Document ID: EPA-HQ-SFUND-2003-0006-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Notice
Title: Notice of Intent to Negotiate Proposed Rule on All Appropriate Inquiry, Notice of Intent to Establish FACA Committee and Negotiate a Proposed Rule
Posted Date: 2003-03-05T05:00Z

10675
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
44
/
Thursday,
March
6,
2003
/
Proposed
Rules
[
FR
Doc.
03
 
5203
Filed
3
 
5
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
4160
 
01
 
S
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Chapter
I
[
FRN
 
7459
 
7]

Notice
of
Intent
To
Negotiate
Proposed
Rule
on
All
Appropriate
Inquiry
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Notice
of
Intent
to
Establish
FACA
Committee
and
Negotiate
a
Proposed
Rule.

SUMMARY:
The
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
is
giving
notice
that
it
intends
to
establish
a
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Committee
under
the
Federal
Advisory
Committee
Act
(
FACA)
and
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Act
(
NRA)
to
negotiate
proposed
federal
standards
for
conducting
all
appropriate
inquiry.
The
purpose
of
the
Committee
will
be
to
conduct
discussions
and
reach
consensus,
if
possible,
on
proposed
regulatory
language
setting
standards
and
practices
for
conducting
all
appropriate
inquiry,
as
required
by
the
Small
Business
Liability
Relief
and
Brownfields
Revitalization
Act
(
the
Brownfields
Law).
The
Committee
will
consist
of
representatives
of
parties
with
a
definable
stake
in
the
outcome
of
the
proposed
standards.
EPA
also
is
announcing
the
date
of
an
open
public
meeting
to
discuss
the
use
of
the
negotiated
rulemaking
process
to
develop
a
proposed
rule.
During
the
public
meeting,
EPA
officials
will
discuss
the
Agency's
plans
for
the
establishment
of
a
FACA
committee
to
negotiate
the
proposed
standards
for
all
appropriate
inquiry.
DATES:
EPA
must
receive
comments
on
this
notice
by
April
7,
2003.
Comments
received
after
this
date
may
not
be
considered.
The
public
meeting
will
be
held
on
April
15,
2003.
The
meeting
is
scheduled
for
1
p.
m.
to
3
p.
m.
ADDRESSES:
The
public
meeting
will
be
held
in
Learning
Forum
Rooms
A
and
B
of
the
Marriott
Learning
Complex
in
the
Ronald
Reagan
Building
and
International
Trade
Center
at
1300
Pennsylvania
Avenue
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20004.
The
Marriott
Learning
Center
Complex
is
on
the
concourse
level
of
the
Ronald
Reagan
Building
just
inside
the
building
entrance
from
the
Federal
Triangle
Metro
station.
Comments
on
today's
notice
may
be
submitted
electronically,
by
mail,
or
through
hand
delivery/
courier.
Follow
the
detailed
instructions
for
submitting
public
comments
provided
in
paragraph
B
of
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION
section
below.
Please
reference
Docket
number
SFUND
 
2003
 
0006
when
submitting
your
comments.
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
For
general
information,
contact
the
RCRA/
CERCLA
Call
Center
at
800
 
424
 
9346
or
TDD
800
 
553
 
7672
(
hearing
impaired).
In
the
Washington,
DC
metropolitan
area,
call
703
 
412
 
9810
or
TDD
703
 
412
 
3323.
For
more
detailed
information
on
specific
aspects
of
today's
notice,
contact
Patricia
Overmeyer,
Office
of
Brownfields
Clean
up
and
Redevelopment
(
5105T),
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0002,
202
 
566
 
2774.
overmeyer.
patricia@
epa.
gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

General
Information
A.
How
Can
I
Get
Copies
of
the
Background
Materials
Supporting
Today's
Notice
or
Other
Related
Information?
1.
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
notice
under
Docket
ID
No.
SFUND
 
2003
 
0006.
The
official
public
docket
consists
of
the
documents
specifically
referenced
in
this
rule
and
other
information
related
to
this
notice.
Although
a
part
of
the
official
docket,
the
public
docket
does
not
include
Confidential
Business
Information
(
CBI)
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
The
official
public
docket
is
the
collection
of
materials
that
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
EPA
Docket
Center
located
at
1301
Constitution
Ave.
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20004.
This
Docket
Facility
is
open
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
federal
holidays.
To
review
docket
materials,
it
is
recommended
that
the
public
make
an
appointment
by
calling
(
202)
566
 
0276.
The
public
may
copy
a
maximum
of
100
pages
from
any
regulatory
docket
at
no
charge.
Additional
copies
cost
$
0.15/
page.
2.
Electronic
Access.
You
may
access
this
Federal
Register
document
electronically
through
the
EPA
Internet
under
the
``
Federal
Register''
listings
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
fedrgstr/.
You
may
use
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket/
to
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
official
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Once
in
the
system,
select
``
search,''
then
key
in
the
docket
identification
number.
Certain
types
of
information
will
not
be
placed
in
the
EPA
Dockets.
Information
claimed
as
CBI,
and
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute,
which
is
not
included
in
the
official
public
docket,
will
not
be
available
for
public
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
EPA's
policy
is
that
copyrighted
material
will
not
be
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
but
will
be
available
only
in
printed,
paper
form
in
the
official
public
docket.
To
the
extent
feasible,
publicly
available
docket
materials
will
be
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
When
a
document
is
selected
from
the
index
list
in
EPA
Dockets,
the
system
will
identify
whether
the
document
is
available
for
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Although
not
all
docket
materials
may
be
available
electronically,
you
may
still
access
any
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
the
docket
facility
identified
above.
For
public
commenters,
it
is
important
to
note
that
EPA's
policy
is
that
public
comments,
whether
submitted
electronically
or
in
paper,
will
be
made
available
for
public
viewing
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
as
EPA
receives
them
and
without
change,
unless
the
comment
contains
copyrighted
material,
CBI,
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
When
EPA
identifies
a
comment
containing
copyrighted
material,
EPA
will
provide
a
reference
to
that
material
in
the
version
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
The
entire
printed
comment,
including
the
copyrighted
material,
will
be
available
in
the
public
docket.
Public
comments
submitted
on
computer
disks
that
are
mailed
or
delivered
to
the
docket
will
be
transferred
to
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Public
comments
that
are
mailed
or
delivered
to
the
Docket
will
be
scanned
and
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
Where
practical,
physical
objects
will
be
photographed,
and
the
photograph
will
be
placed
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
along
with
a
brief
description
written
by
the
docket
staff.
For
additional
information
about
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
visit
EPA
Dockets
online
or
see
67
FR
38102,
May
31,
2002.

