[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 172 (Wednesday, September 5, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45068-45071]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19259]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[EPA-R10-RCRA-2018-0298; FRL-9983-15--Region 10]
Idaho: Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program
Revisions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Idaho has applied to the EPA for authorization of certain
changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended. The EPA has reviewed Idaho's
application and has determined that these changes satisfy all
requirements needed to qualify for final authorization and is proposing
to authorize the State's changes. The EPA seeks public comment prior to
taking final action.
DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received on or before
October 5, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
RCRA-2018-0298 by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: [email protected].
Mail: Barbara McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 155, Mail Stop OAW-150, Seattle, Washington 98101.
Hand Delivery: Barbara McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region 10,
1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155, Mail Stop OAW-150, Seattle, Washington
98101. Such deliveries are only accepted during the normal business
hours of operation; special arrangements should be made for deliveries
of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-RCRA-
2018-0298. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic comment
through www.regulations.gov, the EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with
any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the
EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should
avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be
free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about the
EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at
www.epa.gov/dockets.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Region 10 Library,
1200 Sixth Avenue, First Floor Lobby, Seattle, Washington 98101. The
EPA Region 10 Library is open from 9:00 a.m. to noon, and 1:00 to 4:00
p.m. PST Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA
Region 10 Library telephone number is (206) 553-1289.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region
10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155, Mail Stop OAW-150, Seattle,
Washington 98101, email: [email protected] or phone number
(206) 553-2416.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Proposed Authorization Revision
A. Why are revisions to state programs necessary?
States that have received final authorization from the 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 the EPA to authorize their
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 the EPA's regulations codified in Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 124, 260 through 268, 270, 273,
and 279.
B. What decisions have we made in this proposed rule?
The EPA has determined that Idaho's application to revise its
authorized program meets the statutory and
[[Page 45069]]
regulatory requirements established by RCRA. Therefore, we propose to
grant Idaho final authorization to operate its hazardous waste
management program with the changes described in the authorization
application. Idaho will continue to have 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 the EPA promulgates under the authority of HSWA, and
which are not less stringent than existing requirements, take effect in
authorized States before the States are authorized for the
requirements. Thus, the EPA will implement those requirements and
prohibitions in Idaho, including issuing permits, until Idaho is
granted authorization to do so.
C. What is the effect of this proposed authorization decision?
If Idaho is authorized for these changes, a facility in Idaho
subject to RCRA will have to comply with the authorized State
requirements in lieu of the corresponding Federal requirements to
comply with RCRA. Additionally, such facilities will have to comply
with any applicable Federal requirements, such as HSWA regulations
issued by the EPA for which the State has not received authorization
and RCRA requirements that are not supplanted by authorized State
requirements. Idaho continues to have enforcement authorities and
responsibilities under its State hazardous waste management program for
violations of its program. However, the EPA retains authority under
RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003, which includes, among others,
the authority to:
Conduct inspections, which may include but is not limited
to requiring monitoring, tests, analyses, and/or reports;
Enforce RCRA requirements, which may include but is not
limited to suspending, terminating, modifying, and/or revoking permits;
and
Take enforcement actions regardless of whether Idaho has
taken its own actions.
The action to approve these revisions will not impose additional
requirements on the regulated community because the regulations for
which Idaho is requesting authorization are already effective under
State law and are not changed by the act of authorization.
D. What happens if the EPA receives comments on this action?
If the EPA receives comments on this action, we will address those
comments in a later final action. You may not have another opportunity
to comment. If you want to comment on this proposed authorization, you
should do so at this time.
E. What has Idaho previously been authorized for?
Idaho initially received final authorization for its hazardous
waste management program effective April 9, 1990 (55 FR 11015, March
26, 1990). Subsequently, the EPA authorized revisions to the State's
program effective June 5, 1992 (57 FR 11580, April 6, 1992), August 10,
1992 (57 FR 24757, June 11, 1992), June 11, 1995 (60 FR 18549, April
12, 1995), January 19, 1999 (63 FR 56086, October 21, 1998), July 1,
2002 (67 FR 44069, July 1, 2002), March 10, 2004 (69 FR 11322, March
10, 2004), July 22, 2005 (70 FR 42273, July 22, 2005), February 26,
2007 (72 FR 8283, February 26, 2007), December 23, 2008 (73 FR 78647,
December 23, 2008), July 11, 2012 (77 FR 34229, June 11, 2012) and
September 21, 2015 (80 FR 20726, August 20, 2015).
