition, in its application, New

York states that adequate technical,

support and legal personnel will be

assigned to implement its permit

program.

B. Public Comment

A summary of the public comments

received on the tentative determination

of adequacy and EPA’s responses

thereto follows below. The major

comments suggested the Fresh Kills

landfill in Staten Island, New York is

illegally operating without a permit and

is continuing to operate under consent

orders since 1980. The commentors

believed that this demonstrates the

inability of New York to effectively

enforce landfill criteria. A facility not

meeting Federal Criteria must be

upgraded in a reasonable time to meet

such criteria before or after approval of

the state program. Upgrading can take

place concurrent with or after state

program approval. The use of

enforcement tools such as consent

orders as a method by which a facility

is brought into compliance is not a basis

for disapproving a state program. In fact,

preliminary findings of an EPA study of

the Fresh Kills facility compliance

status indicates relatively minor

violations currently exist and the

facility exceeds some Federal

requirements such as groundwater

monitoring. In fact, we see no loss of

enforcement authority by approving the

State program. The State regulatory

program will enhance compliance with

Federal Criteria which remain in effect

in any case.

EPA believes that the State has the

statutory and regulatory authority to

implement and enforce such a program.

Many of the numerous citings of past

and or continuing site-specific

violations do not recognize that the

State Part 360 regulations underwent a

significant revision which became

effective on October 9, 1993, to conform

to the Federal Part 258 Criteria.

Landfill closures in New York State

have been primarily a result of the State

enforcement of policies and procedures

for compliance with laws and

regulations governing closures of active

solid waste landfills. In 1984, the

Commissioner of the New York State

Department of Environmental

Conservation formally initiated a

landfill closure strategy to obtain

closure of unlined landfills in the State

of New York. Pursuant to the 1984

Landfill Closure Enforcement Directive

and subsequent amendments of 1988, a

methodical program was pursued by the

NYSDEC whereby solid waste disposal

facility planning and landfill closures

were to be coordinated. This strategy

contemplated a process of consolidation

of solid waste disposal into a few

regional landfills, pending planning,

design and permitting of new, properly

designed disposal facilities. The State’s

approach to solid waste compliance by

New York City was in accordance with

this strategy, while at the same time

recognizing the need to allow for

efficient and economic transition to

sound solid waste management

practices by the City.

There were several additional

comments. These are addressed in the

responsiveness summary which is made

part of the public record.

C. Decision

After reviewing the public comments,

I conclude that New York State’s

application for adequacy determination

meets all of the statutory and regulatory

requirements established by RCRA.

Accordingly, the State of New York is

granted a determination of adequacy for

all portions of its municipal solid waste

permit program.

Section 4005(a) of RCRA provides that

citizens may use the citizen suit

provisions of Section 7002 of RCRA to

enforce the Federal MSWLF criteria in

40 CFR Part 258 independent of any

State/Tribal enforcement program.

As EPA explained in the preamble to

the final MSWLF criteria, EPA expects
13724 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Notices

that any owner or operator complying

with provisions in a State/Tribal

program approved by EPA should be

considered to be in compliance with the

Federal Criteria. See 56 FR 50978, 50995

(October 9, 1991).

Today’s action takes effect on March

14, 1995. EPA believes it has good cause

under section 553(d) of the

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C

553(d), to put this action into effect less

than 30 days after publication in the

Federal Register.

All of the requirements and

obligations in New York State program

are already in effect as a matter of law.

EPA’s action today does not impose any

new requirements that the regulated

community must begin to comply with.

Nor do these requirements become

enforceable by EPA as Federal law.

Consequently, EPA finds that it does not

need to give notice prior to making its

approval effective.

Compliance with Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this notice from the

requirements of Section 6 of Executive

Order 12866.

Certification Under the Regulatory

Flexibility Act

Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C.

605(b), I hereby certify that this

approval will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities.

It does not impose any new burdens

on small entities. This notice, therefore,

does not require a regulatory flexibility

analysis.

Authority: This notice is issued under the

authority of Sections 2002, 4005 and 4010(c)

of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended;

42 U.S.C. 6912, 6945, 6949a(c).

Dated: February 21, 1995.

Jeanne M. Fox,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–6269 Filed 3–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

Public Information Collection

Requirement Submitted to Office of

Management and Budget for Review

March 9, 1995.

