

[Federal Register: February 17, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 33)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 8462-8467]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17fe06-14]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 112

[EPA-HQ-OPA-2005-0003; FRL-8033-9]
RIN 2050-AG28

 
Oil Pollution Prevention; Non-Transportation Related Onshore 
Facilities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is today extending the 
dates by which facilities must prepare or amend Spill Prevention, 
Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans, and implement those Plans. 
This action allows the Agency time to take final action on proposed 
revisions to the July 17, 2002 SPCC rule before owners and operators of 
facilities are required to meet requirements of that rule when 
preparing or amending their SPCC Plans.

DATES: This final rule is effective February 17, 2006.

ADDRESSES: The public docket for this final rule, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OPA-2005-0003, contains the information related to this rulemaking, 
including the response to comment document. All documents in the docket 
are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in 

the index, some information may not be publicly available, e.g., 
Confidential Business Information or other information the disclosure 
of which is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as 
copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket, EPA/

DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. 
The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number of the 
Public Reading Room is 202-566-1744, and the telephone number to make 
an appointment to view the docket is 202-566-0276.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact the 
Superfund, TRI, EPCRA, RMP, and Oil Information Center at (800) 424-
9346 or TDD (800) 553-7672 (hearing impaired). In the Washington, DC 
metropolitan area, call (703) 421-9810 or TDD (703) 421-3323. For more 
detailed information on specific aspects of this final rule, contact 
either Vanessa Rodriguez at (202) 564-7913 (rodriguez.vanessa@epa.gov), 
or Mark W. Howard at (202) 564-1964 (howard.markw@epa.gov), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC, 20460-0002, Mail Code 5104A.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Authority

    33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 33 U.S.C. 2720; E.O. 12777 (October 18, 
1991), 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351.

II. Background

    On July 17, 2002, the Agency published a final rule that amended 
the SPCC regulations (see 67 FR 47042). The rule became effective on 
August 16, 2002. The final rule included compliance dates in Sec.  
112.3 for preparing, amending, and implementing SPCC Plans. The 
original compliance dates were amended on January 9, 2003 (see 68 FR 
1348), again on April 17, 2003 (see 68 FR 18890), and a third time on 
August 11, 2004 (see 69 FR 48794).
    Under the regulations in effect prior to this final rule, Sec.  
112.3(a) and (b) required a facility that was in operation on or before 
August 16, 2002 to make any necessary amendments to its SPCC

[[Page 8463]]

Plan by February 17, 2006, and to fully implement its SPCC Plan by 
August 18, 2006. A facility that came into operation after August 16, 
2002, but before August 18, 2006, was required to prepare and fully 
implement an SPCC Plan on or before August 18, 2006. Thus, for 
facilities in operation on or before August 16, 2002, the regulations 
provided a six-month period between the compliance date for Plan 
amendment and the compliance date for Plan implementation. In addition, 
Sec.  112.3(c) required onshore and offshore mobile facilities to 
prepare or amend and implement SPCC Plans on or before August 18, 2006.
    On December 12, 2005, the Agency published in the Federal Register 
a proposed rule that would amend the SPCC requirements in several areas 
(see 70 FR 73524). Specifically, the proposal would allow owners and 
operators of facilities with an oil storage capacity of 10,000 gallons 
or less, that also meet other qualifying criteria, the option of self-
certification of their SPCC Plans (in lieu of review and certification 
by a Professional Engineer); it would provide facilities with certain 
types of oil-filled operational equipment an alternative to the 
secondary containment requirement that would not require a 
determination of impracticability; it would define airport mobile 
refuelers, and exempt such vehicles meeting the definition from the 
specifically sized secondary containment requirements for bulk storage 
containers; it would amend the requirements for animal fats and 
vegetable oils (AFVOs) by removing certain sections of the regulations 
in Subpart C of Part 112 that do not apply to facilities that handle, 
store, or transport AFVOs; and it would define farms, and would provide 
a separate extension of the compliance dates for certain farms.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Comments and our response to them regarding the separate 
extension of the compliance dates for farms will be addressed in the 
rulemaking that addresses the substantive modifications that were 
proposed for the SPCC rule on December 12, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the same day, but in a separate notice in the Federal Register 
(see 70 FR 73518), the Agency also proposed to extend the dates in 
Sec.  112.3(a), (b), and (c) by which a facility must prepare or amend 
and implement its SPCC Plan. Under the proposed extension rule, a 
facility that was in operation on or before August 16, 2002 would have 
to make any necessary amendments to its SPCC Plan, and implement that 
Plan, on or before October 31, 2007. Likewise, a facility that came 
into operation after August 16, 2002 would have to prepare and 
implement an SPCC Plan on or before October 31, 2007. Finally, a mobile 
facility would have to prepare or amend and implement an SPCC Plan on 
or before October 31, 2007.
    The Agency's proposal to extend the compliance dates in Sec.  112.3 
(which is made final in today's notice) was designed to allow the 
Agency time to take final action on the proposed amendments to the SPCC 
requirements before owners and operators are required to prepare, 
amend, and implement their SPCC Plans. The Agency believed that the 
extension was appropriate to allow owners and operators to take 
advantage of any modifications that would be provided by a final SPCC 
amendment rule. In addition, the Agency believed that the extension 
would allow the regulated community the opportunity to understand the 
material presented in its newly released guidance ``SPCC Guidance for 
Regional Inspectors'' \2\ before preparing or amending their SPCC 
Plans. Finally, the Agency believed that the proposed extension was 
necessary for facilities that might have difficulty meeting the 
upcoming compliance dates because they were adversely affected by the 
recent hurricanes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This guidance is intended to assist regional inspectors in 
reviewing a facility's implementation of the SPCC rule. The document 
is designed to facilitate an understanding of the rule's 
applicability, to help clarify the role of the inspector in the 
review and evaluation of the performance-based SPCC requirements, 
and to provide a consistent national policy on several SPCC-related 
issues. The guidance is available on the Agency's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/oilspill
.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of This Final Rule

