Michigan: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revision, 70761-70765 [05-23213]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 23, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Executive Order 13175 Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This proposed rule also does not have
tribal implications because it will not
have a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 13132
Federalism
This proposed action also does not
have federalism implications because it
does 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 the
various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
Redesignation is an action that merely
affects the status of a geographical area,
does not impose any new requirements
on sources, or allows a state to avoid
adopting or implementing other
requirements, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power
and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act.
Executive Order 13045 Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the
absence of a prior existing requirement
for the state to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a
geographical area but does not impose
any new requirements on sources. Thus,
the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply.
15:39 Nov 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, Environmental
protection, National parks, Wilderness
areas.
Dated: November 15, 2005.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 05–23221 Filed 11–22–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[FRL–8001–4]
Michigan: Final Authorization of State
Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revision
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
This proposed rule also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it is not
economically significant.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule does not impose
an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
SUMMARY: Michigan has applied to the
EPA for final authorization of the
changes to its hazardous waste
management program under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that
these changes satisfy all requirements
needed to qualify for final authorization
and is proposing to authorize the state’s
changes through this proposed final
action.
Written comments must be
received on or before December 23,
2005.
DATES:
Send written comments to
Ms. Judy Feigler, Michigan Regulatory
Specialist, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Waste, Pesticides
and Toxics Division (DM–7J), 77 W.
Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Illinois 60604,
phone number: (312) 886–4179. We
must receive your comments by
December 23, 2005. You can view and
copy Michigan’s application from 9 a.m.
to 4 p.m. at the following addresses:
Waste Management Division, Michigan
Department of Environmental Quality,
Constitution Hall—Atrium North,
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70761
Lansing, Michigan (mailing address P.O.
Box 30241, Lansing, Michigan 48909),
contact Ronda Blayer (517) 353–9548;
and EPA Region 5, contact Judy Feigler
at the following address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy
Feigler, Michigan Regulatory Specialist,
U.S. EPA, DM–7J, 77 W. Jackson Blvd.,
Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886–4179.
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?
We conclude that Michigan’s
application to revise its authorized
program meets all of the statutory and
regulatory requirements established by
RCRA. Therefore, we propose to grant
Michigan final authorization to operate
its hazardous waste management
program with the changes described in
the authorization application. Michigan
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
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
implement those requirements and
prohibitions in Michigan, including
issuing permits, until the State is
granted authorization to do so.
C. What Is the Effect of Today’s
Authorization Decision?
This decision means that a facility in
Michigan subject to RCRA will now
have to comply with the authorized
state requirements (listed in section F of
E:\FR\FM\23NOP1.SGM
23NOP1
70762
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 23, 2005 / Proposed Rules
this notice) instead of the equivalent
federal requirements in order to comply
with RCRA. Michigan has enforcement
responsibilities under its state
hazardous waste management program
for violations of such program, but EPA
retains its authority under RCRA
sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003,
which include, among others, the
authority to:
• Do inspections, and require
monitoring, tests, analyses or reports;
• Enforce RCRA requirements and
suspend or revoke permits; and
• Take enforcement actions regardless
of whether the state has taken its own
actions.
This action does not impose
additional requirements on the
regulated community because the
regulations for which Michigan is being
authorized by today’s action are already
effective, and are not changed by today’s
action.
D. What Happens if EPA Receives
Comments That Oppose This Action?
If EPA receives comments that oppose
this authorization, we will address all
public comments in a later Federal
Register. You may not have another
opportunity to comment. If you want to
comment on this authorization, you
must do so at this time.
E. What Has Michigan Previously Been
Authorized for?
Michigan initially received final
authorization on October 16, 1986,
effective October 30, 1986 (51 FR
36804–36805) to implement the RCRA
hazardous waste management program.
We granted authorization for changes to
Michigan’s program on November 24,
1989, effective January 23, 1990 (54 FR
48608); on January 24, 1991, effective
June 24, 1991 (56 FR 18517); on October
1, 1993, effective November 30, 1993 (58
FR 51244); on January 13, 1995,
effective January 13, 1995 (60 FR 3095);
on February 8, 1996, effective April 8,
1996 (61 FR 4742); on November 14,
1997, effective November 14, 1997 (62
FR 61775); on March 2, 1999, effective
June 1, 1999 (64 FR 10111); and on July
31, 2002, effective July 31, 2002 (67 FR
49617).
F. What Changes Are We Authorizing
With Today’s Action?
On September 7, 2005, Michigan
submitted a complete program revision
application seeking authorization of its
changes in accordance with 40 CFR
271.21. We now make a final decision,
subject to receipt of written comments
that oppose this action, that Michigan’s
hazardous waste management program
revision satisfies all requirements
necessary to qualify for final
authorization. Therefore, we propose to
grant Michigan final authorization for
the following program changes:
PROGRAM REVISIONS BASED ON FEDERAL RCRA CHANGES
Description of federal requirement
Checklist No.,
if relevant
Federal Register date and page (and/
or RCRA statutory authority)
Analogous state authority
HSWA Codification Rule; Household 17C ........................
