[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 19 (Friday, January 29, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4596-4599]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-1908]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[FRL-6226-1]
Nevada; Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revision
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Immediate final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Nevada has applied for Final authorization of the revision to
its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). The revision covers regulatory changes that
occurred between July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1997. The EPA has
reviewed Nevada's application and determined that its hazardous waste
program revision satisfies all of the requirements necessary to qualify
for final authorization. Unless adverse written comments are received
during the review and comment period, EPA's decision to authorize
Nevada's hazardous waste program revision will take effect as provided
below.
DATES: This final authorization for Nevada will become effective
without further notice on March 30, 1999, if EPA receives no adverse
comment. Should EPA receive such comments EPA will withdraw this rule
before its effective date by publishing a notice of withdrawal in the
Federal Register. Any comments on Nevada's program revision application
must be filed by March 1, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to Lisa McClain-Vanderpool,
U.S. EPA Region IX (WST-3), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105, Phone: 415/744-2086. Copies of Nevada's program revision
application is available during the business hours of 9:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. at the following addresses for inspection and copying:
Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of
Environmental Protection, 333 W. Nye Lane, Carson City, NV 89710,
Phone: 702/687-5872. Contact Allen Biaggi, Administrator.
U.S. EPA Region IX Library-Information Center, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105, Phone: 415/744-1510.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa McClain-Vanderpool, U.S. EPA
Region IX (WST-3), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Phone:
415/744-2086.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
States with final authorization under section 3006(b) of the RCRA,
42 U.S.C. 6926(b), have a continuing obligation to maintain a hazardous
waste program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less
stringent than the Federal hazardous waste program. As the Federal
hazardous waste program changes, the States must revise their programs
and apply for authorization of the revisions. Revisions to State
hazardous waste programs may be necessary when Federal or State
statutory or regulatory authority is modified or when certain other
changes occur. Most commonly, States must revise their programs because
of changes to EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
parts 124, 260 through 266, 268, 270, 273 and 279.
B. Nevada
Nevada initially received final authorization for the base program
on August 19, 1985 effective October 18, 1985 (160 FR 33359). Nevada
received authorization for revisions to its program on April 29, 1992
effective June 29, 1992 (57 FR 18083), on May 27, 1994 effective July
26, 1994 (59 FR 27472), on April 11, 1995 effective June 12, 1995 (60
FR 18358) and on June 24, 1996 effective August 23, 1996 (60 FR 32345).
On September 22, 1998, Nevada submitted a final complete program
revision application, seeking
[[Page 4597]]
authorization of its program revision in accordance with 40 CFR 271.21.
The EPA reviewed Nevada's application, and now makes an immediate final
decision, subject to receipt of adverse written comment, that Nevada's
hazardous waste program revision satisfies all of the requirements
necessary to qualify for Final Authorization. Consequently, EPA intends
to grant Nevada Final Authorization for the program modifications
contained in the revision.
The public may submit written comments on EPA's immediate final
decision until March 1, 1999. Copies of Nevada's application for
program revision are available for inspection and copying at the
locations indicated in the ADDRESSES section of this document.
If EPA does not receive adverse written comment pertaining to
Nevada's program revision by the end of the comment period, the
authorization of Nevada's revision will become effective 60 days from
the date this document is published. If the Agency does receive adverse
written comment, it will publish a document withdrawing this immediate
final rule before its effective date. EPA will then address the
comments in a later final rule based on the companion document
appearing in the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register.
EPA may not provide additional opportunity for comment. Any parties
interested in commenting should do so at this time.
Nevada is applying for authorization for changes and additions to
the Federal RCRA implementing regulations that occurred between July 1,
1995 and June 30, 1997, as listed below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of Federal requirement Federal Register Analogous State authority
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous Waste Management: Liquids in July 11,1995, 60 FR 35703........ Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS)
Landfills III/Checklist 145. 459.485 and 459.490; Nevada
Administrative Code (NAC)
444.8632 through 444.8634 and
regulations included as
Sections 8 and 9 of LCB File
No. R-202-97 filed with the
Secretary of State, March 5,
1998.
RCRA Expanded Public Participation/ December 11, 1995, 60 FR 63417... Same as above.
Checklist 148.
Identification and Listing of Hazardous March 26, 1996, 61 FR 13103...... Same as above.
Waste: Amendments to Definition of Solid
Waste/Recovered Oil Exclusion, Correction
Checklist 150.
Land Disposal Restrictions Phase III- 61 FR 15566 and 15660, April 8, Same as above.
Decharacterized Waste Waters, Carbamate 1996; 61 FR 19117, April 30,
Wastes and Spent Potliners/Checklist 151. 1996; 61 FR 33680, June 28,
1996; 61 FR 36419, July 10,
1996; 61 FR 43924, August 26,
1996; 62 FR 7502, February 19,
1997.
Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity July 1, 1996, 61 FR 34252........ Same as above.
Disposal Options under RCRA subtitle D/
Checklist 153.
Consolidated Organic Air Emission Standards December 6, 1994, 59 FR 62896- Same as above.
for Tanks, Surface Impoundments and 62953; May 19, 1995, 60 FR 26828-
Containers/Checklist 154. 26829; September 29,1995, 60 FR
50426-50430; November 13, 1995,
60 FR 56952-56954; February 9,
1996, 61 FR 4903-4916; June 5,
1996, 61 FR 28508-28511; and
November 25, 1996, 61 FR 59932-
59997.
