[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 211 (Wednesday, October 31, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55050-55060]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-27380]
[[Page 55049]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Chapter I
Project XL Site-specific Rulemaking for NASA White Sands Test Facility,
Las Cruces, NM; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 211 / Wednesday, October 31, 2001 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 55050]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 Ch. I.
[FRL-7095-7]
RIN 2090-AA27
Project XL Site-specific Rulemaking for NASA White Sands Test
Facility, Las Cruces, NM
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) is
proposing this rule to implement a pilot project under the Project XL
program that would provide site-specific regulatory flexibility under
the Clean Air Act (CAA), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),
and Clean Water Act (CWA) for the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) in Las Cruces,
New Mexico. The principal objective of this XL project is to enable the
NASA WSTF to electronically submit regulatory reports and permit
information required by EPA regulations to the NMED Air Quality Bureau,
Solid Waste Bureau, Hazardous Waste Bureau, Groundwater Bureau, and
Surface Water Bureau in accordance with guidelines set forth in the
NASA WSTF Project XL Final Project Agreement (FPA). This project would
significantly reduce NASA's regulatory reporting costs and enhance the
NMED's ability to analyze and manage NASA WSTF's regulatory and permit
information.
DATES: Public Comments: Comments on the proposed rule must be received
on or before November 30, 2001.
Public Hearing: Commentors may request a hearing by November 14,
2001. Commentors must state the basis for requesting the public
hearing. If EPA determines there is sufficient reason to hold a public
hearing, it will do so no later than November 30, 2001, during the last
week of the public comment period. Requests for a public hearing should
be submitted to the address listed below. If a public hearing is
scheduled, the date, time, and location will be made available through
a Federal Register Notice. If a public hearing is held, it will take
place in Las Cruces, NM.
ADDRESSES: Comments: Written comments should be mailed to the Air
Docket Clerk, Mail Code 6102, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, D.C. 20460. Please send an
original and three copies of all written comments as well as an
original and three copies of any attachments, enclosures, or other
documents referenced in the comments and refer to Docket Number A-2000-
54. A copy should also be sent to Mr. John DuPree at Mail Code 1807,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
EPA will also accept comments electronically. Electronic comments
should be addressed to the following internet address:
[email protected]. Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII
or WordPerfect version 5.1, 6.1, or 8.0 format file, and must avoid use
of special characters or any form of encryption. Electronic comments
will be transferred into a paper version for the official record. EPA
will attempt to clarify electronic comments if there is an apparent
error in transmission.
Request to speak at Hearing: Requests to speak at a hearing should
be mailed to the Air Docket, Mail Code 6102, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C.
20460.
Viewing Project Materials: A docket containing the proposed rule,
Final Project Agreement, supporting materials, and public comments is
available for public inspection and copying at the Air Docket, located
at Waterside Mall, 401 M St., Washington, D.C. 20460. The Air Docket is
open from 9:00 am to 4:00 pm, Monday through Friday, excluding Federal
holidays. The public is encouraged to phone in advance to review docket
materials. Appointments can be scheduled by phoning the Docket Office
at (202) 260-7549. Refer to docket number A-2000-54. The public may
copy a maximum of 100 pages from any regulatory docket at no charge.
Additional copies cost 15 cents per page. Project materials for today's
action are also available on the internet at http://www.epa.gov/projectxl/.
A duplicate copy of the docket is available for inspection and
copying during normal business hours at U.S. EPA Region VI, 1445 Ross
Ave., Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Persons wishing to view the duplicate
docket at the Dallas location are encouraged to contact Mr. David Bond
or Mr. Rob Lawrence, in advance, by telephoning (214) 665-6431 or (214)
665-6580, respectively.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John DuPree; Mail Code 1807; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency; Office of Policy, Economics, and
Innovation; 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.; Washington, D.C. 20460. Mr.
DuPree's telephone number is (202) 260-4468 and e-mail address is
[email protected]. Further information on today's action may also be
obtained on the world wide web at http://www.epa.gov/projectxl/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This project assesses the appropriateness of
submitting regulatory and compliance information electronically instead
of paper reports.
The duration of this project is five years. 016
EPA is soliciting comments on this rulemaking. EPA will publish
responses to comments in the Federal Register and on the Project XL
web-site http://www.epa.gov/projectxl. The XL project will enter the
implementation phase on the effective date of a final rule. Any
comments received will be made available on the Project XL web site:
http://www.epa.gov/projectxl.
The terms of the overall XL project are contained in a Final
Project Agreement (FPA). The FPA is available for review at the Air
Docket in Washington, D.C.; EPA Region VI Library in Dallas, TX; and at
the Las Cruces Public Library in Las Cruces, NM.
Outline of Today's Proposal
The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:
I. Authority
II. Overview of Project XL
III. Overview of the NASA WSTF XL Project
A. To Which Facilities Would the Proposed Rule Apply?
B. What Problems would the NASA WSTF XL Project Address?
C. What Solution is Proposed by the NASA WSTF Project?
D. What Regulatory Changes Will Be Necessary to Implement this
Project?
E. How Have Various Stakeholders Been Involved in this Project?
F. How Would this Project Result in Cost Savings and Paperwork
Reduction?
G. What Are the Terms of the NASA WSTF XL Project and How Would
They Be Enforced?
H. Does EPA Propose to Require Revision of NMED's Authorized,
Delegated, or Approved Programs?
IV. Additional Information
A. How Does this Rule Comply with Executive Order 12866?
B. Is a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required?
C. Does this Trigger the Requirements of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act?
D. How Does this Rule Comply with Executive Order 13045:
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks?
E. How Does this Rule Comply with Executive Order 13132:
Federalism?
F. How Does this Rule Comply with Executive Order 13175:
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments?
[[Page 55051]]
G. How Does this Rule Comply with the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act?
H. How Does this Rule Comply with Executive Order 13211: Energy
Effects?
