33678 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 126 / Friday, June 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

impose any new requirements, I certify

that it does not have a significant impact

on any small entities. Moreover, due to

the nature of the federal-state

relationship under the CAA, preparation

of a regulatory flexibility analysis would

constitute federal inquiry into the

economic reasonableness of state action.

The CAA forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. E.P.A., 427 U.S.

246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more. Under Section

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203

requires EPA to establish a plan for

informing and advising any small

governments that may be significantly

or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that an

attainment date extension does not

include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector. A finding that an area

should be granted a 1-year extension of

the attainment date consists of factual

determinations based on air quality

considerations and the area’s

compliance with certain prior

requirements, and imposes no new

Federal requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action.

The EPA has reviewed this request for

a 1-year extension of the CO attainment

date for the MOA nonattainment area

for conformance with the 1990 CAAA

enacted on November 15, 1990. The

EPA has determined that this action

conforms with those requirements.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,

1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from E.O. 12866

review.

The EPA is publishing this action

without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, the EPA is proposing to

approve the SIP revision should adverse

or critical comments be filed. This

action will be effective August 27, 1996

unless, by July 29, 1996, adverse or

critical comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments,

this action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent notice that will withdraw

the final action. All public comments

received will be addressed in a

subsequent final rule based on this

action serving as a proposed rule. The

EPA will not institute a second

comment period on this action. Any

parties interested in commenting on this

action should do so at this time. If no

such comments are received, the public

is advised that this action will be

effective August 27, 1996.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by August 27, 1996.

Filing a petition for reconsideration by

the Administrator of this final rule does

not affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2), 42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: June 3, 1996.

Jane S. Moore,

Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Subpart C—Alaska

2. Section 52.82 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 52.82 Extensions.

The Administrator, by authority

delegated under section 186(a)(4) of the

Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990,

hereby extends for one year (until

December 31, 1996) the attainment date

for the MOA, Alaska CO nonattainment

area.

[FR Doc. 96–16156 Filed 6–27–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[Region II Docket No. 146, NJ23–1–7243(c);

FRL–5524–4]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans and Designation

of Areas for Air Quality Planning

Purposes; State of New Jersey;

Revised Policy Regarding Applicability

of Oxygenated Fuels Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: On September 28, 1995, the

New Jersey Department of

Environmental Protection (NJDEP)

submitted requests to redesignate the

Camden County nonattainment area and

nine not-classified areas from

nonattainment to attainment for carbon

monoxide (CO). NJDEP also submitted

the required plans to assure continued

attainment of the CO standards in the

redesignated areas. On December 7,

1995, EPA published a direct final

rulemaking (60 FR 62741) approving

New Jersey’s redesignation requests

along with several elements of the New

Jersey State Implementation Plan (SIP)

for CO.

This action announced that the

rulemaking would take effect on

February 5, 1996 (60 days after

publication), unless EPA received

adverse comments by January 8, 1996

(30 days after publication), in response

to a notice of proposed rulemaking

published on the same day (60 FR

62792). EPA also committed to

withdraw the direct final rule in the

event that it received adverse

comments, and to respond to any

adverse comments in a subsequent final

rulemaking action. EPA did receive

adverse comments on this action, but

failed to withdraw the final rule within

the 60 days given in the notice of direct

final rulemaking. Therefore, the rule

took effect on February 5, 1996.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 126 / Friday, June 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 33679

EPA is responding to the comments it

received; but, for the following reasons,

EPA is not changing the final rule in

response to those comments. Had EPA

withdrawn the direct final rule prior to

its going into effect, EPA would have

taken final action based on the proposal

to promulgate a rule identical to the

direct final rule that went into effect.

Rather than now take the action of

withdrawing the direct final rule only to

repromulgate simultaneously an

identical rule, in this action EPA is

deciding to maintain the rule

unchanged. EPA believes that

withdrawal and repromulgation are

unnecessary since the results would be

identical to that obtained simply by

leaving the rule unchanged and

responding to the comments.

This action provides interested parties

an opportunity to review how EPA

addressed the comments and to petition

for judicial review of EPA’s action in

this final rulemaking within 60 days of

this publication, as provided in section

307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act.