B.
How
and
to
Whom
Do
I
Submit
Comments?
You
may
submit
comments
electronically,
by
mail,
or
through
hand
delivery/
courier.
To
ensure
proper
receipt
by
EPA,
identify
the
appropriate
docket
identification
number
in
the
subject
line
on
the
first
page
of
your
comment.
Please
ensure
that
your
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
05
Mar
05,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00010
Fmt
4702
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
06MRP1.
SGM
06MRP1
10676
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
44
/
Thursday,
March
6,
2003
/
Proposed
Rules
comments
are
submitted
within
the
specified
comment
period.
Comments
received
after
the
close
of
the
comment
period
will
be
marked
``
late.''
EPA
will
not
consider
late
comments
in
formulating
a
final
decision.
1.
Electronically.
If
you
submit
an
electronic
comment
as
prescribed
below,
EPA
recommends
that
you
include
your
name,
mailing
address,
and
an
e­
mail
address
or
other
contact
information
in
the
body
of
your
comment.
Also
include
this
contact
information
on
the
outside
of
any
disk
or
CD
ROM
you
submit,
and
in
any
cover
letter
accompanying
the
disk
or
CD
ROM.
This
ensures
that
you
can
be
identified
as
the
party
submitting
the
comment
and
allows
EPA
to
contact
you
in
case
EPA
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
or
needs
further
information
on
the
substance
of
your
comment.
EPA's
policy
is
that
EPA
will
not
edit
your
comment,
and
any
identifying
or
contact
information
provided
in
the
body
of
a
comment
will
be
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket,
and
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
If
EPA
cannot
read
your
comment
due
to
technical
difficulties
and
cannot
contact
you
for
clarification,
EPA
may
not
be
able
to
consider
your
comment.
Your
use
of
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
to
submit
comments
to
EPA
electronically
is
EPA's
preferred
method
for
receiving
comments.
Go
directly
to
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket,
and
follow
the
online
instructions
for
submitting
comments.
To
access
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
from
the
EPA
Internet
Home
Page,
select
``
Information
Sources,''
``
Dockets,''
and
``
EPA
Dockets.''
Once
in
the
system,
select
``
search,''
and
then
key
in
Docket
ID
No.
SFUND
 
2003
 
0006.
The
system
is
an
``
anonymous
access''
system,
which
means
EPA
will
not
know
your
identity,
e­
mail
address,
or
other
contact
information
unless
you
provide
it
in
the
body
of
your
comment.
2.
E­
mail.
Comments
may
be
sent
by
electronic
mail
(
e­
mail)
to
Superfund.
Docket@
epamail.
epa.
gov.
Make
sure
this
electronic
copy
is
in
an
ASCII
format
that
does
not
use
special
characters
or
encryption.
Cite
the
docket
Number
SFUND
 
2003
 
0006
in
your
electronic
file.
In
contrast
to
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
EPA's
e­
mail
system
is
not
an
``
anonymous
access''
system.
If
you
send
an
e­
mail
comment
directly
to
the
Docket
without
going
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket,
EPA's
e­
mail
system
automatically
captures
your
e­
mail
address.
E­
mail
addresses
that
are
automatically
captured
by
EPA's
e­
mail
system
are
included
as
part
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
the
official
public
docket,
and
made
available
in
EPA's
electronic
public
docket.
3.
Disk
or
CD
ROM.
You
may
submit
comments
on
a
disk
or
CD
ROM
that
you
mail
to
the
mailing
address
identified
above.
These
electronic
submissions
will
be
accepted
in
WordPerfect
or
ASCII
file
format.
Avoid
the
use
of
special
characters
and
any
form
of
encryption.
4.
By
Mail.
Send
two
(
2)
copies
of
your
comments
to:
EPA
Docket
Center,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Headquarters,
Mail
Code
5305T,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC,
20460,
Attention
Docket
ID
No.
SFUND
 
2003
 
0006.
5.
By
Hand
Delivery
or
Courier.
Deliver
your
comments
to:
EPA
Docket
Center,
EPA
West
Building,
Room
B
 
102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20007.
Attention
Docket
ID
No.
SFUND
 
2003
 
0006.
Such
deliveries
are
only
accepted
during
the
Docket's
normal
hours
of
operation
as
identified
above.

Preamble
I.
Statutory
Authority
II.
Background
III.
Proposed
Negotiating
Procedures
IV.
Comments
Requested
I.
Statutory
Authority
This
notice
announcing
EPA's
intent
to
negotiate
a
proposed
regulation
setting
federal
standards
for
the
conduct
of
all
appropriate
inquiry
was
developed
under
the
authority
of
sections
563
and
564
of
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Act
of
1996
(
5
U.
S.
C.
561,
Public
Law
104
 
320).
The
proposed
regulation
setting
standards
for
the
conduct
of
all
appropriate
inquiry
that
EPA
is
proposing
to
develop
under
a
negotiated
rulemaking
process
will
be
developed
under
the
authority
of
section
101(
35)(
B)
of
CERCLA
(
42
U.
S.
C.
9601(
35)(
B)(
ii)).