I. Requirements of Today's Rule
J. How Does this Rule Comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act?
I. Authority
EPA is publishing this proposed regulation under the authority of
sections 33 U.S.C. 2701 to 2761; 42 U.S.C. 300f to 300J-26; 42 U.S.C.
6901 to 6992k.
II. Overview of Project XL
The Final Project Agreement (FPA) sets forth the intentions of EPA,
NMED, and the NASA WSTF (hereinafter, collectively, Project
Signatories) with regard to a project developed under Project XL, an
EPA initiative to allow regulated entities to achieve better
environmental results with limited regulatory flexibility. The proposed
regulation, along with the FPA (also available in today's Federal
Register), would facilitate implementation of the project. Project
XL``eXcellence and Leadership''--was announced on March 16, 1995, as a
central part of the National Performance Review and the Agency's effort
to reinvent environmental protection. See 60 FR 27282 (May 23, 1995).
Project XL provides a limited number of private and public regulated
entities an opportunity to develop their own pilot projects to request
regulatory flexibility that will result in environmental protection
that is superior to what would be achieved through compliance with
current and reasonably-anticipated future regulations. These efforts
are crucial to EPA's ability to test new strategies that reduce
regulatory burden and promote economic growth while achieving better
environmental and public health protection. EPA intends to evaluate the
results of this and other Project XL projects to determine which
specific elements of the projects, if any, should be more broadly
applied to other regulated entities for the benefit of both the economy
and the environment.
Under Project XL, participants in four categories--facilities,
industry sectors, governmental agencies, and communities--are offered
the flexibility to develop common sense, cost-effective strategies that
will replace or modify specific regulatory requirements, on the
condition that they produce and demonstrate superior environmental
performance.
The XL program is intended to enable EPA to experiment with
potentially promising regulatory approaches, both to assess whether
they provide benefits at the specific facility affected, and whether
they should be considered for wider application. Such pilot projects
allow EPA to proceed more quickly than would be possible when
undertaking changes on a nationwide basis. As part of this
experimentation, EPA may try approaches or legal interpretations that
depart from, or are even inconsistent with, longstanding Agency
practice, so long as those interpretations are within the broad range
of discretion enjoyed by the Agency in interpreting the statutes that
it implements. EPA may also modify rules, on a site-specific basis,
that represent one of several possible policy approaches within a more
general statutory directive, so long as the alternative being used is
permissible under the statute.
Adoption of such alternative approaches or interpretations in the
context of a given XL project does not, however, signal EPA's
willingness to adopt that interpretation as a general matter, or even
in the context of other XL projects. It would be inconsistent with the
forward-looking nature of these pilot projects to adopt such innovative
approaches prematurely on a widespread basis without first determining
whether they are viable in practice and successful in the particular
projects that embody them. Furthermore, as EPA indicated in announcing
the XL program, EPA expects to adopt only a limited number of carefully
selected projects. These pilot projects are not intended to be a means
for piecemeal revision of entire programs. Depending on the results in
these projects, EPA may or may not be willing to consider adopting the
alternative interpretation again, either generally or for other
specific facilities.
EPA believes that adopting alternative policy approaches and
interpretations, on a limited, site-specific basis and in connection
with a carefully selected pilot project, is consistent with the
expectations of Congress about EPA's role in implementing the
environmental statutes (provided that the Agency acts within the
discretion allowed by the statute). Congress' recognition that there is
a need for experimentation and research, as well as ongoing re-
evaluation of environmental programs, is reflected in a variety of
statutory provisions.
XL Criteria
To participate in Project XL, applicants must develop alternative
environmental performance objectives pursuant to eight criteria:
superior environmental performance; cost savings and paperwork
reduction; local stakeholder involvement and support; test of an
innovative strategy; transferability; feasibility; identification of
monitoring, reporting and evaluation methods; and avoidance of shifting
risk burden. The XL projects must have the full support of the affected
Federal, State, local and tribal agencies to be selected.
For more information about the XL criteria, readers should refer to
the two descriptive documents published in the Federal Register (60 FR
27282, May 23, 1995 and 62 FR 19872, April 23, 1997), and the December
1, 1995 ``Principles for Development of Project XL Final Project
Agreements'' document. A copy of this publication is available in
Docket #A-2000-54. For explanation of how the NASA WSTF XL project
addresses the XL criteria, readers should refer to the Final Project
Agreement available from the EPA Air docket A-2000-54, or the Project
XL web page (http://www.epa.gov/projectxl).
XL Program Phases
The Project XL program has four basic developmental phases: the
initial pre-proposal phase in which the project sponsor identifies an
innovative concept that it would like EPA to consider as an XL pilot
project; the second phase where the project sponsor works with EPA and
interested stakeholders in developing an XL proposal; the third phase
in which EPA, local regulatory agencies, and other interested
stakeholders review the XL proposal; and the fourth phase where the
project sponsor works with EPA, local regulatory agencies, and
interested stakeholders in developing a Final Project Agreement and
implementation mechanism. After the Final Project Agreement has been
signed by all designated parties and promulgation of the final rule (or
other legal mechanism) for the XL pilot, the XL pilot project proceeds
to implementation and evaluation.
Final Project Agreement
The Final Project Agreement (FPA) is a written voluntary agreement
between the project sponsor and regulatory agencies. The FPA contains a
detailed description of the proposed pilot project. It addresses the
eight Project XL criteria, and the expectation of the Agency that the
XL project will meet those criteria. The FPA identifies performance
goals and indicators that the project is yielding the expected
environmental benefits, and specifically addresses the manner in which
the project is expected to produce superior environmental benefits. The
FPA also discusses the administration of the FPA,
[[Page 55052]]
including dispute resolution and termination. The FPA for this XL
project is available for review in the docket for today's action, and
also is available on the world wide web at http://www.epa.gov/projectxl/.