Land Disposal Restrictions Phase III: January 14, 1997, 62 FR 1992..... Same as above.
Emergency Extension of K088 Capacity/
Checklist 155.
Military Munitions Rule/Checklist 156...... February 12, 1997, 62 FR 6622.... Same as above.
Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV-- May 12, 1997, 62 FR 25998........ Same as above.
Treatment Standards for Wood Preserving
Wastes, Paperwork Reduction and
Streamlining, Exemptions From RCRA for
Certain Processed Materials; and
Miscellaneous Hazardous Waste Provisions/
Checklist 157.
Testing and Monitoring Activities/Checklist June 13, 1997, 62 FR 32452....... Same as above.
158.
Conformance with Carbamate Vacatur/ June 17, 1997, 62 FR 32974....... Same as above.
Checklist 159.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: NRS 459.485 effective 1981, amended 1991; NRS 459.490 effective 1981, amended 1987. NAC 444.8632 adopts by
reference 40 CFR part 2, subpart A; part 124, subparts A and B; parts 260 through 270, inclusive; part 273 and
part 279 as modified by NAC 444.8633, NAC 444.8634, 444.86325 and the regulations included as section 8 and 9
of LCB File No. R-202-97 (filed with the Secretary of State on March 5, 1998).
Nevada agrees to review all State hazardous waste permits which
have been issued under State law prior to the effective date of this
authorization. Nevada agrees to then modify or revoke and reissue such
permits as necessary to require compliance with the amended State
program. Nevada is not being authorized to operate any portion of the
hazardous waste program on Indian lands.
C. Decision
I conclude that Nevada's application for program revision
authorization meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements
established by RCRA. Accordingly, EPA grants Nevada Final Authorization
to operate its hazardous waste program as revised. Nevada now has
responsibility for permitting treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities within its borders (except in Indian country) and for
carrying out the aspects of the RCRA program described in its revised
program application, subject to the limitations of the HSWA. Nevada
also has primary enforcement responsibilities, although EPA retains the
right to conduct inspections under
[[Page 4598]]
section 3007 of RCRA, and to take enforcement actions under sections
3008, 3013 and 7003 of RCRA.
D. Codification in Part 272
The EPA uses 40 CFR part 272 for codification of the decision to
authorize Nevada's program and for incorporation by reference of those
provisions of its statutes and regulations that EPA will enforce under
sections 3008, 3013 and 7003 of RCRA. EPA reserves amendment of 40 CFR
part 272, subpart DD until a later date.
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 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 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.
EPA has determined that section 202 and 205 requirements do not
apply to today's action because this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in annual expenditures of $100 million or more
for State, local, and/or tribal governments in the aggregate, or the
private sector. Costs to State, local and/or tribal governments already
exist under the Nevada program, and today's action does not impose any
additional obligations on regulated entities. In fact, EPA's approval
of State programs generally may reduce, not increase, compliance costs
for the private sector. Further, as it applies to the State, this
action does not impose a Federal intergovernmental mandate because UMRA
does not include duties arising from participation in a voluntary
federal program.
The requirements of section 203 of UMRA also do not apply to
today's action because this rule contains no regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Although
small governments may be hazardous waste generators, transporters, or
own and/or operate TSDFs, they are already subject to the regulatory
requirements under the existing State laws that are being authorized by
EPA, and, thus, are not subject to any additional significant or unique
requirements by virtue of this program approval.
Certification Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of rulemaking
for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make available for
public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the
effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions). This analysis is
unnecessary, however, if the agency's administrator certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The EPA has determined that this authorization will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Such small entities which are hazardous waste generators, transporters,
or which own and/or operate TSDFs are already subject to the regulatory
requirements under the existing State laws that are now being
authorized by EPA. The EPA's authorization does not impose any
significant additional burdens on these small entities. This is because
EPA's authorization would simply result in an administrative change,
rather than a change in the substantive requirements imposed on these
small entities.
Pursuant to the provision at 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Agency hereby
certifies that this authorization will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This authorization
approves regulatory requirements under existing State law to which
small entities are already subject. It does not impose any new burdens
on small entities. This rule, therefore, does not require a regulatory
flexibility analysis.
Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in today's Federal Register. This rule is
not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Compliance With Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from the
requirements of Executive Order 12866.
Compliance With Executive Order 12875
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies
with consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the
Office of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's
prior consultation with representatives of affected State, local and
tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal
[[Page 4599]]
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
This rule does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these
entities. The State administers its hazardous waste program
voluntarily, and any duties on other State, local or tribal
governmental entities arise from that program, not from today's action.
Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to
this rule.
Compliance With Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks,'' applies to any rule that: (1) The
Office of Management and Budget determines is ``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 E.O. 13045 because it is not an
economically significant rule as defined by E.O. 12866, and because it
does not involve decisions based on environmental health or safety
risks.
Compliance With Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those
governments. If EPA complies with consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13084 because it does
not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal
governments. Nevada is not authorized to implement the RCRA hazardous
waste program in Indian country. This action has no effect on the
hazardous waste program that EPA implements in the Indian country
within the State.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., Federal
agencies must consider the paperwork burden imposed by any information
request contained in a proposed rule or a final rule. This rule will
not impose any information requirements upon the regulated community.
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 standards.
This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 272
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control,
Water supply.
Authority: This document is issued under the authority of
sections 2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).
Dated: December 21, 1998.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 9.
[FR Doc. 99-1908 Filed 1-28-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
