[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 8, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30434-30437]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-14347]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 239
[FRL-6354-7]
Adequacy of State Permit Programs Under RCRA Subtitle D
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to streamline the approval process for specified States
permit programs for solid waste disposal facilities other than
municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLFs) that receive conditionally
exempt small quantity generator (CESQG) hazardous waste. States whose
subtitle D MSWLF permit programs or subtitle C hazardous waste
management programs have been reviewed and approved or authorized by
the Agency are eligible for this streamlined approval process if their
State programs require the disposal of CESQG hazardous waste in
suitable facilities. EPA is issuing an adequacy determination to the
following State programs: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut,
Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, North
Dakota, Oklahoma, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota,
Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and
Wyoming.
Elsewhere in the proposed rule section of today's Federal Register,
EPA is proposing the program adequacy of these States and soliciting
comment on this decision. If relevant adverse comments are received,
EPA will withdraw this direct final rule of program adequacy and
address the comments in a subsequent final rule document. EPA will not
give additional opportunity for comment. If EPA receives relevant
adverse comment concerning the adequacy of only certain State programs,
the Agency's withdrawal of the direct final rule will only apply to
those State programs. Comments on the inclusion or exclusion of one
State permit program will not affect the timing of the decision on the
other State permit programs.
DATES: This final rule will become effective September 7, 1999, unless
EPA receives relevant adverse comment by July 8, 1999. Should the
Agency receive such relevant adverse comments, EPA will withdraw this
direct final rule and give timely notice in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Commenters must send an original and two copies of their
comments referencing docket number F-98-SAPF-FFFFF to: RCRA Docket
Information Center, Office of Solid Waste (5305G), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Headquarters (EPA, HQ), 401 M Street, SW, Washington,
D.C. 20460. Hand deliveries of comments should be made to the
Arlington, VA, address listed below. Comments may also be submitted
electronically by sending electronic mail through the Internet to:
rcra-docket@epamail.epa.gov. Comments in electronic format should also
be identified by the docket number F-98-SAPF-FFFFF. All electronic
comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special
characters and any form of encryption.
Commenters should not submit electronically any confidential
business information (CBI). An original and two copies of CBI must be
submitted under separate cover to: RCRA CBI Document Control Officer,
Office of Solid Waste (5305W), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW, Washington,
D.C. 20460.
Public comments are available for viewing in the RCRA Information
Center (RIC), located at Crystal Gateway I, First Floor, 1235 Jefferson
Davis Highway, Arlington, VA. The RIC is open from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding federal holidays. To review docket
materials, it is recommended that the public make an appointment by
calling 703-603-9230. The public may copy a maximum of 100 pages from
any regulatory docket at no charge. Additional copies cost $0.15/page.
For information on accessing paper and/or electronic copies of the
document, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
Supporting materials for the final determination for Connecticut,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont are available
for viewing by contacting Cynthia Greene, US EPA Region 1, 90 Canal
Street, Boston, MA 02203, phone 617/565-3165.
Supporting materials for the final determination for New York are
available for viewing by contacting John Filippelli, US EPA Region 2,
290 Broadway, New York, NY 10007-1866, phone 212/637-4125.
Supporting materials for the final determination for Pennsylvania,
West Virginia, and Virginia are available for viewing by contacting
Mike Giuranna, US EPA Region 3, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA
19103-2029, phone 215/814-3298.
Supporting materials for the final determination for Florida,
Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Tennessee are available for
viewing by contacting Patricia Herbert, US EPA Region 4, Atlanta
Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, Atlanta, GA 30303-3104, phone: 404/
562-8449.
Supporting materials for the final determination for Illinois,
Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin are available for viewing by
contacting Mary Setnicar, US EPA Region 5, 77 West Jackson Blvd.,
Chicago, IL 60604-3590, phone 312/886-0976.
Supporting materials for the final determination for Louisiana and
Oklahoma are available for viewing by contacting Willie Kelley, US EPA
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202-2733, phone: 214/665-6760.
Supporting materials for the final determination for Colorado,
North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming are available for viewing
by contacting Gerald Allen, Region 8, US EPA 999 18th Street, Suite
500, Denver, CO 80202-2466, phone 303/312-7008.
Supporting materials for the final determination for Arizona and
California are available for viewing by contacting Steve Wall, US EPA
Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, phone 415/744-
2123.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact the
RCRA Hotline at 800 424-9346 or TDD 800/553-7672 (hearing impaired). In
the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, call 703/412-9810 or TDD 703/
412-3323.