EFFECTIVE DATES: February 5, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State

submittal are available at the following

addresses for inspection during normal

business hours:

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region II Office, Air Programs Branch,

290 Broadway, 20th Floor, New York,

New York 10007–1866

New Jersey Department of

Environmental Protection, Office of

Energy, Bureau of Air Quality

Planning, 401 East State Street,

CN027, Trenton, New Jersey 08625

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

and Radiation Docket and Information

Center, Air Docket (6102), 401 M

Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William S. Baker, Chief, Air Programs

Branch, Environmental Protection

Agency, Region II Office, 290 Broadway,

New York, New York 10007–1866, (212)

637–4249.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Camden County, which is in the

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton

Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical

Area (CMSA), was designated

nonattainment for CO under the

provisions of sections 186 and 187 of

the Clean Air Act. Because the area had

a design value of 11.6 parts per million

based on 1988 and 1989 data, the area

was classified moderate. (See 56 FR

56694 (Nov. 6, 1991) and 57 FR 56762

(Nov. 30, 1992), codified at 40 CFR part

81, § 81.331.) This design value was

based on ambient CO data recorded in

the City of Philadelphia. For moderate

CO nonattainment areas, the Clean Air

Act requires that air quality must attain

the National Ambient Air Quality

Standard (NAAQS) by December 31,

1995. The last exceedance of the CO

NAAQS in Camden County occurred in

1989.

In addition, nine areas were

designated as not-classified

nonattainment under section

107(d)(1)(C) of the Clean Air Act. Three

of these not-classified areas, the City of

Trenton, the City of Burlington and the

Borough of Penns Grove (part), are

located within the PhiladelphiaWilmington-Trenton CMSA. Five of the

not-classified areas, the Borough of

Freehold, the City of Morristown, the

City of Perth Amboy, the City of Toms

River and the Borough of Somerville,

are located in the New York-Northern

New Jersey-Long Island CMSA. The

remaining not-classified area is the City

of Atlantic City, which is not contained

within a CMSA. Atlantic City is part of

the Atlantic City MSA. The oxygenated

gasoline requirements applicable to

each of these areas depend upon its

location in the State. These

requirements are discussed in a

December 7, 1995 direct final notice (60

FR 62741).

The nine areas were considered ‘‘notclassified’’ because they previously had

been designated nonattainment;

however, air quality data collected

during the period 1988 and 1989

showed that the NAAQS were met or

data were not available. In those

instances where air quality was no

longer being monitored, concentrations

measured in prior years had been well

below the CO NAAQS.

In an effort to comply with the Clean

Air Act and to ensure continued

attainment of the NAAQS, on

September 28, 1995, the State of New

Jersey submitted CO redesignation

requests and maintenance plans for

Camden County and the nine notclassified areas. This submittal

contained evidence that public hearings

were held on September 8, 1995.

EPA published a direct final notice

(60 FR 62741) and a proposed notice (60

FR 62792) on December 7, 1995. Since

comments were received which needed

addressing, EPA is addressing these

comments at this time. The reader is

referred to the direct final notice for a

detailed discussion of EPA’s action.

II. Comments

EPA received comments from The

New York Mercantile Exchange

(NYMEX) and the New York State

Department of Environmental

Conservation (NYSDEC) on the

December 7, 1995 notice. EPA’s

response to the comments is contained

in a Technical Support Document

entitled ‘‘New Jersey Carbon Monoxide

Redesignation Request For Camden

County & Nine Not-Classified Areas

Technical Support Document (TSD);

October 16, 1995; Amended March 7,

1996’’ found in Docket No. 146.

EPA does not believe that any of the

comments present reasons why the

Agency should not proceed with its

proposed action, and the Agency is

confident that New Jersey’s

redesignation request is technically

sound. Therefore, EPA reaffirms its

redesignation of Camden County and

the nine not-classified areas in New

Jersey to attainment of the CO NAAQS.

III. Summary

EPA is approving the Camden County

and nine not-classified CO maintenance

plans because they meet the

requirements set forth in section 175A

of the Clean Air Act. In addition, the

Agency is approving the requests for

redesignating Camden County and the

nine not-classified areas to attainment

because the State has demonstrated

compliance with the requirements of

section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act for

redesignation.

In the December 7, 1995 notice EPA

also took action on the contingency

measures and statewide emissions

inventory found in the New Jersey CO

SIP. The contingency measures include

transportation control measures which

cover traffic flow improvements, park &

ride lots, and increased ridesharing.

EPA received no comments on these SIP

elements.