Waste (Resource Recovery Facilities).
Corrective Action Management Units 121 .........................
and Temporary Units.
July 15, 1985, 50 FR 28702 ................
R 299.9204(2)(a) and (2)(a)(i)–(ii).
February 16, 1993, 58 FR 8658 ..........
Waste Water Treatment Sludges from
Metal Finishing Industry; 180-day Accumulation Time.
Organobromine Production Waste and
Petroleum Refining Process Waste:
Technical Correction.
NESHAPS: Final Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Hazardous
Waste Combusters.
184 .........................
March 8, 2000, 65 FR 12378 ...............
R 299.9102(s) and (cc), R 299.9103(r),
R 299.9105(c)(vii), R 299.9105(t), R
299.9107(j),
R
299.9311,
R
299.9413,
R
299.9519(9),
R
299.9601(1), (2)(k) and (l) and
(3)(a), R 299.9627, R 299.9629(3)(a)
and (b), R 299.9635(3), R 299.9636,
and R 299.11003(1)(u).
R 299.9306(1)(d) and (7)–(10).
187 .........................
June 8, 2000, 65 FR 36365 .................
R 299.9220 and R 299.11003(1)(u).
188, 188.1, 188.2 ..
July 10, 2000, 65 FR 42292; May 14,
2001, 66 FR 24270; July 3, 2001, 66
FR 35087.
R
Chlorinated
Aliphatics
Production
Wastes; Land Disposal Restrictions
for Newly Identified Wastes; and
CERCLA Hazardous Substance Designation and Reportable Quantities.
Deferral of Phase IV Standards for
PCBs as a Constituent Subject to
Treatment in Soil.
Storage, Treatment, Transportation and
Disposal of Mixed Wastes.
189 .........................
November 8, 2000, 65 FR 67068 ........
190 .........................
December 26, 2000, 65 FR 81373 ......
R 299.9311, R 299.9413, R 299.9627,
and R 299.11003(1)(u).
191 .........................
May 16, 2001, 66 FR 27218 ................
Mixture and Derived-From Rule Revisions.
Land Disposal Restrictions Correction ..
192A ......................
May 16, 2001, 66 FR 27266 ................
R 299.9101(q), R 299.9102(d) and (z),
R 299.9103(d) and (k), R 299.9104,
R 299.9105(b), (j), (k), (v), (w), (z)
and
(aa),
R
299.9203,
R
299.9822(2)–(14), R 299.9823(2)–(4)
and (6)–(12).
R 299.9203(1)(c), (3), (7) and (8).
192B ......................
May 16, 2001, 66 FR 27266 ................
Change of EPA Mailing Address; Additional Technical Amendments and
Corrections.
193 .........................
June 28, 2001, 66 FR 34374 ...............
R 299.9311, R 299.9413, R 299.9627,
and R 299.11003(1)(u).
R 299.11005(2).
Fmt 4702
23NOP1
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:39 Nov 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\23NOP1.SGM
299.9230(2)
and
(3);
R
299.9519(5)(j)(v); R 299.9623(2),
(3)(b)
and
(11);
and
R
299.11003(1)(n).
R 299.9222, R 299.9311, R 299.9413,
R 299.9627, and R 299.11003(1)(j)
and (u).
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 23, 2005 / Proposed Rules
70763
PROGRAM REVISIONS BASED ON FEDERAL RCRA CHANGES—Continued
Description of federal requirement
Checklist No.,
if relevant
Federal Register date and page (and/
or RCRA statutory authority)
Correction to the Hazardous Waste
Identification Rule (HWIR): Revisions
to the Mixture and Derived-From
Rules.
Inorganic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Wastes Information and Listing.
194 .........................
October 3, 2001, 66 FR 50332 ............
R 299.9203(1)(c) and (7)(c).
195, 195.1 ..............
November 20, 2001, 66 FR 58258;
April 9, 2002, 67 FR 17119.
R
CAMU Amendments ..............................
196 .........................
January 22, 2002, 67 FR 2962 ............
Hazardous Air Pollutant Standards for
Combusters: Interim Standards.
197 .........................
February 13, 2002, 67 FR 6792 ..........
Hazardous Air Pollutant Standards for
Combusters; Corrections.
198 .........................
February 14, 2002, 67 FR 6968 ..........
Vacatur of Mineral Processing Spent
Materials Being Reclaimed as Solid
Wastes and TCLP Use with MGP
Waste.
Zinc Fertilizers Made From Recycled
Hazardous Secondary Materials.
199 .........................
March 13, 2002, 67 FR 11251 .............
200 .........................
July 24, 2002, 67 FR 48393 ................
Land Disposal Restrictions: National
Treatment Variance to Designate
New Treatment Subcategories for
Radioactively Contaminated Cadmium-, Mercury-, and Silver-Containing Batteries.