    This final rule extends the dates in Sec.  112.3 by which owners 
and operators of facilities must prepare or amend their SPCC Plans as 
proposed. Under the new Sec.  112.3(a), a facility that was in 
operation on or before August 16, 2002 must make any necessary 
amendments to its SPCC Plan, and implement that Plan, on or before 
October 31, 2007. Under the new Sec.  112.3(b), a facility that came 
into operation after August 16, 2002 must also prepare and implement an 
SPCC Plan on or before October 31, 2007. Finally, under the new Sec.  
112.3(c), a mobile facility must prepare or amend and implement an SPCC 
Plan on or before October 31, 2007.
    This rule is effective immediately. Section 553(d) of the 
Administrative Procedures Act requires 30-days notice before the 
effective date of a final rule. However, section 553(d)(1) allows an 
exception to the 30-day notice where a rule relieves a restriction. 
Since this final rule relieves a restriction, the Agency invokes 
section 553(d)(1) to allow an immediate effective date.
    It should be noted that today's compliance date extension affects 
only requirements of the July 2002 final SPCC rule that impose new or 
more stringent compliance obligations than did the 1973 SPCC rule. Any 
provision in the July 2002 rule that provides regulatory relief is not 
affected by these compliance date extensions because such provisions 
are not ones for which it would be ``necessary'' to amend existing 
Plans ``to ensure compliance with'' the July 2002 amendments (see Sec.  
112.3). This issue was discussed by the Agency in two previous 
extension notices on April 17, 2003 (see 68 FR 18890, at 18892-3), and 
on August 11, 2004 (see 69 FR 48794, at 48796).

IV. Response to Comment

    The Agency received approximately 80 comments on the proposed rule. 
The discussion below summarizes and responds to the major comments 
received. A more complete response to comments can be found in the 
docket for this rulemaking, EPA-HQ-OPA-2005-0003.
    The majority of commenters supported the Agency's proposal to 
extend the compliance dates in Sec.  112.3. They agreed with the Agency 
that the extension was necessary to allow owners and operators the 
opportunity to take advantage of any modifications that might be 
provided by an amendment to the SPCC rule (see discussion in section 
II). Of those who supported an extension of the compliance dates, some 
commenters agreed with extending the compliance dates as proposed, and 
others opposed the proposed length of the extension.
    A number of commenters requested that the Agency incorporate 
flexibility into the compliance dates in Sec.  112.3, by extending them 
until October 31, 2007, or until a date no less than one year following 
implementation of the final SPCC amendment rule, whichever is later. 
Commenters believed that, since the date for a final SPCC amendment 
rule is uncertain, setting a compliance date of October 31, 2007 does 
not guarantee owners and operators a full year between promulgation of 
a final rule and the compliance dates in Sec.  112.3. These commenters 
believe it is important to coordinate the compliance dates in Sec.  
112.3 with a final SPCC amendment rule.
    The Agency is reluctant to proceed as these commenters suggested 
and set uncertain compliance dates in Sec.  112.3. At the same time, 
the Agency recognizes that the regulated community needs adequate time 
after EPA takes final