II.
Background
As
required
by
the
Federal
Advisory
Committee
Act
(
5
U.
S.
C.
App.
2.
section
9(
a)(
2)),
and
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Act
of
1996
(
5
U.
S.
C.
561,
Pub.
L.
104
 
320),
we
are
giving
notice
that
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency
is
establishing
a
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Committee
to
develop
proposed
standards
and
practices
for
conducting
all
appropriate
inquiry.
On
January
11,
2002,
President
Bush
signed
the
Small
Business
Liability
Relief
and
Brownfields
Revitalization
Act
(``
the
Brownfields
Law'').
In
general,
the
Brownfields
Law
amends
CERCLA
and
provides
funds
to
assess
and
clean
up
brownfields
sites,
clarifies
CERCLA
liability
provisions
for
certain
landowners,
and
provides
funding
to
enhance
State
and
Tribal
clean
up
programs.
Subtitle
B
of
Title
II
of
the
Brownfields
Law
revises
some
of
the
provisions
of
CERCLA
Section
101(
35)
clarifying
the
requirements
necessary
to
establish
the
innocent
landowner
defense
under
CERCLA
in
addition
to
providing
Superfund
liability
limitations
for
bona
fide
prospective
purchasers
and
contiguous
property
owners.
Among
the
requirements
added
to
CERCLA
is
the
requirement
that
such
parties
undertake
``
all
appropriate
inquiry''
into
prior
ownership
and
use
of
a
property
at
the
time
at
which
a
party
acquires
the
property.
The
Brownfields
Law
requires
EPA
to
develop
regulations
establishing
standards
and
practices
for
how
to
conduct
all
appropriate
inquiry
and
promulgate
the
standards
within
two
years
of
its
enactment.
Congress
included
in
the
Brownfields
Law
a
list
of
criteria
that
the
Agency
must
address
in
the
regulations
establishing
standards
and
practices
for
conducting
all
appropriate
inquiry
(
section
101(
35)(
2)(
B)(
ii)).
The
Brownfields
Law
also
requires
that
parties
receiving
funding
under
the
federal
brownfields
program
to
conduct
site
assessments
must
conduct
the
site
assessment
in
accordance
with
the
standards
and
practices
for
all
appropriate
inquiry
established
under
the
same
provision
of
the
Brownfields
Law.

A.
Negotiated
Rulemaking
EPA
has
decided
to
use
the
negotiated
rulemaking
process
to
develop
proposed
federal
standards
for
conducting
all
appropriate
inquiry.
In
the
Brownfields
Law,
Congress
mandated
that
EPA
develop
regulations
establishing
standards
and
practices
for
conducting
all
appropriate
inquiry
and
set
forth
a
series
of
criteria
for
the
Agency
to
follow
in
developing
the
federal
regulations.
The
most
important
reason
for
using
the
regulatory
negotiation
process
for
developing
a
proposed
federal
standard
is
that
all
stakeholders
strongly
support
a
consensual
rulemaking
effort.
EPA
believes
a
regulatory
negotiation
process
will
be
less
adversarial
than
the
regulatory
rulemaking
process
and
that
a
regulatory
negotiation
will
result
in
a
proposed
rule
that
will
effectively
reflect
Congressional
intent.
A
regulatory
negotiation
process
will
allow
EPA
to
solicit
direct
input
from
informed,
interested,
and
affected
parities
when
drafting
the
regulation,
rather
than
delay
public
input
until
the
public
comment
period
provided
after
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
05
Mar
05,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00011
Fmt
4702
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
06MRP1.
SGM
06MRP1
10677
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
44
/
Thursday,
March
6,
2003
/
Proposed
Rules
publishing
a
proposed
rule;
therefore,
ensuring
that
the
rule
is
more
sensitive
to
the
needs
and
limitations
of
both
the
parties
and
the
Agency.
A
rule
drafted
by
negotiation
with
informed
and
affected
parties
is
expected
to
be
more
pragmatic
and
more
easily
implemented,
therefore
providing
the
public
with
the
benefits
of
the
rule
while
minimizing
the
negative
impact
of
a
regulation
conceived
or
drafted
without
the
input
of
outside
knowledgeable
parties.
Since
a
negotiating
committee
includes
representatives
from
the
major
stakeholder
groups
affected
by
or
interested
in
the
rule,
the
number
of
public
comments
on
the
proposed
rule
may
be
reduced
and
those
comments
that
are
received
may
be
more
moderate.
EPA
anticipates
that
there
will
be
a
need
for
few
substantive
changes
to
a
proposed
rule
developed
under
a
regulatory
negotiation
process
prior
to
the
publication
of
a
final
regulation.