NESHAP: Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Hazardous Waste
Combusters: Corrections.
Recycled Used Oil Management Standards.
201 .........................
October 7, 2002, 67 FR 48393 ............
202 .........................
December 19, 2002, 67 FR 77687 ......
203 .........................
July 30, 2003, 68 FR 44659 ................
Analogous state authority
299.9204(2)(o), R 299.9222, R
299.9311, R 299.9413, R 299.9627,
and R 299.11003(1)(j) and (u).
R 299.9102(s) and (t), R 299.9107(j),
R 299.9635, R 299.9638, and R
299.9639.
R 299.9504(4), (15) and (20), R
299.9508(1)(b), R 299.9601(2)(i) and
(7), R 299.9623, R 299.9640, R
299.9808(4), (7) and (9), R
299.11003(1)(v).
R 299.9519(5)(j)(v), R 299.9808(2),
(3), (4), (7) and (9); and R
299.11003(1)(r).
R 299.9202(1)(b)(iii), R 299.9204(1)(v),
and R 299.9212(4).
R 299.9204(1)(x) and (y), R 299.9311,
R 299.9413, R 299.9627, R
299.9801(3) and (5), and R
299.11003(1)(u).
R 299.9311, R 299.9413, R 299.9627,
and R 299.11003(1)(u).
R
299.9504(4) and (15) and R
299.9508(1)(b), R 299.9623(8), and
R 299.9808(7) and (9).
R 299.9205(8), R 299.9809 (1)(e) and
(2)(p), and R 299.9815(1)(b) and
(3)(f).
STATE-INITIATED MODIFICATIONS
State requirement
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Effective date
299.9205(4) ..................................................................
299.9206(3) ..................................................................
299.9206(3)(g) ..............................................................
299.9207(3) ..................................................................
299.9212(1), (2), and (3) ..............................................
299.9215(3) ..................................................................
299.9303(4) ..................................................................
299.9304(2)(h) and (4)(c) .............................................
299.9304(6) ..................................................................
299.9306(1)(e) and (f) ..................................................
299.9307(5)–(7) ............................................................
299.9401 .......................................................................
299.9404 .......................................................................
299.9410(1) and (3) .....................................................
299.9503(1)(i) and (k) and (5) ......................................
299.9508(1)(f) ...............................................................
299.9514(1) and (2)(c) .................................................
299.9516(3) ..................................................................
299.9611(4) ..................................................................
299.9629(3)(a)(ii) and (iii) and (3)(b)(ii) and (iii) ..........
299.9633 .......................................................................
299.9701(2) (removal) and (3) renumbered as (2) ......
299.9713(6) and (7) .....................................................
299.11004(4) ................................................................
299.11007(2) ................................................................
299.11008(2) ................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:39 Nov 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
October 15, 1996 ....................
September 11, 2000 ...............
September 11, 2000 ...............
June 21, 1994 .........................
October 15, 1996 ....................
April 20, 1988 ..........................
September 22, 1998 ...............
October 15, 1996 ....................
October 15, 1996 ....................
October 15, 1996 ....................
September 22, 1998 ...............
October 15, 1996 ....................
October 15, 1996 ....................
October 15, 1996 ....................
October 15, 1996 ....................
October 15, 1996 ....................
September 22, 1998 ...............
October 15, 1996 ....................
October 15, 1996 ....................
September 11, 2000 ...............
October 15, 1996 ....................
September 11, 2000 ...............
October 15, 1996 ....................
September 11, 2000 ...............
September 11, 2000 ...............
September 11, 2000 ...............
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Federal analog
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
None.
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
None.
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
40 CFR
None.
None.
E:\FR\FM\23NOP1.SGM
261.5 and 262.34.
261.6(a)(3).
261.6(1)(2).
261.7(b)(1)(i).
261.21, 261.22, and 261.23.
261.21(c).
262.12(b) and 270.11.
262.20.
262.34(a)(1).
262.40(c).
263.10.
263.12.
263.30 and 263.31.
262.34.
270.14(b)(17).
124.12.
270.50.
264.90(a) and 264.101(b).
260.10, definition of ‘‘treatment’’.
264.140(a) and (c).
264.101(b).
part 263.
23NOP1
70764
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 23, 2005 / Proposed Rules
G. Where Are the Revised State Rules
Different from the Federal Rules?
Michigan hazardous waste
management regulations are more
stringent than the corresponding federal
regulations in a number of different
areas. The more stringent provisions are
being recognized as a part of the
federally-authorized program and are
federally enforceable. More stringent
provisions in the state’s authorization
application include, but are not limited
to, the following:
1. At MAC R 299.9203(7)(a) and (c),
Michigan’s exclusion differs from the
corresponding Federal counterpart at 40
CFR 261.3(g)(2)(i) in that the exclusion
only applies to mixtures generated as a
result of a cleanup conducted at the
individual site of generation pursuant to
parts 31, 111, 201, or 213 of Michigan’s
Act 451 (1994 PA 451, MCL 324.101,
known as the natural resources and
environmental protection act), or
CERCLA.