The Federal Communications

Commission has submitted the

following information collection

requirement to OMB for review and

clearance under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3507).

Copies of this submission may be

purchased from the Commission’s copy

contractor, International Transcription

Service, Inc., 2100 M Street, N.W., Suite

140, Washington, DC 20037, (202) 857–

3800. For further information on this

submission contact Judy Boley, Federal

Communications Commission, (202)

418–0214. Persons wishing to comment

on this information collection should

contact Timothy Fain, Office of

Management and Budget, Room 10236

NEOB, Washington, DC 20503, (202)

395–3561.

Please note: The Commission has

requested emergency OMB review of this

item by March 17, 1995, under the provisions

of 5 CFR 1320.18.

OMB Number: None

Title: Survey Governing Effects of the

‘‘Must Carry’’ Requirements

Action: New collection

Respondents: Businesses or other forprofit

Frequency of Response: One time

collection

Estimated Annual Burden: 2,000

responses; .25 hours average burden

per response; 500 hours total annual

burden

Needs and Uses: In cooperation with the

U.S. Department of Justice, the

Federal Communications Commission

seeks information from cable

television operators in connection

with pending litigation involving

cable television ‘‘must carry’’

requirements (Turner Broadcasting

System v. FCC. Civil Action No. 92–

2247 and consolidated cases D.D.C.)).

The survey asks cable operators to

indicate the number of broadcast

stations carried on their systems

under ‘‘must carry’’ requirements or

‘‘retransmission consent’’ so that the

courts are fully informed of the ‘‘must

carry’’ requirements’ impact.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

Survey Concerning Effects of the ‘‘MustCarry’’ Requirements

March lll, 1995.

In Turner Broadcasting Co., Inc. v.

FCC, 114 S. Ct 2445 (1994), the United

States Supreme Court considered the

constitutionality of the ‘‘Must-Carry’’

requirements, the provisions of the

Cable Television Consumer Protection

and Competition Act of 1992 which

require cable operators to carry local

television broadcast stations on their

cable systems. 47 U.S.C. §§ 534, 535.

The Court did not rule on the

constitutionality of Must-Carry, but

returned the case to the lower court for

additional inquiry into a number of

issues. These include the impact of the

Must-Carry requirements on cable

system operators. The Court described

the extent to which Must-Carry requires

cable operators to make changes in their

programming selections as one of

several questions ‘‘critical’’ to

determining whether the Must-Carry

requirements are constitutional.

Accordingly, the FCC, in cooperation

with the United States Department of

Justice, which is defending the

constitutionality of the Must-Carry

requirements in the Turner

Broadcasting case, seeks your assistance

in responding to the enclosed survey

questionnaire, so that the Department

can more fully inform the courts of

Must-Carry’s impact.

Notice to Individuals Required by the

Privacy Act of 1974 and the Paperwork

Reduction Act

The request for information in this survey

is authorized by the Communications Act of

1934, as amended. The Commission will use

the information as described above. The

Department of Justice will also use the

information. All information provided in

response to this survey will be available for

public inspection. A response is requested,

but your response to the survey is voluntary.

Public reporting burden for this

information is estimated to average 15

minutes per response, including the time for

reviewing instructions, searching existing

data, gathering and maintaining the data

needed, and completing and reviewing the

information. Send comments regarding the

burden estimate or any other aspect of this

request for information, including

suggestions for reducing the burden, to the

Federal Communications Commission,

Records Management Division, Washington,

D.C. 20554, and to the Office of Management

and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project

(3060–lll), Washington, D.C. 20503.

This notice is required by the Privacy Act

of 1974, P.L. 93–579, Dec. 31, 1975, 5 U.S.C.

§ 522a(e)(3) and the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1980, P.L. 96–511, Dec. 11, 1980, 47

U.S.C. § 3507.

Please complete and return the

enclosed survey form by mail or fax by

April 7, 1995. Thank you for your

cooperation.

For further information, please

contact:

Adam Issenberg (202) 616–8476, Eric

Angel (202) 514–4775, United States

Dept. of Justice

Grey Pash (202) 418–1740, Federal

Communications Commission, Office

of General Counsel

Survey Concerning Effects of the ‘‘MustCarry’’ Requirements

Please complete this form and return it by

mail in the enclosed envelope or by fax to

one of the numbers listed below no later than

April 7, 1995.

Physical System Identification No.: llll

Operator:

lllllllllllllllllll