[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 12, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55153-55158]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-26332]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[FRL-6454-1]


Massachusetts: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste 
Management Program Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Today's action finalizes EPA's decision to grant authorization 
to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for certain revisions to its 
hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery 
Act (RCRA). The revisions addressed by this action include two rules 
promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency: the Toxicity 
Characteristics (TC) Rule (including subsequent revisions to that rule) 
and the Universal Waste Rule (UWR). The Agency finds that the State's 
hazardous waste program revisions, except for a provision which relates 
to the TC Rule and exempts intact Cathode Ray Tubes (CRTs) from 
hazardous waste regulation, satisfy all of the requirements necessary 
to qualify for final authorization. Thus, the EPA is taking action to 
approve the authorization of Massachusetts for the UWR and the TC Rule 
for all wastes other than CRTs. At this time, EPA defers action 
relating to CRTs; however, the agency plans to address this issue in a 
future Federal Register document.

DATES: The approval of Massachusetts' program revisions shall become 
effective without further notice on October 12, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts' revision 
application and related materials which support the basis for EPA's 
authorization decision (the ``Administrative Record'') are available 
for inspection and copying during normal business hours at the 
following addresses: Massachusetts Department of Environmental 
Protection Library, One Winter Street--2nd Floor, Boston, MA 02108, 
business hours: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Telephone: (617) 292-5802 and 
EPA Region I Library, One Congress Street--11th Floor, Boston, MA 
02114-2023, business hours: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Telephone: (617) 
918-1990.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robin Biscaia, EPA Region I, One 
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CHW), Boston, MA 02114-2023; Telephone: 
(617) 918-1642.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Why Are Revisions to State Programs Necessary?

    States which have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA 
Section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste 
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent 
than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes, States must 
change their programs and ask EPA to authorize the changes. Changes to 
State programs may be necessary when Federal or State statutory or 
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur. 
Most commonly, States must change 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. What Decisions Have We Made In This Rule?

1. Background

    On January 8, 1998, Massachusetts submitted a final program 
revision application relating to the Satellite Accumulation Rule, UWR 
and TC Rule seeking authorization of its program revision in accordance 
with 40 CFR 271.21. On Septemer 30, 1998, the EPA granted authorization 
to the Massachusetts hazardous waste management program for the 
Satellite Accumulation Rule only and deferred a decision relative to 
the TC and UWR portions of the application due to the unresolved CRT 
issues (63 FR 52180).

2. The Proposed Rule

    On February 24, 1999 EPA published in the Federal Register a 
proposed rule announcing its plan to authorize Massachusetts for the TC 
Rule and the UWR excluding those provisions which relate to CRTs (64 FR 
9110). Also, at that time, the agency proposed to disapprove a 
provision of the Massachusetts hazardous waste regulations at 310 CMR 
30.104(21) relating to CRTs. A forty-five (45) day extension to the 
thirty (30) day comment period of this proposal was requested by 
Massachuetts and granted in the Federal Register on March 24, 1999 (64 
FR 14201) thereby extending the public comment period from March 26, 
1999 to May 10, 1999.

3. Recent Developments

    Since the publication of the proposed disapproval, the EPA and 
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection

[[Page 55154]]

(``DEP'') have discussed a new regulatory approach with respect to 
CRTs. The DEP currently is seeking input from its Hazardous Waste 
Advisory Committee regarding this new approach.

4. Comments to the Proposed Rule

    EPA has received comments on the proposed rule Federal Register 
document from various sources, all of which relate solely to CRTs. The 
EPA is not responding to these comments at this time. Rather, if the 
DEP revises its regulations to adopt the new approach, the EPA plans to 
publish a new proposed rule in the Federal Register prior to any final 
approval, inviting public comment on the new approach. If, on the other 
hand, the EPA and DEP do not reach final agreement on the CRT issue, 
the EPA will publish a future final Federal Register notice setting out 
its final decision on the current DEP regulations and will respond to 
all comments that have been filed at that time. No final action 
regarding the CRT issue is being taken by the EPA at this time.

5. The Decision

    Today's action finalizes the Agency's approval for final 
authorization of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for program 
revisions which cover the TC Rule and UWR except as they relate to 
CRTs. We conclude that Massachusetts' application to revise its 
authorized program, excluding provisions which relate to the regulation 
of CRTs, meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements 
established by RCRA. Therefore, we grant the Commonwealth of 
Massachusetts final authorization to operate its hazardous waste 
program with the changes described in the authorization application 
except for those that relate to CRTs. Massachusetts has responsibility 
for permitting Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) 
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 Hazardous and Solid 
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New federal requirements and 
prohibitions imposed by Federal regulations that EPA promulgates under 
the authority of HSWA take effect in authorized States before they are 
authorized for the requirements. Thus, EPA will continue to implement 
those requirements and prohibitions in Massachusetts for which the 
state is not authorized, including issuing permits for those provisions 
until the State is granted authorization to do so.