2. At R 299.9306(7)(d)(i) and (ii) and
(g), Michigan’s rules contain
containment, inspection, recordkeeping
and emergency requirements that are
not found in the Federal counterpart at
40 CFR 262.34(g)(4)(i)(A) and (B) and
(g)(4)(v), respectively.
3. At R 299.9307(7)(d)(i)(C), Michigan
does not allow containment buildings,
as does 40 CFR 262.34(g)(4)(i)(C).
4. At R 299.9639(5)(e), Michigan does
not allow permits as a shield as does the
Federal counterpart at 40 CFR
§ 264.555(e)(5).
We consider the following state
requirements to be beyond the scope of
the Federal program, though this list
may not be exhaustive:
At R 299.9104 and R 299.9203,
Michigan regulates more hazardous
wastes than the Federal counterpart at
40 CFR 266.210. The hazardous wastes
that are regulated by Michigan but not
by EPA are broader-in-scope
requirements.
Broader-in-scope requirements are not
part of the authorized program and EPA
cannot enforce them. Although you
must comply with these requirements in
accordance with state law, they are not
RCRA requirements.
H. Who Handles Permits After the
Authorization Takes Effect?
Michigan 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, until they expire or are
terminated. We will not issue any more
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:39 Nov 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
new permits or new portions of permits
for the provisions listed in the Table
above after the effective date of this
authorization. EPA will continue to
implement and issue permits for HSWA
requirements for which Michigan is not
yet authorized.
I. How Does Today’s Action Affect
Indian Country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in
Michigan?
with applicable executive orders and
statutory provisions as follows:
1. Executive Order 18266: Regulatory
Planning Review
The Office of Management and Budget
has exempted this rule from its review
under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993).
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
Michigan is not authorized to carry
out its hazardous waste program in
Indian country within the state, as
defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. This
includes:
1. All lands within the exterior
boundaries of Indian reservations
within the State of Michigan;
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.
EPA will continue to implement and
administer the RCRA program in Indian
country. It is EPA’s long-standing
position that the term ‘‘Indian lands’’
used in past Michigan hazardous waste
approvals is synonymous with the term
‘‘Indian country.’’ Washington Dep’t of
Ecology v. U.S. EPA, 752 F.2d 1465,
1467, n.1 (9th Cir. 1985). See 40 CFR
144.3 and 258.2.
This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
J. What Is Codification and Is EPA
Codifying Michigan’s Hazardous Waste
Program as Authorized in This Rule?
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
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. Michigan’s rules, up to
and including those revised October 19,
1991, have previously been codified
through incorporation-by-reference
effective April 24, 1989 (54 FR 7421,
February 21, 1989); as amended
effective March 31, 1992 (57 FR 3724,
January 31, 1992). We reserve the
amendment of 40 CFR part 272, subpart
X, for the codification of Michigan’s
program changes until a later date.
K. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This proposed rule only authorizes
hazardous waste requirements pursuant
to RCRA 3006 and does not impose
requirements other than those already
imposed by state law (see
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, Section A.
Why Are Revisions to State Programs
Necessary?; and Section C. What Is the
Effect of Today’s Authorization
Decision?). Therefore, this rule complies
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act
After considering the economic
impacts of today’s rule on small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.), I certify that this rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule approves preexisting requirements under state law
and does not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required
by state law, it does not contain any
unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as
described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 19, 1999) does not apply to this
rule because it will not have federalism
implications (i.e., 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 the
various levels of government).
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000) does not apply to
this rule because it will not have tribal
implications (i.e., substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian tribes, or
on the relationship between the federal
government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian tribes.)
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) because it is not economically
significant and it is not based on
environmental health or safety risks.
E:\FR\FM\23NOP1.SGM
23NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 225 / Wednesday, November 23, 2005 / Proposed Rules
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22,
2001) because it is not a significant
regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866.
42 CFR Part 121
Health Resources and Services
Administration
RIN 0906AA62
9. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
Organ Procurement and
Transplantation Network
EPA approves state programs as long
as they met criteria required by RCRA,
so it would be inconsistent with
applicable law for EPA, in its review of
a state program, to require the use of any
particular voluntary consensus standard
in place of another standard that meets
requirements of RCRA. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply to this rule.
AGENCY:
10. Executive Order 12988
As required by section 3 of Executive
Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7,
1996), in issuing this rule, EPA has
taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize
potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct.
11. Executive Order 12630: Evaluation
of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated
Takings
EPA has complied with Executive
Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15,
1988) by examining the takings
implications of the rule in accordance
with the Attorney General’s
Supplemental Guidelines for the
Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of
Unanticipated Takings issued under the
Executive Order.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
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: November 9, 2005.