III. Overview of the NASA WSTF XL Project
Today's proposed rule would facilitate implementation of Phases 1
and 2 of the NASA WSTF FPA (the document that embodies EPA's intent to
implement this project) that has been developed by EPA, the New Mexico
Environmental Department (NMED), NASA WSTF and other stakeholders. In
order for New Mexico to implement this project, it may be necessary for
NMED to make conforming changes to its regulations or State-issued
permits.
In this XL Project, the NASA WSTF proposes to electronically submit
regulatory reports and permit information to the NMED in lieu of paper
reports. This reporting process will be implemented in a six-phase
process that will first utilize data submitted on a CD-ROM before
transitioning to a system that will utilize the internet to transmit
information to NMED. Today's rule sets forth provisions to facilitate
implementation of phases 1 and 2 of this XL project. All six phases are
described in Appendix A of the NASA WSTF FPA and in the Table below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase Action Affected NMED Bureau
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase 1................ NASA WSTF shall submit Hazardous Waste,
the reports and permit Groundwater, Surface
information listed in Water.
Table A on CD-ROM to
the affected NMED
Bureau with an
electronic
certification
statement for
compliance purposes.
Phase 2................ NASA WSTF shall submit Hazardous Waste,
the reports and permit Groundwater, Surface
information listed in Water.
Table A on CD-ROM to
the affected NMED
Bureau with an
electronic
certification
statement for
compliance purposes.
NASA WSTF shall post Hazardous Waste,
the compliance reports Groundwater, Surface
and permit information Water.
listed in Table A to
their web site for
general information
purposes.
Phase 3................ NASA WSTF shall post Hazardous Waste,
the reports and permit Groundwater, Surface
information listed in Water.
Table A to the NASA
web site for
compliance purposes.
Eliminate CD ROM Hazardous Waste,
submittals for the Groundwater, Surface
reports listed in Water.
Table A.
Phase 4................ Post reports and permit Hazardous Waste,
information listed in Groundwater, Solid
Table A to the NASA Waste.
Website for compliance
purposes.
Submit reports and Air Quality, Solid
permit information Waste Bureaus.
listed in Table B on
CD-ROM to the NMED Air
Quality and Surface
Water Bureaus for
compliance purposes.
Phase 5................ Post reports and permit Hazardous Waste,
information listed in Groundwater, Solid
Table A to the NASA Waste.
Website for compliance
purposes.
Submit reports and Air Quality, Solid
permit information Waste Bureaus.
listed in Table B on
CD-ROM to the NMED Air
Quality and Surface
Water Bureaus for
compliance purposes.
Post reports and permit Air Quality, Solid
information listed in Waste Bureaus.
Table B to the NASA
Web site for general
information purposes.
Phase 6................ Eliminate CD-ROM Air Quality, Solid
submittals for the Waste Bureaus.
reports listed in
Table B.
Post reports and permit Air Quality, Solid
information listed in Waste, Groundwater,
Tables A and B to the Solid Waste,
NASA Web site for Hazardous Waste.
compliance with EPA
and NMED reporting
requirements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Key Infrastructure (PKI)-Based Digital Signatures
In today's rule, EPA proposes to require the use of PKI based
digital signatures to sign certifications of data submitted by NASA
WSTF to NMED as part of this XL project. The PKI-based digital
signatures utilized in today's proposed rule are the product of two
concepts:
1. ``Asymmetric'' cryptography, and
2. a framework for ``certifying'' the identity of a digital
signature-holder, provided by PKI.
``Asymmetric'' cryptography is based on a mathematical relationship
that exists between certain pairs of numbers, for example number A and
number B, such that
1. if A is used to encrypt a message, B and only B can decipher it,
and
2. if B deciphers the message, it can only have been encrypted with
A.
For purposes of a digital signature, then, A and B are uniquely
assigned to individual X. One of the numbers, say A, submitter X shares
with no one. This is X's ``private key''. The other, B, is X's ``public
key'', and X shares B with anyone to whom X wishes to send a message--X
may even publish B together with information that identifies him/her as
X.
X then signs an electronic document as follows: (1) X uses a
standard formula or algorithm to produce a number uniquely related to
the content of the electronic document; this is referred to as the
``message digest'' or ``hash'' of the document. (2) X uses A, the
private key, to encrypt this hash; this encrypted hash is X's digital
signature, and it is unique both to X and to the particular message it
signs. (3) X attaches this digital signature to X's message (which is
otherwise not encrypted), and sends it.
When Y gets X's message, Y validates X's signature by: (1) deriving
the hash of the message, using the same standard algorithm that X used;
(2) deciphering X's digital signature, using X's public key, B; and (3)
comparing the hash Y derived (in step 1) with the deciphered signature.
The two numbers--the derived hash and the deciphered signature--should
agree. If (and only if) they do, then Y knows both that the signature
was produced using A (which
[[Page 55053]]
belongs to X), and that the message has not changed since X signed it.
Because the digital signature is specific to the particular
document, and is unique in each case, to say that X is a ``signature-
holder'' in this context is to refer to A and B, the private/public
key-pair. The A/B key-pair does belong to X and plays the same role in
each of the many digital signatures X may create through the process
described above. Accordingly, it is this key-pair--rather than the
individual signatures they are used to create--that is associated with
the process of certifying a signature-holder's identity that is
provided by PKI.
PKI is a way of reliably establishing and maintaining the identity
of the individual associated with a given key-pair used in producing
digital signatures. This protocol involves the issuance of a ``PKI
certificate'' by a ``trusted'' ``certificate authority'' (CA). The CA
is ``trusted'' in the sense that it operates in conformance with an
appropriate certificate policy, and has demonstrated this conformance
through its operations across a wide range of electronic commerce
applications.