F. What changes are we proposing to authorize?
On March 29, 2018, Idaho submitted a program revision application
to the EPA requesting authorization for all delegable Federal hazardous
waste regulations codified as of July 1, 2016, incorporated by
reference in IDAPA 58.01.05.000 et seq., which were adopted and
effective in the State of Idaho on March 29, 2017. This authorization
revision request includes the following federal rules for which Idaho
is being authorized for the first time: Conditional Exclusions from
Solid and Hazardous Waste for Solvent Contaminated Wipes (78 FR 46448,
July 31, 2013); Conditional Exclusion for Carbon Dioxide Streams in
Geologic Sequestration Activities (79 FR 350, January 3, 2014);
Modification of the Hazardous Waste Manifest System--Electronic
Manifests (79 FR 7518, February 7, 2014); Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste--CFR Correction (79 FR 35290, June 20, 2014); Revisions
to the Export Provisions of Cathode Ray Tube Rule (79 FR 36220, June
26, 2014); Definition of Solid Waste (80 FR 1694, January 13, 2015);
Response to Vacaturs of the Comparable Fuels Rule and the Gasification
Rule (80 FR 18777, April 8, 2015); Disposal of Coal Combustion
Residuals from Electric Utilities (80 FR 21302, April 17, 2015);
Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities--
Correction of the Effective Date (80 FR 37988, July 2, 2015); and
Transboundary Shipments of Hazardous Wastes Between OECD Member
Countries--Revisions to the List of OECD Member Countries (80 FR 37992,
July 2, 2015).
The EPA proposes to authorize Idaho's revised hazardous waste
program in its entirety through July 1, 2016, as described above. The
EPA seeks public comment prior to taking final action.
G. Where are the revised State rules different from the Federal rules?
Under RCRA section 3009, the EPA may not authorize State law that
is less stringent than the Federal program. Any State law that is less
stringent does not supplant the Federal regulations. State law that is
broader in scope than the Federal program requirements is not
authorized. State law that is equivalent to, and State law that is more
stringent than, the Federal program may be authorized, in which case
those provisions are enforceable by the EPA. This section discusses
certain rules in this proposed action where the EPA has made the
finding that Idaho's program is broader in scope, and discusses certain
portions of the Federal program that are not delegable to the State
because of the Federal government's special role in foreign policy
matters and because of national concerns that arise with certain
decisions.
Idaho is currently broader in scope than the Federal program in its
adoption of 40 CFR 260.43 (2015) and 40 CFR 261.4(a)(24) (2015) at
IDAPA 58.01.05.004 and 58.01.05.005. Both of these regulations include
provisions from the 2015 Definition of Solid Waste (DSW) Rule that have
been vacated and replaced with the less stringent requirements found at
40 CFR 260.43 (2018) and 40 CFR 261.4(a)(24) and (25) (2018), which
were reinstated from the 2008 DSW Rule. Idaho will be revising its
regulations to include this update as required by the vacatur to be
equivalent to the Federal program.
The EPA cannot delegate certain Federal requirements associated
with the following rules: Modification of the Hazardous Waste Manifest
System--Electronic Manifests (79 FR 7518, February 7, 2014), Revisions
to the Export Provisions of Cathode Ray Tube Rule (79 FR 36220, June
26, 2014), and Transboundary Shipments of Hazardous Wastes Between OECD
Member Countries--Revisions to the List of OECD Member Countries (80 FR
37992, July 2, 2015). Idaho has adopted these requirements and
appropriately
[[Page 45070]]
preserved EPA's authority to implement them.