B.
The
Concept
of
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Usually,
EPA
develops
a
proposed
rulemaking
using
Agency
staff
and
consultant
resources.
The
concerns
of
affected
parties
are
made
known
through
various
informal
contacts,
the
circulation
of
a
draft
proposal
to
known
affected
parties
for
their
informal
comment,
through
advance
notices
of
proposed
rulemaking
published
in
the
Federal
Register,
or
formal
consultation
with
an
advisory
committee.
After
the
notice
of
proposed
rulemaking
is
published
for
comment,
affected
parties
may
submit
arguments
and
data
defining
and
supporting
their
positions
with
regard
to
the
issues
raised
in
the
proposed
rule.
All
communications
from
affected
parties
are
directed
to
the
Agency.
In
general,
there
is
not
much
communication
among
parties
representing
different
interests.
Many
times,
effective
regulations
have
resulted
from
such
a
process.
However,
as
Congress
noted
in
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Act,
such
regulatory
development
procedures
may
``
discourage
the
affected
parties
from
meeting
and
communicating
with
each
other,
and
may
cause
parties
with
different
interests
to
assume
conflicting
and
antagonistic
positions
*
*
*''
(
Sec.
2(
2)).
Congress
also
stated
that
``
adversarial
rulemaking
deprives
the
affected
parties
and
the
public
of
the
benefits
of
face­
to­
face
negotiations
and
cooperation
in
developing
and
reaching
agreement
on
a
rule.
It
also
deprives
them
of
the
benefits
of
shared
information,
knowledge,
expertise,
and
technical
abilities
possessed
by
the
affected
parties.''
(
Sec.
2(
3)).
Using
negotiated
rulemaking
to
develop
the
proposed
rule
is
fundamentally
different.
Negotiated
rulemaking
is
a
process
in
which
a
proposed
rule
is
developed
by
a
committee
composed
of
representatives
of
all
those
interests
that
will
be
significantly
affected
by
the
rule.
Decisions
are
made
by
consensus,
which
generally
require
concurrence
among
the
interests
represented.
The
process
is
started
by
the
Agency's
careful
identification
of
all
interests
potentially
affected
by
the
rulemaking
under
consideration.
To
help
in
this
identification
process,
the
Agency
publishes
a
notice
in
the
Federal
Register,
such
as
this
one,
which
identifies
a
preliminary
list
of
interests
and
requests
public
comment
on
that
list.
Following
receipt
of
the
comments,
the
Agency
establishes
an
advisory
committee
representing
these
various
interests
to
negotiate
a
consensus
on
the
terms
of
a
proposed
rule.
Representation
on
the
committee
may
be
direct,
that
is,
each
member
represents
a
specific
interest,
or
may
be
indirect,
through
coalitions
of
parties
formed
for
this
purpose.
The
Agency
is
a
member
of
the
committee
representing
the
Federal
government's
own
set
of
interests.
The
negotiated
rulemaking
advisory
committee
is
facilitated
by
a
trained
mediator,
who
facilitates
the
negotiation
process.
The
role
of
this
mediator,
or
facilitator,
is
to
apply
proven
consensus
building
techniques
to
the
advisory
committee
setting.
Once
a
regulatory
negotiation
advisory
committee
reaches
consensus
on
the
provisions
of
a
proposed
rule,
the
Agency,
consistent
with
its
legal
obligations,
uses
such
consensus
as
the
basis
of
its
proposed
rule,
to
be
published
in
the
Federal
Register.
This
provides
the
required
public
notice
and
allows
for
a
public
comment
period.
Other
participants
and
other
interested
parties
retain
their
rights
to
comment,
participate
in
an
informal
hearing
(
if
requested)
and
judicial
review.
EPA
anticipates,
however,
that
the
preproposal
consensus
agreed
upon
by
this
Committee
will
effectively
address
all
major
issues
prior
to
publication
of
a
proposed
rulemaking.

C.
Proposed
Rule
Setting
Standards
for
All
Appropriate
Inquiry
The
negotiated
Rulemaking
Act
allows
EPA
to
establish
a
negotiated
rulemaking
committee
if
it
is
determined
that
the
use
of
the
negotiated
rulemaking
procedure
is
in
the
public
interest.
We
understand
that
voluntary
standards
developed
by
standards
developing
organizations,
such
as
the
ASTM
1527
 
2000
standard,
are
available
and
are
currently
being
used
to
conduct
all
appropriate
inquiry
in
conjunction
with
private
real
estate
property
transactions.
In
addition,
site
assessment
protocols
have
been
established
under
the
federal
Superfund
program
and
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA)
corrective
action
programs.
Similarly,
many
State
response
programs
include
site
assessment
requirements.
We
intend
to
develop
federal
regulations
that
build
upon
the
depth
of
experience
accrued
in
both
the
public
and
private
sectors
in
implementing
these
standards
and
programs.
We
believe
that
building
upon
currently
available
private
sector
standards
for
undertaking
all
appropriate
inquiry
as
well
as
building
on
the
experience
of
state
and
federal
government
site
assessment
programs
is
the
most
efficient
and
economical
way
to
develop
federal
regulatory
standards
that
will
both
meet
the
criteria
set
in
the
Brownfields
Law
and
ensure
minimal
disruption
to
the
private
market
and
state
and
federal
site
assessment
programs.
EPA
has
determined
that
the
regulatory
negotiation
process
will
ensure
that
we
obtain
a
diverse
array
of
input
from
both
private
sector
stakeholders
and
state
program
officials
who
are
familiar
with
and
experienced
in
implementing
processes
to
conduct
all
appropriate
inquiry.
During
the
fall
of
2002,
we
initiated
the
convening
stage
of
the
negotiated
rulemaking
process
to
identify
appropriate
stakeholder
groups
and
solicit
advice
and
input
from
experienced
public
and
private
sector
users
of
similar
standards.
We
retained
an
expert
facilitator
to
contact
parties
potentially
affected
by
the
all
appropriate
inquiry
rule
to
determine
whether
or
not
stakeholders
are
interested
in
participating
in
a
negotiated
rulemaking
process
and
determine
the
potential
for
stakeholder
issues
to
be
successfully
addressed
through
a
regulatory
negotiation.
Following
an
evaluation
of
stakeholder
interest
and
input
during
the
convening
process,
our
facilitator
determined
that
there
is
sufficient
enthusiasm
among
stakeholders
for
a
negotiated
rulemaking
process
and
almost
all
stakeholders
that
we
identified
and
interviewed
expressed
a
belief
that
potential
issues
and
differences
between
interested
parties
could
be
successfully
addressed
and
negotiated
through
the
regulatory
negotiation
process.
A
description
of
the
issues
raised
by
identified
stakeholders
and
a
list
of
interested
stakeholders,
as
well
as
the
findings
of
our
facilitator
are
contained
in
the
final
report
entitled
Convening
Assessment
Report
on
the
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
05
Mar
05,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00012
Fmt
4702
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
06MRP1.
SGM
06MRP1
10678
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
44
/
Thursday,
March
6,
2003
/
Proposed
Rules
Feasibility
of
a
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Process
to
Develop
the
All
Appropriate
Inquiry
Standard
Required
Under
the
Small
Business
Liability
Relief
and
Brownfields
Revitalization
Act.
A
copy
of
this
final
report
is
included
in
the
regulatory
docket
for
today's
notice.