[[Page 8464]]

action on the proposed amendments to the SPCC Plan requirements to 
amend or prepare their SPCC Plans and to implement them. The Agency 
agrees that one year is a reasonable period of time to allow for 
preparing, amending, and implementing SPCC Plans following final Agency 
action on the proposed amendments to the SPCC rule. The Agency plans to 
develop and publish a Federal Register notice taking final action on 
the December 12, 2005 proposal as soon as possible. At this time, based 
on the information at hand, the Agency believes that extending the 
compliance dates in Sec.  112.3 until October 31, 2007 will allow 
owners and operators an adequate interval to comply with the SPCC rule. 
Regarding modifications of the SPCC regulations, to the extent 
practicable, EPA will establish deadlines for compliance implementation 
that commence one year after promulgating the regulatory revisions.
    Other commenters objected to the Agency's proposal to eliminate the 
six-month interim period in Sec.  112.3(a) between the compliance dates 
for Plan amendment and implementation. Those commenters requested that 
the date for implementing amended SPCC Plans be revised to include a 
six-month period after the October 31, 2007 date for Plan amendment.
    The Agency disagrees with these commenters. For the reasons 
discussed above, the Agency believes the October 31, 2007 date for Plan 
implementation is adequate. The effect of the Agency's decision to 
eliminate the gap between Plan preparation or amendment and 
implementation was to allow additional time for Plan preparation or 
amendment. The Agency believes that this approach, which allows owners 
and operators flexibility, makes sense given that owners and operators 
are not required to submit their SPCC Plans to the Agency.
    Several commenters conditioned their support of the proposed 
compliance date extensions on the Agency's timely resolution of issues 
related to regulation of animal fats and vegetable oils (AFVOs). These 
commenters were concerned that the Agency has not yet developed 
differentiated requirements for AFVOs, and some suggested that the 
Agency develop a timeframe to do so.
    In the December 12, 2005 SPCC amendment proposed rule, the Agency 
requested information that would support differentiated SPCC 
requirements for AFVOs (see 70 FR 73542, at 73541). The Agency is not 
prepared, at this time, to determine whether that request for comment 
will produce information that is appropriate or adequate for 
development of differentiated requirements for AFVOs. Thus, the Agency 
believes it would be inappropriate to condition the compliance dates in 
Sec.  112.3 on such uncertain factors. Further, issues specific to the 
regulation of AFVOs are outside the scope of this extension. The Agency 
will review and give full consideration to all comments it receives 
related to AFVOs, and address those comments when it has had a chance 
to assess them and any data provided.
    Finally, some commenters objected to extending the compliance dates 
in Sec.  112.3. Generally, those commenters believed that extension of 
the dates would delay development and implementation of SPCC Plans, 
which are necessary for protection of human health and the environment. 
Further, they raised concerns that extending the compliance dates only 
encourages non-compliance.
    For example, one commenter argued that it is unnecessary and absurd 
to extend the compliance dates a third time. The commenter pointed out 
that this rule would extend compliance to a time four years after the 
2002 SPCC rule should have first been effective, and almost 35 years 
after the SPCC rules were first promulgated. The commenter believed 
that facilities should already be in compliance with the 1973 rules, 
and consequently should be in compliance with the rule changes proposed 
by the Agency because they primarily reduce the requirements for 
regulated facilities. The commenter also believed that most regulated 
facilities already have developed and implemented SPCC plans to comply 
with the earlier compliance dates that were subsequently extended. The 
commenter believed that these facilities are ready to meet their 
obligations to prevent oil spills and other releases, and that it is 
entirely unnecessary to extend the compliance dates when most 
facilities have developed and implemented Plans. Finally, the commenter 
anticipated that extending the compliance dates will extend the 
Agency's practice of reduced inspections and enforcement at SPCC 
regulated facilities, continuing the increased likelihood of oil 
releases and endangerment of facility personnel and neighboring 
communities. By extending the compliance dates, the commenter was 
concerned that the Agency would allow noncompliant facilities that have 
not put SPCC Plans in place to continue to operate and endanger human 
health and the environment.
    The Agency believes that it is in the best interest of both the 
regulated community and the environment to address areas of confusion 
that arose after promulgation of the 2002 amendments. By promulgating a 
proposal intended to clarify requirements and reduce burdens, 
particularly on small businesses, and by making the SPCC Inspectors 
Guidance available to the regulated community, the Agency believes that 
a more effective and complete implementation of the SPCC regulation and 
improved environmental protection will ultimately result. The Agency 
also believes that the regulated community needs the additional time 
allowed by the extension in order to better take advantage of the 
guidance and any further amendments that are promulgated and that the 
benefits of this extension outweighs the concerns raised by commentors 
of increased administrative burdens.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether a regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (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.
    Under the terms of Executive Order 12866, this action has been 
judged as not a ``significant regulatory action'' because it extends 
the compliance dates in Sec.  112.3, but has no other substantive 
effect. However, because of its interconnection with the rulemaking 
proposed on December 12, 2005 (see discussion in section II), which is 
a significant action under the terms of Executive Order 12866, this 
action was

[[Page 8465]]

nonetheless submitted to OMB for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 
because this action does not change the requirements of the rule.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.).