6. Technical Corrections

    Additionally, EPA is making a technical correction to a provision 
referenced in its immediate final rule published in the Federal 
Register on September 30, 1998 (effective November 30, 1998) which 
authorized the State for the Satellite Accumulation Rule (63 FR 52180). 
This technical correction is described in section G below.

C. What is the Effect of Today's Authorization Decision?

    The effect of this decision is that a facility in Massachusetts 
subject to RCRA will now have to comply with the newly authorized State 
requirements instead of the equivalent federal requirements in order to 
comply with RCRA. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has enforcement 
responsibilities under its state hazardous waste program for violations 
of such program, but EPA also retains its full authority under RCRA 
sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003.
    This action does not impose additional requirements on the 
regulated community because the state regulations for which 
Massachusetts is being authorized by today's action have already been 
in effect under state law, and are not changed by today's action.

D. What Has Massachusetts Previously Been Authorized For?

    Massachusetts initially received Final Authorization on January 24, 
1985, effective February 7, 1985 (50 FR 3344) to implement its base 
hazardous waste management program. We granted authorization for 
changes to their program regarding satellite accumulation on September 
30, 1998, effective November 30, 1998 (63 FR 52180).

E. What Changes Are We Authorizing With Today's Action?

    On January 8, 1998 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts submitted a 
final program revision application seeking authorization of their 
changes in accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. We now make a final decision 
that Massachusetts' hazardous waste program revision satisfies all of 
the requirements necessary to qualify for Final authorization. 
Therefore, we grant the Commonwealth of Massachusetts final 
authorization for the following program changes which cover the UWR and 
TC Rule except as they relate to CRTs:
    The TC Rule was promulgated on March 29, 1990 (55 FR 11798) under 
the authority of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) to 
RCRA and refines and expands EPA's Extraction Procedure (EP) Toxicity 
Characteristics Rule promulgated on May 19, 1980 (49 FR 33084). On May 
11, 1995 (60 FR 25492) EPA promulgated the UWR which contains new 
streamlined hazardous waste management regulations governing the 
collection and management of certain widely generated wastes 
(batteries, pesticides and thermostats) known as universal wastes. In 
addition, the regulation contains a provision for a petition process 
through which additional wastes can be added.
    The specific RCRA program revisions for which EPA authorizes the 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts are listed in the table below. The 
Federal requirements in the table are identified by their checklist 
numbers and rule descriptions. The following abbreviations are used in 
defining analogous state authority: MGL = Massachusetts General Laws; 
CMR = Code of Massachusetts Regulations.

[[Page 55155]]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Description of Federal Requirement and Checklist Reference Number                               Analogous State Authority 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consolidated Checklist for the Toxicity Characteristic Revisions as of June  MGL c 21C Secs.  4 and 6, enacted 11/9/79; 310 CMR 30.099(25) adopted 11/9/
 30, 1994                                                                     90, 30.104(13) adopted 10/17/97, 30.105 adopted 11/17/95, 30.125B adopted
   (74) Toxicity Characteristic Revisions: 55 FR 11798, 3/29/90 as amended    11/9/90, 30.130 adopted 11/9/90, and 30.155B adopted 11/9/90 and amended
    on 6/29/90 55 FR 26986;                                                   10/17/97.
   (80) Hydrocarbon Recovery Operations: 55 FR 40834, 10/5/90 as amended on  (The Massachusetts regulatory citations above are approved except as they
    2/1/91, 56 FR 3978 as amended on 4/2/91, 56 FR 13406, optional rule (MA   relate to CRTs.)
    is not seeking authorization for this provision);
   (84) Chlorofluoro Refrigerants: 56 FR 5910, 2/13/91, optional rule, (MA
    is not seeking authorization for this provision);
   (108) Toxicity Characteristics Revision; Technical Correction: 57 FR
    30657, 7/10/92;
   (117B) Toxicity Characteristic Revision: 57 FR 23062, 6/1/92,
    (correction not applicable; MA is not seeking authorization for this
    provision);
   (119) Toxicity Characteristic Revision, TCLP: 57 FR 55114, 11/24/92,
    optional rule (MA is not seeking authorization for this provision).
Universal Waste Rule Checklists 142 A-E                                      MGL c 21C Secs.  4 and 6, enacted 11/9/79 and MGL c 21E Sec.  6, enacted
   (142A) Universal Waste Rule: General Provisions, 60 FR 25492-25551, 5/11/  July 20, 1992; 310 CMR 30.010, 30.130, 30.143(2), 30.340(1), 30.351(2)(b)6
    95;                                                                       and 30.351(3), 30.353(2)(b)5 and 30.353(3), 30.392(8), 30.393(6),
   (142B) Universal Waste Rule: Specific Provisions for Batteries, 60 FR      30.501(2)(e), 30.601(2)(e), 30.801(14), and 30.1000 adopted on 10/17/97.
    25492-25551, 5/11/95;
   (142C) Universal Waste Rule: Specific Provisions for Pesticides, 60 FR
    25492-25551, 5/11/95;
   (142D) Universal Waste Rule: Specific Provisions for Thermostats, 60 FR
    25492-25551, 5/11/95;
   (143E) Universal Waste Rule: Petition Provisions to Add a New Universal
    Waste, 60 FR 25492 25492-25551, 5/11/95;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Commonwealth of Massachusetts' provisions are from the Code of Massachusetts Regulations, 310 CMR 30.000, Hazardous Waste Regulations, adopted
  October 17, 1997.