Issuing a certificate for individual X typically involves the
following steps: (1) X applies to the CA for a certificate; (2) the CA
requests various pieces of personal information from X, and/or
notarized verifications of X's personal information, and/or X to appear
in person, to provide the CA with the basis for ``proving'' X's
identity; (3) the CA provides X with a way to generate X's unique key
pair; (4) the CA conducts the ``identity proofing'' process--matching
what X has provided against information about X in various commercial
databases, official documents, etc.; (5) when the ``identify proofing''
is successfully completed, the CA creates a ``certificate'' for X that
incorporates X's public key, along with various pieces of identifying
information about X; and (6) the CA digitally signs the certificate to
certify its authenticity, and makes it available to users through
directory services.
Digital Signature Process
In this project, the digital certificate used to create a digital
signature would be issued to a ``Designated Representative'' at the
NASA WSTF by an EPA authorized Certificate Authority (CA). For the
purposes of this XL project EPA has contracted with a third party to
serve as the CA, to issue digital certificates to individuals at the
NASA WSTF who are authorized to submit signed, electronic reports to
NMED. To receive a digital certificate, a Designated Representative
would be required to log-on to the CA website and provide the
``entrance'' number provided in their instruction letter from EPA and
the NMED. The submitter provides the requested personal information
that the CA needs to perform identity-proofing (name, address, Social
Security Number, driver's license number, credit card number, etc.).
This information will not be given to EPA or NMED. During this
registration process, the issuer of the certificates will also generate
the public and private cryptographic keys that are associated with the
digital certificate that the CA will issue. After the CA has completed
identity-proofing, the submitter will receive a letter from the CA with
instructions on how to download the certificate to their local computer
via a web connection. This web session will install the certificate in
the web browser so it can be used to create digital signatures.
The electronic signing process will use software issued by an EPA-
approved third party to affix a digital signature to the electronic
document being submitted via CD ROM. The document is displayed to the
user on the computer screen. When the submitter activates the signing
block of the document, a ``signing ceremony'' is initiated. The user is
advised that he/she is creating a digital signature through the use of
their private key. After the user provides access to their private key
by providing a password, a hash function is used to obtain a condensed
or hash version of the document being submitted, called a message
digest. The message digest and private key are then input into the
approved software's digital signature algorithm, to generate the
digital signature. Any subsequent changes to the document would render
the original digital signature invalid.
Electronic Signature Agreement
Today's proposed rule would require NASA WSTF and NMED to enter
into an Electronic Signature Agreement to properly use and protect the
validity of the digital signatures used in this XL project. Today's
rule proposes that the terms in this agreement include, a commitment
to: (1) protect the private key from unauthorized use by anyone other
than the Designated Representative; (2) be held as legally bound,
obligated, or responsible by use of the Designated Representative's
private key to create a digital signature as by handwritten signature;
(3) under no circumstances, delegate the use of the private key or make
it available for use by anyone else; (4) report to NMED within twenty-
four hours of discovery any evidence of the loss, theft, or other
compromise of any component of the digital signature; (5) immediately
notify EPA and NMED in writing if the Designated Representative loses
the authority to sign reports submitted to NMED as a representative of
NASA WSTF; and (6) secure any assistance of third parties that is
needed to protect a signature from unauthorized use. EPA believes that
this agreement is important to ensure that the holder of the private
key understands how to properly use and protect the key. It is also
important to ensure that the signature holder understands the legal
effect of using the private key to affix the digital signature to an
electronic document. To achieve these goals, EPA believes that the
signature agreement should require that the signature holder agree to:
(1) protect the private key from unauthorized use by anyone other than
the Designated Representative; (2) be held as legally bound, obligated,
or responsible by use of the Designated Representative's private key to
create a digital signature as by handwritten signature; (3) under no
circumstances, delegate the use of the private key or make it available
for use by anyone else; (4) report to NMED within twenty-four hours of
discovery any evidence of the loss, theft, or other compromise of any
component of the digital signature; (5) immediately notify EPA and NMED
in writing if the Designated Representative loses the authority to sign
reports submitted to NMED as a representative of NASA WSTF; and (6)
secure any assistance of third parties that is needed to protect a
signature from unauthorized use.
CD-ROM Submission Procedures
During the first, second, fourth and fifth phases of this project,
NASA WSTF would mail compliance reports and permit information on
Compact Disc-Read Only Memory (CD-ROM) to the appropriate NMED bureau.
The CD-ROMs for this project would be prepared at the NASA WSTF. NASA
WSTF's preparation process would include draft creation by the
originator, internal review by NASA WSTF's contractor Environmental
Department personnel, and final editing prior to NASA WSTF concurrence,
document signature, and preparation of the CD-ROMs. After internal
review and final edits are completed, the finalized document and
certification statement would be electronically submitted to NASA
management for signatory review. If NASA management requires changes,
the document would be returned to the originator for correction. When
the document is approved by the appropriate NASA management, that
individual applies a digital signature using standard Public Key
Infrastructure
[[Page 55054]]
(PKI) software and digital certificates provided by the EPA.
After the document is digitally signed, it would be submitted to
the document management system. The document management system copies
the electronic deliverable to CD-ROMs for submission to the regulatory
agencies. The CD-ROM that contains the Project XL Final Project
Agreement certification statement listed in section 7 of today's rule
would then be submitted to the NMED. This certification statement would
be contained in each of the reports listed in Table A of today's
proposed rule that would be forwarded to NMED by NASA WSTF on a CD-ROM.
In addition, the document management system would prepare a duplicate
copy of all submittals and place the electronic documents in the NASA
on-site document archival system for secure storage and future access.
The following flow chart provides the electronic deliverable
preparation steps.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP31OC01.001
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
Certification Statement
Each report listed in Table A of today's proposed rule forwarded to
NMED as part of this XL project would include a certification statement
created by the NASA WSTF Designated Representative as specified in
section 7 of today's rule. The NASA WSTF Designated Representative
would be a NASA official legally responsible for the accuracy and
integrity of the regulatory reports and permit information submitted to
NMED.