For information on specific aspects of this direct final rule,
contact Allen Geswein, Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division of
the Office of
[[Page 30435]]
Solid Waste (mail code 5306W), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Headquarters, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20460; 703/308-7261,
[[email protected] EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The official record for this action will be
kept in paper form. Accordingly, EPA will transfer all comments
received electronically into paper form and place them in the official
record, which will also include all comments submitted directly in
writing. The official record is the paper record maintained at the
address in ADDRESSES at the beginning of this document.
EPA responses to comments, whether the comments are written or
electronic, will be in a notice in the Federal Register as outlined in
DATES above or in a response to comments document placed in the
official record for this rulemaking. EPA will not immediately reply to
commenters electronically other than to seek clarification of
electronic comments that may be garbled in transmission or during
conversion to paper form, as discussed above.
A. Background
Section 4010(c) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
revise the criteria for facilities that accept household hazardous
waste and conditionally exempt small quantity generator (CESQG)
hazardous waste or both. On October 9, 1991, EPA issued revised
Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (MSWLFs) (40 CFR part
258). MSWLFs typically receive both household hazardous waste and CESQG
hazardous waste. On July 1, 1996, EPA issued the revised Criteria for
Classification of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and Practices to
address solid waste disposal facilities other than MSWLFs that
facilities receive CESQG waste (40 CFR part 257, subpart B).
RCRA section 4005, as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments (HSWA) of 1984, requires States to develop permitting
programs or other systems of prior approvals and conditions to ensure
that solid waste disposal units that receive household hazardous waste
and CESQG hazardous waste or both comply with the revised Federal
criteria under part 257, subpart B. Section 4005 also requires EPA to
determine the adequacy of State permit programs. To fulfill this need,
the Agency issued the State Implementation Rule (SIR) on October 23,
1998 (63 FR 57026) to give a process for approving State municipal
solid waste permit programs. The SIR specifies the needs that State
MSWLF permit programs must satisfy to be determined adequate. The SIR
also addresses the processes that should be used for approving State
programs for non-MSWLFs that receive CESQG hazardous waste.
Throughout this document, the term ``approved State'' refers only
to a State that has received approval for its MSWLF permit program
under subtitle D (40 CFR part 258) and the term ``authorized State''
refers only to a State that has an authorized hazardous waste landfill
permit program under subtitle C (40 CFR part 264). Today's final
adequacy determination is intended to give a streamlined approval
process to address, as a group, those State programs that require the
disposal of CESQG hazardous waste in suitable facilities and whose
subtitle D MSWLF permit programs or subtitle C hazardous waste
management programs have been reviewed and approved or authorized by
the Agency. Today's direct final rule notice applies to the following
State programs: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida,
Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan,
Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota,
Oklahoma, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee,
Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
Programs developed by these States for permitting either hazardous
waste facilities or MSWLFs have been reviewed and approved or
authorized by the Agency. The regulatory programs are more
comprehensive and are equal to or more stringent than the part 257,
subpart B criteria.
The Agency has determined that the above States have submitted the
documentation that would have been needed for the determination of
permit program adequacy under 40 CFR part 257, subpart B. Further, the
Agency has determined that the technical review conducted for either
``approval'' of MSWLF permitting programs or ``authorization'' of
hazardous waste permitting programs can substitute for the technical
review of the standards for 40 CFR part 257, subpart B and their
implementation by the States.
The States that are today receiving a final determination of
adequacy had previously submitted documentation of State statutory
authorities and requirements that regulate solid waste disposal units
that may receive CESQG waste. Each State has sent a letter requesting
EPA's determination of permit program adequacy under subtitle C or
subtitle D, as appropriate. Each State has submitted a written
statement from the State Attorney General certifying that the laws,
regulations, and guidance cited in the State's submission would be
fully enacted and fully effective when the ``authorization'' or
``approval'' of the permit program became effective. The State legal
certification served as the foundation for ensuring that the State
permit program or other system of prior approvals and conditions had
adequate authority to ensure compliance with the hazardous waste or
MSWLF regulations, as appropriate. This certification could have been
signed by the independent legal counsel for the State, rather than the
Attorney General, provided that such counsel had the full authority to
represent independently the lead State Agency in court on all matters
pertaining to the State program.
The technical requirements for part 257, subpart B are location
restrictions, ground-water monitoring, corrective action, and
recordkeeping requirements. These requirements have been met by the
State programs listed in today's final determination.