Margaret M. Guerriero,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 05–23213 Filed 11–22–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:39 Nov 22, 2005
Jkt 208001
Health Resources and Services
Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the
Secretary’s proposal to include
intestines within the definition of
organs covered by the rules governing
the operation of the Organ Procurement
and Transplantation Network. The
Secretary further proposes a
corresponding change to the definition
of human organs covered by section 301
of the National Organ Transplant Act, as
amended.
DATES: To be considered, comments on
this proposed rule must be submitted by
January 23, 2006. Subject to
consideration of the comments
submitted, the Department intends to
publish final regulations.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by RIN 0906AA62, by any of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Agency Web site: https://
www.hrsa.gov/. Follow the instructions
for submitting comments on the Agency
Web site.
• E-mail: jburdick@hrsa.gov. Include
RIN 0906AA62 in the subject line of the
message.
• Fax: 301–594–6095.
• Mail: Jim Burdick, M.D., Director,
Division of Transplantation, Healthcare
Systems Bureau, Health Resources and
Services Administration (HRSA), 5600
Fishers Lane, Room 12C–06, Rockville,
Maryland 20857.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Jim
Burdick, M.D., Director, Division of
Transplantation, Healthcare Systems
Bureau, Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA), 5600 Fishers
Lane, Room 12C–06, Rockville,
Maryland 20857.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
Regulatory Information Number (RIN)
for this rulemaking. All comments
received will be posted without change
to https://www.hrsa.gov/, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on submitting
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70765
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to the Division
of Transplantation, Healthcare Systems
Bureau, Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA), 5600 Fishers
Lane, Room 12C–06, Rockville,
Maryland 20857 weekdays (Federal
holidays excepted) between the hours of
8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. To schedule an
appointment to view public comments,
phone (301) 443–7757.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim
Burdick, M.D. at the above address;
telephone number (301) 443–7577.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Adding Intestines to the Definition of
Organs Covered by the Rules Governing
the Operation of the Organ
Procurement and Transplantation
Network (OPTN)
Based upon a review of intestinal
transplants, the Secretary believes that
intestines should now be included
within the definition of organs covered
by the rules governing the operation of
the OPTN (42 CFR part 121) (hereinafter
the final rule). This notice sets forth the
history of intestinal transplants, the
factors that have persuaded the
Department of the advisability of
including intestines within the ambit of
the regulations governing the operation
of the OPTN, and the anticipated
consequences of this proposal.
The first successful intestinal
transplant was performed in 1989.
Intestinal transplantation may be
considered for patients with irreversible
intestinal failure due to surgery, trauma,
or acquired or congenital disease who
cannot be managed through the
intravenous delivery of nutrients, also
referred to as total parenteral nutrition
(TPN). Although intestinal transplants
have been performed for years,
considerable morbidity and mortality
have limited widespread clinical use.
Complications are frequent and include
acute and chronic rejection,
lymphoproliferative disease, and serious
infections such as cytomegalovirus
disease. For patients who received
intestinal transplants in the United
States from January 2000 through June
2002, one-year graft and patient survival
rates were 67 percent and 81 percent
respectively for adults, and 58 percent
and 65 percent respectively for pediatric
recipients. Despite the shortcomings,
the number of candidates for intestinal
transplants and the number of intestinal
E:\FR\FM\23NOP1.SGM
23NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 225 (Wednesday, November 23, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70761-70765]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-23213]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[FRL-8001-4]
Michigan: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revision
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Michigan has applied to the EPA for final authorization of the
changes to its hazardous waste management program under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that these
changes satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for final
authorization and is proposing to authorize the state's changes through
this proposed final action.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 23,
2005.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Ms. Judy Feigler, Michigan
Regulatory Specialist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Waste,
Pesticides and Toxics Division (DM-7J), 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago,
Illinois 60604, phone number: (312) 886-4179. We must receive your
comments by December 23, 2005. You can view and copy Michigan's
application from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the following addresses: Waste
Management Division, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality,
Constitution Hall--Atrium North, Lansing, Michigan (mailing address
P.O. Box 30241, Lansing, Michigan 48909), contact Ronda Blayer (517)
353-9548; and EPA Region 5, contact Judy Feigler at the following
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy Feigler, Michigan Regulatory
Specialist, U.S. EPA, DM-7J, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604,
(312) 886-4179.
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?
We conclude that Michigan's application to revise its authorized
program meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements
established by RCRA. Therefore, we propose to grant Michigan final
authorization to operate its hazardous waste management program with
the changes described in the authorization application. Michigan 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 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 implement those
requirements and prohibitions in Michigan, including issuing permits,
until the State is granted authorization to do so.
C. What Is the Effect of Today's Authorization Decision?
This decision means that a facility in Michigan subject to RCRA
will now have to comply with the authorized state requirements (listed
in section F of
[[Page 70762]]
this notice) instead of the equivalent federal requirements in order to
comply with RCRA. Michigan has enforcement responsibilities under its
state hazardous waste management program for violations of such
program, but EPA retains its authority under RCRA sections 3007, 3008,
3013, and 7003, which include, among others, the authority to:
Do inspections, and require monitoring, tests, analyses or
reports;
Enforce RCRA requirements and suspend or revoke permits;
and
Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the state
has taken its own actions.