Recordkeeping Requirements
Today's rule proposes standards to provide for electronic
recordkeeping of documents submitted by NASA WSTF to NMED as part of
this XL project. In lieu of paper recordkeeping requirements, NASA WSTF
would be required to maintain electronic records of the reports
included in Table A of today's rule for a time period no shorter than
what is currently required under existing NMED and EPA regulations. The
point of today's proposed rule requirements in section 8 is to ensure
that the authenticity and integrity of the electronic documents
submitted to NMED by NASA WSTF as part of this XL project, are
preserved as they are created, submitted and/or maintained
electronically, so that they can provide strong evidence of what was
intended by the individuals who created and or signed them.
A. To Which Facilities Would the Proposed Rule Apply?
The proposed rule would apply only to the NASA White Sands Test
Facility in Las Cruces, NM and NMED bureaus of Solid Waste, Hazardous
Waste, Air Quality, Surface Water, and Ground Water. Further, the
regulatory modifications being proposed would only affect the reporting
and recordkeeping requirements for the reports listed in Table A.
B. What Problems Would the NASA WSTF XL Project Address?
The NASA XL project proposes to implement an electronic document
submission and recordkeeping system that will reduce the cost and time
necessary to submit selected regulatory reports and permit information
to NMED as required by EPA regulations. Implementation of this project
will reduce the cost and time associated with the reporting of
regulatory reports and permit information currently required by EPA and
NMED.
C. What Solution Is Proposed by the NASA WSTF Project?
The NASA WSTF proposes to implement an electronic regulatory
reporting system. NASA proposes that the extensive paper reporting
deliverable requirements of multiple Bureaus of NMED can be simplified
and streamlined through use of a paperless regulatory reporting system
that allows data to be reported electronically. The system will
ultimately provide regulatory agencies with real-time desktop access to
site-specific environmental compliance information and reduce needed
resources including document preparation time, white paper usage, and
triplicate reproduction.
D. What Regulatory Changes Will Be Necessary To Implement This Project?
To implement this project, the Agency is proposing today a site-
specific rule that would authorize NMED to allow the NASA WSTF to
electronically submit the regulatory reports and permit information
included in Table A of
[[Page 55055]]
today's proposed rule to the NMED bureaus.
This XL project consists of six phases. After completion of the
second phase, EPA intends to draft a site-specific rule to enable NASA
WSTF to utilize an internet-based electronic reporting system to be
described in a subsequent rule.
E. How Have Various Stakeholders Been Involved in This Project?
NASA established an appropriate stakeholder group to assist in
developing the Final Project Agreement for this XL pilot project and to
evaluate NASA WSTF's plan and progress in implementing the project.
NASA solicited input on this project from a wide range of stakeholders
including local and national environmental groups, neighborhood
associations, and industry trade associations. Stakeholders were
notified of this project by direct mail, telephone, and notification in
the local press.
NASA WSTF solicited public involvement in this project by holding
public meetings while negotiating the Final Project Agreement for this
project with EPA and NMED. The NMED supports this project and is a
Project Signatory to the Final Project Agreement.
NASA has kept an open dialogue with interested stakeholders since
the project's inception and will continue to involve any interested
stakeholders in the project's development. In addition, EPA and NASA
will make all project-related final documents and events publicly
accessible through announcements, EPA's web site, and public dockets.
F. How Would This Project Result in Cost Savings and Paperwork
Reduction?
In this XL project, the NASA White Sands Test Facility proposes to
reduce its EPA and NMED reporting and recordkeeping costs through use
of an electronic document reporting and recordkeeping system. NASA
would provide NMED and EPA with access to NASA WSTF's regulatory
information by electronically submitting regulatory reports and permit
information to a NASA controlled web site and forwarding compliance
data on CD-ROM's in lieu of submitting paper reports to each NMED
Bureau. NASA's use of electronic reporting would greatly reduce the
number of reports submitted on paper. Additionally, use of the proposed
electronic reporting system would reduce the manpower required to
compile and disseminate compliance information.
G. What Are the Terms of the NASA WSTF XL Project and How Would They Be
Enforced?
This project would be in effect for five years from the date the
final rule takes effect. Any Project Signatory may terminate its
participation in this project at any time in accordance with the
procedures set forth in the FPA.
Upon completion of the project term, EPA and NMED, have committed
to evaluate the project. If the project results indicate that it was a
success, EPA will consider transferring the regulatory flexibility (or
some similar flexibility) to the national RCRA, CAA, or CWA program
(through rulemaking procedures). Should the project results indicate
that the project was not successful or if the project is terminated
early, EPA may promulgate a rule to remove the site-specific regulatory
flexibility.
H. Does EPA Propose to Require Revision of NMED's Authorized,
Delegated, or Approved Programs?
EPA is not proposing to revise the affected State authorized,
delegated, or approved programs. Today's rule would affect only certain
reports submitted by a single facility. Electronic reporting and record
keeping would also be permitted only in accordance with the specific
requirements articulated in today's proposal. EPA solicits comments on
these specific requirements. Under these circumstances, EPA does not
believe that program revision is necessary. Nonetheless, EPA solicits
comment on whether EPA should require New Mexico to seek revision of
the affected State programs.
IV. Additional Information
A. How Does This Rule Comply With 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 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 in 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 entitlement, grants,
user fees, or loan programs of 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.
Because this rule affects only one facility, it is not a rule of
general applicability and therefore not subject to OMB review and
Executive Order 12866. In addition, OMB has agreed that review of site
specific rules under Project XL is not necessary. Additionally, the
annualized cost of this final rule would be significantly less than
$100 million and would not meet any of the other criteria specified in
the Executive Order, therefore, it has been determined that this rule
is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive
Order 12866, and is therefore not subject to OMB review.