H. Who handles permits after the authorization takes effect?
Idaho will continue to issue permits for all the provisions for
which it is authorized and will administer the permits it issues. If
the EPA issued permits prior to authorizing Idaho for these revisions,
these permits would continue in force until the effective date of the
State's issuance or denial of a State hazardous waste permit, at which
time the EPA would modify the existing EPA permit to expire at an
earlier date, terminate the existing EPA permit for cause, or allow the
existing EPA permit to otherwise expire by its terms, except for those
facilities located in Indian country. The EPA will not issue new
permits or new portions of permits for provisions for which Idaho is
authorized. The EPA will continue to implement and issue permits for
HSWA requirements for which Idaho is not authorized.
I. How does this action affect Indian country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in
Idaho?
Idaho is not authorized to carry out its hazardous waste program in
Indian country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. Indian country includes:
1. All lands within the exterior boundaries of Indian reservations
within or abutting the State of Idaho;
2. Any land held in trust by the U.S. for an Indian tribe; and
3. Any other land, whether on or off an Indian reservation, that
qualifies as Indian country. Therefore, this program revision does not
extend to Indian country where the EPA will continue to implement and
administer the RCRA program.
II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action proposes to revise the State of Idaho's authorized
hazardous waste management program pursuant to section 3006 of RCRA and
imposes no requirements other than those currently imposed by State
law. This authorization complies with applicable executive orders and
statutory provisions as follows:
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993),
Federal agencies must determine whether the regulatory action is
``significant'', and therefore subject to OMB review and the
requirements of the E.O. The E.O. 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 E.O. The EPA has
determined that this proposed authorization is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of E.O. 12866 and is therefore not
subject to OMB review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
because this proposed authorization does not establish or modify any
information or recordkeeping requirements for the regulated community
and only seeks to propose authorization for the pre-existing
requirements under State law and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing, and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires Federal agencies
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes
of assessing the impacts of this proposed authorization on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business defined by
the Small Business Administration's size regulations at 13 CFR part
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district, or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field. I certify that this proposed
authorization will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities because the proposed authorization
will only have the effect of authorizing pre-existing requirements
under State law and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Pub.
L. 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, the
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 the 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 the EPA
to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-
effective, or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator
publishes with the rule an explanation why the alternative was not
adopted. Before the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that
may significantly or uniquely affect small
[[Page 45071]]
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 the EPA regulatory proposals with
significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing,
educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the
regulatory requirements. This proposed authorization contains no
Federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of Title II of the
UMRA) for state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. It
proposes to impose no new enforceable duty on any state, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. Similarly, the EPA has also
determined that this proposed authorization contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
government entities. Thus, this proposed authorization is not subject
to the requirements of Sections 202 and 203 of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This proposed authorization does not have federalism implications.
It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among various levels of
government, as specified in E.O. 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This document proposes to authorize pre-existing State rules. Thus,
E.O. 13132 does not apply to this proposed authorization.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000),
requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed
authorization does not have tribal implications, as specified in E.O.
13175 because the EPA retains its authority over Indian Country. Thus,
E.O. 13175 does not apply to this proposed authorization.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health
or safety risks, such that the analysis required under Section 5-501 of
the E.O. has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is
not subject to E.O. 13045 because it proposes to approve a state
program.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This proposed authorization is not subject to Executive Order
13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001)
because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' as defined under
E.O. 12866, as discussed in detail above.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), (Pub. L. 104-113, 12(d)) (15 U.S.C. 272),
directs the 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 bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Federal agency decides not
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This
proposed authorization does not involve technical standards. Therefore,
the EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus
standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States. The EPA has determined that this
proposed authorization will not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income
populations. This proposed authorization does not affect the level of
protection provided to human health or the environment because this
document proposes to authorize pre-existing State rules which are
equivalent to and no less stringent than existing Federal requirements.
K. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801-808
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801-808, 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 document 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 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indians--lands, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority
This proposed action is issued under the authority of sections
1006, 2002(a), 3006, and 3024 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6926, and 6939g.
Dated: August 22, 2018.
Chris Hladick,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2018-19259 Filed 9-4-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P