This action does not impose additional requirements on the
regulated community because the regulations for which Michigan is being
authorized by today's action are already effective, and are not changed
by today's action.
D. What Happens if EPA Receives Comments That Oppose This Action?
If EPA receives comments that oppose this authorization, we will
address all public comments in a later Federal Register. You may not
have another opportunity to comment. If you want to comment on this
authorization, you must do so at this time.
E. What Has Michigan Previously Been Authorized for?
Michigan initially received final authorization on October 16,
1986, effective October 30, 1986 (51 FR 36804-36805) to implement the
RCRA hazardous waste management program. We granted authorization for
changes to Michigan's program on November 24, 1989, effective January
23, 1990 (54 FR 48608); on January 24, 1991, effective June 24, 1991
(56 FR 18517); on October 1, 1993, effective November 30, 1993 (58 FR
51244); on January 13, 1995, effective January 13, 1995 (60 FR 3095);
on February 8, 1996, effective April 8, 1996 (61 FR 4742); on November
14, 1997, effective November 14, 1997 (62 FR 61775); on March 2, 1999,
effective June 1, 1999 (64 FR 10111); and on July 31, 2002, effective
July 31, 2002 (67 FR 49617).
F. What Changes Are We Authorizing With Today's Action?
On September 7, 2005, Michigan submitted a complete program
revision application seeking authorization of its changes in accordance
with 40 CFR 271.21. We now make a final decision, subject to receipt of
written comments that oppose this action, that Michigan's hazardous
waste management program revision satisfies all requirements necessary
to qualify for final authorization. Therefore, we propose to grant
Michigan final authorization for the following program changes:
Program Revisions Based on Federal RCRA Changes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Register date
Description of federal Checklist No., if relevant and page (and/or RCRA Analogous state
requirement statutory authority) authority
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HSWA Codification Rule; 17C......................... July 15, 1985, 50 FR R 299.9204(2)(a) and
Household Waste (Resource 28702. (2)(a)(i)-(ii).
Recovery Facilities).
Corrective Action Management 121......................... February 16, 1993, 58 R 299.9102(s) and (cc),
Units and Temporary Units. FR 8658. R 299.9103(r), R
299.9105(c)(vii), R
299.9105(t), R
299.9107(j), R
299.9311, R 299.9413,
R 299.9519(9), R
299.9601(1), (2)(k)
and (l) and (3)(a), R
299.9627, R
299.9629(3)(a) and
(b), R 299.9635(3), R
299.9636, and R
299.11003(1)(u).
Waste Water Treatment Sludges 184......................... March 8, 2000, 65 FR R 299.9306(1)(d) and
from Metal Finishing Industry; 12378. (7)-(10).
180-day Accumulation Time.
Organobromine Production Waste 187......................... June 8, 2000, 65 FR R 299.9220 and R
and Petroleum Refining Process 36365. 299.11003(1)(u).
Waste: Technical Correction.
NESHAPS: Final Standards for 188, 188.1, 188.2........... July 10, 2000, 65 FR R 299.9230(2) and (3);
Hazardous Air Pollutants for 42292; May 14, 2001, R 299.9519(5)(j)(v); R
Hazardous Waste Combusters. 66 FR 24270; July 3, 299.9623(2), (3)(b)
2001, 66 FR 35087. and (11); and R
299.11003(1)(n).
Chlorinated Aliphatics 189......................... November 8, 2000, 65 FR R 299.9222, R 299.9311,
Production Wastes; Land 67068. R 299.9413, R
Disposal Restrictions for Newly 299.9627, and R
Identified Wastes; and CERCLA 299.11003(1)(j) and
Hazardous Substance Designation (u).
and Reportable Quantities.
Deferral of Phase IV Standards 190......................... December 26, 2000, 65 R 299.9311, R 299.9413,
for PCBs as a Constituent FR 81373. R 299.9627, and R
Subject to Treatment in Soil. 299.11003(1)(u).
Storage, Treatment, 191......................... May 16, 2001, 66 FR R 299.9101(q), R
Transportation and Disposal of 27218. 299.9102(d) and (z), R
Mixed Wastes. 299.9103(d) and (k), R
299.9104, R
299.9105(b), (j), (k),
(v), (w), (z) and
(aa), R 299.9203, R
299.9822(2)-(14), R
299.9823(2)-(4) and
(6)-(12).
Mixture and Derived-From Rule 192A........................ May 16, 2001, 66 FR R 299.9203(1)(c), (3),
Revisions. 27266. (7) and (8).
Land Disposal Restrictions 192B........................ May 16, 2001, 66 FR R 299.9311, R 299.9413,
Correction. 27266. R 299.9627, and R
299.11003(1)(u).
Change of EPA Mailing Address; 193......................... June 28, 2001, 66 FR R 299.11005(2).