Executive Order 12866 also encourages agencies to provide a
meaningful public comment period, and suggests that in most cases the
comment period should be 60 days. However, in consideration of the very
limited scope of today's proposed rulemaking and the public involvement
in the development of the proposed Final Project Agreement, EPA
considers 30 days to be sufficient in providing a meaningful public
comment period for today's action.
B. Is a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required?
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.
generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility
analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking
requirements 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 not-for-profit
enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions. This rule would not
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities
because it would only affect the NASA White Sands Test Facility, in Las
Cruces, NM, and it is not a small entity. Therefore, EPA certifies that
this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
C. Does this Project Trigger the Requirements of the 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
[[Page 55056]]
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 one 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 of 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 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.
As noted above, this rule would apply only to one facility in Las
Cruces, New Mexico. EPA has determined that this rule contains no
regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. EPA has also 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. Thus, today's rule is
not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
D. How Does This Rule Comply With Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risk?
The 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.
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not
an economically significant rule, as defined by Executive Order 12866,
and because it does not involve decisions based on environmental health
or safety risks. This rule sets forth electronic reporting procedures
for the submission of environmental compliance data.
E. How Does This Rule Comply With 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 proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It would
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. Today's proposed rule would
implement a project developed under an entirely voluntary federal
program; thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicited comments on the proposed rule
from State and local officials.
F. How Does This Rule Comply With Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal Government?
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 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.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
This proposed rule would not have tribal implications. It would not
have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Today's proposed rule, would affect a single, non-tribal facility that
is not located on tribal lands and this rule would have no impact on
tribal law or culture; thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this rule.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13175, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and tribal governments,
EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule from
tribal officials.
G. How Does This Rule Comply With the 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 (e.g., 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 standard.
[[Page 55057]]
Today's proposed rule would allow NASA WSTF to mail regulatory
reports and permit information on a CD-ROM diskette to NMED using
specified technical standards. EPA proposes to require that NMED
require NASA WSTF to use Portable Data Format (PDF), Hypertext Markup
Language (HTML) and eXtensible Mark-Up Language (XML) format standards
in these CD-ROM submissions. Accordingly, this rule would comply with
the requirements of NTTAA.
H. How Does This Rule Comply With Executive Order 13211: Energy
Effects?
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. Requirements for Today's Rule
For the reasons set forth above and under the conditions described
below, EPA authorizes the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) to
allow the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) White
Sands Test Facility (WTSF) to submit and retain in electronic form any
of the documents listed in Table A.
J. How Does This Rule Comply With the Paperwork Reduction Act?
Information collection requests will not pertain to this rule,
which pertains to a site specific pilot program that has only one
respondent.
1. Definitions. For purposes of this rule, the terms listed below
are defined as follows:
Certificate Authority (CA) means an entity which EPA has authorized
to serve as the trusted third party to oversee the certificate
enrollment, issuance, validation, and revocation processes. The CA also
conducts identity proofing inquiries and issues digital certificates
that accurately convey the subscriber's identity information and public
keys.
Designated Representative means an individual who is authorized to
sign reports for the NASA WSTF with respect to the submission of any
documents listed in Table A.
Digital Signature means a number uniquely calculated by the
application of an encryption algorithm, using a value supplied by an
individual's private key, to a message digest for the document being
signed.
Electronic record-keeping system means any set of apparatus,
procedures, software, records or documentation used to retain exact
electronic copies of electronic records and electronic documents.
Electronic signature means any electronic record that is
incorporated into (or appended to) an electronic document for the
purpose of expressing the same meaning and intention that an
individual's handwritten signature would express if affixed in the same
relation to the document's content presented on paper.
Private/public key pair means a pair of numbers mathematically
related to each other and to a specified encryption algorithm such
that: (i) the private key cannot be derived from the public key, and
(ii) using the encryption algorithm, the public key will only decrypt
messages encrypted with the private key and it is the only key that
will decrypt these messages.
2. Authentication. A Designated Representative must use a digital
certificate, issued by a third party authorized by EPA, and EPA-
approved electronic signature software to affix a digital signature to
any electronic version of a document in Table A.
3. Electronic Signature Agreement. NMED shall require each
Designated Representative to sign, in handwriting with ink on paper,
the Electronic Signature Agreement in Appendix A. By signing the
Electronic Signature Agreement, a Designated Representative must, at a
minimum, agree to:
(a) protect the private key from unauthorized use by anyone other
than the Designated Representative;
(b) be held as legally bound, obligated, or responsible by use of
the Designated Representative's private key to create a digital
signature as by handwritten signature;
(c) under no circumstances, delegate the use of the private key or
make it available for use by anyone else;
(d) report to NMED within twenty-four hours of discovery any
evidence of the loss, theft, or other compromise of any component of
the digital signature;
(e) immediately notify EPA and NMED in writing if the Designated
Representative loses the authority to sign reports submitted to NMED as
a representative of NASA WSTF; and
(f) secure any assistance of third parties that is needed to
protect a signature from unauthorized use.
4. General Submission Requirements. In lieu of a paper document,
NMED may accept from NASA WSTF an electronic version of any document
listed in Table A, provided the electronic document bears a valid
digital signature, as provided in sections 2 and 3 of this rule, to the
same extent that a paper submission for which the document substitutes
would bear a handwritten signature. To be valid a digital signature
must be created by a Designated Representative and with a private key
device issued to that person.
5. CD-ROM Submission Procedures. Electronic versions of documents
listed in Table A may only be submitted by certified mail to the
appropriate NMED bureau in Portable Data Format (PDF), Hypertext Markup
Language (HTML) or eXtensible Markup Language format on a read-only CD-
ROM disk. To be acceptable, each submission must include a digital
signature, as provided in sections 2, 3, and 4 of this rule, and a
certification statement, as provided in section 7 of this rule.