D.
Agency
Commitment
In
initiating
this
regulatory
negotiation
process,
EPA
is
making
a
commitment
to
provide
adequate
resources
to
ensure
timely
and
successful
completion
of
the
process.
This
commitment
includes
making
the
process
a
priority
activity
for
all
representatives,
components,
officials,
and
personnel
of
the
Agency
who
need
to
be
involved
in
the
rulemaking,
from
the
time
of
initiation
until
such
time
as
a
final
rule
is
issued
or
the
process
is
expressly
terminated.
EPA
will
provide
administrative
support
for
the
process
and
will
take
steps
to
ensure
that
the
negotiated
rulemaking
committee
has
the
dedicated
resources
it
requires
to
complete
its
work
in
a
timely
fashion.
These
include
the
provision
or
procurement
of
such
support
services
as:
Properly
equipped
space
adequate
for
public
meetings
and
caucuses;
logistical
support;
word
processing
and
distribution
of
background
information;
the
service
of
a
facilitator;
and
such
additional
research
and
other
technical
assistance
as
may
be
necessary.
To
the
maximum
extent
possible
consistent
with
the
legal
obligations
of
the
Agency,
EPA
will
use
the
consensus
of
the
regulatory
negotiation
committee
as
the
basis
for
the
rule
proposed
by
the
Agency
for
public
notice
and
comment.
The
Agency
is
committed
to
publishing
a
consensus
proposal
that
is
consistent
with
the
legal
mandate
of
the
Brownfields
Law.

E.
Negotiating
Consensus
As
discussed
above,
the
negotiated
rulemaking
process
is
fundamentally
different
from
the
usual
development
process
for
developing
a
proposed
rule.
Negotiation
allows
interested
and
affected
parties
to
discuss
possible
approaches
to
various
issues
rather
than
only
asking
them
to
respond
to
details
on
an
Agency
proposal.
The
negotiation
process
involves
a
mutual
education
of
the
parties
by
each
other
on
the
practical
concerns
about
the
impact
of
such
approaches.
Each
committee
member
participates
in
resolving
the
interests
and
concerns
of
other
members,
rather
than
leaving
it
up
to
EPA
to
bridge
different
points
of
view.
A
key
principle
of
negotiated
rulemaking
is
that
agreement
is
by
consensus
of
all
the
interests.
Thus,
no
one
interest
or
group
of
interests
is
able
to
control
the
process.
The
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Act
defines
consensus
as
the
unanimous
concurrence
among
interests
represented
on
a
negotiated
rulemaking
committee,
unless
the
committee
itself
unanimously
agrees
to
use
a
different
definition.
In
addition,
experience
has
demonstrated
that
using
a
trained
mediator
to
facilitate
this
process
will
assist
all
potential
parties,
including
EPA,
to
identify
their
interests
in
the
rule
and
so
to
be
able
to
reevaluate
previously
stated
positions
on
issues
involved
in
this
rulemaking
effort.

III.
Proposed
Negotiating
Procedures
A.
Key
Issues
for
Negotiation
We
anticipate
the
issues
to
be
addressed
by
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Committee
on
All
Appropriate
Inquiry
may
include:
 
Balancing
the
goals
and
priorities
of
state
regulatory
programs,
privatelydeveloped
consensus
standards,
and
the
Congressional
mandate
for
a
federal
standard
for
conducting
all
appropriate
inquiry.
 
Developing
clear
and
concise
standards
that
address
each
of
the
statutory
criteria
(
Section
101(
35)(
B)(
iii)
of
CERCLA).
 
Balancing
the
need
to
put
abandoned
properties
back
into
productive
reuse
with
concerns
for
public
health
and
environmental
protection.
 
Balancing
a
need
for
clear
and
comprehensive
standards
that
will
ensure
a
high
level
of
certainty
in
identifying
potential
environmental
concerns
without
imposing
time
consuming
and
unnecessarily
expensive
regulatory
requirements.
 
Defining
the
shelf
life
of
an
assessment
and
the
extent
to
which
an
assessment,
or
the
results
of
all
appropriate
inquiry,
may
be
transferred
to
subsequent
property
owners.
 
Minimizing
disruptions
to
the
current
real
estate
market
due
to
the
development
of
a
federal
standard
that
is
different
from
current
industry
protocols
while
ensuring
that
the
federal
standard
is
protective
and
in
compliance
with
statutory
criteria.
 
Identifying
the
extent
to
which
sampling
and
analysis
of
potentially
contaminated
property
may
be
required
to
document
the
presence,
or
the
lack
of,
environmental
contamination.
 
Identifying
what
information
is
necessary
on
the
potential
contamination
of
adjacent
and
adjoining
properties,
as
well
as
underlying
groundwater
resources.
 
Establishing
a
list
of
contaminants
to
include
in
the
investigation
when
conducting
all
appropriate
inquiry.
B.
Committee
Formation
The
negotiated
rulemaking
Committee
will
be
formed
and
operated
in
full
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
the
Federal
Advisory
Committee
(
FACA)
in
a
manner
consistent
with
the
requirements
of
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Act.