Additional Technical Amendments 34374.
and Corrections.
[[Page 70763]]
Correction to the Hazardous 194......................... October 3, 2001, 66 FR R 299.9203(1)(c) and
Waste Identification Rule 50332. (7)(c).
(HWIR): Revisions to the
Mixture and Derived-From Rules.
Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing 195, 195.1.................. November 20, 2001, 66 R 299.9204(2)(o), R
Wastes Information and Listing. FR 58258; April 9, 299.9222, R 299.9311,
2002, 67 FR 17119. R 299.9413, R
299.9627, and R
299.11003(1)(j) and
(u).
CAMU Amendments................. 196......................... January 22, 2002, 67 FR R 299.9102(s) and (t),
2962. R 299.9107(j), R
299.9635, R 299.9638,
and R 299.9639.
Hazardous Air Pollutant 197......................... February 13, 2002, 67 R 299.9504(4), (15) and
Standards for Combusters: FR 6792. (20), R
Interim Standards. 299.9508(1)(b), R
299.9601(2)(i) and
(7), R 299.9623, R
299.9640, R
299.9808(4), (7) and
(9), R
299.11003(1)(v).
Hazardous Air Pollutant 198......................... February 14, 2002, 67 R 299.9519(5)(j)(v), R
Standards for Combusters; FR 6968. 299.9808(2), (3), (4),
Corrections. (7) and (9); and R
299.11003(1)(r).
Vacatur of Mineral Processing 199......................... March 13, 2002, 67 FR R 299.9202(1)(b)(iii),
Spent Materials Being Reclaimed 11251. R 299.9204(1)(v), and
as Solid Wastes and TCLP Use R 299.9212(4).
with MGP Waste.
Zinc Fertilizers Made From 200......................... July 24, 2002, 67 FR R 299.9204(1)(x) and
Recycled Hazardous Secondary 48393. (y), R 299.9311, R
Materials. 299.9413, R 299.9627,
R 299.9801(3) and (5),
and R 299.11003(1)(u).
Land Disposal Restrictions: 201......................... October 7, 2002, 67 FR R 299.9311, R 299.9413,
National Treatment Variance to 48393. R 299.9627, and R
Designate New Treatment 299.11003(1)(u).
Subcategories for Radioactively
Contaminated Cadmium-, Mercury-
, and Silver-Containing
Batteries.
NESHAP: Standards for Hazardous 202......................... December 19, 2002, 67 R 299.9504(4) and (15)
Air Pollutants for Hazardous FR 77687. and R 299.9508(1)(b),
Waste Combusters: Corrections. R 299.9623(8), and R
299.9808(7) and (9).
Recycled Used Oil Management 203......................... July 30, 2003, 68 FR R 299.9205(8), R
Standards. 44659. 299.9809 (1)(e) and
(2)(p), and R
299.9815(1)(b) and
(3)(f).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State-Initiated Modifications
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State requirement Effective date Federal analog
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MAC R 299.9205(4).............. October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 261.5 and 262.34.
MAC R 299.9206(3).............. September 11, 2000 40 CFR 261.6(a)(3).
MAC R 299.9206(3)(g)........... September 11, 2000 40 CFR 261.6(1)(2).
MAC R 299.9207(3).............. June 21, 1994..... 40 CFR 261.7(b)(1)(i).
MAC R 299.9212(1), (2), and (3) October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 261.21, 261.22, and 261.23.
MAC R 299.9215(3).............. April 20, 1988.... 40 CFR 261.21(c).
MAC R 299.9303(4).............. September 22, 1998 40 CFR 262.12(b) and 270.11.
MAC R 299.9304(2)(h) and (4)(c) October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 262.20.
MAC R 299.9304(6).............. October 15, 1996.. None.
MAC R 299.9306(1)(e) and (f)... October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 262.34(a)(1).
MAC R 299.9307(5)-(7).......... September 22, 1998 40 CFR 262.40(c).
MAC R 299.9401................. October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 263.10.
MAC R 299.9404................. October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 263.12.
MAC R 299.9410(1) and (3)...... October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 263.30 and 263.31.
MAC R 299.9503(1)(i) and (k) October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 262.34.
and (5).
MAC R 299.9508(1)(f)........... October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 270.14(b)(17).
MAC R 299.9514(1) and (2)(c)... September 22, 1998 40 CFR 124.12.
MAC R 299.9516(3).............. October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 270.50.
MAC R 299.9611(4).............. October 15, 1996.. None.
MAC R 299.9629(3)(a)(ii) and September 11, 2000 40 CFR 264.90(a) and 264.101(b).
(iii) and (3)(b)(ii) and (iii).
MAC R 299.9633................. October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 260.10, definition of ``treatment''.
MAC R 299.9701(2) (removal) and September 11, 2000 40 CFR 264.140(a) and (c).
(3) renumbered as (2).
MAC R 299.9713(6) and (7)...... October 15, 1996.. 40 CFR 264.101(b).
