[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 198 (Thursday, October 14, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55629-55632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-26191]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[FRL-6453-2]


Georgia: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management 
Program Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Immediate final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Georgia has applied for Final authorization of revisions to 
its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act (RCRA). Georgia's revision consists of provisions 
promulgated between July 1, 1996 and June 30, 1997. The EPA has 
reviewed Georgia's application and determined that its hazardous waste 
program revision satisfies all of the requirements necessary to qualify 
for Final authorization. EPA is authorizing the state program revision 
through this immediate final action. EPA is publishing this rule 
without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a 
noncontroversial action and does not anticipate adverse comments. 
However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register, EPA is 
publishing a separate document that will serve as a proposal to 
authorize the revision should the Agency receive adverse comment. 
Unless EPA receives adverse written comments during the review and 
comment period, the decision to authorize Georgia's hazardous waste 
program revision will take effect as provided below.

DATES: This Final authorization for Georgia will become effective 
without further notice on December 13, 1999, unless EPA receives 
adverse comment by November 15, 1999. Should EPA receive such comments 
the Agency will publish a timely withdrawal informing the public that 
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Narindar Kumar, Chief, RCRA 
Programs Branch, Waste Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 
Atlanta, GA, 30303-3104; (404) 562-8440. Copies of the Georgia program 
revision application and the materials which EPA used in evaluating the 
revision are available for inspection and copying during normal 
business hours at the following addresses: Georgia Department of 
Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division, Floyd Towers 
East, Room 1154, 205 Butler Street, SE., Atlanta, Georgia 30334; and 
U.S. EPA Region 4, Library, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, 
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303; (404) 562-8190.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Narindar Kumar, Chief, RCRA Programs 
Branch, Waste Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, GA, 
30303-3104; (404) 562-8440.

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. Georgia

    Georgia initially received final authorization on August 7, 1984, 
effective August 21, 1984, (49 FR 31417) to implement its base 
hazardous waste management program. Georgia most recently received 
authorization for revisions to its program on September 18, 1998, 
effective November 17, 1998, (63 FR 49852). On October 27, 1998, 
Georgia submitted a final complete program revision application, 
seeking authorization of its program revision in accordance with 40 CFR 
271.21. The EPA reviewed Georgia's application and now makes an 
immediate final decision, subject to receipt of adverse written 
comment, that Georgia's hazardous waste program revision satisfies all 
of the requirements necessary to qualify for Final Authorization. 
Consequently, EPA intends to grant Georgia Final Authorization for the 
program modifications contained in the revision.
    Today, Georgia is seeking authority to administer the following 
Federal requirements promulgated between July 1, 1996 through June 30, 
1997:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Federal Register date and
        Federal requirement                      page                      Analogous State authority \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conditionally Exempt Small          7/1/96, 61 FR 34278..........  GHWMA, O.C.G.A. Secs.  12-8-62(10) and (12),
 Quantity Generator Disposal                                        12-8-64(1)(A) (B), (D), (E), (I) and (K), 12-
 Options under Subtitle D;                                          8-65(a)(16) and (21); Rule 391-3-11-.07(1).
 Checklist 153.
Consolidated Organic Air Emission   12/6/94, 59 FR 62926; 5/19/    GHWMA, O.C.G.A. Secs.  12-8-64(1)(A), (B),
 Standards for Tanks, Surface        95, 60 FR 26828; 9/29/95, 60   (C), (D), (E), and (F), 12-8-65(a)(3), (16)
 Impoundments, and Containers;       FR 50428; 11/13/95, 60 FR      and (21), 12-8-66; Rules 391-3-11-.02(1),
 Checklist 154.                      56953; 2/9/96, 61 FR 4911; 6/  391-3-11-.07(1), 391-3-11-.08(1), 391-3-11-
                                     5/96, 61 FR 28509; 11/25/96,   .10(1) and (2), and 391-3-11-.11(3)(h) and
                                     61 FR 59950.                   (5)(f); Georgia Quality Air Act, O.C.G.A.
                                                                    Sec.  12-9-1 et seq., at O.C.G.A. Sec.  12-9-
                                                                    5-(b)(1) and (3); Rules for Air Quality
                                                                    Control, Chapter 391-3-1, at Rule 391-3-1-
                                                                    .01(nnnn) effective June 15, 1998.