Today's determination includes ``authorized'' States that have
laws, regulations, or guidance in place requiring that CESQG hazardous
waste be managed in a RCRA subtitle C facility (see 61 FR 34264). These
``authorized'' States are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida,
Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan,
Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont,
West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Arizona, Virginia, and New York
are ``approved'' States that require CESQG waste to be disposed of in a
MSWLF meeting or exceeding the requirements of 40 CFR part 258 (see 61
FR 34264). For all cases, the State regulations have been reviewed by
EPA, found to be equal to or more stringent than 40 CFR part 257,
subpart B and approved. Most State program regulations contain
additional requirements and are more stringent.
The States covered by today's approval have permit programs or
other systems of prior approval for all waste disposal units that may
receive CESQG hazardous waste in their jurisdictions. These States
provide for public participation in permit issuance and enforcement as
specified in the SIR rule. Finally, EPA believes that these States have
sufficient compliance monitoring and enforcement authorities to take
action against any owner or operator that fails to comply with
regulations applicable to waste disposal units that may receive CESQG
hazardous waste.
[[Page 30436]]
B. Decision
After reviewing the States' previous submissions for approval under
subtitle D (40 CFR part 258) and authorization under subtitle C (40 CFR
part 264), the Agency concludes that the above States meet all of the
statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA. Accordingly,
the above States are granted a final determination of adequacy for all
portions of their permit program for solid waste disposal units that
may receive CESQG hazardous waste.
RCRA section 4005(a) provides that citizens may use the citizen
suit provisions of RCRA section 7002 to enforce the Federal Criteria
for Classification of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and Practices in
40 CFR part 257, subpart B independent of any State enforcement
program. As explained in the preamble to 40 CFR part 257, subpart B,
EPA expects that any owner or operator complying with the provisions of
a State program approved by EPA that requires that CESQG hazardous
waste be disposed of in either a subtitle C facility or a subtitle D
MSWLF would be in compliance with the Federal Criteria. See 61 FR 34264
(July 1, 1996).
In the future, approval for State permit programs for non-MSWLF
units that accept CESQG hazardous waste and meet the 40 CFR part 257,
subpart B requirements, will follow the procedures outlined in the SIR
and will be done on an individual State basis.
Today's action will become effective ninety (90) days from the date
of publication if no adverse comments are received.
Related Acts of Congress and Executive Orders
We have evaluated these streamlined approvals in relation to a
number of statutory provisions and executive orders which apply to
rules. These evaluations are summarized below, and further analysis and
explanation can be found in the proposed rule published elsewhere in
todays Federal Register.
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the
Agency must determine whether a regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as
one that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State,
local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by
another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy
issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive Order.'' It has been
determined that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject
to OMB review.
B. 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
(SBREFA) 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).
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of
an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying
that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The following discussion explains
EPA's determination. This rule does not impose any new burdens on small
entities. It merely confirms existing needs for the disposal of CESQG
waste under state law. This proposal does not impose any new cost
burdens. I hereby certify that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule,
therefore, does not need a regulatory flexibility analysis.
C. The Paperwork Reduction Act
Today's final rule is in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. We found that no information is being
collected from the States for this direct final rule, so we do not need
to prepare an Information Collection Request (ICR).
D. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Agency's analysis of compliance with UMRA found that today's
direct final rule imposes no enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector; thus today's rule is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13045
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 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.
F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This direct final rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus
standards.
G. Executive Order 12875
Today's direct final rule does not create a mandate on State, local
or tribal governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties
on these entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of
Executive Order 12875 do not apply to this rule.
H. Executive Order 13084
Today's direct final rule does not significantly or uniquely affect
the communities of Indian tribal governments. There is no impact to
tribal governments as the result of the State plan approvals.
Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084
do not apply to this rule.
I. Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice
EPA is committed to addressing environmental justice concerns and
is assuming a leadership role in environmental justice initiatives to
enhance environmental quality for all residents of the United States.
The Agency's goals are to ensure that no segment of the population,
regardless of race, color, national origin, or income bears
disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental
effects as a result of EPA's policies, programs, and activities, and
all people live in clean and sustainable communities.
The Agency does not believe that today's direct final rule granting
State permit program approval will have a disproportionately high and
adverse environmental or economic impact on any minority or low-income
group, or on any other type of affected community.
[[Page 30437]]
J. The Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this 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 the Federal Register. 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 September 7, 1999.
Authority: This document is issued under the authority of
section 4005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended, 42 U.S.C.
6946.
Dated: May 28, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 99-14347 Filed 6-7-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U