C.
Interests
Involved/
Committee
Membership
The
Agency
intends
to
conduct
the
negotiated
rulemaking
proceedings
with
particular
attention
to
ensuring
full
and
adequate
representation
of
those
interests
that
may
be
significantly
affected
by
the
proposed
rule
setting
standards
for
conducting
all
appropriate
inquiry.
Section
562
of
the
NRA
defines
the
term
``
interest''
as
``
with
respect
to
an
issue
or
matter
multiple
parties
which
have
a
similar
point
of
view
or
which
are
likely
to
be
affected
in
a
similar
manner.''
Listed
below
are
parties
which
the
Agency
has
identified
tentatively
as
being
``
significantly
affected''
by
the
matters
that
may
be
included
in
the
proposed
rule.
EPA
anticipates
that
the
negotiating
committee
will
be
composed
of
approximately
25
members
representing
parties
of
interest
to
the
rulemaking.
EPA
will
monitor
membership
carefully
to
ensure
that
there
is
a
balanced
representation
from
affected
and
interested
stakeholder
groups.
EPA
anticipates
that
the
committee
will
contain
the
following
types
of
representatives:
 
Environmental
Interest
Groups
 
Environment
Justice
Community
 
Federal
Government
 
Tribal
Government
 
State
Government
 
Local
Government
 
Real
Estate
Developers
 
Bankers
and
Lenders
 
Environmental
Professionals
We
point
out
that
one
purpose
of
this
notice
is
to
determine
whether
federal
standards
for
conducting
all
appropriate
inquiry
will
significantly
affect
interests
that
are
not
listed
above,
as
well
as
whether
the
list
provided
below
identifies
accurately
and
comprehensively
a
group
of
stakeholders
representing
the
interests
listed
above.
We
invite
comment
and
suggestions
on
the
list
of
``
significantly
affected''
interests,
as
well
as
the
list
of
suggested
stakeholders,
or
committee
members.
EPA
recognizes
that
the
regulatory
actions
we
take
under
this
program
may
at
times
affect
various
segments
of
society
in
different
ways,
and
that
this
may
in
some
cases
produce
unique
``
interests''
in
a
proposed
rule
based
on
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
05
Mar
05,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00013
Fmt
4702
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
06MRP1.
SGM
06MRP1
10679
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
44
/
Thursday,
March
6,
2003
/
Proposed
Rules
income,
gender,
or
other
factors.
Particular
attention
will
be
given
by
the
Agency
to
ensure
that
any
unique
interests
that
have
been
identified
in
this
regard,
and
that
may
be
significantly
affected
by
the
proposed
rule,
are
fully
represented.
EPA
tentatively
identified
the
following
list
of
possible
interests
and
parties
as
representing
the
above
list
of
interested
stakeholder
groups.
The
following
list
includes
those
organizations
tentatively
identified
by
EPA
as
being
either
a
potential
member
of
the
Committee,
or
a
potential
member
of
a
coalition
that
would
in
turn
nominate
a
candidate
to
represent
one
of
the
significantly
affected
interests
listed
above:
 
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
 
Sierra
Club
 
Environmental
Defense
 
Center
for
Public
Environmental
Oversight
 
Partnership
for
Sustainable
Brownfields
Redevelopment
 
Association
of
State
and
Territorial
Solid
Waste
Management
Officials
 
National
Association
of
Attorneys
General
 
Gila
Tribe,
Department
of
Environmental
Quality
 
U.
S.
Conference
of
Mayors
 
National
Association
of
Local
Government
Environmental
Professionals
 
National
Association
of
Home
Builders
 
The
Real
Estate
Roundtable
 
National
Association
of
Industrial
and
Office
Parks
 
Trust
for
Public
Land
 
National
Brownfields
Association
 
Bank
of
America
 
Freddie
Mac
 
Mortgage
Bankers
Association
 
Wasatch
Environmental
 
National
Groundwater
Association
 
Associated
Soil
and
Foundation
Engineers
The
list
of
potential
parties
shown
above
is
not
presented
as
a
complete
or
exclusive
list
from
which
committee
members
will
be
selected,
nor
does
inclusion
on
the
list
of
potential
parties
mean
that
a
party
on
the
list
has
agreed
to
participate
as
a
member
of
the
committee
or
as
a
member
of
a
coalition.
The
list
merely
indicates
parties
that
EPA
has
tentatively
identified
as
representing
significantly
affected
interests
in
the
outcome
of
the
proposed
rule
establishing
federal
standards
for
the
conduct
of
all
appropriate
inquiry.
This
document
gives
notice
of
this
process
to
other
potential
participants
and
affords
them
the
opportunity
to
request
representation
in
the
negotiations.
The
procedure
for
requesting
such
representation
is
set
out
under
Section
I
``
General
Information''
part
of
this
document.
In
addition,
comments
and
suggestions
on
this
tentative
list
are
invited.
The
negotiating
group
should
not
exceed
25
members.
The
Agency
believes
that
more
than
25
members
would
make
it
difficult
to
conduct
effective
negotiations.
EPA
is
aware
that
there
are
many
more
potential
participants,
whether
they
are
listed
here
or
not,
than
there
are
membership
slots
on
the
Committee.
The
Agency
does
not
believe,
nor
does
the
NRA
contemplate,
that
each
potentially
affected
group
must
participate
directly
in
the
negotiations;
nevertheless,
each
affected
interest
can
be
adequately
represented.
To
have
a
successful
negotiation,
it
is
important
for
interested
parties
to
identify
and
form
coalitions
that
adequately
represent
significantly
affected
interests.
These
coalitions,
to
provide
adequate
representation,
must
agree
to
support,
both
financially
and
technically,
a
member
to
the
Committee
whom
they
will
choose
to
represent
their
``
interest.''
It
is
very
important
to
recognize
that
interested
parties
who
are
not
selected
to
membership
on
the
Committee
can
make
valuable
contributions
to
this
negotiated
rulemaking
effort
in
any
of
several
ways:
 
The
person
could
request
to
be
placed
on
the
Committee
mailing
list,
submitting
written
comments,
as
appropriate;
 
The
person
could
attend
the
Committee
meetings,
which
are
open
to
the
public,
caucus
with
his
or
her
interest's
member
on
the
Committee,
or
even
address
the
Committee
(
usually
allowed
at
the
end
of
an
issue's
discussion
or
the
end
of
the
session,
as
time
permits);
or
 
The
person
could
assist
in
the
work
of
a
workgroup
that
might
be
established
by
the
Committee.
Informal
workgroups
are
usually
established
by
an
advisory
committee
to
assist
the
Committee
in
``
staffing''
various
technical
matters
(
e.
g.,
researching
or
preparing
summaries
of
the
technical
literature
or
comments
on
particular
matters
such
as
economic
issues)
before
the
Committee
so
as
to
facilitate
Committee
deliberations.
They
also
might
assist
in
estimating
costs
and
drafting
regulatory
text
on
issues
associated
with
the
analysis
of
the
affordability
and
benefits
addressed,
and
formulating
drafts
of
the
various
provisions
and
their
justification
previously
developed
by
the
committee.
Given
their
staffing
function,
workgroups
usually
consist
of
participants
who
have
expertise
or
particular
interest
in
the
technical
matter(
s)
being
studied.
Because
it
recognizes
the
importance
of
this
staffing
work
for
the
Committee,
EPA
will
provide
appropriate
technical
expertise
for
such
workgroups.
EPA
requests
comment
regarding
particular
appointments
to
membership
on
the
regulatory
negotiation
committee.
Members
can
be
individuals
or
organizations.
If
the
effort
is
to
be
fruitful,
participants
should
be
able
to
fully
and
adequately
represent
the
viewpoints
of
their
respective
interests.
Those
who
wish
to
be
appointed
as
members
of
the
committee
should
submit
a
request
to
EPA,
in
accordance
with
the
public
participation
procedures
outlined
in
Section
I
``
General
Information''
of
this
notice.
The
list
of
potential
committee
members
provided
above
includes
those
who
have
been
tentatively
identified
by
EPA
as
being
either
a
potential
member
of
the
Committee,
or
a
potential
member
of
a
coalition
that
would
in
turn
nominate
a
candidate
to
represent
one
of
the
significantly
affected
interests,
also
listed
above.

D.
Good
Faith
Negotiation
Committee
members
should
be
willing
to
negotiate
in
good
faith
and
have
the
authority,
from
his
or
her
constituency,
to
do
so.
The
first
step
is
to
ensure
that
each
member
has
good
communications
with
his
or
her
constituencies.
An
intra­
interest
network
of
communication
should
be
established
to
bring
information
from
the
support
organization
to
the
member
at
the
table,
and
to
take
information
from
the
table
back
to
the
support
organization.
Second,
each
organization
or
coalition
should,
therefore,
designate
as
its
representative
an
official
with
credibility
and
authority
to
insure
that
needed
information
is
provided
and
decisions
are
made
in
a
timely
fashion.
Negotiated
rulemaking
efforts
can
require
a
very
significant
contribution
of
time
by
the
appointed
members
that
must
be
sustained
for
up
to
a
year.
Other
qualities
that
can
be
very
helpful
are
negotiating
experience
and
skills,
and
sufficient
technical
knowledge
to
participate
in
substantive
negotiations.
Certain
concepts
are
central
to
negotiating
in
good
faith.
One
is
the
willingness
to
bring
all
issues
to
the
bargaining
table
in
an
attempt
to
reach
a
consensus,
instead
of
keeping
key
issues
in
reserve.
The
second
is
a
willingness
to
keep
the
issues
at
the
table
and
not
take
them
to
other
forums.
Finally,
good
faith
includes
a
willingness
to
move
away
from
the
type
of
positions
usually
taken
in
a
more
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
05
Mar
05,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00014
Fmt
4702
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
06MRP1.
SGM
06MRP1
10680
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
44
/
Thursday,
March
6,
2003
/
Proposed
Rules
traditional
rulemaking
process,
and
instead
explore
openly
with
other
parties
all
ideas
that
may
emerge
from
the
discussions
of
the
committee.

E.
Facilitator
The
facilitator
will
not
be
involved
with
the
substantive
development
of
the
standard.
Rather,
the
facilitator's
role
generally
includes:
 
Facilitating
the
meetings
of
the
committee
in
an
impartial
manner;
and
 
Impartially
assisting
the
members
of
the
Committee
in
conducting
discussions
and
negotiations;

F.
EPA
Representative
The
EPA
representative
will
be
a
full
and
active
participant
in
the
consensus
building
negotiations.
The
Agency's
representative
will
meet
regularly
with
various
senior
Agency
officials,
briefing
them
on
the
negotiations
and
receiving
their
suggestions
and
advice,
to
effectively
represent
the
Agency's
views
regarding
the
issues
before
the
Committee.
EPA's
representative
also
will
ensure
that
the
entire
spectrum
of
federal
governmental
interests
affected
by
the
all
appropriate
inquiry
rulemaking,
including
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
the
Department
of
Justice,
and
other
Departments
and
agencies,
are
kept
informed
of
the
negotiations
and
encouraged
to
make
their
concerns
known
in
a
timely
fashion.

G.
Committee
Notice
and
Schedule
EPA
will
have
an
open
public
meeting
of
all
parties
to
discuss
the
possibility
of
using
negotiated
rulemaking
on
April
15,
2003.
The
Public
Meeting
will
be
held
in
Learning
Forum
Rooms
A
and
B
of
the
Marriott
Learning
Complex
in
the
Ronald
Reagan
Building
at
1300
Pennsylvania
Avenue
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20004.
The
meeting
is
scheduled
for
1
p.
m.
to
3
p.
m.
If
EPA
proceeds
with
a
negotiated
rulemaking
committee
on
all
appropriate
inquiry,
EPA
plans
for
the
Committee
to
begin
deliberations
in
May,
2003
and
conclude
negotiations
in
December,
2003.
After
evaluating
the
comments
on
this
announcement
and
the
requests
for
representation,
EPA
will
issue
a
notice
that
will
announce
the
establishment
of
the
committee
and
its
membership,
unless
after
reviewing
the
comments,
it
is
determined
that
such
an
action
is
inappropriate.
The
negotiation
process
will
begin
once
the
committee
membership
roster
is
published
in
the
Federal
Register.

IV.
Comments
Requested
EPA
requests
comments
on
whether
it
should
use
negotiated
rulemaking
to
develop
draft
language
for
this
rule
and
the
extent
to
which
the
issues,
parties
and
procedures
described
above
are
adequate
and
appropriate.

Dated:
February
27,
2003.
Thomas
P.
Dunne,
Associate
Assistant
Administrator,
EPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
and
Emergency
Response.
[
FR
Doc.
03
 
5324
Filed
3
 
5
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
P
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
62
[
NH
 
055b;
FRL
 
7458
 
4]

Approval
and
Promulgation
of
State
Plans
for
Designated
Facilities
and
Pollutants:
New
Hampshire;
Negative
Declaration
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Proposed
rule.

SUMMARY:
EPA
proposes
to
approve
the
sections
111(
d)
negative
declaration
submitted
by
the
New
Hampshire
Department
of
Environmental
Services
(
DES)
on
July
22,
1998.
This
negative
declaration
adequately
certifies
that
there
are
no
existing
municipal
solid
waste
(
MSW)
landfills
located
in
the
state
of
New
Hampshire
that
have
accepted
waste
since
November
8,
1987
and
that
must
install
collection
and
control
systems
according
to
EPA's
emissions
guidelines
for
existing
MSW
landfills.
DATES:
EPA
must
receive
comments
in
writing
by
April
7,
2003.
ADDRESSES:
You
should
address
your
written
comments
to:
Mr.
Steven
Rapp,
Chief,
Air
Permits,
Toxics
&
Indoor
Programs
Unit,
Office
of
Ecosystem
Protection,
U.
S.
EPA,
One
Congress
Street,
Suite
1100
(
CAP),
Boston,
Massachusetts
02114
 
2023.
Copies
of
documents
relating
to
this
proposed
rule
are
available
for
public
inspection
during
normal
business
hours
at
the
following
location:
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Air
Permits,
Toxics
&
Indoor
Program
Unit,
Office
of
Ecosystem
Protection,
One
Congress
Street,
Suite
1100,
Boston,
Massachusetts
02114
 
2023.
The
interested
persons
wanting
to
examine
these
documents
should
make
an
appointment
with
the
appropriate
office
at
least
24
hours
before
the
day
of
the
visit.
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
John
Courcier,
Office
of
Ecosystem
Protection
(
CAP),
EPA­
New
England,
Region
1,
Boston,
Massachusetts
02203,
(
617)
918
 
1659,
or
by
e­
mail
at
courcier.
john@
epa.
gov.
While
the
public
may
forward
questions
to
EPA
via
email
it
must
submit
comments
on
this
proposed
rule
according
to
the
procedures
outlined
above.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
Under
section
111(
d)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act,
EPA
published
regulations
at
40
CFR
part
60,
subpart
B
which
require
states
to
submit
control
plans
to
control
emissions
of
designated
pollutants
from
designated
facilities.
In
the
event
that
a
state
does
not
have
a
particular
designated
facility
located
within
its
boundaries,
EPA
requires
that
a
state
submit
a
negative
declaration
in
lieu
of
a
control
plan.
The
New
Hampshire
DES
submitted
the
negative
declaration
to
satisfy
the
requirements
of
40
CFR
part
60,
subpart
B.
In
the
Final
Rules
section
of
this
Federal
Register,
EPA
is
approving
the
New
Hampshire
negative
declaration
as
a
direct
final
rule
without
a
prior
proposal.
EPA
is
doing
this
because
the
Agency
views
this
action
as
a
noncontroversial
submittal
and
anticipates
that
it
will
not
receive
any
significant,
material,
and
adverse
comments.
A
detailed
rationale
for
the
approval
is
set
forth
in
the
direct
final
rule.
If
EPA
does
not
receive
any
significant,
material,
and
adverse
comments
to
this
action,
then
the
approval
will
become
final
without
further
proceedings.
If
EPA
receives
adverse
comments,
we
will
withdraw
the
direct
final
rule
and
EPA
will
address
all
public
comments
received
in
a
subsequent
final
rule
based
on
this
proposed
rule.
EPA
will
not
begin
a
second
comment
period.

Dated:
February
20,
2003.
Robert
W.
Varney,
Regional
Administrator,
EPA
New
England.
[
FR
Doc.
03
 
5305
Filed
3
 
5
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
P
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
62
[
Region
2
Docket
No.
NJ57
 
251b;
FRL
 
7459
 
5]

Approval
and
Promulgation
of
Plans
for
Designated
Facilities;
New
Jersey;
Delegation
of
Authority
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Proposed
rule.

SUMMARY:
The
EPA
is
proposing
approval
of
the
New
Jersey
Department
of
Environmental
Protection's
request
VerDate
Jan<
31>
2003
14:
05
Mar
05,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00015
Fmt
4702
Sfmt
4702
E:\
FR\
FM\
06MRP1.
SGM
06MRP1