6. Frequency. Any electronic documents submitted must be submitted
at the same time and with the same frequency prescribed under
applicable NMED and EPA regulations for their paper equivalents.
7. Compliance Certification. NMED must require that, as part of any
electronic document that it receives from NASA WSTF, a Designated
Representative provides a digitally-signed electronic compliance
certification that includes at least the following:
(a) the name of the regulatory document being submitted;
(b) date of signature;
(c) name and mailing address of the NMED bureau to which the
document is being sent; and
(d) a digital signature of the Designated Representative who
attests to a statement that reads as follows:
``I am authorized to submit the electronic document identified
above on behalf of the NASA White Sands Test Facility. I certify under
penalty of law that I have personally examined, and am familiar with,
the statements and information submitted in this electronic document
and all of its attachments. Based on my inquiry of those individuals
with primary responsibility for obtaining the information, I certify
that the statements and information contained in this electronic
document and its attachments are, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are
significant penalties for submitting false statements and information
or omitting required statements and information, including the
possibility of fine or imprisonment.
I recognize that NMED and EPA will rely on this electronic document
in lieu of an equivalent paper document, and that this document and the
information it contains will be used to determine my compliance with
federal and State law.
In addition, I certify that I am the individual to whom the digital
[[Page 55058]]
certificate used in signing this document has been issued and that I
have at all times complied with the terms under which this certificate
was issued, including my obligation to protect my private key from use
by anyone other than myself and to report any compromise of any
component of my digital signature.''
8. Electronic Record-keeping. Any electronic version of a document
listed in Table A must be retained in electronic format by both NASA
WSTF and NMED for as long as a corresponding paper document must be
stored under applicable State or federal law. NMED must require that:
(a) NASA make electronic copies of electronic documents available
on an individual, collective, or standing basis to NMED upon written
request. These electronic documents must be promptly transmitted,
mailed, or available for inspection as NMED requests.
(b) NASA employ a method of electronic record retention that:
(1) Generates and maintains accurate and complete electronic
documents in a form that may not be altered without detection;
(2) produces accurate and complete copies of any electronic
document and renders these copies readily available, in both human
readable and electronic form, for on-site inspection and off site
review, for the entirety of the required period of record retention;
(3) ensures that any electronic record or electronic document
bearing an electronic signature contain the name of the signatory and
the date and time of signature;
(4) prevents an electronic signatory and the date and time of
signature;
(5) ensures that record changes do not obscure previously recorded
information and that audit trail documentation is retained for at least
as long as the electronic document;
(6) ensures that electronic documents are searchable and
retrievable for reference and secondary uses, including inspections,
audits, and legal proceedings; and
(7) archives records in an electronic form which preserves the
context, meta data, and audit trail.
Dated: October 24, 2001.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.
Table A.--Covered Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State permit Report name
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Application for renewal
submittal.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Duty to provide requested
information.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Revision/Modification
Notification Report.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Non compliance report.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Notification of Emergency
Coordinators list change.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Annual compliance monitoring
report.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Annual potentiometric flow net
report.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Incident reports.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Request for modified post
closure care period.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Completion of post closure care
requirements submittal.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Appendix IX analysis new
defects notification.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Annual effectiveness/
conclusions report.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Well Replacement notification.
Post Closure Care Permit NM88000194-2.. Modification of groundwater
monitoring plan submittal.
Landfill Post Closure Care Plan........ Plan revision submittal.
Landfill Post Closure Care Plan........ Methane and groundwater.
Landfill Post Closure Care Plan........ Inspections and maintenance
reports.
Discharge Plan DP-392.................. Annual Wastewater flow volumes
submittal.
Discharge Plan DP-392.................. Spill contingency notification.
Discharge Plan DP-392.................. Contingency Plan notification.
Discharge Plan DP-392.................. Duty to provide requested
information.
Discharge Plan DP-392.................. Modification notifications.
Discharge Plan DP-392.................. Right to appeal petition.
Discharge Plan DP-392.................. Transfer of ownership
notification.
Discharge Plan DP-392.................. Application for renewal
submittal.
Discharge Plan DP-392.................. Internal written recordkeeping.
Discharge Plan DP-584.................. Semi-annual Monitoring Reports
Submittal.
Discharge Plan DP-584.................. Semi-annual wastewater
discharge volumes report
submittal.
Discharge Plan DP-584.................. Closure sampling results
submittal.
Discharge Plan DP-584.................. Internal written recordkeeping.
Discharge Plan DP-584.................. Duty to provide requested
information.
Discharge Plan DP-584.................. Spill contingency notification.
Discharge Plan DP-584.................. Modification notifications.
Discharge Plan DP-584.................. Right to appeal petition.
Discharge Plan DP-584.................. Transfer of ownership
notification.
Discharge Plan DP-584.................. Application for renewal
submittal.
Discharge Plan DP-697.................. Leak contingency notification
and reporting.
Discharge Plan DP-697.................. Mitigation summary report
submittal.
Discharge Plan DP-697.................. Quarterly monitoring reports
submittal.
Discharge Plan DP-697.................. Internal written
recordlkeeping.
Discharge Plan DP-697.................. Duty to provide requested
information.
Discharge Plan DP-697.................. Modification notifications.
Discharge Plan DP-697.................. Right to appeal petition.
Discharge Plan DP-697.................. Transfer of ownership
notification.
Discharge Plan DP-697.................. Application for renewal
submittal.
Discharge Plan DP-1170................. Leak contingency notification
and reporting.
Discharge Plan DP-1170................. Semi annual monitoring reports
submittal.
Discharge Plan DP-1170................. Internal written recordkeeping.
[[Page 55059]]
Discharge Plan DP-1170................. Duty to provide requested
information.
Discharge Plan DP-1170................. Modification notifications.