    The specific State regulation not covered in this action is 310 CMR 
30.104(21) which falls under 310 CMR 30.104, ``Wastes Not Subject 310 
CMR 30.000'' and identifies intact CRTs as a waste not subject to 
Massachusetts' hazardous waste regulations. EPA is limiting its 
approval of the State's TC Rule regulations to all wastes except CRTs.

F. Where Are the Revised State Rules Different From the Federal 
Rules?

    Under the provisions of the State's UWR program, there are several 
differences related to the way in which universal wastes are regulated. 
First, as allowed by EPA's UWR (40 CFR part 273, subpart G), the State 
program includes additional waste streams; i.e., mercury-containing 
devices and mercury containing lamps are included as universal wastes 
(310 CMR 30.1081). The inclusion of these additional wastes, however, 
is viewed as equivalent to the federal rule rather than broader in 
scope (or less stringent) as the federal rule allows a petition process 
by which additional wastes may be added. Massachusetts has adopted a 
rulemaking process rather than a petition process to include additional 
wastes under its universal waste program, a provision the EPA also 
considers equivalent.
    Related to the coverage of batteries under the UWR, Massachusetts, 
as required by The Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery 
Management Act of May 13, 1996 (``The Battery Act''), (Public Law 104-
142), has implemented state requirements governing the collection, 
storage and transportation of batteries which are identical to EPA's 
UWR requirements. There are differences from the federal requirements 
regarding how Massachusetts regulates batteries, but the EPA has 
determined that they do not concern the ``collection, storage or 
transportation'' of batteries, where the State is required to be 
identical. For example, the EPA has determined that the State's 
requirement regarding site closure (described below) is not within what 
is preempted by the Battery Act. The differences, and the reasons why 
the EPA has determined that there is no preemption, are set forth in 
the EPA's Administrative Record, which is available for public review.
    We consider the following State requirements to be more stringent 
than the Federal requirements:
     310 CMR 30.155B(10) requires quality assurance/quality 
control procedures (QA/QC) in the State's TCLP test which are more 
stringent than the analogous federal procedures as the State has not 
adopted EPA's changes to QA/QC procedures under the TC Rule (40 CFR 
part 261, appendix II, 8.2, 8.4 and 8.5).
     310 CMR 30.1033(4), 30.1043(5) and 30.1061 cover state 
closure requirements which specifies that handlers who cease operations 
shall comply with state closure requirements at 310 CMR 30.689, which 
require removal of waste and site decontamination. This provision 
covers all of the State's universal wastes (including batteries).
     310 CMR 30.1043(a), (b) require large quantity handlers of 
universal waste (other than batteries) to notify the State of their 
universal waste activity even though they may have previously provided 
notification for hazardous waste activity; the federal requirement does 
not require such re-notification.
     310 CMR 30.1033(3) requires small quantity generators to 
submit a change of status request in anticipation of accumulating 5,000 
kg or more of universal waste (other than batteries); there is no such 
federal requirement.
     310 CMR 30.1010 does not allow transfer facilities (except 
for batteries) as defined in 40 CFR 273.6.
     310 CMR 30.1034(3)(b)(7) requires that ampules, once 
removed from thermostats, be fully regulated as a hazardous waste. 
Under the federal UWR program, ampules removed from thermostats are 
subject to the less restrictive UWR management standards

