Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Proposed Rules 60689 

SIP revision. Because that cost will not 

exceed $100 million, this proposal (if it 

is a federal mandate at all) is not subject 

to the requirements of sections 202 and 

205 of UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1532 and 1535). 

EPA has also determined that this 

proposal would not result in regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments 

because only the State would take any 

action as result of today’s rule, and thus 

the requirements of section 203 (2 

U.S.C. 1533) do not apply. 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132 requires EPA 

to develop an accountable process to 

ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have federalism implications.’’ This rule 

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 the 

various levels of government, as 

specified in Executive Order 13132, 

because it merely proposes to 

redesignate an area for Clean Air Act 

planning purposes and does not alter 

the relationship or the distribution of 

power and responsibilities established 

in the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 

requirements of section 6 of the 

Executive Order do not apply to this 

rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, 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.’’ The area proposed for 

redesignation does not yet include, and 

EPA is deferring action on the Ak-Chin 

Indian Reservation, the Pinal County 

portion of the Gila River Indian 

Reservation, and TON’s Florence Village 

and San Lucy Farm. In formulating its 

further action on these areas, EPA has 

been communicating with and plans to 

continue to consult with representatives 

of the Tribes, as provided in Executive 

Order 13175. Accordingly, EPA has 

addressed Executive Order 13175 to the 

extent that it applies to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

This proposed rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 (‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks’’) (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

because it is not an economically 

significant regulatory action based on 

health or safety risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This 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 under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12 of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal 

agencies to evaluate existing technical 

standards when developing a new 

regulation. The EPA believes that the 

requirements of NTTAA are 

inapplicable to this action because they 

would be inconsistent with the Clean 

Air Act. 

J. Executive Order 12898, Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Today’s action proposes to 

redesignate an area to nonattainment for 

an ambient air quality standard. It will 

not have disproportionately high and 

adverse effects on any communities in 

the area, including minority and lowincome communities. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, National parks, Particulate 

Matter, Wilderness areas. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: September 21, 2010. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24683 Filed 9–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 261 

[EPA–R06–RCRA–2010–0066; SW FRL– 

9208–6] 

Hazardous Waste Management 

System; Identification and Listing of 

Hazardous Waste; Proposed Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to grant a 

petition submitted by Exxon Mobil 

Beaumont Refining and Supply 

Company—Beaumont Refinery 

(Beaumont Refinery) to exclude (or 

delist) a certain solid waste generated by 

its Beaumont, Texas, facility from the 

lists of hazardous wastes. EPA used the 

Delisting Risk Assessment Software 

(DRAS) Version 3.0 in the evaluation of 

the impact of the petitioned waste on 

human health and the environment. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 1, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R06– 

RCRA–2010–0066 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: peace.michelle@epa.gov. 

3. Mail: Michelle Peace, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Multimedia Planning and Permitting 

Division, RCRA Branch, Mail Code: 

6PD–C, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 

75202. 

4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to: Michelle Peace, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Multimedia Planning and Permitting 

Division, RCRA Branch, Mail Code: 

6PD–C, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 

75202. The Regional Office official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further technical information 

concerning this document or for 

appointments to view the docket or the 

Beaumont Refinery facility petition, 

contact Michelle Peace, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Multimedia 

Planning and Permitting Division, 

RCRA Branch, Mail Code: 6PD–C, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202, by 

calling (214) 665–7430 or by e-mail at 

peace.michelle@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving Exxon 

Mobil’s delisting petition 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 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
60690 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

response to this rule, 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: September 20, 2010. 

Bill Luthans, 

Acting Director, Multimedia Planning and 

Permitting Division. 

[FR Doc. 2010–24572 Filed 9–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 216 and 252 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS); 

Electronic Ordering Procedures 

(DFARS Case 2009–D037) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Proposed rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend 

the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement to address 

electronic business procedures for 

placing orders. 

DATES: Comment date: Comments on 

this proposed rule should be submitted 

in writing to the address shown below 

on or before November 30, 2010, to be 

considered in the formation of the final 

rule. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by DFARS Case 2009–D037, 

using any of the following methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

E-mail: dfars@osd.mil. Include 

DFARS Case 2009–D037 in the subject 

line of the message. 

Fax: 703–602–0350. 

Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System, Attn: Mr. Julian E. Thrash, 

OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DARS), Room 

3B855, 3060 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

Comments received generally will be 

posted without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

To confirm receipt of your 

comment(s), please check http:// 

www.regulations.gov approximately two 

to three days after submission to verify 

posting (except allow 30 days for 

posting of comments submitted by 

mail). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Julian E. Thrash, 703–602–0310. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

DoD is proposing to add language to 

the DFARS to make electronic 

distribution procedures a routine part of 

order issuance. This case establishes a 

standard method for issuance of orders 

via electronic means. DoD currently has 

the capability to distribute orders 

electronically on a routine basis, and 

can post those orders centrally to a site 

any contractor can access. 

DoD is proposing the following 

changes: 

• Add the prescription at DFARS 

216.506(a) to require a new clause 

252.216–70XX, Ordering, in lieu of the 

clause at FAR 52.216–18, Ordering, in 

solicitations and contracts when a 

definite-quantity contract, a 

requirements contract, or an indefinitequantity contract is contemplated; and 

• Add a new clause at DFARS 

252.216–70XX, Ordering. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This change may have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities within the meaning of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, 

et seq. 

DoD has prepared an initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis consistent with 5 

U.S.C. 603. A copy of the analysis may 

be obtained from the point of contact 

specified herein. The objective of this 

rule is that, as the DoD now has the 

capability to distribute orders 

electronically on a routine basis and can 

post those orders centrally to a Web site 

that any contractor can access, the 

DFARS needs to provide language that 

will make those procedures a routine 

part of contract issuance. This rule will 

enable DoD to further the goals of the E– 

Government Act of 2002. 

For Fiscal Year 2009, DoD made 

awards to 6,097 small business-unique 

Data Universal Numbering System 

(DUNS) numbers using the clause at 

FAR 52.216–18, Ordering. The benefit of 

this rule to small business is that it will 

make electronic distribution procedures 

a routine part of order issuance. This 

change will ultimately help improve the 

management and promotion of 

electronic Government services and 

processes, and establish a framework to 

improve public access to Government 

information and services. DoD invites 

comments from small business concerns 

and other interested parties on the 

expected impact of this rule on small 

entities. 

DoD will also consider comments 

from small entities concerning the 

existing regulations in subparts affected 

by this rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

610. Interested parties must submit such 

comments separately and should cite 5 

U.S.C. 610 (DFARS Case 2009–D037) in 

correspondence. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act does 

not apply because the rule does not 

impose any information collection 

requirements that require the approval 

of the Office of Management and Budget 

under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 216 and 

252 

Government procurement. 

Ynette R. Shelkin, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, DoD proposes to amend 48 

CFR parts 216 and 252 as follows: 

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 216 and 252 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR 

chapter 1. 

PART 216—TYPES OF CONTRACTS 

2. Amend section 216.506 by adding 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

216.506 Solicitation provisions and 

contract clauses. 

(a) Insert the clause at 252.216–70XX, 

Ordering, in lieu of the clause at FAR 

52.216–18, in solicitations and contracts 

when a definite-quantity contract, a 

requirements contract, or an indefinitequantity contract is contemplated. 

PART 252—SOLICITATION 

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT 

CLAUSES 

3. Add section 252.216—70XX to read 

as follows: 

252.216–70XX Ordering. 

As prescribed in 216.506(a), use the 

following clause: 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS