[Federal Register: March 15, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 49)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 12632-12634]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15mr05-20]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 228
[FRL-7883-7]
Ocean Dumping; De-designation of Ocean Dredged Material Disposal
Sites and Designation of New Sites; Correction
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
correct a final rule that appeared in the Federal Register of March 2,
2005 (70 FR 10041). The document de-designated certain ocean dredged
material disposal sites and designated new sites located off the mouth
of the Columbia River near the states of Oregon and Washington. The
coordinates for one of those sites, the Shallow Water site, contained a
typographical error in the Overall Site Coordinates as published
[[Page 12633]]
on page 10055 in Federal Register. This rule proposes to correct the
typographical error.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 30, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on this proposed rule should be sent on or
before 5 p.m. of the 15th day from the date of this publication in the
Federal Register to: John Malek, Dredging and Ocean Dumping
Coordinator, EPA Region 10, MS: ETPA-083, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,
WA 98101-1128.
Electronic comments may be sent to: malek.john@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Malek, Ocean Dumping Coordinator,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 (EPTA-083), 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101-1128, telephone (206) 553-1286, e-mail:
malek.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. General Information
In the Federal Register of Wednesday, March 2, 2005 (70 FR 10041),
EPA published a final rule to de-designate and to designate ocean
dredged material disposal sites off the mouth of the Columbia River
near the states of Oregon and Washington. The final rule published on
that date contained a typographical error in the coordinates for one of
those sites, the Shallow Water site. The typographical error was
printed in the Overall Site Coordinates for the Shallow Water site as
published on page 10055 in Federal Register. EPA proposes to correct
the typographical error by making the following correction to that
final rule:
Section 228.15 Dumping Sites Designated on a Final Basis [Corrected]
1. On page 10055, Sec. 228.15(n)(8)(i) is corrected to read as
follows:
(i) Location: Overall Site Coordinates for the third N and third W
coordinates of the Shallow Water site are as follows: 46 [deg] 15'02.87
N, 124 [deg] 08'11.47 W.
II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
1. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and, therefore, subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as
one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect in a material way, the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this proposed action, which is a
technical correction, is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is, therefore, not subject to
OMB review.
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., is intended
to minimize the reporting and record-keeping burden on the regulated
community, as well as to minimize the cost of Federal information
collection and dissemination. In general, the Act requires that
information requests and record-keeping requirements affecting ten or
more non-Federal respondents be approved by OPM. Since the proposed
Rule does not establish or modify any information or record-keeping
requirements, it is not subject to the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq., generally requires Federal agencies to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing the impacts of
today's rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small
business, as codified in the Small Business Size Regulations at 13 CFR
part 121; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field. EPA has determined that this proposed
action, a technical correction, will not have a significant impact on
small entities. After considering the economic impacts of today's
proposed rule on small entities, I certify that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
4. Unfunded Mandates
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Public
Law 104-4) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is
needed, Section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the
least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why the
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA, a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements. This proposed rule contains no Federal mandates (under
the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. It imposes no new enforceable
duty on any State, local or tribal government or the private sector.
[[Page 12634]]
EPA has also determined that this proposed rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
government entities. Thus, the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA
do not apply to this rule.
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), 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.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among various levels of government.'' This proposed
rule, a technical correction, does not have federalism implications. It
will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and 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.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The
proposed rule is a technical correction and does not establish any
regulatory policy with tribal implications. Thus, Executive Order 13175
does not apply to this proposed rule.
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined
to be ``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children.
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered
by the Agency. This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order
13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866 and because the Agency does not have reason to
believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this
proposed action, a technical correction, present a disproportionate
risk to children.
8. 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'' as defined under Executive Order
12866.
9. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress,
through the OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This proposed
rulemaking is a technical correction and does not involve technical
standards.
10. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations
To the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, and
consistent with the principles set forth in the report on the National
Performance Review, each Federal agency must make achieving
environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human
health and environmental effects of its programs, policies, and
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the
United States and its territories and possessions, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the
Mariana Islands. Because this proposed rule is a technical correction
with no anticipated significant adverse human health or environmental
effects, the rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228
Environmental protection, Water pollution control.
Dated: March 4, 2005.
Ronald A. Kreizenbeck,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, chapter I of title 40 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as set forth
below:
PART 228--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 228 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1412 and 1418.
2. Section 228.15 is amended by revising paragraph (n)(8)(i) to
read as follows:
Sec. 228.15 Dumping sites designated on a final basis.
* * * * *
(n) * * *
(8) * * *
(i) Location: Overall Site Coordinates: 46 [deg] 15'31.64'' N, 124
[deg] 05'09.72'' W; 46 [deg] 14'17.66'' N, 124 [deg] 07' 14.54'' W;
46[deg] 15' 02.87'' N, 124 [deg] 08' 11.47'' W; 46 [deg] 15'52.77'' N,
124[deg] 05' 42.92'' W. Drop Zone: 46 [deg] 15' 35.36'' N, 124 [deg]
05' 15.55'' W; 46 [deg] 14' 31.07'' N, 124[deg] 07' 03.25'' W; 46 [deg]
14' 58.83'' N, 124[deg] 07' 36.89'' W; 46 [deg] 15' 42.38'' N, 124
[deg] 05' 26.65' W (All NAD 83)
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-5049 Filed 3-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P