[[Page 55630]]

 
Land Disposal restrictions Phase    1/14/97, 62 FR 1997..........  GHWMA, O.C.G.A. Secs.  12-8-62(14), 12-8-
 III--Emergency Extension of the                                    64(1)(A), (B), (D), (F), and (I), 12-8-
 KO88 Capacity Variance; Checklist                                  65(a)(16) and (21); Rule 391-3-11-.16.
 155.
Military Munitions Rule: Hazardous  2/12/97, 62 FR 6650..........  GHWMA, O.C.G.A. Secs.   12-8-62(10), (16),
 Waste Identification and                                           (20), 12-8-64(1)(A), (B), (C), (D), (E),
 Management; Explosives                                             (F), (G), and (I), 12-8-65(a)(16) and (21),
 Emergencies; Manifest Exemption                                    12-8-66, 12-8-67, 12-8-75; Rules 391-3-11-
 for Transport of Hazardous waste                                   .02(1), 391-3-11-.07(1), 391-3-11-.08(1),
 on Right-of-Ways on Contiguous                                     391-3-11-.09, 391-3-11-.10(1), 391-3-11-
 Properties; Checklist 156.                                         .10(2), 391-3-11-.10(3), 391-3-11-.11(1)(a),
                                                                    391-3-11-.11(7)(d).
Land Disposal Restrictions Phase    5/12/97, 62 FR 26018.........  GHWMA, O.C.G.A. Secs.  12-8-62(10), (13),
 IV--Treatment Standards for Wood                                   (14), (20), (23), 12-8-64(1)(A), (B), (D),
 Preserving Wastes, Paperwork                                       (E), (F), (I), (J), (K), (L), 12-8-65(a)(16)
 Reduction and Streamlining;                                        and (21), (25); Rules 391-3-11-.07(1), 391-3-
 Checklist 157.                                                     11-.16.
Testing and Monitoring Activities   6/13/97, 62 FR 32462.........  GHWMA, O.C.G.A. Secs.  12-8-62(9), (10), and
 Amendment III; Checklist 158.                                      (13), 12-8-64(1)(A), (D), and (F), 12-8-
                                                                    65(a)(16) and (21); Rules 391-3-11-.02(1),
                                                                    391-3-11-.10(1), (2), (3).
Conformance with the Carbamate      6/17/97, 62 FR 32977.........  GHWMA, O.C.G.A. Secs.  12-8-62(9), (10),
 Vacatur; Checklist 159.                                            (14), (20) and (23), 12-8-64(1)(A), (B),
                                                                    (D), (F) and (I), 12-8-65(a)(16) and (21);
                                                                    Rule 391-3-11.07(1) and 391-3-11-.16.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Georgia provisions are from the Georgia Hazardous Waste Management Regulations effective September 26,
  1985 and recently revised December 24, 1997.

    EPA shall administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits, or portions 
of permits that contain conditions based upon the Federal program 
provisions for which the State is applying for authorization and which 
were issued by EPA prior to the effective date of this authorization. 
EPA will suspend issuance of any further permits under the provisions 
for which the State is being authorized on the effective date of this 
authorization.
    Georgia is not authorized to operate the federal program on Indian 
lands. This authority remains with EPA unless provided otherwise in a 
future statute or regulation.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because we view 
this as a noncontroversial program revision and do not anticipate 
adverse comment. However in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's 
Federal Register, we are publishing a separate document that will serve 
as the proposal to authorize the revision if we receive adverse 
comments. This authorization will become effective without further 
notice on December 13, 1999, unless EPA receives adverse comment by 
November 15, 1999. Should EPA receive such comments it will publish a 
timely withdrawal informing the public that the rule will not take 
effect. We will address all public comments in a subsequent final 
action based on the proposed rule. EPA may not provide additional 
opportunity for comment. Any parties interested in commenting must do 
so at this time.
    The public may submit written comments on EPA's immediate final 
decision until November 15, 1999. Copies of Georgia's application for 
program revision are available for inspection and copying at the 
locations indicated in the ADDRESSES section of this document. The 
ADDRESSES section also indicates where to send written comments on this 
action.

C. Decision

    I conclude that Georgia's application for program revision 
authorization meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements 
established by RCRA. Accordingly, EPA grants Georgia Final 
Authorization to operate its hazardous waste program as revised. 
Georgia 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 HSWA. 
Georgia also has primary enforcement responsibilities, although EPA 
retains the right to conduct inspections under 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 Georgia'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 II 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.

[[Page 55631]]

    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 Georgia 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 
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.

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,

[[Page 55632]]

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. Georgia 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 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 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).
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 99-26191 Filed 10-13-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P