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency 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 defined 
in the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 
121.201--the SBA defines small businesses by category of business using 
North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, and in the 
case of farms and production facilities, generally defines small 
businesses as having less than $500,000 in revenues or 500 employees, 
respectively; (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 that is independently owned and 
operated and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on 
small entities, the Agency certifies that this action would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any 
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the 
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify 
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant 
economic impact of the rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule 
relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect 
on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
    This rule relieves the regulatory burden for small entities by 
extending the compliance dates in Sec.  112.3. 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.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 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 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 
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of 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-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
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 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.
    EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal 
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for 
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private 
sector in any one year. This rule would reduce burden and costs for all 
facilities.
    EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory 
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments. As was explained above, the effect of the rule is to 
reduce burden and costs for all facilities, including small governments 
that are subject to the rule by extending the compliance dates.

E. 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 the various levels of government.''
    This rule does not have federalism implications. It does 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. Under CWA section 311(o), States 
may impose additional requirements, including more stringent 
requirements, relating to the prevention of oil discharges to navigable

[[Page 8466]]

waters. EPA encourages States to supplement the Federal SPCC regulation 
and recognizes that some States have more stringent requirements (56 FR 
54612, October 22, 1991). This rule does not preempt State law or 
regulations. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    On November 6, 2000, the President issued Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249) entitled, ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments.'' Executive Order 13175 took effect on January 6, 2001, 
and revokes Executive Order 13084 (Tribal Consultation) as of that 
date.
    Today's rule would not significantly or uniquely affect communities 
of Indian tribal governments. Therefore, the Agency has not consulted 
with a representative organization of tribal groups.

G. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risk

    Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 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.
    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that 
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the 
potential to influence the regulation. This 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 action present a disproportionate risk to children.

H. Executive Order 13211--Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in 
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not likely to have a significant 
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 
272 note) 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 such as materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA 
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides 
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This rule does not involve technical standards. Therefore, NTTAA 
does not apply.

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act (CRA), 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. Prior to publication of the final rule in 
the Federal Register, we will submit all necessary information to the 
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller 
General of the United States. Under the CRA, a major rule cannot 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 
rule will be effective upon publication in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 112

    Environmental protection, Oil pollution, Penalties, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 10, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, title 40 CFR, chapter I, 
part 112 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 112--OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION

0
1. The authority citation for part 112 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 33 U.S.C. 2720; E.O. 12777 
(October 18, 1991), 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351.


0
2. Section 112.3 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  112.3  Requirement to prepare and implement a Spill Prevention, 
Control, and Countermeasure Plan.

* * * * *
    (a) If your onshore or offshore facility was in operation on or 
before August 16, 2002, you must maintain your Plan, but must amend it, 
if necessary to ensure compliance with this part, by October 31, 2007, 
and implement the Plan no later than October 31, 2007. If your onshore 
or offshore facility becomes operational after August 16, 2002, through 
October 31, 2007, and could reasonably be expected to have a discharge 
as described in Sec.  112.1(b), you must prepare and implement a Plan 
on or before October 31, 2007.
    (b) If you are the owner or operator of an onshore or offshore 
facility that becomes operational after October 31, 2007, and could 
reasonably be expected to have a discharge as described in Sec.  
112.1(b), you must prepare and implement a Plan before you begin 
operations.
    (c) If you are the owner or operator of an onshore or offshore 
mobile facility, such as an onshore drilling or workover rig, barge 
mounted offshore drilling or workover rig, or portable fueling 
facility, you must prepare, implement, and maintain a facility Plan as 
required by this section. You must maintain your Plan, but must amend 
and implement it, if necessary to ensure compliance with this part, on 
or before October 31, 2007. If your onshore or offshore mobile facility 
becomes operational after October 31, 2007, and could reasonably be 
expected to have a discharge as described in Sec.  112.1(b), you must 
prepare and implement a Plan before you begin operations. This 
provision does not require that you prepare a new Plan each time you 
move the facility to a new site. The Plan may be a general Plan. When 
you move the mobile or portable facility, you must locate and install 
it using the discharge prevention practices outlined in the Plan for 
the facility. The Plan is applicable only

[[Page 8467]]

while the facility is in a fixed (non-transportation) operating mode.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-1502 Filed 2-16-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