The State has demonstrated to EPA’s

satisfaction that Camden County and the

nine not-classified areas had attained

the CO standard before the

implementation of the oxygenated

gasoline program and that as a result the

oxygenated gasoline program was not

needed to attain or maintain the CO

standard. Therefore, EPA finds that the

oxygenated gasoline program is not

required in these areas in order to meet

the criteria for redesignation.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603
33680 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 126 / Friday, June 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and

Subchapter I, Part D of the Clean Air Act

do not create any new requirements, but

simply approve requirements that the

State is already imposing. Therefore,

because the federal SIP-approval does

not impose any new requirements, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on any small entities affected.

Moveover, due to the nature of the

federal-state relationship under the

Clean Air Act, preparation of a

regulatory flexibility analysis would

constitute federal inquiry into the

economic reasonableness of state action.

The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base

its actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v US EPA,

427 US 246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’),

signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must undertake various actions in

association with proposed or final rules

that include a federal mandate that may

result in estimated annual costs of $100

million or more to the private sector, or

to state, local, or tribal governments in

the aggregate.

Through submission of this SIP or

plan revision, the state and any affected

local or tribal governments have elected

to adopt the program provided for under

sections 110 and 187 of the Clean Air

Act. These rules may bind state, local

and tribal governments to perform

certain actions and also require the

private sector to perform certain duties.

To the extent that the rules being

approved by this action would impose

any mandate upon the state, local or

tribal governments either as the owner

or operator of a source or as a regulator,

or would impose any mandate upon the

private sector, EPA’s action will impose

no new requirements; such sources are

already subject to these regulations

under State law. Accordingly, no

additional costs to state, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action. EPA has also

determined that this final action does

not include a mandate that may result

in estimated annual costs of $100

million or more to state, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate or to the

private sector.

Under 5 U.S.C. section 605(b), I

certify that redesignations do not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

(See 46 FR 8709.)

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,

1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from E.O. 12866

review.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this rule must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit within 60 days from

date of publication. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of

this final rule does not affect the finality

of this rule for the purposes of judicial

review nor does it extend the time

within which a petition for judicial

review may be filed and shall not

postpone the effectiveness of such rule

or action. This rule may not be

challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations.

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks,

and Wilderness areas.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: May 31, 1996.

William J. Muszynski,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–16158 Filed 6–27–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Parts 148 and 268

[EPA # F–96–PH3F–FFFFF; FRL–5528–1]

RIN 2050–AD38

Land Disposal Restrictions Phase III—

Decharacterized Wastewaters,

Carbamate Wastes, and Spent

Potliners

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Technical correction.

SUMMARY: On April 8, 1996, EPA

published regulations covering both

congressionally-mandated and courtordered prohibitions on land disposal of

certain hazardous wastes. On the same

day, EPA published a partial

withdrawal and correction of those

regulations to the extent the Land

Disposal Program Flexibility Act

(LDPFA) (signed by the President on

March 26, 1996) revoked most of the

court-ordered prohibitions. This notice

corrects technical errors in the final

regulations and the partial withdrawal

notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on

June 28, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Supporting materials are

available for viewing in the RCRA

Information Center (RIC), located at

Crystal Gateway One, 1235 Jefferson

Davis Highway, First Floor, Arlington,

VA. The Docket Identification Number

is F–96–PH3F–FFFFF. The RCRA

Docket is open from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.

Monday through Friday, except for

Federal holidays. The public must make

an appointment to review docket

materials by calling (703) 603–9230. The

public may copy a maximum of 100

pages from any regulatory document at

no cost. Additional copies cost $0.15

per page.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

general information contact the RCRA

Hotline at (800) 424–9346 (toll free) or

(703) 920–9810 in the Washington, DC

metropolitan area. For information on

this notice contact Michael Petruska

(5302W), Office of Solid Waste, 401 M

Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20460,

(703) 308–8434.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Reasons and Basis for Today’s

Amendment

The Agency has received comments

from the regulated community and State

agencies requesting clarification on

certain aspects of the April 8, 1996 Land

Disposal Restrictions (LDR) Phase III

final rule (61 FR 15566) and the April

8, 1996 withdrawal notice (61 FR

15660). Today’s amendment responds to

these comments and makes technical

corrections where appropriate.

II. Amendments to the LDR Phase III

Final Rule

There were several errors in the

treatment standard table in § 268.40,

and in the table of Universal Treatment

Standards (UTS) in § 268.48. The errors

pertained to portions of the final rule

which were not affected by the LDPFA.

It should be noted that certain errors in

both of these tables are not being

corrected here as they are being

corrected by the Office of Federal

Register.

A. Section 268.40 Table

There were several errors in the table

‘‘Treatment Standards for Hazardous