Discharge Plan DP-1170................. Right to appeal petition.
Discharge Plan DP-1170................. Transfer of ownership
notification.
Discharge Plan DP-1170................. Application for renewal
submittal.
Landfill Post Closure Care Plan........ Inspections and maintenance
reports.
Landfill Post Closure Care Plan........ Methane and groundwater
monitoring data reports. .
Landfill Post Closure Care Plan........ Plan revision submittal.
Landfill Post Closure Care Plan........ Change of responsible parties
notification.
Landfill Post Closure Care Plan........ 30 year reporting requirement.
Landfill Groundwater Monitoring Plan... Plan revision submittal.
Landfill Groundwater Monitoring Plan... Request to modify sampling
frequencies submittal.
Landfill Groundwater Monitoring Plan... Monitoring level exceedance
notification.
Landfill Groundwater Monitoring Plan... Analytical data reports.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Revision/Modification
notification.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Waste Analysis Plan
modification submittal.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Submittal signatory
requirements.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Requests for deadline
extension.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Newly identified SWMUs
notification.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Newly identified SWMUs
notification plan.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Newly discovered release
notification.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Newly discovered release
investigation plan.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Transfer of ownership
notification.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... RFI/CMS and monthly progress
reports.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Revised reports submittals.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Non EPA analytical method
protocol submittal.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Off site access agreements
submittal.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Monthly analytical data
reports.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Project coordinator change
notification.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Reports, plans, notifications,
etc ``in writing''
requirement.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Lack of funds notification.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Written statement of dispute
submittal.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... ``Force majeur'' event
notification.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Final RFI/CMS submittal.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Application for renewal
submittal.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Duty to provide requested
information. .
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Annual ETU liner assessment
report.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Notification of non compliance.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Notification and certification
of closure and survey plat.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Emergency coordinator personnel
change notification.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Contingency plan modification
submittal.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Spill incident reports.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Spill response and corrective
action reports.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... Certifications of major repairs
submittal and recordkeeping.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... ETU secondary containment
useful life extension request.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... ETU steel structure useful life
extension request.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... ODU waste quantity exceedance
notification.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... ODU statistical results and
constituent exceedance report.
RCRA Operating Permit NM8800019434-1... FTU waste quantity exceedance
notification.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... 40 CFR Notification
Requirements.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... Revision/Modification Notice.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... Compliance Testing schedule
notification.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... Written test protocol
submittal.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... Compliance test report
submittal.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... Quarterly reports submittal.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... Duty to provide requested
information.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... Transfer of ownership
notification.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... Modification notifications.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... Change of operator
notification.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... Right to appeal notification.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... Certifications of major repairs
submittals and recordkeeping.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... ETU secondary containment
useful life extension request.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... ETU steel structure useful life
extension request.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... ODU waste quantity exceedance
notification.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... ODU statistical results and
constituent exceedance report.
Air Quality Permit # 629-M-1........... FTU waste quantity exceedance
notification.
Air Quality Permit # 629 M-3........... 40 CFR part 60 notification
requirements.
Air Quality Permit # 629 M-3........... Revision/Modification
notification.
Air Quality Permit # 629 M-3........... Compliance Testing schedule
notification.
Air Quality Permit # 629 M-3........... Written test protocol
submittal.
Air Quality Permit # 629 M-3........... Compliance test report
submittal.
Air Quality Permit # 629 M-3........... Transfer of ownership
notification.
[[Page 55060]]
Air Quality Permit # 629 M-3........... Duty to provide requested
information.
Air Quality Permit # 629 M-3........... Change of operator
notification.
Air Quality Permit # 629 M-3........... Quarterly reports submittal.
Air Quality Permit # 629 M-3........... Right to appeal petition.
Air Quality Permit #400 M-1............ Revision/Modification
notification.
Air Quality Permit #400 M-1............ 40 CFR part 60 notification
requirements.
Air Quality Permit #400 M-1............ Change of operator
notification.
Air Quality Permit #400 M-1............ Compliance testing schedule
notification.
Air Quality Permit #400 M-1............ Written test protocol
submittal.
Air Quality Permit #400 M-1............ Transfer of ownership
notification.
Air Quality Permit #400 M-1............ Duty to provide requested
information.
Air Quality Permit #400 M-1............ Right to appeal petition.
Air Quality Permit #400 M-1............ Transfer of ownership
notification.
Air Quality Permit #400 M-1............ Duty to provide requested
information.
Air Quality Permit #400 M-1............ Right to appeal petition.
Surface Water.......................... Best Management Practices
Report.
Surface Water.......................... Surface Water Management:
Surface Water Worksheet
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix A
Project XL Electronic Signature Agreement
In accepting the digital certificate issued by the EPA approved
Certificate Authority to digitally sign electronic documents
submitted to the New Mexico Environmental Department (NMED) as part
of the NASA White Sands Test Facility (NASA WSTF) Project XL pilot
project, I, [name of digital signature holder],
(1) agree to protect the private key from use by anyone except
me,
(2) understand and agree that I will be held as legally bound,
obligated, or responsible by my use of my private key as I would be
using my hand-written signature, and that legal action can be taken
against me based on my use of my private key in submitting reports
to NMED.
(3) agree never to delegate the use of my private key or make it
available for use by anyone else;
(4) agree to report to NMED and the issuer of the certificate
within twenty-four (24) hours of discovery, any evidence of the
loss, theft, or other compromise of my private key;
(5) agree to report to NMED and the issuer of the certificate
within twenty-four (24) hours of discovery, any evidence of
discrepancy between a report I have signed and submitted and what
NMED has received from me;
(6) agree to notify NMED and issuer of the certificate in
writing if I cease to represent NASA WSTF as signatory of that
organization's reports to NMED as soon as this change in
relationship occurs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
NASA WSTF Designated Representative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
NMED Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 01-27380 Filed 10-30-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P