Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule; correction.
In the Federal Register on March 15, 2005 (70 FR 12632), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed 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. In today's final rule, EPA finalizes the correction of the coordinates for the Shallow Water site.
This final rule is effective June 30, 2005.
EPA has established a docket for this action which is available Start Printed Page 37697for inspection at the EPA Region 10 Seattle Office. For access to the docket, contact John Malek, Ocean Dumping Coordinator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 (EPTA-083), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101-1128, telephone at (206) 553-1286, e-mail: email@example.com.End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
I. General Information
In the Federal Register of Tuesday, March 15, 2005 (70 FR 12632), EPA proposed to correct a typographical error in the coordinates for the Shallow Water site, designated as an ocean dredged material disposal site by EPA on Wednesday, March 2, 2005 (70 FR 10041)—EPA's 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 typographical error was printed in the Overall Site Coordinates for the Shallow Water site as published on page 10055 in Federal Register. EPA did not receive any comments on the proposed correction. Today, EPA finalizes the correction of the typographical error.
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 final rule, 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 recordkeeping requirements affecting ten or more non-Federal respondents be approved by OPM. Since the final rule does not establish or modify any information or recordkeeping 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 that 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 final rule, a technical correction, will not have a significant impact on small entities. After considering the economic impacts of today's 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 (Pub. L. 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 final 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. EPA has also determined that this final 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. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the action in the Federal Register. A major rule Start Printed Page 37698cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This action will be effective immediately upon publication in the Federal Register.
6. 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 final 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.
7. 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 final rule does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The final rule is a technical correction and does not establish any regulatory policy with tribal implications. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.
8. 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 final 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 final action, a technical correction, present a disproportionate risk to children.
9. 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.
10. 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 final rule is a technical correction and does not involve technical standards.
11. 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 final rule is a technical correction with no anticipated significant adverse human health or environmental effects, the rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 228
- Environmental protection
- Water pollution control
Dated: June 22, 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 amended as set forth below:End Amendment Part Start Part
PART 228—[AMENDED]End Part Start Amendment Part
1. The authority citation for part 228 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part Start Amendment Part
2. Section 228.15 is amended by revising paragraph (n)(8)(i) as follows:End Amendment Part
(n) * * *
(8) * * *
(i) Location: Overall Site Coordinates: 46°15′31.64″ N, 124°05′09.72″ W; 46°14′17.66″ N, 124°07′14.54″ W; 46°15′02.87″ N, 124°08′11.47″ W; 46°15′52.77″ N, 124°05′42.92″ W. Drop Zone: 46°15′35.36″ N, 124°05′15.55″ W; 46°14′31.07″ N, 124°07′03.25″ W; 46°14′58.83″ N, 124°07′36.89″ W; 46°15′42.38″ N, 124°05′26.65″ W (All NAD 83)
[FR Doc. 05-12941 Filed 6-29-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P