MAC R 299.11004(4)............. September 11, 2000 40 CFR part 263.
MAC R 299.11007(2)............. September 11, 2000 None.
MAC R 299.11008(2)............. September 11, 2000 None.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 70764]]
G. Where Are the Revised State Rules Different from the Federal Rules?
Michigan hazardous waste management regulations are more stringent
than the corresponding federal regulations in a number of different
areas. The more stringent provisions are being recognized as a part of
the federally-authorized program and are federally enforceable. More
stringent provisions in the state's authorization application include,
but are not limited to, the following:
1. At MAC R 299.9203(7)(a) and (c), Michigan's exclusion differs
from the corresponding Federal counterpart at 40 CFR 261.3(g)(2)(i) in
that the exclusion only applies to mixtures generated as a result of a
cleanup conducted at the individual site of generation pursuant to
parts 31, 111, 201, or 213 of Michigan's Act 451 (1994 PA 451, MCL
324.101, known as the natural resources and environmental protection
act), or CERCLA.
2. At R 299.9306(7)(d)(i) and (ii) and (g), Michigan's rules
contain containment, inspection, recordkeeping and emergency
requirements that are not found in the Federal counterpart at 40 CFR
262.34(g)(4)(i)(A) and (B) and (g)(4)(v), respectively.
3. At R 299.9307(7)(d)(i)(C), Michigan does not allow containment
buildings, as does 40 CFR 262.34(g)(4)(i)(C).
4. At R 299.9639(5)(e), Michigan does not allow permits as a shield
as does the Federal counterpart at 40 CFR Sec. 264.555(e)(5).
We consider the following state requirements to be beyond the scope
of the Federal program, though this list may not be exhaustive:
At R 299.9104 and R 299.9203, Michigan regulates more hazardous
wastes than the Federal counterpart at 40 CFR 266.210. The hazardous
wastes that are regulated by Michigan but not by EPA are broader-in-
scope requirements.
Broader-in-scope requirements are not part of the authorized
program and EPA cannot enforce them. Although you must comply with
these requirements in accordance with state law, they are not RCRA
requirements.
H. Who Handles Permits After the Authorization Takes Effect?
Michigan 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,
until they expire or are terminated. We will not issue any more new
permits or new portions of permits for the provisions listed in the
Table above after the effective date of this authorization. EPA will
continue to implement and issue permits for HSWA requirements for which
Michigan is not yet authorized.
I. How Does Today's Action Affect Indian Country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in
Michigan?
Michigan is not authorized to carry out its hazardous waste program
in Indian country within the state, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. This
includes:
1. All lands within the exterior boundaries of Indian reservations
within the State of Michigan;
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.
EPA will continue to implement and administer the RCRA program in
Indian country. It is EPA's long-standing position that the term
``Indian lands'' used in past Michigan hazardous waste approvals is
synonymous with the term ``Indian country.'' Washington Dep't of
Ecology v. U.S. EPA, 752 F.2d 1465, 1467, n.1 (9th Cir. 1985). See 40
CFR 144.3 and 258.2.
J. What Is Codification and Is EPA Codifying Michigan's 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. Michigan's rules, up to
and including those revised October 19, 1991, have previously been
codified through incorporation-by-reference effective April 24, 1989
(54 FR 7421, February 21, 1989); as amended effective March 31, 1992
(57 FR 3724, January 31, 1992). We reserve the amendment of 40 CFR part
272, subpart X, for the codification of Michigan's program changes
until a later date.
K. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This proposed rule only authorizes hazardous waste requirements
pursuant to RCRA 3006 and does not impose requirements other than those
already imposed by state law (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, Section A.
Why Are Revisions to State Programs Necessary?; and Section C. What Is
the Effect of Today's Authorization Decision?). Therefore, this rule
complies with applicable executive orders and statutory provisions as
follows:
1. Executive Order 18266: Regulatory Planning Review
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from its
review under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act
After considering the economic impacts of today's rule on small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), I
certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state
law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that
required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 19, 1999) does not apply
to this rule because it will not have federalism implications (i.e.,
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 the various levels of government).
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) does not
apply to this rule because it will not have tribal implications (i.e.,
substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, or on the
relationship between the federal government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian tribes.)
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it is not economically significant and it is
not based on environmental health or safety risks.
[[Page 70765]]
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action as defined
in Executive Order 12866.
9. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
EPA approves state programs as long as they met criteria required
by RCRA, so it would be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, in
its review of a state program, to require the use of any particular
voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard that meets
requirements of RCRA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) do not apply to this rule.
10. Executive Order 12988
As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729,
February 7, 1996), in issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary
steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential
litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct.
11. Executive Order 12630: Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of
Unanticipated Takings
EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15,
1988) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance
with the Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation
of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings issued under the
Executive Order.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
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: November 9, 2005.
Margaret M. Guerriero,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 05-23213 Filed 11-22-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