[[Page 55156]]

unless they are leaking and exhibit a characteristic of hazardous 
waste, in which case they must be managed in accordance with EPA's 
hazardous waste requirements (40 CFR 273.13(c)(3) and 273.33(c)(3)).
    These requirements are part of Massachusetts' authorized program 
and are federally enforceable.
    We also consider the following State requirements go beyond the 
scope of the Federal program:
     310 CMR 30.1034(5)(c)(2) and 30.1044(5) requires 
dismantling/crushing operations of small and large quantity generators 
who recycle crushed fluorescent bulbs to obtain a State recycling 
permit. There is no federal permitting requirement for recycling 
activities per se, although storage prior to recycling could trigger 
the federal part B permit requirements of 40 CFR part 264.
     310 CMR 30.392(8) and 30.393(6). The State UWR program 
also has a provision regarding the household hazardous waste collection 
events in which universal wastes may be collected. The regulation of 
this event is a broader-in-scope provision as there is no analogous 
federal component. However, the EPA also has determined that these 
State provisions (insofar as they cover universal wastes) do not result 
in the State program being non-equivalent to the federal program under 
RCRA or non-identical under The Battery Act.
    Broader-in-scope requirements are not part of the authorized 
program and EPA does not enforce them. Although sources must comply 
with these requirements in accordance with state law, they are not 
federal RCRA requirements.

G. What Technical Corrections Are Addressed by Today's Action?

    On September 30, 1998, EPA published its decision to authorize 
Massachusetts for revisions that relate to EPA's Satellite Rule (see 63 
FR 52180). In the regulatory crosswalk table of that notice, EPA cited 
an incorrect date of 12/29/84 on which EPA promulgated its Satellite 
Rule at 49 FR 49568. Note, this document corrects the date cited in the 
regulatory crosswalk on which EPA's Satellite Rule was promulgated to 
read 12/20/84.

H. Who Handles Permits After This Authorization Takes Effect?

    Massachusetts will issue permits for all the provisions for which 
it is authorized and will administer the permits it issues. EPA will 
continue to administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits or portions of 
permits which we issued prior to the effective date of this 
authorization. EPA will continue to implement and issue permits for 
HSWA requirements for which Massachusetts is not yet authorized.

I. How Does Today's Action Affect Indian Country (18 U.S.C. Section 
115) In Massachusetts?

    Massachusetts is not authorized to carry out its hazardous waste 
program in Indian country within the State. Therefore, this action has 
no effect on Indian country. EPA will continue to implement and 
administer the RCRA program in these lands.

J. What Is Codification and Is EPA Codifying Massachusetts' 
Hazardous Waste Program as Authorized in This Rule?

    Codification is the process of placing the State's statutes and 
regulations that comprise the State's authorized hazardous waste 
program into the Code of Federal Regulations. We do this by referencing 
the authorized State rules in 40 CFR part 272. We are today 
authorizing, but not codifying, the enumerated revisions to the 
Massachusetts program. We reserve the amendment of 40 CFR part 272, 
subpart W for the codification of Massachusetts' program until a later 
date.

K. Regulatory Analysis and Notices

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 Massachusetts' 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

[[Page 55157]]

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 
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 this action. 
Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to 
this rule.
    On August 4, 1999, President Clinton issued a new executive order 
on federalism, Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) 
which will take effect on November 2, 1999. In the interim, the current 
Executive Order 12612 (52 FR 41685, October 30, 1987) on federalism 
still applies. This rule will not have substantial direct effect on 
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 12612 
because this rule affects only one State. In addition, this rule simply 
approves the State's proposal to be authorized for updated requirements 
in the hazardous waste program that the state has voluntarily chosen to 
operate. Finally, as a result of this action, for provisions enacted 
pursuant to the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA), 
those newly authorized provisions of the State's program now apply in 
Massachusetts in lieu of the equivalent Federal program provisions. 
Affected parties are subject only to those authorized state program 
provisions, as opposed to being subject both to the Federal and State 
program provisions.

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 concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has 
reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. 
Rather, this rule simply applies previously established health and 
safety requirements with respect to the Massachusetts state RCRA 
program.

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 E.O. 13084 because it does not 
significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal 
governments.

[[Page 55158]]

Massachusetts 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 non-federal 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 imposing federal technical standards. 
Therefore, EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus 
standards.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste 
transportation, Incorporation by reference, Indian lands, 
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Water pollution control, Water supply.

    Authority: This action 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: September 29, 1999.
John P. DeVillars,
Regional Administrator, Region I.
[FR Doc. 99-26332 Filed 10-8-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P